Bug Posted March 3, 2008 Share Posted March 3, 2008 Houses are too big around here. True. Things will get worse before they get better. But really big changes are coming this way within our lifetime. Most of them will hurt. Burning down a few houses isn't doing anything but feeding the arsonists' egos. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StevenSeagal Posted March 3, 2008 Author Share Posted March 3, 2008 You guys are right. You've made me see the error of my ways. I hope the developers use the insurance money to cut down some old growth to make room for more mansions. After all, everybody needs AT LEAST 4,000 sq ft in a new, gated development. Â My point, for the 3rd time: The developers WILL do EXACTLY that. Oh wait, you mean maybe ELF's big statement (if they really did it) might have them reconsidering their ways? Â Â Â Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted March 3, 2008 Share Posted March 3, 2008 Why does this fall under the classification of "domestic terrorism"? It was a pure property crime that had nothing to do with kidnapping, bombing, hijacking, murder; the usual definition of terrorism, which (should) be defined as crimes against people, not just property. Uninhabited property can't be 'terrorized'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chucK Posted March 3, 2008 Share Posted March 3, 2008 "It's a leaderless ideology," Gutt said. "Unlike traditional organized crime, it's a different animal. So anyone inspired by their message who commits violence against people or property . . . that's an ELF act." Â Makes it hard to tell who to rant about! Does this mean Rob is an ELF? Â Oh and by the way, good job guys! I think you have come from behind to overtake the nwhikers.net thread. I knew you could do it. Â Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chucK Posted March 3, 2008 Share Posted March 3, 2008 What would be really interesting is if the government used all it's extra-legal new anti-terrorist stuff (maybe a little wiretapping, a dash of torture lite, a little refusal of counsel) to find the culprit and get evidence and a confession. Â But now the twist in the tale is that turns out to be an insurance scam, so not terrorism. Smart lawyer for wealthy developer/arsonist figures this out in 10 seconds and gets his client off by questioning constitutionality of FBI actions, and it GOES TO THE SUPREME COURT BABY!!!!!!! Â how will it turn out? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbw1966 Posted March 4, 2008 Share Posted March 4, 2008 Most insurance policies specifically exclude acts of terrorism. If this was insurance fraud they better hope they had an endorsement covering terrorist acts. Â Â Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billcoe Posted March 4, 2008 Share Posted March 4, 2008 Most insurance policies specifically exclude acts of terrorism. If this was insurance fraud they better hope they had an endorsement covering terrorist acts.  I'm sure they'll get to that when they're done waterboarding the developers who made the mistake of thinking they were building some houses that some fortunate homeowner families would just love. Now those families who were thinking of buying those homes will be forced to move into Robs parents basement with Rob. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billcoe Posted March 4, 2008 Share Posted March 4, 2008 (edited) Smiley face. Â opps, wrong one. Edited March 4, 2008 by billcoe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PLC Posted March 4, 2008 Share Posted March 4, 2008 First off, it's not uncommon for a $2m house to take a couple years to sell. That's part of what drives up the price. Also, the Street of Dreams was just the first phase in a much larger development and the first section of houses take the longest to sell, because owners don't want to deal with construction traffic and noise. Â Secondly, insurance will not cover the full cost of the homes. Large contractors don't burn down houses for insurance money. They just declare bankruptcy and continue on with their business. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PLC Posted March 4, 2008 Share Posted March 4, 2008 I happen to live in a 4000 square foot house in Woodinville, but my house has been around for almost 15 years, so I guess I'm not in any danger of hippies burning it down... Â To all those who oppose "sprawl" - where, exactly, do you think all the people who've moved here over the past twenty years should live? Sprawl is a sign of progress, it means people are rich enough to afford their own home and a little piece of land. It is an unmitigated good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fairweather Posted March 4, 2008 Share Posted March 4, 2008 Seems to me, given the current real estate market, that there is a high likelihood this is just an insurance scam--but who knows at this point. I will say that the comments posted by Tvashtarketena and Rob are utterly disgusting. I wonder what Tvashie's fantasy ACLU buddies would think of his support for this act. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prole Posted March 4, 2008 Share Posted March 4, 2008 Savagely abhorrent, thoroughly despicable, shamefully disgraceful, undeniably egregious, downright sinful, absolutely inhuman... The outpouring of sanctimonious indignation and sympathies for parasitic real-estate developer/barons, that is! Â Everyday this place sounds more and more of the shrill clucking and tsk-tsking of the nursing home day-room. Take your meds, drink your Nutrifeed, watch some Matlock, and STFU. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PLC Posted March 4, 2008 Share Posted March 4, 2008 So, some dude risks everything to go into business for himself, providing good jobs for dozens of people and supplying goods which are in ready demand and somehow he's a parasite? I don't think you know what that word means. Â Actually, it means exactly the opposite of what you think it means. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PLC Posted March 4, 2008 Share Posted March 4, 2008 Real estate for homes in the $1M + price range is a very seperate market. Demand for less expensive homes has dried up in the past six months for a variety of reasons, none of which should impact the demand for luxury properties. Â I just looked at zillow, and in a two mile radius around my home, there have been 14 $1m+ sales in the past six months, which is just slightly below average. Â Again, it is very normal for a $2m home to take two years or more to sell. When I first moved into my neighborhood, there was a house for sale for $7.2m which took four years to sell. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prole Posted March 4, 2008 Share Posted March 4, 2008 (edited) supplying goods which are in ready demand  Real estate for homes in the $1M + price range is a very seperate market. Demand for less expensive homes has dried up in the past six months for a variety of reasons, none of which should impact the demand for luxury properties. I just looked at zillow, and in a two mile radius around my home, there have been 14 $1m+ sales in the past six months, which is just slightly below average.  Again, it is very normal for a $2m home to take two years or more to sell. When I first moved into my neighborhood, there was a house for sale for $7.2m which took four years to sell.  Keep diggin' buddy. Eventually you'll get that parasite thing figured out. Edited March 4, 2008 by prole Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fairweather Posted March 4, 2008 Share Posted March 4, 2008 You're the parasite, my self-absorbed little comrade. Need to be stomped out, you and your ELF buddy gnats. Please accelerate your earlier boasted plans to leave this country. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlpineK Posted March 4, 2008 Share Posted March 4, 2008 I have a feeling that as the price of oil goes up folks who live in, "dream homes," will feel the pinch of transportation costs. In the end they'll all buy condos in the city and take the bus. Â Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevbone Posted March 4, 2008 Share Posted March 4, 2008 Terrorism wrapped in flame. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billcoe Posted March 4, 2008 Share Posted March 4, 2008 I have a feeling that as the price of oil goes up folks who live in, "dream homes," will feel the pinch of transportation costs. In the end they'll all by condos in the city and take the bus. Â The people who will be feeling this particular pain is the poor, who will be forced to move to transportaionly (made that up) undesirable areas ...shacks in the hinterlands so to speak. Â Someone paying 2 mill for a home will be driving past the shacks in the Hummer and still paying $5 a gallon for gas. Â You dumb mf prick assholes who support this thing: I find your attitude: that the rule of law is not good enough for you, and that it's fine with you that any angry asswipe with a bic lighter gets to make the rules and risk life and property, abhorrent of the first order. Had the fire spread to the nearby woods then houses with low income families and burned some poor child or killed some of the firefighters who responded.....Jesus H Christ you dudes are fucked in the head. Â So when some other disagreeable shithead comes to burn your house down for some other imagined "offense" in his head, I hope you remember these words. Â If you really think increasing inner city density is a good thing, as I do, then put your money where you mouth is. Build inner city yourselves, and get involved to increase density and exclude growth on farmland. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prole Posted March 4, 2008 Share Posted March 4, 2008 You're the parasite, my self-absorbed little comrade. Need to be stomped out, you and your ELF buddy gnats. Please accelerate your earlier boasted plans to leave this country. Â Sounds like yur gittin' ready fur a gnat-hunt! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
minx Posted March 4, 2008 Share Posted March 4, 2008 wow...i seldom find myself agreeing with Bill but this time I do. Â Don't build on my farmland. It'd be nice however to not go bankrupt trying to permit a small house on my acreage but that's another story. Â i live in the sticks (sort of). it was a calculated decision. while my commute is not short, i have shortened it considerably over the years. i continually evaluate my options for mass transit which suck at this point but appear to be improving. Â i live where i do and commute to job so i don't have to drive as far to go play and run my small business. how far and how often do you drive after work to go pursue your hobbies? Â as for living in the city, i suppose i could. i suppose i'd go nuts too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaskadskyjKozak Posted March 4, 2008 Share Posted March 4, 2008 I have a feeling that as the price of oil goes up folks who live in, "dream homes," will feel the pinch of transportation costs. In the end they'll all by condos in the city and take the bus. Â The people who will be feeling this particular pain is the poor, who will be forced to move to transportaionly (made that up) undesirable areas ...shacks in the hinterlands so to speak. Â Someone paying 2 mill for a home will be driving past the shacks in the Hummer and still paying $5 a gallon for gas. Â You dumb mf prick assholes who support this thing: I find your attitude: that the rule of law is not good enough for you, and that it's fine with you that any angry asswipe with a bic lighter gets to make the rules and risk like and property, abhorrent of the first order. Had the fire spread to the nearby woods then houses with low income families and burned some poor child or killed some of the firefighters who responded.....Jesus H Christ you dudes are fucked in the head. Â So when some other disagreeable shithead comes to burn your house down for some other imagined "offense" in his head, I hope you remember these words. Â If you really think increasing inner city density is a good thing, as I do, then put your money where you mouth is. Build inner city yourselves, and get involved to increase density and exclude growth on farmland. Â Â As for SS's original fears about the right using this story to further marginalize environmentally-conscious folks. Looks like some of the posters on this site, by applauding this disgusting criminal act - have done just that. No need for a Rush or O'Reilley to do it - just call on Prole and TTK. Â Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prole Posted March 4, 2008 Share Posted March 4, 2008 Actually, I didn't applaud the act and I don't necessarily find the tactics appropriate. What I find absolutely hilarious are the contortions necessary on your parts to find language invective enough to your express your pious outrage. But then, I expect nothing less from the CC.com Victorian Ladies Sewing Circle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sexual_chocolate Posted March 4, 2008 Share Posted March 4, 2008 this disgusting criminal act  why does this bring up so much vitriolic hatred for you and others? just curious....  is it because the perps MIGHT be people who you disagree with? or do you feel really badly for the project owner? or maybe the people who were denied a wonderful new house to live in? or perhaps it's concern for the house itself, you know, like an animistic worship of house spirit deities?  would you feel the same anger if it turns out to be insurance fraud, and it was the project owner him or herself?  i mean, i understand the american attachment to houses (well, actually i don't!), but i still want to know from someone who's angry as to exactly why an act like this causes such amount of anger.  Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaskadskyjKozak Posted March 4, 2008 Share Posted March 4, 2008 why does this bring up so much vitriolic hatred for you and others? just curious.... Â Vitriolic hatred? Sorry, but your attempts at slanderous mischaracterization (for what end? rhetorical? blindness?). Outrage is not hatred, my friend. Â My outrage as expressed in this thread is more towards the reaction of those who actually applaud this type of misdeed, gleefully, joyfully, probably with a hard-on - "yeah yeah, burn it down, destroy, that's the way". Â This attitude threatens civilization. It's dangerous. Just because you disagree with the way others live, and can not effect change as you want does not justify throwing rule of law out the window. It's exactly what we've seen in all violent revolutions, and totalitarian regimes. Â And BTW, this is exactly what Islam - you know moderate Islam - is accused of regarding terrorist acts. Tacit support. Support. At least sympathizing with the goals. Â It is extremely discomforting knowing we have the same types of folks in our midst. Â Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.