This makes the gamestop delivery disclaimer warning on pre-orders ('not liable for stolen delivery trucks') seem a bit less humorous and more apropos

"If this makes people angry at Amnesty International for fucking up their fun at the movies, it's simple proof that people are evil morons."

I think that proof would be more or less redundant in the eyes of many. Much of the rest of your post reminds me of 'the banality of evil' which is theory I often ascribe to when trying to account for bad things happening - it is simply people going about their usual business. However, methods like this film can very easily cause more of a ruckus over the method than real change in action or opinion about the real issue (torture). People going to see a nice movie being confronted with this will (I think) be far more likely to actively protest the Amnesty movie than start fighting torture - though, of course, I will be very happy to be wrong if they do rise up against torture instead

In terms of tactics, I find this disturbingly similar to displaying pictures of dead babies outside of abortion clinics.

I'm anti-torture (and pro-abortion - yes, I have gone beyond pro-choice to pro-abortion) but this route seems questionable in terms of methodology and very likely to cause resentment among people who would otherwise be on board with Amnesty's basic message

Don't mess with me when I'm smiling cause that means I have my gun with me...and I love to smile

Bah - the macbook air is entirely useless (at least for me personally). It crosses the line as portable as it is because going that far in terms of size I am willing to just lug a real notebook without its comprimises. Give the iphone or touch a keyboard via slider or hinge and it gains a whole new level of practicality - actually what I really want is just a full browser experience on my treo.

bah - put a real keyboard on it and make it as useful as it should be

Yet more evidence of the biological superiority of reptilians. When will you monkeys finally concede?

@77 Zed

"I'll stick to being offended by other, more easily verified, things -- it's not like there's a shortage"

If you don't like the evidence on that one fine but your final sentiment is the point I was making - her behaviour is not unusual or uncommon. What is noteworthy is that people are finally taking the offense that they should

Damn posting errors...

I just wanted to clarify for xodarep that I simply said fight (#25) and you projected in violence v non-violence. The fighting could be non-violent and perfectly in line with the ideas of MLK and Gandi. Currently, I think public speech and the courts are the best methods. However, as someone who has been physically threatened for being an atheist I am not prone to pacifism. My tolerance ends at your fist.

I say atheists must fight people of faith ( or resist if that helps prevent you mis-reading violence in my words ) because they will not tolerate us. All to often for people of faith tolerance means tell people of other faiths and no faith how to live. I don't claim to be enlightned - I am put off by anyone who does - and I do not want to be on top. I simply want to be given space to live as I choose. I am perfectly willing to extend that same courtesy to anyone of faith who can stay out of my business.

As offensive as her statements are, I am surprised that anyone here (or even in general) would be surprised - particularly at her being an elected official and saying such things. What she has said on this occasion still pales in comparison to public remarks about atheists by former presidents (such as Bush senior - google 'bush atheists') who denied atheists could be patriots or even citizens. This sort of thinking is par for the course with them.

My words to fellow atheists: You cannot play live and let live with people who want to destroy you. Until people of faith actually exhibit some tolerance, we have to fight the war they demand with us in yet another act of self-contradiction of (alleged) principles)

For there to be any public trust in the police there must not only be no impropriety but no appearance of impropriety. There is no such thing as a minor infraction for public servants who are given trust and power like that we give to police officers. Any sense of entitlement or such abuse must be grounds for dismissal and/or criminal punishment.

To every police officer who has ever complained about an ungrateful public, stories like this are the root of our discontent. No matter how fine you may be individually, you will be known by the worst of your ranks.

Varies by locale - many places that have the under 49cc exception still stipulate that if it can do more than 30mph it requires a license regardless

As a gamer I would like to ask everyone to please be quiet about how WoW is not a violent video game. Sure, we all know this to be true but given how games get slandered and scapegoated in the media let us not undermine a reporting screw up that actually works in our favor.

And to borrow from a comedian whose name I cannot remember, the next time someone says that games cause violence ask them what game Hitler was playing...

@47 (and others)

"No prank is funny unless it is funny to the victim."

Well, I have been shocked and I have laughed hysterically about it. So, are we only to prosecute based upon whether or not the victim of this kid's camera (and have we ascertained with certainty that there was one or did he just get caught with it somehow) got the joke? Humor is wholly subjective and cannot be the basis for any rational system of rules and/or punishment

The response to this by the authorities and several posters in this comment thread (don't project your personal childhood tragedies into other peoples stories) is out of line with the behaviour regardless of the age of the person with the shock camera. There are real crimes and problems in the world and particularly in our schools - this is not and never will be one of them. Bullying is serious but it doesn't happen via poor gags like shock toys. If all a bully ever did was trick you with a shock toy then bullying would not be a problem.

@36

Well, the theatrics may be designed to make you feel less safe (I think I may agree with you) but the claim made about them is that they make you safe. Really, it is an intrincate art form - creating something that makes people worry more about safety but is ostensibly for their safety so that it is self-justified and the basis for future abuse.

Regardless, my point about the extra checkpoint was that it was a tacit admission of their lie - it should not exist UNLESS it was ineffective.

@28

I know I should just sit back and watch because it is often more fun (at least with comment threads) but...

I will re-iterate that there is no necessary conflict with an individualist helping others - even to their own detriment.

@34

No - again that is an inappropriate level of response.

@22

Security as an individual responsibility doesn't mean you won't help others.

Pulling dumb pranks is part of being a kid (I would actually argue part of being human regardless of age) and often so is getting caught and punished for it. The problem here is that the issue of pranking is far outwieghed by the issue of an inappropriate level of punishment.

Use a shock toy in school and the response level should be take it away, possibly detention, at most suspension but not criminal charges.

I have to go with Takuan on this one, my nostalgic episode was completely ruined by the totally artifical cleanliness, it strains credulity

@4 - I would like to buy your rock ;)

I recently had an experience with security theater meant to make me feel safe that made me feel less safe in the form of an additional security screening checkpoint between connecting flights. I would have merely thought of it as an annoyance but then thought that since we had been contained in the secure area the entire time since de-boarding the presence of the additional checkpoint meant they had doubts about the area being kept secure meaning that the checkpoints presence was itself an admission that the terminal was not secure. I thought about suggesting this to a staff member but figured making my flight was better than dealing with the fallout

Todd is a great man and a good friend of mine - though I may have to have a friendly word with him about that 'last sideshow entertainer' ad claim :) Anything he does is always very entertaining and well worth the cost of admission.

Another great book that should have been in your list is How to Cheat at Everything by Simon Lovell

@4 Don't think too hard that is how people tend to get taken, perfectly easy to do it with an ordinary short match

Damn - cut myself off in mid post...

Many, if not all, games are fair in that they are not rigged but have an incredible house bias (you aren't being cheated simply trying to do something very very hard that doesn't necessarily appear so) in their win percentage combined the almost complete lack of real value of the prizes (the entire display is often only worth a few bucks - one or two players losing covers the inventory costs). This means the operators have no reason to risk cheating and the subsequent bad faith / legal issues.

I will pass over the racial commentary and get to the 'exposure'

As a sometimes carny of a sort and someone with a romanticized love of that world I am loathe to ruin the fun but I will say readers should look at these pieces with skepticism. Often they are fake reveals, similar to the magic secrets revealed TV shows that expose complicated mechanical gimmicks for tricks that are really just sleights or other methods - remember Occam's razor and beware the convincing lie

@19

I am willing to take Brown's word about using stooges since nothing he does in terms of magic effects really require them (though they would make things monumentally easier) but you have to keep in mind that he only claims not to use stooges for effects which means he does not deny using them for pranks and performances which may masquerade in the viewer's mind as magic tricks. If you could truly back him into a corner on some of the things he has done, I suspect his answer would be along the lines of 'Of course that was a paid actor but that was a dramatization not an illusion - oh you poor fool, you thought I was doing a trick when I was just putting on a short play'

A con man (and in his case an artist) on that level can easily find a way to lie with the truth.

@23

What on earth makes me think they wouldn't have taken my gun?

How about the fact that it is not something I leave at home. If my gun is in my house then I am almost certainly in there as well.

Seems like someone decided that Derren Brown's entertaining effects would make a good basis for a petty larceny scam.

It's really just sad that poorly knocking off the script of widely televised magic trick / prank can be seriously cited in the reporting of a real crime. I hope the police are keeping an eye on those staffers at the very least - if they care to solve the crime that is.

@11

Depending on your locale (I might guess it to be Brooklyn but won't make that assumption) you could justifiably (in the legal sense) shoot to kill. Even if the ad had been legitimate it doesn't let people on the property to start collecting things without the owner present.

It would seem that everyone who went there is at least guilty of trespass - you do not go onto or into other people's property and buildings without them present.

I think there is a fundamental lack of and/or complete mis - understanding of how many artists interact via their work(s) for many involved in this story and commenting upon it.

Most of my fondest memories of my time in art school are of exactly this sort of behaviour. I had an installation completely worked over (some might even say vandalized) by some of my colleagues and it was an absolute privilege and far better than any of the positive reviews and compliments it had been receiving.

A world without pranks - especially good natured ones like this that cause no harm - is not worth saving

I won't speak for that specific sticker but stickers using this gag pre-date both Stuff & Maxim magazine. The message itself on stickers goes back to the late 80's / early 90's at least. I first saw one in 1990 and it had been up for a while

An old classic that has even more implications now than it did when it first surfaced

There is also one in the bathroom of Obscurities (piercing & tattooing) in Dallas, TX

Context and delivery are everything - while I have little doubt he is a bigoted old coot (if he isn't it would be a miracle given his age and developmental environment), the vast majority of those statements could be meant and taken as humor. If you simply printed selected remarks between myself and my friends of various races & creeds it would read far worse but the truth would be that there was a complete lack of animousity or offense in them

Ventriloquism for all! Technology based vaudeville is coming

@ 133

OK, Antinous the phrase does mean what we both think it means after all.

However, I think you are misreading my comments horribly if that is what you see. I did not start with the conclusion there was no historical jesus, in fact just the opposite. To my mind it is the proponents of a historical jesus who start with their conclusion and cherry pick to support their position (which, as I stated, was once mine). I am not handpicking my facts, I am looking at all available evidence and subjecting it the same critieria most historical evidence is put to which is sadly something that rarely happens in matters involving religion and will often result in very negative consequences when it doesn't meet the status quo

@ 85

How so? I don't think that phrase means what one of us thinks it does.

Obviously, I cannot prove there was no historical jesus. However, I can and have come to the conclusion that the evidence given for such a person is extremely lacking and utterly unconvincing. I am open to seeing more evidence, in fact I have devoted a great deal of time looking for it as I was once in the position of thinking there was a historical jesus (but have always been an atheist) and upon being challenged on that point was unable to back it up and thusly changed my position.

@ 64

Antinous,

From my admittedly limited experience a good number of historians will agree with me but most know better than to make such an unpopular public outcry. The fact that there is still a case made for there being a historical jesus is a political and social situation rather than one of interpeting facts. Not to mention that most people who are doing the history have a vested interest in continuing to claim there was a historical jesus

Outside of the bible there is little to no mention or support for jesus as even just a historical figure. Given what we know or can at least assert to know of the bible's (group) authorship it is most likely that jesus is an amalgam character based on various persons and echoing ideas popular with the writers - which goes a long way to explaining some of his positional variances.

In any other case we would hardly accept one document (which is known to have several other historical inaccuracies - many of which were seemingly willfully included / manufactured) to be the deciding evidence

There is no problem with anything jesus said and jesus was not a jew because...jesus didn't exist!

Arguing about the alleged doings and beliefs of a myth is worse than most internet arguments unless they are taking place in a fan fiction forum.

"historical" jesus is bigger scam than the religion he didn't spawn

@ 2

If they were as irrelevant as they should be, the world would be a much better place and we wouldn't even bother making the obvious jokes about this list. Sadly, they still have a great deal of wealth and influence which doesn't look to be going away soon enough.

How many times do I have to warn you monkeys not to provoke my people?

I demand that the TSA laptop bag also have a faux gun impression.

http://www.boingboing.net/2008/03/04/bag-with-gun-shape.html#comments

Whenever I see an 'asking for trouble' comment I start thinking about girls in short skirts - not because the comments turn me on but because they remind me of the old rape and wardrobe nonsense arguments. Its not a perfect analogy I know so save yourself the trouble of deconstructing it because it is just what comes to my mind.

At the end of the day, security should be able to quickly and easily discern things like this from real threats and handle them with politeness and professionalism. If I want to take my faux gun impression bag to the airport the problem isn't me but rather that we have a system that can't handle this. If a delay is caused don't misdirect your anger at the person with the bag, focus on the real problem which is the ineptitude of the security then take your outrage and use it positively by taking action(s) to improve the the security

More baseless slander and libel - I have never vandalized cars, though I have scared and bewildered people in South Carolina (its not hard).

@10: If 25% are smokers then the smart businessman will be going for what attracts non-smokers, IF people actually divide along those lines in their consumer actions.

I used to have a problem with reconciling smoking bans with individual freedom but I now view smoking bans like noise ordinances or disturbing the peace. A smoker may as well be screaming and smell of feces and no one tolerates that - actually that would be better since with smoking the stink gets into your clothes and follows you home. It is at least, if not more offensive than many other behaviours we have restricted via law for years.

I always thought gerrymandering was bad, but anything that gets Americans walking (and 7 miles one way at a shot no less) may have some merits

@15

The retailers know and so do many customers - it is a selling point. The type of animal and the type of hair from the animal used are a big deal to some people. If you move from makeup brushes to ones for lathering up for a shave you will find fierce loyalties and hundreds of dollars being spent on just the right brush.

Personally though, I dry shave.

#5 Anaxaforminges

I like both games as well and your point as to the horrible things you can do to the nurses (why is their gender important though?) is well taken however, in Bioshock those nurses are actively attacking you and arguably barely or possibly not even human anymore whereas in GTA most of what you do affects harmless pedestrians.

Were I to raise a child I too would feel that it was an ok lesson that they defend themself (in a gruesome fashion) from attacks by genetically spliced monsters but that they refrain from killing random folks walking or driving on the street

Anything that gets more leeches in the home is a positive step forward

Or retro video game gear - the game thief. In one installment of the game (I think the second) you had a ball you could toss that would act as an extension of Garret's mechanical eye. There were a couple easter eggs that could be viewed by tossing the ball into odd places

Obtaining this gives purpose to life.

Harbor Freight provided me with a similar device ($20 de-icer) that uses standard camping propane containers, they also carry a larger version suitable for use as a flamethrower in your next homemade war/ sci-fi movie.

Both of these would make pretty decent anti-infantry weapons and it makes me smile, especially in our current age, to know that they are on the shelf at a store around the corner.

@ Coaxial (#7)

You are correct, I apologize to the TSA for the interim of 3 years or until an 8 year old gets harassed in this fashion. Now I have to go catch a flight to Turkey because the trans Atlantic bridge is just a dream I had last night

This link showed up in the coments on the other child search post:

http://www.tsa.gov/approach/mythbusters/8yo_noflylist.shtm

I'd like to see a TSA official response to the question of who is lying? Their website or their agent who is telling people their children are on the list. I'm pretty sure it would be double speak nonsense and that nothing of value would come of it except perhaps an good BB post or bit for The (A) Daily Show. I'd suggest the parents carry a printout of that page from the TSA site but it would probably just get them even worse treatment.

I can't stop flying entirely but I have made it a last resort as the result of this sort of thing and many other indiginities

I used to spend 6 weeks a year in Orlando as contracted entertainment for Universal Studio's HHN. The Appliance Direct guy & Scratch and Dent World lady became a highlight of those gigs - I ended up having to record their work and send it out to verify my stories to people about them. This is more horrifying and less amusing IMO

The Tarbell magic reference is a great piece of magic history.

This is an interesting phrase from the copy: "read or write" ??

@12

If you want the age of terrorism to end you simply need to stop being afraid of people taking pictures of public spaces. Defeat your fear and you defeat terrorism.

The reason some people get worked up over nonsense like grandparents being banned for taking pics at a mall is because the people who come up with such bans and those who think this is ok are the ones holding us back from victory.

Some of my ferrets love music

Twig folded but I'll still direct this at him:

Would you similarly say that I can make terrorist jokes at airport security checkpoints then and shouldn't be hassled unless I commit a terrorist act? They're just words but they'll get me detained, removed from flights, and potentially worse...

@ 21

That is a slur on magic!

The real news here may be that that a Wiccan managed to get such a position with the administration screening candidates for their political and religious views rather than competence. She must have cast a heck of a spell to get the job - fear her powers!

Regular zip ties can be unlocked and re-used as well. You just need a paper clip, knife point, nail file, or similar and a basic understanding of how the tie works.

Mostly good for if you are short on ties or need to get into something without it being apparent - I have used this for some stage gags & escapes where the zip provides the appearance of something staying sealed

"Material affluence enables choice, which leads to peculiar depression."

-in SOME people! The rest of us laugh at or pity the whiners who can't handle their own good fortune and suggest they suck it up and/or hand it over to us. If anyone here is having trouble coping with their affluence, I will gladly help redistribute it for them.

I'm sure this will quickly get corrected if wrong but my recollection and a quick bit of searching seems to indicate that most of those calls were made on the in flight phones (seat back phones) not cell phones (and those cell phone calls that were managed were close to a technological miracle by many accounts) and only a few people successfully made calls - nowhere near most of the passengers.

Hopefully this doesn't collapse into a conspiracy thread

If you can't find a simple fixture and cord, you aren't in a hardware store - they are harder not to find than to find, in my experience. Worst case scenario - buy a cheap lamp and and bust away the rest of it.

As for stiffening it - run a length of stiff wire along the cord and then wrap both in the sheathing of your choice (colored electrical tape) perhaps less elegant but just as functional and the same basic look

@ #8 & #9

I won't speak absolutely for this video as the camera is much easier to fool than the live observer but the act is genuine in that it does exist and has been done by various different performers - though the volume of water is often exaggerated.

On this video specifically though, the hidden hose explanation doesn't work for the water he expels when bent over at the end of the video - there are no blocked angles there to hide the hose.

It is not self explanatory - particularly in debate where self-explanatory is often code for I have no supporting evidence.

Further, they do not make a regular income in the sense that someone working a traditional job does - their incomes vary incredibly and they often go through periods of incredible losses - look at Mike Matusow (I am certain I spelled his last name wrong - "the mouth") as one example among many.

And, being gambling on different level or of a different sort than roulette or football is still gambling!

I have never said anything about the skill (I don't believe there is any) in playing slots - professionally or otherwise. I simply brought it up as something that existed in response to your original statement that the existence of professional poker players went towards poker not being gambling. Either quit trying to make baseless distractions from the point(s) or do a better job of it please. I have done nothing but agree with you on the level of skill involved with good poker play but that skill does not make poker any less an example gambling.

If you want it to be a special case of gambling fine - but it is still gambling by your words here. However, I will point out again there are are other forms of gambling with people making a living and doing the sorts of things you describe (keeping books, etc) mostly they are playing other card games and sports book people. Knowing both professional poker players and sports betters I can tell you that the serious sports people make less dramatic but more consistent wins and display insane skill in their collection and analysis of data

Not a dream and I will agree right now that is insanely silly - however, they do exist and their tournaments have been featured on the same sports networks that often cover poker. Further, I did not compare them to any professional poker player and agree that such a comparison would probably be nonsense. I have a great deal of respect for the skill of high level poker players. But all of that is irrelevant and you have not addressed my question, so I will ask again:

How does the mere existence of professional poker players go to show that poker is not gambling?

There are some real issues to be found in this story but denying that poker is gambling is not only silly but draws away from those real issues.

@ Graham

Please explain how the existence of professional poker players goes towards proving that poker is not gambling.Keeping in mind that there are professional slot players as well - and the issue (at least as you have raised it thus far) is not success or intelligence but simply existence.

While I will agree that poker involves a great deal of skill and that over time a skilled player will almost always win out over the random luck of the unskilled, there is always a chance the unskilled will win.

Regardless - see the definition of gambling:

intransitive verb
1 a: to play a game for money or property b: to bet on an uncertain outcome
2: to stake something on a contingency : take a chance

1a - covers any poker game played for anything other than fun
1b - covers every poker game with betting unless the players absolutely know each others cards
2 - see 1a & 1b

Poker IS gambling, get over it and move on. We all understand that good players (greatly)mitigate the risks of chance but those risks are still there

I am a little saddened that no one has started taking bets on the outcome of the case yet

@ 2

That story bears some further scrutiny & skepticism - here's a start from snopes:

http://www.snopes.com/horrors/drugs/candymeth.asp

The real effect of such additives per taste is highly dubious - go to any rehab and ask around

I'm leaning heavily towards drug war propaganda rather than fact

Honestly, if this was remotely local (same country) my wife I would likely make a trip...

I would make a completely unscientific guess that the majority of situations calling for an extra key are simply to get into the vehicle but even if I am wrong I think you may be overestimating the number of transponders keys v non-transponder keys but that is an equally unscientific guess based on personal experience and is likely related to income and age of myself and the majority of people I know / meet well enough to know about their keys.

The best solution IMO is to keep a spare key in your wallet - I had a couple cars come with spare keys and credit card sized holders for them to place in the wallet. A simple DIY version is to staple around the edges of a couple business cards to create a pocket and keep a key in that, inside your wallet. Or you can just shove the key in there if that works for you. I have locked my keys in my car but never my wallet...

@ Benjamin

Point taken - having apple and its fanboys around is worth it for the comedic fodder they provide but every now and then you have to troll them a little with a jab. And btw, I love apples - every time I eat one I imagine I am devouring a portion of Jobs soul

@ Gobo

It will take a lot more than simply being forthright and more informative about delays to repair the damage the airlines have done to their credibility - at least for me.

Isn't the person in that crappy commercial a member of the flight crew (pilot) anyway who then talks to the tower? There is a notable difference between this and some annoying passenger chiming in.

Also, down with Apple and the iPhone.

Tasering to death only happens to obvious non-threats, a person bringing this through Boston will likely be shot and/or sent to Gitmo and their family billed a couple million dollars to reimburse the city.

I'll take two weeks.

@ David

I should never post before noon - I tend to take things too much at face value when I am up too early.

I'm not real good with German so I may have missed something but this isn't future anything - it is just old technology. File folders on walls is an old and in some cases still very practical way of doing things. The only novel element here are the computer icon mimicking labels and that is still questionable in terms of originality as labels were used in this fashion before such desktop icons existed.

One of the most common examples are folders for daysheets, setlists, etc on tours which are posted in this fashion in or near the production office. It was in the 90's that I first heard someone jokingly reference desktop icons in relation to such a display but the practice goes back to at least the 1980's in my personal experience (seen then in an institutional office context) and probably much before then.

Obligatory Simpsons Reference:

'Some of these must be duplicates'

'O-ray-gone-O??'

Ripley's covered a similar experiment in Europe years ago - I believe it was in France.

Just felt the need to comment because this is such a fantastic book. I've said that reading it should be a pre-requisite for stepping on a stage regardless of the show because the quality of entertainment in the world would rise dramatically. It is nice to see these lessons being applied to other mediums as well.

As already stated repeatedly above this case is a hoax and a fairly obvious one. However, ear pointing is real and relatively easy to have done by various practioners (not doctors). It has been available for years and there is good documentation of it which runs counter to almost every claim on this hoax site.

The strength of this illusion is that even with it's incredible age it still lives on and has been the basis for a great number of effects which continue to play in many of the best reviewed shows in the world. Certainly this 'classic' version may not be impressive on the levels which most of the commentators here are functioning but there is a great deal to appreciate here if magic is your 'thing'. Certainly anyone who cannot discern or find the method would be too dense and incapable of internet searches to warrant any concern beyond forcible sterilization for the bettering of the gene pool but magic is not simply method and if you only watch to be fooled you or prove you aren't fooled you are missing out.

@Garret

My goal was not 'pedantry' (sic), when I see a factual error I correct it because my experience has been that things tend to go better when people operate with the correct information. When I am in error I prefer and actually often enjoy or am at least thankful for being corrected. If you want something pedantic, I will point out that Merriam-Webster does not recognize 'pedantry' as a word. Send the flowers and candy to your former educators who let believe this falsehood probably along with many others. I do feel better for having provided information that was apparently unknown to you before - if you don't appreciate it, that's your issue.

I have to wonder if you have ever played WoW since you characterize it as simply gathering electronic tokens. My experience of it was only enriched by recognizing the elements the designers borrowed from and found the interaction with other players to be valuable and stimulating for many of my other creative endeavors. As with much of life, you get out what you put in and my WoW time was not significantly different than my time reading books or watching currently relevant TV that provide much fodder for me onstage. I did not lose any time to WoW in terms of work I might have done rather it was a pleasant leisure activity that more often than not contributed to my creative endeavors. Perhaps you should try playing a bit...

PT Barnum never said "There is a sucker born every minute" and the mis-attributing of that phrase to him only goes to prove that the speaker has missed out on the most important lessons of Barnum's work and philosophy towards showmanship. even if you were to make the case that PT would have agreed with the sentiment of the quote it should still be qualified that he would never take the risk of saying such things even in confidence because it would undermine his real work of entertaining them. Barnum didn't think people were ignorant suckers he thought they wanted grandiose entertainment and he was willing to create that bigger than life story for them.

As for WoW being a trap - when I played WoW I was still actively writing and performing live over 250 days a year and the other players I knew were largely in the same situation. Creative people often enjoy consuming other people's creative content but that doesn't stop them working themselves.

Strangled herself with her own cuffs is about as likely as was strangled by a unicorn.

I work as an escape artist and as such I am familiar with all kinds of restraints from the most common to some very esoteric and the only way you could strangle yourself with your own cuffs would be if they were of a type almost never used (particularly in this type of situation) and if it was a deliberate suicide. Even if this woman was an undiscovered contortionist of heretofor unimagined abilities this would be an unbelievable feat.

It sounds as if the detention was legitimate but the idea that she killed herself in this manner is offensively ludicrous or an admission of incredibly irresponsible restraint use by the officers in question. A person restrained with common cuffs in the manner used by law enforcement can potentially escape from them unsupervised but they cannot strangle themself unwittingly - and to do so purposefully would be a momumental athletic achievement

One of the unexpected joys of my life has been tripping out Icke fans. Doing so at the Denver airport is just that much easier. The artwork is great, IMO, but a slightly odd choice for an airport still.