Ed Hulett -> Mimi Gallandt wrote:
 EH> Mimi Gallandt -> Ed Hulett wrote:
 MG>> Ed Hulett -> Bob Klahn wrote:
 EH>>> Bob Klahn -> Mimi Gallandt wrote:

 EH>>>>>> Yep. It was Stan who made the comment and the
idiot Klahn is now
 EH>>>>>> threatening to post Stan's words back to him in
POL_DISORDER.

 MG>>>>> What a hypocrite.

 BK>>>>  The hypocrisy is in commenting on it in this echo, when I was
 BK>>>>  not allowed to respond.

 EH>>> Oh, the humanity!

 BK>>>>  And the true idiocy is in complaining
 BK>>>>  about the *OFFER* to find his comments when he asked about them.

 EH>>> You didn't offer, you threatened. As if there was something
 EH>>> incriminating in his words.

 MG>> IIRC Klahn posted a reply to Vern in an echo that he knew Vern doesn't
 MG>> read. This is just another incidence of Klahn saying one thing but
 EH> doing
 MG>> another.

 EH> There you go pointing out Klahn's hypocrisy again.

 MG>> (note: there are no flames in this reply, unless remarking on the
 EH> truth of something is now considered flaming)

 EH> Don't worry, BK will find some part of it offending. He will then use
 EH> that to justify an attack on you.

An attack he knows I won't read but will make it any way.  :)

-- 
L'Chaim,
Mimi

fcpnmimi(at)cox.net

http://www.myspace.com/fcpnmimi

Whatcha reading?

--- Thunderbird 2.0.0.16 (Windows/20080708)