David Cameron told us today that he finds the appearance of horsemeat in 100% beefburgers on sale in our supermarkets “extremely disturbing and totally unacceptable”. A common expression in the US (based on an old Burger King campaign of thirty years ago) is “Where’s the beef?” – meaning, where is the content in this or that piece of marketing or political puffery, such as ‘Yes We Can’ for example. Today, all over Britain, people are asking “Why the Horse?”

I find it very hard to believe that horsemeat is cheaper than beef. We’re talking economies of scale here after all, and so I’m mystified by this scam: is this a new vanguard of anti-capitalism deliberately reducing margins in order to implode the system?

So far we just don’t know. But in the meantime, I think we should compare and contrast Dave’s extremely and totally. I mean, you don’t need a totally in front of an unacceptable: it’s like saying “slightly dead”…it is a comparative colliding with an absolute to produce a convolute. It is the sort of thing expensively half-educated pillocks say. Slightly more interesting, however, is the fact that Cammers also finds this horsey revelation extremely disturbing.

For myself, I find it mildly surprising (see earlier re price factors) but not on the basis of eating horse. Eating viande de cheval in France is pretty normal, and for some a delicacy. But the likes of Dave and his best friend Rebekah Redtop tend to ride horses rather than eat them, and so this discovery of yet more skullduggery is to them extremely disturbing. I’m damned if I know why: we eat cows, sheep, lambs, goats and many another four-legged beast of the field. We even use horses to chase and kill foxes, whose meat is (I’m told) unpalateable. Such behaviour strikes me as extremely disturbed – but probably not the Prime Minister.

Mr Cameron is as I type flying to somewhere to make a speech about something to do with the EU, although tonight’s latest is that he will postpone this due to the late-in-the-day Foreign Office discovery that Islamist terrorism is a complete pain in the arse. One wonders what the authorities will do next on the question of Islam, but there may be something about it that they’re missing…and so it falls to me to point it out.

There has been much talk over the years of the British media demonising Islamists, but in truth the verb to demonise tends to be reflexive when it comes to Islamic terrorists. The chief entry criterion if you want to be a Jihadist is, let’s face it, the possession of wonky eyes, hooks, and curly beards down to the knee.  Thus we can observe that the latest in this genetically-joined line of Killers for Islam is one Abu al-Baraa, and here he is (left).

Just like Abu-Hamza, he sports the informally focusing eye. And while he lacks the Captain Hook feature, it is safe to say that Mr al-Baraa would not pull well on a dating agency site, if only because most applicants would assume he is more kalashnikosexual than sexual stallion.

I think the main point I’m trying to register here is that from Osama Bin Laden onwards, The Islamist Front for the Stoning of Infidels appears to have been a magnet for swivel-eyed nutters. Judging by the latest news from the ransomists of Algeria tonight, the trend continues.

Oddly enough, having a bizarre boat-race is also the key requirement if you wish to rise to the top of that other infamous cradle of financial terrorism, the European Union. Here (right) is one of the more luminary of the 23 leaders of Europe, Herman van Rompuy. Had David Cameron delivered his speech tomorrow, van Rompuy would’ve been one of the keener listeners. But before hearing any of the speech – which was pretty obviously going to ask for a radical new Union Treaty – Herman opined that “We do not need anything like as much Treaty change as people think. Too much change would open the floodgates”.

Whatever you do people, don’t open those f**king floodgates. Do not under any circumstances let any freedom or democracy drown this perfect Oasis of well-managed economic growth, fiscal control, and lean bureaucracy we have over there in Brussels. Otherwise, the results could be truly disastrous.

It is indeed a sobering thought. Perhaps even extremely disturbing….and on a bad day, totally unacceptable.