In article ,
 "Mac Breck"  wrote:

> Anim8rFSK wrote:
> > In article ,
> >  "Mac Breck"  wrote:
> >
> >> Anim8rFSK wrote:
> >>> In article ,
> >>>  "Mac Breck"  wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Anim8rFSK,
> >>>>
> >>>> Did you get that email I sent you Sunday, April 06,
2008 12:45 AM?
> >>>
> >>> No.
> >>>
> >>> I got an email from you dated Saturday April 5 9:48pm and
replied at
> >>> 11:06pm.  Nothing from you since.
> >>
> >> That was a newsgroup post, not an email.  The one I sent at Sunday,
> >> April 06, 2008 12:45 AM was an email and had a scan of a newspaper
> >> comic attached.  You don't have yahoo.com blocked, do you?
> >
> > I got the newspaper comic attached to the e-mail.  Reality shows?
> 
> That's the one.  Too bad they didn't show a woman at the meeting.  Well,
> Bonnie and a TNT suit were probably in a separate meeting.
> 
> 
> > That's the one I was talking about.  I gave you the date from it, and
> > gave you the date of my reply, something along the lines of "at least
> > this explains Bonnie Hammer"
> 
> Well, just so you got it.  Your reply never made it through.

Weird.  Here it be again:

Date:  Sat, Apr 5, 2008 11:06 PM

Re: We May Not Agree on Some of Spielberg's Movies But....

In a message dated 4/5/08 9:48:53 PM, macxxxxxxxxx writes:

>...I think we CAN agree on the attached comic.

Explains a lot about Bonnie Hammer  :)

**************

Since you sent it 3 hours before I got it, I think one of us must be on 
GMT or something.   :)

-- 
Star Trek 09:

No Shat, No Show.
http://www.disneysub.com/board/noshat.jpg
--- SBBSecho 2.12-Win32