The People's Cube - Political Satire

It was to be a perfect wedding in the Western Saudi town of Medinah. Though neither bride nor groom had met face to face before the ceremony, they had much in common and were deeply in love. Or so the onlookers thought.

After the ceremony the photographer began recording what was to be a cherished album of memories for the happy couple. But something strange was about to happen. As the bride lifted her veil to smile for a photo, the groom recoiled in horror, “You're not the girl I had imagined. You look like,...like...Helen Thomas!”

The groom ran from the room screaming, “No,...no,...a thousand times no! I divorce you! You cannot be my wife!” According to local daily Okaz, the bride immediately collapsed in a fit of tears as panicked wedding guests stepped in to try and console her. But their efforts were to no avail.

This, my friends, is the problem with niqabs...

I'm not so sure that is a problem, comrade Craptek. It seems more like a solution, to me.

LOL, what they don't know (until they get there) is that this is what all 72 of the promised virgins in the Jihadist's afterlife look like!

Mikhail Lysenkomann wrote:LOL, what they don't know (until they get there) is that this is what all 72 of the promised virgins in the Jihadist's afterlife look like!

Indeed, comrade. Very likely the reason for their virginity.

LOL...

They forgot to tell the sheik that the '72' in '72 Virgins' refers to a virgin's ankle sizes.

Mikhail Lysenkomann wrote:LOL, what they don't know (until they get there) is that this is what all 72 of the promised virgins in the Jihadist's afterlife look like!

Comrade Lysenkomann,

Thank you for responding to my story. Since you are the world's greatest living authority on Lysenkoism, I believe you may have the answer to a question which I will outline below.

After much deep thought - thought undertaken strictly during my 5 minute lunch periods in the field, and carefully planned to enhance my future progeny's suitability for acceptance into The People's Rodent Laborer Union, 2025™ - it occurred to me that concealing the face of potential brides may not have been the idea of repressive men, but rather, the carefully conceived plot of our clever and powerful feminist comrades!

The nature of this plot becomes clear when considered in light of the following axioms:

1) The “New Man” will not evolve korrectly if permitted to freely follow his nature.
2) Brutish, ungoverned men are prone to selecting mates by physical appearance.
3) State approved females are not always physically attractive to brutish men.

It follows therefore:

1) That physical attraction must be regulated for the betterment of all The People.™
2) That State approved females courted by brutish men be temporarily concealed.
3) That male urges will, in due course, compel acquiesce to State authorized mating.
4) That in this way the “New Man” will be conditioned to propagate appropriately.

My question:

Since, to my knowledge, no program compelling State approved women be hidden from view exists, can niqabs and other cloaking garments be the invention of our progressive feminist comrades?

I look forward to your thoughts concerning this important matter.

Captain Craptek (lunchtime thinker about stuff for The People™)

Captain Craptek I am so happy your lady friend does not wear a niqab when she visits me during her morning jog.

Captain Craptek wrote: can niqabs and other cloaking garments be the invention of our progressive feminist comrades?

Comrade Craptek, first of all I must admit that I admire your furry tail! It is so cute as you flick it about while gathering nuts and doing other Squirrel Stuff. I watch you often, scurrying about outside my window. I had a cat once with a tail that -- oh, wait, we shouldn't talk about cats, da?

Regarding niqabs and a selective breeding program -- I think you might be on to something here. Especially the part about Lysenkoism, which just seems to fit.

I shall think about this some more after my next ration of vodka comes in. It helps me think, you know. Thank you for asking me such an Important Question.

Captain Craptek wrote:

Mikhail Lysenkomann wrote:LOL, what they don't know (until they get there) is that this is what all 72 of the promised virgins in the Jihadist's afterlife look like!

Comrade Lysenkomann,

Thank you for responding to my story. Since you are the world's greatest living authority on Lysenkoism, I believe you may have the answer to a question which I will outline below.

After much deep thought - thought undertaken strictly during my 5 minute lunch periods in the field, and carefully planned to enhance my future progeny's suitability for acceptance by The People's Rodent Laborer Union, 2025™ - it occurred to me that concealing the face of potential brides may not have been the idea of repressive men, but rather, the carefully conceived plot of our clever and powerful feminist comrades!

The nature of this plot becomes clear when considered in light of the following axioms:

1) The “New Man” will not evolve korrectly if permitted to freely follow his nature.
2) Brutish, ungoverned men are prone to selecting mates by physical appearance.
3) State approved females are not always physically attractive to brutish men.

It follows therefore:

1) That physical attraction must be regulated for the betterment of all The People.™
2) That State approved females courted by brutish men be temporarily concealed.
3) That male urges will, in due course, compel acquiesce to State authorized mating.
4) That in this way the “New Man” will be conditioned to propagate appropriately.

My question:

Since, to my knowledge, no program compelling State approved women be hidden from view exists, can niqabs and other cloaking garments be the invention of our progressive feminist comrades?

I look forward to your thoughts concerning this important matter.

Captain Craptek (lunchtime thinker about stuff for The People™)

Captain Craptek, Or it could be the fruit of the New World Order's plan for population control. Fostering the idea that a sexual commodity transportation enclosure is apropos falls in step with arranged marriage to choke off the sexual drive of the Koranimal. No wood is good.

Biff Henderson wrote:

Captain Craptek wrote:

Mikhail Lysenkomann wrote:LOL, what they don't know (until they get there) is that this is what all 72 of the promised virgins in the Jihadist's afterlife look like!

Comrade Lysenkomann,

Thank you for responding to my story. Since you are the world's greatest living authority on Lysenkoism, I believe you may have the answer to a question which I will outline below.

After much deep thought - thought undertaken strictly during my 5 minute lunch periods in the field, and carefully planned to enhance my future progeny's suitability for acceptance by The People's Rodent Laborer Union, 2025™ - it occurred to me that concealing the face of potential brides may not have been the idea of repressive men, but rather, the carefully conceived plot of our clever and powerful feminist comrades!

The nature of this plot becomes clear when considered in light of the following axioms:

1) The “New Man” will not evolve korrectly if permitted to freely follow his nature.
2) Brutish, ungoverned men are prone to selecting mates by physical appearance.
3) State approved females are not always physically attractive to brutish men.

It follows therefore:

1) That physical attraction must be regulated for the betterment of all The People.™
2) That State approved females courted by brutish men be temporarily concealed.
3) That male urges will, in due course, compel acquiesce to State authorized mating.
4) That in this way the “New Man” will be conditioned to propagate appropriately.

My question:

Since, to my knowledge, no program compelling State approved women be hidden from view exists, can niqabs and other cloaking garments be the invention of our progressive feminist comrades?

I look forward to your thoughts concerning this important matter.

Captain Craptek (lunchtime thinker about stuff for The People™)

Captain Craptek, Or it could be the fruit of the New World Order's plan for population control. Fostering the idea that a sexual commodity transportation enclosure is apropos falls in step with arranged marriage to choke off the sexual drive of the Koranimal. No wood is good.

Comrade Biff,

Questions regarding "wood" are best left to specialists. I recommend you try Comrade Putout. She's a master woodworker and considered our resident expert in all such matters.

In any case, keep item #3 in mind as you ponder. Remember, recycling paper grocery bags is encouraged by The Party™ and our collective.

State authorized is one thing, State MANDATED is what I fear.

"State mandated mating is like a box of chawklitts...."

Ivan The Cube Maker wrote:Captain Craptek I am so happy your lady friend does not wear a niqab when she visits me during her morning jog.

WHAT IS THIS MAN DOING HERE!?

Raum Emmanual Goldstein wrote:






WHAT IS THIS MAN DOING HERE!?

Comrade Goldstein,

I'm told Wolfgang is sniffing out those responsible for his untimely downfall. Why he showed up in this thread is a mystery! Here, at The People's Cube we are all above suspicion,...aren't we?

Captain Craptek wrote:
Comrade Biff,

Questions regarding "wood" are best left to specialists. I recommend you try Comrade Putout. She's a master woodworker and considered our resident expert in all such matters.

In any case, keep item #3 in mind as you ponder. Remember, recycling paper grocery bags is encouraged by The Party™ and our collective.

Captain Craptek, If I am in need of a ferret of minutiae on all things wood I won't hesitate to call upon the expertise of Comrade Putout. If there's a pallet of "If it'll burn It'll compost" posters collecting dust who might I query as to what is the Current Truth™ thoughtcrime response to hypotheticals proper course of action in this scenario?

Proceed with caution, new comrade.

It is entirely possible that those posters and their proper and timely distribution are in fact YOUR responsibility and a layer of dust indicates both negligence and dereliction. You may even now be drawing unwanted scrutiny.

Do tend your own beets, and for your own safety-- don't make eye contact with anyone in a babushka holding a golden shovel...

Ivan the Stakhanovets wrote:Proceed with caution, new comrade.

It is entirely possible that those posters and their proper and timely distribution are in fact YOUR responsibility and a layer of dust indicates both negligence and dereliction. You may even now be drawing unwanted scrutiny.

Do tend your own beets, and for your own safety-- don't make eye contact with anyone in a babushka holding a golden shovel...

Comrade Ivan, When I stumbled upon the questionable contents of the pallet it was draped with a moldy, sideshow canvas done in a style reminiscent of the Chicago Bathhouse School period. When I say questionable it is because the recycled paper watermark is not a logotype that was in use at that time. The attraction depicted on the canvas was the Barking Spider of Scarsdale and my own independent research revealed that at that time he was not involved in the Sideshow circuit but was in fact gainfully employed rearranging toothpicks right-side up. I have gathered samples of the pigments used to render the work but not do know a chemist I can trust. That's right, I shudder at the very idea of suggesting it may be an ill-conceived forgery, a fabrication fashioned to bolster an as yet unknown plot that could shake the very foundation of Amerika itself. I had not been made aware that the Blessed of the golden spade are to be feared. Thanks for the heads down.

[color=#C0392B]Captain Craptek[/color] was just giving me a hard time when he wrote:
Comrade Biff,

Questions regarding "wood" are best left to specialists. I recommend you try Comrade Putout. She's a master woodworker and considered our resident expert in all such matters.

.
Captain Craptek - you know I am the spokeswoman for our forestry operations...

...and why don't you and your purple buddy stop following me around yacking about your damn money!
.
.

Ivan the Stakhanovets wrote:State authorized is one thing, State MANDATED is what I fear.

"State mandated mating is like a box of chawklitts...."

You know, Ivan, you took the words right out of my mouth by implication: "When things are concealed, you never know what you're gonna get."


I mean, like Duuuuuh?



I have three brothers. One of them is an unhinged, apoplectic progressive. The other two are conservative.


We (and the progressive one) had a phone conversation about two months ago where he said, "I'm a wait-and-see kinda guy." I told him I saw what was happening regarding Obamacare and Obama eight years ago. I mentioned that it wasn't that hard to see. All you had to do is look.


After I expressed my deep concern and actual terror about our country and the loss of freedom for all of us, he ranted in a most hateful way: "If you're so scared, go to your God! You stupid Christians! Sucker Teabaggers!


Jeez, talk about a redirect! I never have had a conversation about God with this brother. Ever.


I got the exact same response from a former friend, a friend of George Soros, who played a chess game with him. He later denied this. What? Did they play chess in Central Park? Huh?


This is very discouraging, but I will not let the bastards get me down!


Sometimes this is very difficult.

According to a senior Islamic cleric in Iran, Hojatoleslam Kazem Sedighi, regarding Sharia-Compliant attire for females, to paraphrase the famous GEICO commercial catch-phrase, "Everybody knows that 'Women dressing immodestly cause earthquakes.'"

--Kommisar of Fatwas

Kommisar of Fatwas wrote:

According to a senior Islamic cleric in Iran, Hojatoleslam Kazem Sedighi, regarding Sharia-Compliant attire for females, to paraphrase the famous GEICO commercial catch-phrase, "Everybody knows that 'Women dressing immodestly cause earthquakes.'"

--Kommisar of Fatwas

According to the strictest opinion, the entirety of the Musloidah is ‘awrah. All of Allah's imperfect hump is ‘awrah; her body, her voice, and with the exception of seeing the way and sundry necessities of life, of the ten ‘awrah one cannot be covered even by the presence of the copulation void's owner as they are clothed yet naked, walking with an enticing gait that leads righteous men into the Pit.The firebrands of the Umma do not so much admonish the flowers of Islam that modesty is a branch of faith as to remind them the defective nature of women best remain hidden from sight. Stay to your houses and the faithful will not be enticed by delicious eyes or the undulating sway of the temptress. For the black sack harbors a black widow whose very existence rends the devout from Allah's Path. Restaurants in the Saudi Kingdom having taken to posting "Women Are Not Allowed" signs for this very reason.The horrors of paying no heed to Allah's Carnival Barker (Phlegm Burble Upon Him) are chronicled by the wise sages of the jurisprudent as a warning to those deficient in their religion. The Best of the Malay have been plagued with tornados owning to the wicked initiating intimacies with filthy mongrels and thereby inviting Allah's wrath upon both the innocent and the depraved. In spite of not being counted as a Lion of Allah, Dear Leader's unknowable depth of sensitivity to the sufferings of those kindred spirits of the Abrahamic Faith shines like a beacon for all those who's desire is to respectfully honor the angst of the afflicted. – May the pangs of your body be vanquished with the healing nectar of the She camel (Let not the slaughter and mutilation of the imbibes of Allah's blessing put in doubt the efficacious nature of this remedy. Suffice it to say MadMo thumbed OK). Correction - I didn't intent to mislead by omission that a pleasure unit, be it property bought and paid for or one currently on the market, cannot receive protection unless the vagina is formally recognized as tilth. A male family member can act as a Wali. I know the son of the unit can fulfill this role but one is swaddling clothes may not.