road

December 13th, 2006
└ Tags: ,

Discussion (9)¬

  1. Lou Geoffrion says:
    December 13, 2006 at 6:17 am

    what is ‘NORKAGE’ ?

  2. Satantiago says:
    December 13, 2006 at 6:29 am

    What is Jesus scared of? Can’t he resurrect himself later?

    What’s wrong with Mo getting his driver’s license in Saudi? When Mo said that he passed the test years ago he really meant 1400 years ago? And on a camel’s hump?

    Was Mo thinking of Katiusha-type norks?

    THERE’S A BURKA ON THE CROSSING! HAHAHAHA!!!! That made my day, thank you!

  3. r00db00y says:
    December 13, 2006 at 6:33 am

    Lou,

    Norks is another word for the female mammary glands.

    So is Norkage 😀

  4. Cytrynian says:
    December 13, 2006 at 9:46 am

    🙂 After a short hiccup J and Mo are back on the right track! Keep up, keep up!!!! And thank you, The Author, whoever you are!!!

  5. Sir Beast says:
    December 14, 2006 at 4:43 am

    What? No car bomb jokes? 😉

    “There’s a burka on the crossing” nearly made me wet myself.

  6. mat says:
    December 15, 2006 at 1:44 pm

    i love the fact Mo can’t see over the stearing wheel… Excellent one

  7. Acolyte of Sagan says:
    September 5, 2012 at 11:36 pm

    And not one of you picked up on both Mo (no surprise) and Jesus (on reflection, no surprise either) referring to the Muslim woman on the crossing as ‘it’ and ‘burka’ respectively. Shame on y’all.

  8. Bob Annaliffia says:
    January 29, 2014 at 4:27 pm

    That “burka on the crossing” could have contained anything; a woman, a man, a troupe of acrobatic cats, a letterbox. “It” therefore, is appropriate. Like this guy: http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/nov/04/suspect-burqa-counter-terror-restrictions

  9. Bones'sDog says:
    April 29, 2017 at 4:44 pm

    Acolyte of Sagan, 5/9/12, I have seen News footage from the perpetual war-zone between Europe and Africa showing very tall, sturdy human figures in black tents striding across rubble-strewn ground, wearing heavy combat boots. If those were women they were certainly extremely fit, well-fed and powerful examples.
    I suspect transvestism or perhaps skulduggery.

    Not that it matters, really. If you treat a Burka as a generic, genderless human you can’t go far wrong. After all, the entire reason for them is to divest the wearer of sexuality so seeing it as a person should be quite acceptable to it.

Comment¬

NOTE: This comments section is provided as a friendly place for readers of J&M to talk, to exchange jokes and ideas, to engage in profound philosophical discussion, and to ridicule the sincerely held beliefs of millions. As such, comments of a racist, sexist or homophobic nature will not be tolerated.

If you are posting for the first time, or you change your username and/or email, your comment will be held in moderation until approval. When your first comment is approved, subsequent comments will be published automatically.