ednesday's attacks in the Iraqi city of Fallujah, in which four former US soldiers were killed in a terrorist ambush before their bodies were dismembered, dragged behind cars and hung from a bridge by an angry mob, created a conundrum for television networks faced with the tough moral question of how to best profit from these shocking images.

"If we show them, we make a shitload of money," explained ABC News spokesperson Al Reuben. "If we don't show them, maybe we can claim the moral high ground and make a shitload of money down the line. It's a tough call."

Least troubled by the moral quandary was Fox News, whose plans to strap a helmet-cam to one of the dead bodies were scrapped when the angry mob grew impatient waiting for technicians to get a reading on the gray levels.

"Americans have a right to see this footage," opined Fox News Executive Producer Leonard Williams. "And we have the right to boost our ratings through the fuckin' roof by being the first to show the really awful parts that make you want to throw up. If anybody out there was blindly discharging a firearm into their Arab neighbor's house yesterday, you know they were watching hard-hitting Fox News."

Other networks took the debate more seriously, holding off on showing the footage through the morning, and then gradually releasing more and more of the horrible images throughout the day as it became apparent that Internet sites were kicking their ratings in the balls by showing the Fallujah footage uncut. By Wednesday evening the gloves were off and charred bodies were seen dangling from the Euphrates River bridge on most major networks.

"We really didn't want to show the footage of those kids beating the guy's flaming corpse with their shoes," explained CBS Evening News spokesperson Clint Adams. "But then we realized, 'Jesus Christ, we're losing money here!' I feel truly bad for the families of these men, and any children who may have been forever scarred by these images, but come on. You know how much money we made off that Somalia footage? Shit."

While the long-term impact of these images is yet to be seen, experts speculate that the American people being reminded that "Oh yeah, war is really ugly and horrible and stuff" can only harm the president's chances for reelection in November, not to mention driving the final nail into the coffin of Iraqi tourism.

"We owe it to future history to inform the American people of what's really going on over there," offered Marcus Graves of ABC News. "Maybe because of this footage being in the collective memory, next time we'll think twice about going to war again."

When asked by the commune news if he was shitting us, Graves admitted that yeah, he kind of was, but it sounds a lot better than saying you make your living selling people grisly video death. No argument here.

he torn-off front cover of a Newsweek magazine dating back to March of 2004, discovered by archaeologists at a dig outside Prozac City examining the remains of a 21st century McDonald’s child care facility, has sparked heated speculation as to the meaning of the magazine’s headline: “Inside the 9/11 Investigation.�

Since all records of the early 21st century were destroyed in the Great Silicon Wipe of 2009, modern-day scientists can only wonder about the troubles of 21st century man, not to mention what a 9/11 is and why it might need to be investigated. Archaeologists are split as to the possible interpretations.

“This clearly has to do with air pollution,� asserts present archaeologist and former Past Bob VI roommate Paul Silvestri, pointing out what appear to be industrial smokestacks in the background of the cover photo. “Look at all that smoke, that must be a coal refinery or something. Nasty. I don’t know who the white guy is on the cover; the part where his name should be is caked in 100-year-old mustard that’s become part of the paper. But he was probably a coal baron or something.�

“Get your cock out of that crock,� disagreed fellow archaeologist Alan Hayes. “What does nine divided by eleven have to do with air pollution? This clearly involves the controversial integration of New Math. They were probably all up in shit about 9/11 equaling four, like that was too advanced for their Cro-Magnon brains. That’s probably why this guy is raising his hand, like he doesn’t get it because the teacher’s going too fast.�

“I don’t know,� interrupted Silvestri. “If that’s true, then what’s this stuff about ‘Your Government Failed You... And I Failed You’? Who is this guy? He’s obviously poor, look at how bald he is. So he’s clearly not a government official.�

“Maybe he’s a robot,� offered Hayes. “Maybe his arm’s up like that because he’s doing the robot dance.�

“Hmmm,� Silvestri thought about it for a moment. “No, that’s not it. Look, he’s got a napkin tucked into his collar, like he’s eating dinner. And why would you build a robot that needs glasses?�

“Maybe he’s a glasses-testing robot,� offered Hayes.

“You’re an idiot,� countered Silvestri.

Laymen on the street have been even more confused, asking why the man on the cover is wearing those round eye shields and why ancient man only set aside one week a year for news. Will the truth ever again be known? No one can know for sure, but if they ever do figure it out, Future Bob IV will be there, carrying on the fine Bob family tradition by reporting to the commune offices via my high-tech pastwave radio implant, bringing you the latest future news on what, in this case, you already know. Good day.

I have emerged from my underground bunker. The Thai place will no longer deliver food there. It was fun while it lasted, but since the world has yet to blow up under the leadership of George W. Bush, the international response might not be exactly what I predicted. They're probably taking a "wait and see rather than destroy the world" approach, and I will follow that lead. For now.

Personally, if I were a Thai delivery guy, I would be happy to give blood and urine samples to a customer who asked for them before letting you enter the domicile. But that's just me—security isn't a big concern in Thailand, I suppose. Not a lot of cases of stolen identity.

But let's put that behind us. I picked an opportune time to return from exile, as I can see. The new commune is looking sharp, thanks for the redesign go to Randy and Glynis in IT for that. My return was also timely in that Gay Bagel's influence here has been growing stronger in the meantime. They all hate him, of course, nothing new on that front, but without my steady leadership, Raoul Dunkin, commune nutsack, has entirely disappeared, and I think they have been getting ever-closer to making Lil Duncan some sort of woman leader here, to combat Gay's attempts to take over the commune. She tells me she's been running the commune since my absence, and I humor her. No one can run the commune, baby. It's like a tornado. Can you run a tornado? No, you can't—liar.

They have made some changes I'm not so sure about. Gay Bagel was all "statistics" this and "statistics" that, apparently referring to statistics of a site. Under pressure from Big Gay, as his enemies call him, Lil instituted a ratings system for the weekly commune pieces here. It's for advertising sales figures, she told me. I said that's Advertising's job, not ours. She said she went to advertising and Shelk's been waiting all this time for sales figures before proceeding. I told her to tell Shelk sales figures are somebody else's job, not his, and not ours. I don't know who should do that.

To get to the point already, goddammit, I had to bend a little to keep Gay from making another power play for control. We're wasting money, Gay said, paying all these people to do columns and news and having no way to make money off our endeavors. He argued that it's vital we figure out how many people are reading the commune, what they're reading, and the benefits and cons (business speak nonsense) of each piece. He told me I should no longer give people a column just because they buy me a drink, or I think seeing their picture in the commune staff photo will be funny. I ask him what other criteria are available to decide who to hire and who to not hire. Well, sir, don't ever do that. I got a list a mile long. The guy is such a knob, it's hard to believe we're related.

Hence you'll notice the new commune ratings system, just to the right side of the page, under the big picture that we put there because we think it's funny. These numbers are pretty raw, of course—judging by them, you would initially think no one is reading the commune. But we haven't properly interpreted the data yet. I just hired a guy, Perry "Bigger" Dunston, to research all those numbers and tell us exactly what they mean, with the idea that hopefully we'll be able to cut some deadweight around the office and keep on people who can make the commune more profitable. Dunston charges $2,000 a week for his service, but when you're trying to reduce spending, you can't spare any expense.

So bear with us, faithful readers. Or reader. We are doing what we can to make the commune the kind of online magazine you want to read—you, and hopefully, ten to twenty thousand white males ages 18-34.

º Last Column: The Election of the Twenty-First Century
º more columns