Are You "Of the Body" Brother? Have You Found Landru?

Al Fin has scored another coup, in interviewing a true believing follower of Landru. Yes, of course we know that Dr. McCoy is dead--no, we are referring to a more recently absorbed believer. We refer to Al Gore, prophet of the true faith, prophet of Landru.

Al Fin: Thank you for speaking with me today, Mr. Gore . . .

A.G.: Please, brother, call me brother. Are you of the body?

Al Fin: Well, (clears throat), brother, not really.

A.G.: You must go to Landru, and be absorbed. The survival of the earth depends on it.

Al Fin: Yes, uh, brother, but I wondered . . .

A.G.: You may not call me brother until you are absorbed into the body of Landru. You must go at once.

Al Fin: Yes, of course, Mr. Gore, certainly. First I would like for you to answer a few questions about your recent motion picture. Some blogs have reacted negatively to your picture, and the Washington Post printed an article featuring global warming skeptics. How do you feel about this opposition?

A.G.: The same way I feel about any moron who contradic--er, I mean to say, you will understand everything once you are of the body. Why are you still here? Why do you not go at once to Landru?

Al Fin: By all means, Mr. Gore, in a moment. Mr. Gore, some people are likening your film and your activities in the climate change movement to a propaganda campaign of religious proportions. Some feel that you are like a huckster revivalist, cynically using ordinary people's vague fears about the environment, and amplifying them to a revivalist frenzy last seen in the days of McCarthyism, and before that, the witch hunters.

A.G.: Son, I have friends who could make you disap--er, what I'm trying to say is, I am a true servant of Landru. If you do not go to Landru immediately for absorption, I'll be forced to call the Climate Police to take you directly to Landru. Once you are absorbed, all questions will be answered, and you will understand the peace of the body in Landru.

Al Fin: (looking around, notices guards closing in from three directions) Thank you very much, Mr. Gore. My readers will be very enlightened by this interview (runs in the one direction not occupied by guards).

Brave Feminists Rage, Rage, Against the Testicle!

Recent news stories about finding stem cells in the testicles of mice and humans has prompted a backlash from courageous feminist professors of Women's Studies at Balwynne College. Dr. Letisha Snotsberry and Dr. Nadine Bulsnort have graciously agreed to be interviewed by Al Fin, on this important issue.

AF: Thank you for speaking with me today. I wonder if you can each summarize your objections to the latest stem cell news, starting with Dr. Snotsberry.

LS: The issue is very simple, Al. Feminism in the western world is based upon the fact that all bad things in the world come from the human testicle. Testosterone is the maker of war, the source of domestic abuse, and the reason for the subjugation of women everywhere . . .

NB: . . . Not only that, but the testicle produces sperm, and sperm causes pregnancy which stops many women from achieving their potential. You have no idea how many women drop out of school, or even careers, just to have a sniveling little baby. It's uncivilized.

AF: But surely you can see the necessity of propagating the species, after all if there were no babies, the entire human race would . . . .

NB: . . . Don't give me that nonsense, Al. If women stopped allowing men to use them as babymakers, men would have to invent another way to have babies. Women are just too convenient . . .

LS: . . . Getting back to the topic of the human testicle, I think it's pretty clear that it already had two strikes against it. Now with the news of stem cells being derived from the human testicle--well it's simply too much! The testicle simply contains too many things--it could lead us all back to the patriarchy again.

AF: Excuse me, you are saying that because the human testicle is turning out to be the Swiss Army Knife of human organs, it should be downgraded somehow?

LS: Well, obviously, Al. For one thing, why do all men have two testicles?

NB: Exactly, Tish! It's total overkill. One testicle is plenty--maybe even too much. We've had discussions in national committee about a "Testicles-Optional Policy", or TOP for short. All newborn males would come under the policy, all overseen by a Bioethics Committee staffed by professors of Women's Studies from the local college or university.

AF: Wait a minute, Doctor. Are you suggesting neutering baby boys when they are born?

LS: Let me answer that. No, Al, you are making it sound worse than it is. The informed consent would clearly give the option of retaining one testicle or none. The parents are given a vote in the matter, along with each member of the Bioethics Committee. It is all quite democratic.

AF: But what would be done with the testicles that are removed?

The two professors exchange a quick glance, then check their watches for the time.

LS: Oh dear, Al, it seems to be getting quite late. We have another appointment--if you'll please excuse us . . .

NB: . . . Yes, we're in a big hurry Al, sorry.

AF: But surely you have some plans for the little boys' testicles?

NB: You're making too much of a big deal out of this, Al. We already told you that testicles are the source of everything bad in the world. What would we want with testicles? You seem to be insinuating . . .

AF: . . . No, not at all. I am simply curious . . .

LS: Thank you so much, Al. We have both really enjoyed this.

The professors walk away whispering furiously to each other.

AF: Well, ladies and gentlemen, I certainly appreciate the professors' sharing their thoughts. Apparently the human testicle is more controversial than I had thought previously. Please stay tuned for further developments.