537 Comments Posted by Felyne

wrote:
Lori, honey, this is someone elses site, not your own. It is there perogative to keep or remove your comments, whether you appreciate it or not. Clearly they do not appreciate your comments, so perhaps keep that sort to yourself.
wrote:
... funniest, provided Mr Motts isn't offended, of course. ;)
wrote:
I agree with ~Me, that is that funniest question asked.
wrote:
Looks like a soap dispenser
wrote:
Would the real Amie please stand up, I repeat, would the real Amie please stand up.
wrote:
what side to pick... what side to pick...

Asbestos, if stable, is quite safe. Disturbed, and in particular crumbling asbestos is the dangerous stuff you don't want to play with. From what I read, the AntiCuriositySeekers are blaming the CSs for disturbing the stuff in the first place, the Curiosity Seekers are saying the damage they've caused is insignificant compared to the power of The Force. You're pushing shit uphill if you're trying to blame collapsed water sodden ceiling tiles on a CS, sure they've probably done a lot of damage and helped expediate the death of the building, but an decrepid building with asbestos is going to give you grief someday. As for the illegal handling and cost cutting, get factual information you can back up, wild allegations only discredit your cause when they cant be substantiated.

Hopefully those burning asbestos aren't dumb enough to stick around watching the bonfire, if they did, they're lives after 40 aren't going to be pleasant for them.

*looks at the smile* Have A Nice Day!
wrote:
.. nevermind...

*wanders into the darkness*
wrote:
Define 'gainfully'
wrote:
Oh, and stop pimpin' out the boss.
wrote:
Hrrm, not feeling any oilpaintingness from this angle. :(

This was the previous shot, taken by the window, no?
wrote:
For some reason I can't stop imagining an oil painting of this photo.
wrote:
Aren't the ones with their own toilets called jail cells?