NEWSFLASH Airliner crashes in New York, Queens

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

NEWSFLASH

An American Airlines Boeing 767 is reported to have crashed in the Queens District of New York.

Rudolph Giuliani is reported to be joining rescue services at the scene.

― DJ Martian, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

NEWSFLASH

― DJ Martian, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I was just about to post this myself, seems like it was on approach.

― chris, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Just watching CNN. At the moment they've just got pictures of a big load of smoke and reports that at least 3-4 buildings on fire. Jesus, this seems unreal, again.

― Nick, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

CNN now say it wasn't a Boeing 767, but an Airbus. American Airlines, flight 587, on way to Dominican Republic.

― Nick, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

BBC News

also reports 290 - 350 on board, 4 buildings crashed into, on Rockeraway Beach, Queens (sp?)

All New York airports shut.

Level 1 emergency declared.

― DJ Martian, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Hmm...so was it incoming or outgoing? Either way, seems like an accident more than anything else -- for now.

― Ned Raggett, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Ananova is saying the Newport Avenue area.

― chris, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

fuck fuck fuck...is this OBL fighting back?

― Geoff, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

flight 587

― Geoff, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

If it is, that was one dumb move on his part. Now, my concern -- no ILx folks in the area, hopefully? *crosses fingers* As it is, that's at least 300 dead that shouldn't be.

― Ned Raggett, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Ned, I think its pretty unlikely that a plane crash in New York would be an accident at this point.

― Pete, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

there are people here from Queens aren't there? Shit.

― chris, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

If an attack, it's chilling since it seems completely non-targeted, more a demonstration that [whoever] can do this kind of thing whenever they want.

Ugh.

― Tom, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Hey now, hold up. Maybe it isn't, I agree. But until proof is offered otherwise, the full range of possibilities must be kept in mind. It has to be said -- cold comfort to everyone in the buildings in question -- that hitting a section of Rockaway Beach doesn't seem to have much the same impact as going for the WTC or the Pentagon.

― Ned Raggett, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Hm, what Tom said. And again, was it incoming or outgoing, exactly? Did people board in America or not?

― Ned Raggett, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Was it coming or going? I've heard loads of conflicting reports. Barbelith is saying both.

― Paul, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

NYC is pretty much shut down again - brdiges, tunnels etc.

― Geoff, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

from jfk to dominican republic.

― Geoff, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

9th st and newport avenue, according to newsradio(bbc)

― Geoff, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

according to eyewitness, explosion on right side,plane plummeted.

― Geoff, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I'm here at 277 Park Avenue in Manhattan. We're a little confused right now, because the news is only trickling in from the 'net. There was an unusual number of sirens a little earlier, but other than that...

― Michael Daddino, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

according to eyewitness, explosion on right side,plane plummeted

Hm indeed...

― Ned Raggett, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Blair quoted already:

http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_447435.html

sorry can't do the html

― chris, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

American Airlines flight crashes on takeoff in NYC borough of Queens

FAA: American Flight 587 -- Airbus A300 -- from JFK airport to Santa Domingo, Dominican Republic

NYC Port Authority: 246 passengers, 9 crew

All NYC area airports closed, bridges and tunnels leading into city closed

Affiliate WCBS reports at least 4 buildings on fire

New York Fire Department dispatches 44 trucks, 200 firefighters

All that from CNN.com if that helps.

― Sarah, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I agree I guess, no point jumping to conclusions (that said - jumping to those same conclusions - looking at the time it has taken place and the possible response of airline pilots who may well have had more time to reflect on what to do when in that situation ditch at a "less inhabited" place). Still if it was even vaguely targeted this is another "civilian caualty" reminder - there are no proper targets just loss of random lives. Let us hope the numbers remain low on the casualty list.

― Pete, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

It has to be said right now that American Airlines is going to *really* be hurting, first 9/11 and now this. Whether it's a security issue or a technical one...

― Ned Raggett, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Early reports say no contact to ground of distress or malfunction. Witnesses say plane went down at a 60 degree angle to the ground.

― Samantha, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

If what Geoff says is true and there was an explosion, then arguably the pilot might not have had time to do anything, regardless of the intentionality or not.

― Ned Raggett, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

CNN: Eyewitnesses report seeing explosion on right side of plane. Engine and rest of plane landed quite a way apart (explains conflicting reports about location of crash site)

― Nick, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Reports up to 15 Buildings on fire.

― DJ Martian, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Apparently pilot reported engine failure

― Paul, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

over there is public holiday as well. which may or may not be a good thing.

― Geoff, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Well, hopefully it meant less/no people at work, but not everything is closed. Cross yer fingers.

― Ned Raggett, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

fighter jets were dispatched, and are now circling.

― Geoff, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Bridges and Tunnels into New York have also been closed but the Federal Aviation Authority has ruled out terrorism as a cause.

The organisation earlier stated that the cause of the crash is not known, although there are reports the jet suffered engine failure.

― Sarah, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

eyewitness report on radio 5 just now claims fighters alongside plane before crashing.

― chris, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Yes I believe it's Veteran's Day. Also Rockaway close to JFK so it sounds to me like tech problems, at least with the info we have.

― suzy, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

This is horrible. A thread for NYC Regulars to check in? (I hate the fact that we're developing some kind of bloody protocol on this)

― Tom, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

British Prime Minister Tony Blair has warned against speculation over the cause of the crash. abc.net.au

thanks tony.

― Geoff, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Good idea Tom, start one....

― Sarah, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

A thread for NYC Regulars to check in?

Up and running.

― Ned Raggett, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

un bigwigs were in town as well.

― Geoff, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

First figures are 255 missing, no signs of survivors. Horrible.

― Sarah, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Horrific, this gap between speculation and waiting for hard facts. Giuliani states that an engine 'fell off' after taking off, thus it could be an accident. But American Airlines again????

― stevo, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

this is from the guardian: The Pentagon has confirmed that it had been aware of a problem with the flight and had an F-15 fighter plane in the area, but it could not reach the passenger flight before it crashed.

― Geoff, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Initially they said it was an accident but now the FAA are reportedly saying that nothing can be discounted

― Jonnie, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

What would have happened if it had?

― Nick, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I wonder what an F-15 could have done, though?

― Sam, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

same result as pensylvania me thinks. report of enormour flash where wing meets fuselage.

― Geoff, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Skipping 13 messages at this point... Click here if you want to load them all.

That Ananova 'terrorism ruled out' story was posted over 45 mins ago - other sources are still saying (as seems unavoidable at this time) that there is no current evidence that it was to do with terrorism but it can't be ruled out either. I mean at this stage, how could it be completely ruled out?

― Nick, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Re: I mean at this stage, how could it be completely ruled out?

Spot on Nick.

― DJ Martian, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Word, Ned.

Tech problems that will down a flight generally happen within minutes of takeoff. This looks to be the case.

― suzy, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

[could this be another dunedin plot for world takeover] he asks slyly

― Geoff, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

You folks in the UK have to remember that since 9/11, we on the other side of the pond have been subjected to conflicting reports, news stories that have been flogged to death for a day or two and suddenly dropped, and things like: fighter jets patrolling the skies and not being reported on the news; there was a terrorist threat on x building, then two hours later saying that it wasn't true; the FBI saying one thing and other authorities saying another thing. I get a sense that sometimes we are being told things or not being told things in order to be kept sufficiently "alert" without being outright panicked.

― Kerry, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

BBC website states:

Due to unprecedented demand we have now switched to the low-graphics version of the site in order to be able to bring you all the latest developments.

BBC is back

David Learmount of Flight International told BBC New Online it was very rare for an Airbus A300 to crash on take-off in good weather, but not completely impossible.

― DJ Martian, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

As much as I hope it isn't a terrorist attack, from a statistical point of view the alternative is awfully unlikely (tho' not impossible). That said timescale would either suggest externally triggered bomb/engineered malfunction or very fast hijack situation.

― Pete, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

the fbi said there WAS an explosion of some kind on board, says BUSH.

― Mike Hanle y, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

or ground to air activity, which is a bad thought to have, but someone would have spotted a missile or whatever. The speculation is going again isn't it? But personally I can't help it, you hear about something like this and you start to think how could it have happened? and until definite news is supplied you have to cover all bases.

― chris, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Airplane expert on NPR says this kind of plane (airbus) has only ever had 8 accidents. 4 due to terrorism, 2 due to pilot error, 2 due to mechanical error. Nothing related to engines and the plane is designed to keep flying with only 1 engine. Engine "falling off" highly unlikely.

― Samantha, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

pete, yr statistical argt is completely wack

― mark s, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

A senior administration official tells CNN there are initial indications of an explosion aboard an American Airlines A300 in New York, but that the source is unknown.

― fritz, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Yeah. tell me about it. Sometimes I'm embaressed to be a mathematician. Still can I plead never actually going near stats like ever - and being a born gambler. Nope I didn't think so.

I think whatever the answer is we are fiddling with such low probabilities that they are all pretty plausible right now (ie prob of "engine falling off" etc).

― Pete, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Woman who lives 4 blocks from crash site says plane crashed on a busy street full of small businesses (bank, vet, etc). Engine landed on gas station (!) and fire was too intense for rescue workers to get too close to crash site. She saw plane right before impact and saw no fire on the plane itself. AA is completely screwed.

― Samantha, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

AA Press conference in about 1 hour time.

― DJ Martian, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Engine "falling off" highly unlikely.

Engine actually designed to 'fall off'/be jettisoned in event of fire (to stop damage spreading) to fusilage/wing. Unfortunately it appears that the wing was already damaged by the time that engine came off.

― Nick, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Samantha : yes they can keep flying with one engine OPERATIONAL (all jets can for obv. reasons), but not with only one attached to the plane. (In fact an airbus landed with both engines out recently).

If an engine has come off, there will be other severe damage - hydraulics, fuel lines etc - virtually no chance to fly a plane in this situation. Also, engines don't FALL OFF! This has to be an explosion - could be localized in the engine itself. Could be a bird strike? Terrorism seems possible, but unlikely - HOW could they blow- up an engine in flight?

― Dr. C, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Alfred Hitchcock has a lot to answer for.

― Pete, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

for bird strike to be fatal the bird has to pretty big, standard practice is to test engines with chickens, the ebgine must not send debris towards the wing or fuselage. however the information is sketchy at the moment, it could be another paris concorde style accident, they're is no way of knowing just yet

― Ed, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

crikey. i hope the chickuns are already dead!

― katie, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

BBC TV are doing a special 5pm news - you can watch it via the website.

― Madchen, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Well, that would be too easy, Katie. ;-)

― Ned Raggett, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

there's an urban myth involving testing the engines with chickens and forgetting to defrost them isn't there?

― chris, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I have received that darned email several times. Grrr!

― Madchen, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Ned = enemy of chickens :)

― katie, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

MY EVIL SHOWS FORTH. Gonzo would not approve.

― Ned Raggett, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

This is almost certainly impossible, by the way. The crash site is located just across Jamaica Bay from the Kennedy Airport runways. We're talking a matter of a minute or two after takeoff, too short a time to have communication to and fro. And there aren't F-15s routinely cruising New York airspace, at least there weren't until a half hour after the crash (you know when they're overhead, as they're deafeningly loud).

― Benjamin, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

That's funny (I'm not saying you're wrong) cause TV has been saying there were USAF planes (don't know what type) flying around area as matter of post-Sept 11 routine and that, as you say, they wouldn't have had time to have been launched in response to anything.

― Nick, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I've seen several news reports here that confirmed this. They don't say when, where and how often the F-16s have been patrolling the skies, but they say that they are. As I've said, local news sources have not said, "yes, they are flying over *our* city". I have, however, heard and seen them flying over Chicago - at night or early morning, sometimes they were just unbearable. I know because we have an air & water show every year, and the sound was comparable to *that*. My mother saw them in the air as well. They weren't consistently present - it was more like, once a week over my apt., and I haven't heard them lately.

Here is one among many news stories that confirms this.

― Kerry, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I also found a bunch of articles on Lexis-Nexis. Here is an excerpt of one from the Minneapolis Star-Tribune, Sept.21:

"Many Twin Cities-area residents noticed 'the 148th Fighter Wing was flying combat air patrols' last week, Lt. Col. Denny Shields said Thursday. Those patrols ceased last Thursday, the Minnesota National Guard spokesman said, 'however, they have maintained a high state of readiness since that time.'

So this jibes with my own experience, where the patrols died down after a few weeks.

― Kerry, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Hank just saw some flying around here (Dallas) last week.

― Samantha, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I suspect the chemtrail crowd has been having fun with all the extra patrols, I'm sure.

― Ned Raggett, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

It all sounds like a terrible accident to me. I doubt if it was shot down. I've been sickened by the BBC news coverage, they really want it to be terrorism.

― james, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

It all sounds like a terrible accident to me.

Why? I'm not saying you're wrong, but are you hoping, or do you have some evidence? I haven't heard any, either way.

As for combat air patrols: you can hear them, they're distinctive, and they're hella loud. I'm saying that I wasn't hearing any, and certainly not within the kind of range that would allow them to make a difference within a half minute, a couple hundred feet off the ground (i.e., close enough to shoot down a huge plane just over a urban residential area).

― Benjamin, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

My main reason for thinking it's an accident is because one of the engines fell off the plane, and landed seperately from the rest. I don't know how this would affect the rest of the plane, or whether this could be an act of sabotague. I don't discount terrorism, but until any definite facts emerge it should be treated as an accident, rather than foul play. Some of the media seem to be going for the latter, and I just think that's poor journalism.

― james, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I'm sure there are conspiracy theorists right now trying to link this, 9/11, and the TWA 800 crash of years ago all into their own convenient little stories.. sigh..

More than ever, it's high time to point out that, while a occasional check to a major media outlet is a good idea, major media addiction is not. Constant reinforcement of fear is part of their marketing plan.. sad to say. Fear is great journalism, if profit is the end result.

Hmmm, I sound like a McCarthy song.

― Brian MacDonald, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Sorry, it doesn't take much of a conspiracy theory to associate this with Sept. 11, but the flight 800 stuff is a straw man argument and presumably below the usual level of discussion here. I mean, of course it could have been an innocent mechanical failure, but in the wake of the rhetoric and threats from Bin Laden and sympathizers, a US murderous US bombing campaign that is either bumbling or flat-out ruthless, repeated general warnings from the US government about imminent terrorist actions, and continuing reports of US airline security failings, that this could have been sabotage isn't a "conspiracy" theory, but a reasonably well-founded supposition. And while there wasn't, say, a missle seen streaking towards the plane, I'm really not sure what disproves either the possibility of accident or the possibility of deliberate sabotage.

It's funny that these amateur media critiques are essentially the same thing the Bush admin. is saying. Even in cases where a mechanical failure was the evident cause if a plane crash, I have never heard anything, really, ruled out after a mere few hours. The US gov't emphasis on massaging investor confidence and reassurance of the public (Keep Spending Money!) has been a cause of wrong-headed reassurance before in the past month or so-- if you recall, Tom Ridge opined that the first respiratory anthrax death in October might well have been due to a visit to a North Carolina forest. What's motivating a quick denial among certain ILErs?

― Benjamin, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

oh, ILE has all been paid off handsomely by the CIA to register response of grief, sorrow and confusion. and what's motivating your snarky prematurely know-it-all attitude, benji?

― maryjanedownthelane, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Sorta what James said, I should say. Right now my belief is that I think this was an accident -- my belief may be proved wrong. If the preceding bothers you, Ben, that's your worry and not mine.

― Ned Raggett, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I'm not convinced of either possibility, because there's not any real evidence. I have deep misgivings about what the US government tells people, though, and they have some interest in minimizing fear early on. All we're really relying on is a set of circumstances that reasonably suggests two mutually exclusive possibilities (sabotage or not).

So to distill the question: why, given a lack of adequate information, decide one way or the other?

If you're an NTSB investigator, you certainly need to have a hypothesis to disprove, and I suppose they have more data on accidents than bombings. That's not reassuring, though I suppose I'm not looking for reassurance.

― Benjamin, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

why, given a lack of adequate information, decide one way or the other?

In this case, because the majority of plane accidents involve mechanical failure rather than terrorism -- this leads me not to a flat-out *decision*, Ben (to use your choice of words), but a current supposition.

― Ned Raggett, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Fair enough, Ned, though I was addressing Brian's point deriding anyone who would try to make a connection between this and Sept. 11 as some sort of opportunistic conspiracy theorist, and throwing in Flight 800 for good measure (there have been two more planes that crashed after leaving JFK since summer of 1996, so he might as well have thrown those in, as well). The idea that this could be related to recent events isn't irrational. I suppose I was asking Brian, or anyone else, what would lead him to say that.

If it's the idea that the news media are driving hysteria to increase ratings, I don't buy it. Of course the main news sources do a poor job, but CNN didn't sell any commercials today, and furthermore, talk of terrorism was mostly absent from what news I saw (not only CNN, but every channel in NYC has been covering the story continuously). Brian's theory is a pretty conventional take on the mainstream news media, but it doesn't cohere with at least what I've seen and heard today.

― Benjamin, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Well, I'm hardly an authority on what happened today, so anything I said that's tied to today's event can be safely taken with far less than grain of salt...

My last statement was really just a cynical, tired burp... I didn't intend it to be any sort of grand proclamation -- but I am so sick of drowning in reports based on hysteria, pro or anti States, that having to endure another wave of that storm yet again prompted me to be a little bitchy this time. That's all. I'll keep my words to myself next time.

― Brian MacDonald, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

No, I got tetchy unfairly, and I'm sorry. Too much stress to have to wake up every morning and think "what next?" and be reconciled to the idea that it's not irrational to think that someone might blow up several city blocks or unleash the bubonic plague on the IRT.

Of course, the misery worsens when vindictive leftists tell Americans that they <i>deserve</i> to live in fear because of the vile actions of their government. But no one here would do that, right?

― Benjamin, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Well, most people I spoke to were very highly strung about this whether they were journalists or not. Journalists are no different to their non-media counterparts in this respect; the initial sinking feeling of 'oh shit, here we go again' followed by the 'calm' of things appearing to be the result of a 'normal' accident.

The most fearful person I know is my friend, a Sikh girl working at the BBC. She was worried that this was a perpetuating cycle and I had to spend ages talking her down from such a paranoid position.

― suzy, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I'm not afraid of Anthrax or getting blown up. But where DOES it end? What did you tell her Suzy?

― Tracer Hand, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

"unleash the bubonic plague" Pffff, plague's for wusses, a good dose of antibiotics would get rid of it. Now, virii (?) on th other hand...

― DG, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

from what I've heard even if opne engine fails the plane can stilll be flown for a while and piolets are trained for this. Why would the engine fall off unless there was an explosion? I still suspect sabatoge.

― Mike Hanle y, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I have a suspicious bulbule.

― Benjamin, Monday, 12 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

oh ben, that puss-filled mass has been there since i've known you. I thought you knew, but I guess just noone had the heart to tell you. Sorry

― phil, Tuesday, 13 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.