Truth is stranger than fiction?

A gang of robbers walks into a bank. The gang leader is named -- let's call him, oh, I don't know, how about Whitey McOrange? Somehow that makes sense, you figure it out.

He has a bomb strapped to his chest. He announces, "Give me all the money in this bank or I'll set off this bomb and destroy the whole bank." The bank manager comes out of his office and says, "I'll tell you what, I'll give you 80% of the money in the bank if you'll promise not to set off the bomb. I need the other 20% to take care of the widows and orphans."

The gang refuses any compromise and demands the full 100%. Reporters show up to cover the standoff and they start writing stories about how sad it is that both parties can't act like adults and come to a reasonable agreement. The bank manager isn't doing enough to meet Whitey halfway at least by giving him 99% of the money.

The bank manager points out that no matter what, Whitey isn't going to set off the bomb because that would kill Whitey and his gang and anyway, their own savings are in the same bank. So the gang members start telling the reporters that the bank manager is engaging in inappropriate threats and everybody knows the bomb will actually be harmless so why doesn't the bank manager stop trying to scare people and just hand over the money?

The reporters nod and look into the camera declaim, more in sorrow than in anger, that Whitey is representing the interests of his gang members, while trying to solve the very serious problem posed by the bomb, and the bank manager is acting like a dick.

Then the deadline passes and Whitey sets off the bomb. . . . It's the bank manager's fault.

Makes perfect sense to me.