9 May 2011

Pointless refutation of the day

While I appreciate Jemima Khan could potentially be stoned to death for infidelity, I don't think there was really any need for her to go to the trouble of opening a Twitter account to refute allegations she had taken out a Super-Injunction to hide sordid details of an affair with Jeremy Clarkson.

Clearly by marrying into the Islamic faith she has a submissive nature, but she would also have to be an incredible masochist to subject herself to an appalling sexual mauling from the Top Gear front man.

I'm keen to believe anything I read on Twitter, but like poor Jemima, there are somethings I just can't swallow.

Quite apart from anything else, Clarkson is obviously as bent as one of Uri Geller's spoons anyway.

2 comments:

Paul said...

If a former worthy ECOTW were to have actually slept with Clarkson, I can't help feeling it would taint the award somewhat. Here's hoping the "revelations" are false, and it was just a few dozen county cricketers instead

Rich said...

She'd have to give the award back if she really has messed with Clarkson's junk. There is a code to slut-errantry.