by C. Baer Bush, Undersecretary of Undress, Project for a Nude American Century (PNAC)
Several European countries have banned the niqab - the face-veil that a small minority of Muslim women wear to signify their spirituality.
These bans do not go far enough. Civilized societies must also ban the hijab, which many Muslim women use to conceal their hair.
But even banning the hijab would not solve the problem. Under a
niqab/hijab ban, Muslim women would keep trying to follow the Qur’an’s
injunction to dress modestly – and hide many other important parts of
The only solution: Outlaw all forms of female clothing.
When women hide their bodies from the male gaze, they do so for one
reason and one reason only: To submit to patriarchal male oppression.
The act of wearing clothing, especially if it conceals important female
charms such as face, hair, breasts, thighs, derrière, and genitals, is
an admission by women that old-fashioned religious patriarchs are in
charge of society.
Women must be forcibly liberated from their clothing!
My colleagues at the Committee for a Nude World Order and the Project
for a Nude American Century will be introducing a bill that would
provide a penalty of up to ten years in prison to any woman who conceals
her body with clothing. The bill provides funding for police “strip
squads” with the power to roam the streets and remove any article or
object designed to conceal a woman’s charms from the male gaze.
Opponents of the anti-clothing bill will undoubtedly claim that women
should have the right to wear whatever they like. But when a female
“chooses” to wear clothes, is this really a free choice? Isn’t it likely
that her father, uncles, or brothers are exerting subtle social
pressure to prevent her from wandering around naked in public?
Obviously the horrific practice of clothing women is not a “free
choice” at all. It is a symptom of patriarchy. And it is part of a grand
Muslim conspiracy to destroy Western civilization.
Conspiracy theorists who oppose the Nude World Order will undoubtedly
claim that forcibly stripping women is a violation of their civil
liberties. But sometimes, if we wish to preserve freedom, we have to
give up our liberties. This is one of those times.
The conspiracy theorists have raised other arguments against the
clothing ban. They say, for example, that forcing the population to
witness the naked bodies of such women as the Queen of England, Hilary
Clinton, Barbara Bush, Angela Merkel, and Nancy Pelosi would amount to
cruel and unusual punishment.
Yes, being forced to witness such horrors would be a difficult
ordeal. But Western civilization has survived the Black Death, the
Mongol hordes, two world wars, a stealth takeover by Zionist banksters,
and an interminable series of atrocious performances by Justin Bieber.
It can surely survive the sight of Angela Merkel’s flabby, drooping,
Clothing-ban opponents also claim that the proposed law would
devastate the fashion industry and hamper economic growth. In reality,
the opposite is the case. By preventing billions of dollars from being
wasted on women’s clothing, funding would become available for
productive investment in such genuinely useful industries as munitions
factories. For the price of one year’s worth of women’s clothing, we
could buy five stealth bombers, three nuclear submarines, or several
dozen nuclear warheads capable of obliterating a major city.
The bottom line: If the War on Terror is to be won, we cannot settle
for half measures. Simply banning niqab and hijab will not bring us
final victory. The only way for Western Civilization to triumph over its
modesty-espousing enemies is to wage an all-out, uncompromising war to
the death on women’s clothing.
Labels: ban, clash of civilizations, feminism, hijab, Islam, modesty, New World Order, niqab, veil