Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Discarded AT&T Microwave Bunkers For Sale

Posted by chrisd on Wed Sep 11, 2002 08:38 PM
from the good-place-for-a-party dept.
InitZero writes "American Tower is selling nearly 2000 old AT&T Long Line microwave locations that are no longer needed thanks to fiber. These towers -- spaced about 50 miles in every direction -- and their associated bunkers were designed to withstand World War III. The average location (find one near you) has two acres of land, 1,800 square feet worth of bunker and a tower of 200 feet. Some locations still have their hardware (60KW generator, microwave feedlines, equipment racks, feed horns, etc.) All this for an average price of just $25,000. If you're a ham radio operator, building a data center or just looking for a place to put your wireless access point, these locations look awesome."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold:
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • Slashdotted? by Phroggy (Score:2) Wednesday September 11 2002, @09:04PM
    • Re:Slashdotted? by rmohr02 (Score:3) Wednesday September 11 2002, @09:12PM
    • Re:Slashdotted? (Score:5, Funny)

      by Anonvmous Coward (589068) on Wednesday September 11 2002, @09:15PM (#4242143)
      "No replies yet, and it's slashdotted already?!?"

      Wouldn't most people read the article before replying? ::eyeroll::

      Okay, getting back on topic, is it possible to aim these things? I have a noisy neighbor that I'd like to ...uh.. provide free heating to.
      [ Parent ]
      • Hah! by wiredog (Score:2) Thursday September 12 2002, @06:35AM
      • Re:Slashdotted? by Anonvmous Coward (Score:2) Thursday September 12 2002, @02:15AM
        • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
      • Re:Slashdotted? by Anonvmous Coward (Score:2) Thursday September 12 2002, @02:18AM
        • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
      • 3 replies beneath your current threshold.
    • Re:Slashdotted? by TheKey (Score:1) Wednesday September 11 2002, @09:15PM
    • Re:Slashdotted? by brad3378 (Score:2) Wednesday September 11 2002, @09:19PM
      • Re:Slashdotted? by SpaceLifeForm (Score:1) Wednesday September 11 2002, @10:14PM
    • Re:Slashdotted? by sporty (Score:2) Wednesday September 11 2002, @09:38PM
    • Re:Slashdotted? by packeteer (Score:2) Wednesday September 11 2002, @10:27PM
    • Re:Slashdotted? by G-funk (Score:2) Wednesday September 11 2002, @11:17PM
    • 3 replies beneath your current threshold.
  • microwaves kick ass by Anonymous Coward (Score:2) Wednesday September 11 2002, @09:05PM
  • Google cache by diesel66 (Score:1) Wednesday September 11 2002, @09:05PM
  • EMP Hardening by davidstrauss (Score:1) Wednesday September 11 2002, @09:07PM
    • Re:EMP Hardening (Score:4, Informative)

      by Phasedshift (415064) on Wednesday September 11 2002, @09:16PM (#4242158)
      According to the page that is linked in the summary http://www.drgibson.com/towers/ It mentions:

      The buildings supporting the towers were hardened against a nuclear blast, and some of them in high-danger areas were underground. The towers themselves were engineered to withstand all but a close (within 5 miles) blast. The microwave horns were covered with a protective shield to keep out not only the elements, but also radioactive fallout. The buildings were shielded with copper to protect the equipment against the Electromagnetic Pulse associated with a nuclear explosion. Foot-thick concrete walls protected the vital electronics and people inside the base installations of these towers. Thick copper grounds went deep into the bedrock beneath each tower. Fallout showers, backup generators, sleeping facilities all existed to keep the network up in times of war.

      So while the equipment itself is likely hardened, the building is shielded.. It doesn't say how much shielding, etc there is however :)
      [ Parent ]
    • Re: EMP Hardening by Black Parrot (Score:2) Wednesday September 11 2002, @09:22PM
    • Re:EMP Hardening by djupedal (Score:1) Wednesday September 11 2002, @10:04PM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • GeekNet by ni5mo (Score:1) Wednesday September 11 2002, @09:07PM
    • Re:GeekNet by CrackersnSoup (Score:1) Wednesday September 11 2002, @10:50PM
      • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
    • Re:GeekNet by nick_with_a_z (Score:1) Friday September 13 2002, @01:55AM
  • Let me get this straight ... by RimmerExperience (Score:1) Wednesday September 11 2002, @09:07PM
  • yes maybe but... by neo8750 (Score:1) Wednesday September 11 2002, @09:07PM
  • /.ed Already by Honig the Apothecary (Score:1) Wednesday September 11 2002, @09:07PM
  • No kidding... I remember these well. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by djupedal (584558) on Wednesday September 11 2002, @09:07PM (#4242077)
    I was an Inspector on these in Northern Calif. I monitored the construction for a private firm. Concrete pours and steel, etc.

    They are hell-for-stout, no doubt. You could wipe out everything above ground in the US, and still get a dial tone. Most are in remote locations, naturally, and include fuel storage tanks (propane) and blast shielding. Just the ticket for anyone looking for the ultimate private bomb shelter.
  • Sadly... (Score:5, Funny)

    by descentr (296258) <descentr4.yahoo@com> on Wednesday September 11 2002, @09:08PM (#4242079) Homepage
    It appears these bunkers will NOT protect you from the fury of Slashdot.
  • World War III... really? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Devil's BSD (562630) on Wednesday September 11 2002, @09:08PM (#4242082) Homepage
    Assuming there was a nuclear holocaust/World War III, how would a 500 ft microwave tower resist being blown down by a nuclear blast? Even if there is the bunker, the transmission effectiveness will be effectively zero without the tower.
    • Re:World War III... really? by descentr (Score:2) Wednesday September 11 2002, @09:11PM
      • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
    • Re:World War III... really? by garcia (Score:2) Wednesday September 11 2002, @09:14PM
    • blast pressure (Score:5, Informative)

      by rebelcool (247749) on Wednesday September 11 2002, @09:15PM (#4242147)
      is measured in lb/sq. inch. The reason the blast is so damaging to buildings is because of wall size magnifies the force to a few tons of pressure on the side of the wall. The towers if you notice, are open, thin bars that present little surface area for the blast to contact. What is exposed is well anchored.
      [ Parent ]
      • Re:blast pressure by adamjaskie (Score:1) Wednesday September 11 2002, @10:19PM
      • Re:pedantry by lars_stefan_axelsson (Score:1) Thursday September 12 2002, @04:23AM
      • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
    • Re:World War III... really? by Janitor (Score:1) Wednesday September 11 2002, @11:50PM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • Thats a lot of pixels... by DrShaggy (Score:1) Wednesday September 11 2002, @09:09PM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • This brings back fond memories. by Gumber (Score:2) Wednesday September 11 2002, @09:09PM
  • Not useful, is it? by Dancin_Santa (Score:1) Wednesday September 11 2002, @09:09PM
  • Fiber + Microwaves by messiertom (Score:1) Wednesday September 11 2002, @09:09PM
  • Idea! by Com2Kid (Score:2) Wednesday September 11 2002, @09:10PM
    • Re:Idea! by settonull (Score:1) Wednesday September 11 2002, @10:11PM
      • Re:Idea! by antisocial77 (Score:1) Wednesday September 11 2002, @10:59PM
        • Re:Idea! by operagost (Score:1) Thursday September 12 2002, @02:23PM
    • Re:Idea! by Pig Hogger (Score:2) Wednesday September 11 2002, @10:20PM
    • Re:Idea! by Kredal (Score:2) Thursday September 12 2002, @12:43AM
    • Re:Idea! by jonbrewer (Score:2) Thursday September 12 2002, @02:28PM
      • Re:Idea! by Com2Kid (Score:1) Thursday September 12 2002, @02:48PM
    • 4 replies beneath your current threshold.
  • Cool... by Mikeydude750 (Score:1) Wednesday September 11 2002, @09:10PM
  • by cygnus (17101) on Wednesday September 11 2002, @09:11PM (#4242105) Homepage
    AT LAST! a location for my echelon spoofing site. ;)
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • a thought by sstory (Score:1) Wednesday September 11 2002, @09:13PM
    • Re:a thought by geekindustries (Score:1) Thursday September 12 2002, @08:55AM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • When in the market, also consider.. by tedDancin (Score:1) Wednesday September 11 2002, @09:13PM
  • Awesome and cheap.. by mcraw (Score:1) Wednesday September 11 2002, @09:14PM
  • These sites are awesome! (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Newer Guy (520108) on Wednesday September 11 2002, @09:14PM (#4242140)
    I've been inside of several of them and they're simply awesome and must have cost a fortune to build and maintain. They have living quarters and water tanks. The equipment mostly ran off of banks of single cell (2 volt) batteries that were kept charged by utility power and generator. They used klystron transmitters I understand. Another cold war relic made obsolete I guess..but I can't help but be nostalgic for just a bit.. Can you?
    • Re:These sites are awesome! (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Nate B. (2907) on Wednesday September 11 2002, @09:34PM (#4242254) Homepage Journal
      I'm too young in the business to know, but I've been told by some of the elder techs in the company (we maintain a private microwave system) that the AT&T sites were laid out so identically to each other that a tech who knew his way around one could be blindfolded and taken into any site and would be able to work on the equipment. AT&T and the Bell System were big on standards so I don't doubt the accuracy of this claim.

      Even as careful as we are to try to maintain a standard layout, each of the sites I maintain all have their own quirks. But then, we have auxillary equipment that varies from site to site so that screws up the attempt at standardization.

      [ Parent ]
    • Re:These sites are awesome! by Mt._Honkey (Score:2) Wednesday September 11 2002, @10:55PM
  • More Long Lines information (Score:5, Informative)

    by ISAKMP (85791) on Wednesday September 11 2002, @09:15PM (#4242144)
    Mark Foster has another really nice Long Lines site [shore.net] that includes a table [shore.net] that lists many Long Lines facilites in many states, describes the equipment installed there and has photos of some of the facilities. He also provides the technical specifications [shore.net] for the construction of these sites, as well as photos from tour [shore.net] he took of a still-operating one.
  • Slashdotted Already? (Score:5, Informative)

    by MoodyLoner (76734) <moodyloner.ca@gmai l . com> on Wednesday September 11 2002, @09:15PM (#4242150) Homepage Journal

    Guess I'm not the only one to dream of owning a nuke-resistant bunker.



    Here's the Google cache [216.239.51.100] of the site map to salivate over...



    Good news if you're back east or in the Bay Area, bad news otherwise.



    Say, wonder if Mrs. Moody would mind running a home daycare out of one of these?



  • Made for parties (Score:5, Funny)

    by fiori (45848) on Wednesday September 11 2002, @09:16PM (#4242165) Homepage
    Just fill the microwave horn with popcorn and fire-up that 60kW generator.

  • Built to withstand World War 3? by cperciva (Score:2) Wednesday September 11 2002, @09:17PM
  • Not just microwave by Nate B. (Score:2) Wednesday September 11 2002, @09:18PM
  • build a giant tesla coil by fleps (Score:1) Wednesday September 11 2002, @09:20PM
  • Broadband 2 boonies (Score:5, Interesting)

    by CrazyDuke (529195) on Wednesday September 11 2002, @09:20PM (#4242185)
    Am I the only one thinking of the possibility of buying 2 within signal distance of each other, one in a city where broadband is actually affordable, and one out in the boonies or small cities where at best people get 53K dialup and using it to set up a broadband ISP? $50,000 initial investment + permits is pretty steep still, though.

    Hell, or get paid for offering an alternative route for congested hops.
    • Re:Broadband 2 boonies (Score:5, Informative)

      by adolf (21054) <adolf@phreaker.net> on Wednesday September 11 2002, @10:53PM (#4242513)
      These things aren't in cities, for the most part.

      The one I'm familiar with is near Mount Cory, Ohio, and is situated in the middle of a corn field (or is it soybeans, this year?). It consists of a man-made hill, twenty-or-so feet tall, with a couple of small buildings on top. The tower itself is as other posters have described - not terribly tall (less than 200 feet), with an incredibly wide base. Giant feedhorns flow gracefully from it. I'm told by people who've been into it that the space below ground is much more expansive.

      High-tension transmission lines live nearby to supply power. It has its own substation.

      It would be a very poor choice as a location from which to which to distribute massive amounts of bandwidth.

      For one thing, a wireless ISP [comwavz.net] set up their NOC in an abandoned local telco building about a quarter-mile down the road from there. They constructed a rather monstrous, more modern-looking tower. I'd estimate height at 600' - it positively dwarfs the AT&T relay station.

      For another thing, it must have made more sense to build new, than buy the little relay station, or lease tower space, or whatever. Else, they wouldn't have done it. And if a couple-hundred feet would've been OK for this ruler-flat Ohio landscape, I doubt they'd have gone as far up as they did.

      And ironically, I had a conversation that went something like this when I had the comwavz installers at my house, not long after service rollout:

      Him: So, the DS-3 should be up Real Soon Now, after AT&T gets their head screwed on straight. For now, all we have is a T1.

      Me: Well, that's fine. What's the holdup on the DS-3?

      Him: I guess they can't figure out how to sell it to us via microwave.

      Me: This is the same AT&T with the relay station right over there [/me points], right?

      Him: Yeah. Strange, huh?

      It's -hard- to get bandwidth out in the sticks, even if you've got a cold war microwave relay within spitting distance. I doubt things would improve much by owning one or two instead of just being near one.
      [ Parent ]
    • Mmmmmmm.... by warrior (Score:1) Thursday September 12 2002, @10:07AM
    • Re:Broadband 2 boonies by shepd (Score:1) Wednesday September 11 2002, @10:26PM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • not only by Gavitron_zero (Score:1) Wednesday September 11 2002, @09:24PM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • World War III? by thelinuxking (Score:2) Wednesday September 11 2002, @09:24PM
  • Too Much of a Good Thing by Stephen VanDahm (Score:2) Wednesday September 11 2002, @09:29PM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • Build a house! by Alizarin Erythrosin (Score:2) Wednesday September 11 2002, @09:35PM
  • die of boredom by SlugLord (Score:1) Wednesday September 11 2002, @09:42PM
  • Friend bought one (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Lewie (3743) on Wednesday September 11 2002, @09:46PM (#4242298)
    A friend who owns a paging company just bought one of these. I tagged along during the negotiation and purchase. They are indeed, as a previous poster put it, "hell for stout." The scale of the tower, building and microwave cones makes the whole thing seem like a toy. It's just that weird. The towers are huge, this one is a 100 ft free-standing, 30 ft on a side IIRC with 25 foot tall microwave cones at the peak and associated waveguide down into the concrete buildings. This is a smaller installation, but still has huge power service and infrastructure, neat-o VW diesel inline 6 backup generator and enormous battery supply (the size of a truck or so), later added hardline to the top, it was a hell of a deal (more so considering how difficult towers are to get up these days).

    What really boggles my mind is the BILLIONS and BILLIONS of dollars that went into building these things in the 60's. They are truly incredible, inside and out. Someone decided that there WOULD be long distance (and there was).

    • Re:Friend bought one (Score:4, Informative)

      by djupedal (584558) on Wednesday September 11 2002, @10:02PM (#4242320)
      I worked on some of these (underground bunker types), as an Inspector (concrete/steel), during the early '70s. I recall at least one had to be abandoned due to several batches of concrete that failed strength testing in the lab. They simply covered it with dirt and moved over several hundred yards to begin again.

      They were heavily compartmented, and built much like a bank vault, where you have a box inside a box inside a box. There was at least one central cavity that was meant to be home for worst case attacks.

      As I recall, this was pre ATT, and they were built for ITT, under a government contract to provide domestic communications if WWW III (as stated) broke out. And yes, there was considerable money invested.
      [ Parent ]
    • I6 VW diesel with batteries? by hpulley (Score:1) Thursday September 12 2002, @10:05AM
  • The Dust Puppy Walks at Midnight by doublem (Score:2) Wednesday September 11 2002, @10:01PM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • Anyone actually seeing the site? by jsimon12 (Score:2) Wednesday September 11 2002, @10:06PM
  • Another example of why IIS, ASP and VB suck by jsimon12 (Score:1) Wednesday September 11 2002, @10:15PM
  • I could use one of these bunkers by clovis (Score:1) Wednesday September 11 2002, @10:16PM
  • MIRROR of complete list by jsimon12 (Score:2) Wednesday September 11 2002, @10:34PM
  • THE REAL QUESTION by buswolley (Score:1) Wednesday September 11 2002, @10:35PM
  • Security ex post facto by Waffle Iron (Score:1) Wednesday September 11 2002, @10:40PM
  • Building &/or Living UNDERGROUND by ivi (Score:1) Wednesday September 11 2002, @10:45PM
  • Ham radio clubs lining up... by LinuxHam (Score:2) Wednesday September 11 2002, @10:46PM
  • There's a good thing in this... (Score:5, Informative)

    by Newer Guy (520108) on Wednesday September 11 2002, @11:01PM (#4242541)
    Back in the olden days of satellite communications, all satellites operated on the "C" band. The bane of C band was "TI". TI stood for terrestrial interference...and these towers were the culprits! As a secondary service (these towers were the primary service), satellites were limited to very low powers (5-10 watts), so C band dishes had to be very large to pick up such feeble signals from space. Now that these are being decommissioned, maybe, just maybe, C band's potential can finally be realized. I can think of many uses of this slice of 2-4 Ghz spectrum...though the Govt. is probably already salivating at the prospect of another spectrum auction.
  • Excellent! by Eric_Cartman_South_P (Score:2) Wednesday September 11 2002, @11:07PM
  • Ask Slashdot... (Score:5, Funny)

    by evilviper (135110) on Wednesday September 11 2002, @11:11PM (#4242575) Journal
    Dear Slashdot. As a head of state in Iraq, I've been plann...umm, I mean, *worried* about the vague posibility that World War 3 will start on Nov 23, 2002. Can you possibly recomend a bomb shelter that would withstand a direct hit from a 10K-Ton U.S Titan missle?

    Note: Resistance to oncomming ground troops is a big plus.

    (if you don't get it, just move along)
  • should have sold sooner by ruck (Score:2) Wednesday September 11 2002, @11:27PM
  • anyone have price confirmation? really $25K avg? by gc2488 (Score:1) Wednesday September 11 2002, @11:27PM
  • Abandoned bell sites by aaronsb (Score:2) Wednesday September 11 2002, @11:29PM
  • Canada? by psyconaut (Score:1) Wednesday September 11 2002, @11:46PM
    • Re:Canada? by satterth (Score:1) Thursday September 12 2002, @11:22AM
      • Re:Canada? by satterth (Score:1) Monday September 16 2002, @10:12AM
      • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • FOR SALE: Titan-1 Site, Colorado (Must Sell) by rMuD (Score:2) Wednesday September 11 2002, @11:52PM
  • great for parties... by Tex Bravado (Score:1) Thursday September 12 2002, @12:01AM
  • B.A.S.E. jump! by CvD (Score:1) Thursday September 12 2002, @02:44AM
  • Secret Nuclear Bunker by oniony (Score:1) Thursday September 12 2002, @04:10AM
  • Was This Public Property? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by N8F8 (4562) on Thursday September 12 2002, @07:11AM (#4243759)
    Since AT&T/Bell used to be a monopoly, did the government help pay for and construct these sites? If so, how does a private company end up selling these?
  • Fiber huh? (Score:3, Funny)

    by msheppard (150231) on Thursday September 12 2002, @07:22AM (#4243780) Homepage Journal
    Maybe some of that fiber should be run to whatever machine is hosting the website.

    M@
  • Long Line Information (Score:3, Informative)

    by jwilhelm (238084) on Thursday September 12 2002, @07:36AM (#4243825) Homepage Journal
    AT&T Long Lines Places and Routes [addr.com] contains a list of Maps, Diagrams and Lists relating to the AT&T Long Line Bunkers.
  • Buying it in the MA area by McFly69 (Score:1) Thursday September 12 2002, @07:50AM
  • drgibson cache with images .... by Carbon Unit 549 (Score:1) Thursday September 12 2002, @08:05AM
  • How serendiptous... by FatSean (Score:1) Thursday September 12 2002, @09:08AM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • Looks like a bargain to me (Score:3, Interesting)

    by torklugnutz (212328) on Thursday September 12 2002, @09:28AM (#4244465) Homepage
    This sounds even better than a Missile Silo [missilebases.com]

    First off, it's cheaper.
    Secondly, these are more conveniently located
    Lastly, it looks like there's a lot more of these than missile silos.

    For $25k, it's a cheap way to get a couple of acres with some improvments.
  • Somebody screwed up the list... by iforgotmyfirstlogon (Score:2) Thursday September 12 2002, @10:21AM
  • nuclear blast design criteria (Score:3, Interesting)

    by mlas (165698) on Thursday September 12 2002, @11:18AM (#4245245) Homepage
    While browsing some of the supplied links, ran across this page [archive.org], which is a summary of the design criteria the engineers used for these sites. The site vary in "hardness"-- that is, their ability to withstand a nuclear blast-- but the top level sites were designed to withstand:
    • 2 1/2 miles from 20 megaton blast
    • 1000 Miles per hour wind
    • 40 G shock wave
    • high velocity debris
    • Intense radiation, heat and electromagnetic effects

    Given that wind resistance for a given surface area increases exponentially (I think... been a long time since physics class), that 1000mph figure is astounding.

    Also this: "Above ground structure (microwave and troposcatter antennas) require at least two thirds of the structure to be below grade to prevent tilting or rotation". Does that mean these 200ft towers are rooted 400ft deep?
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • band together! by boskone (Score:1) Thursday September 12 2002, @01:26PM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • IMPORTANT INFORMATION (Score:3, Informative)

    by TheSHAD0W (258774) on Thursday September 12 2002, @02:59PM (#4246915) Homepage
    After expressing interest in two sites, I received this email response:

    From: Ross Elder
    To: 'John Hoffman'
    Subject: RE: Sites of interest
    Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2002 15:44:03 -0400

    Please note that the message posted yesterday on Slash Dot is incorrect.
    American Tower Corporation has only a limited number of Surplus towers for
    sale that can be accessed by clicking "Sites For Sale" on our home page.
    These are the only towers that are for sale. Please also note that these
    Surplus sites are sold on a strictly "as is-where is", all cash basis.

    If the site you are inquiring about is not on the "Sites For Sale" list,
    then it is not for sale.

    If you are interested in a Surplus site, please contact me via email.

    If you are having difficulty accessing our website, please try again later
    as we were experiencing technical difficulties earlier today.

    Thanks,

    Ross Elder
    Senior VP/Development
    American Tower Corporation

    The actual list of available sites can be downloaded at:
    http://www.americantower.com/acweb/ATCSDMAREP02/Pu blic%20Reports/Marketing/AvailableSitesList.xls [americantower.com]
  • It helps giving the right information by jtara (Score:1) Thursday September 12 2002, @05:40PM
  • think: total cost of ownership... by I'm a fscking genius (Score:1) Thursday September 12 2002, @08:51PM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • Errors in original Post-American Tower Correction by Joe Ryan (Score:1) Friday September 13 2002, @11:14AM
  • ATT selling these? by jpostel (Score:2) Saturday September 14 2002, @02:38PM
  • nevermind (Score:3, Informative)

    by victim (30647) on Wednesday September 11 2002, @09:13PM (#4242121) Homepage
    Someone please mod the parent into oblivion. I believe that is the active site list, not the surplus site list.
    [ Parent ]
  • Re:Um, laws? by jbrians (Score:1) Wednesday September 11 2002, @10:15PM
    • Re:Um, laws? by shepd (Score:1) Wednesday September 11 2002, @10:19PM
      • Re:Um, laws? by evilempireinc (Score:1) Wednesday September 11 2002, @11:58PM
        • Re:Um, laws? by shepd (Score:1) Thursday September 12 2002, @12:43AM
  • Re:yeahbut by thefalconer (Score:1) Thursday September 12 2002, @01:09AM
    • Re:yeahbut by knisa (Score:1) Thursday September 12 2002, @02:29PM
      • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • Re:Survive WW3, but not a good slashdotting... by mjpaci (Score:2) Thursday September 12 2002, @07:38AM
  • Re:Pink MW Horns? by CheapEngineer (Score:1) Thursday September 12 2002, @09:39AM
  • 30 replies beneath your current threshold.