"-L." wrote in message
oups.com...


Meghan Noecker wrote:
On 8 Jul 2005 01:14:25 -0700, "-L." wrote:

Direct proof that Mary's plan was to send Conan to Charlie. There was
never any plan to home him in CA. She's a busted liar.



Well, this is the email I received that Monday night, when nobody knew
Dan had changed the plans:

No one is giving up. We just decided to stop planning on the
newsgroup. Please keep it to yourself for the moment (Candace knows as
well), but Dan will pick the cat up tomorrow. He found a vet two
blocks from his house that can temporarily board the cat for $10/day.



You mean Conan was going to be kept in a CAGE!! A CAGE!! A CAGE!! A
CAGE!! A ****ing, goddamned CAGE!!

For one or two nights, you hidous shrew, Not for 11 and counting.


There is an adoption possibility in San Diego, one in the Bay Area,
your sister and Charlie. One of them will work out and transport will
be arranged.


Um hum. IOW, "Let's hand the cat off to whomever will take him."


We're prioritizing in terms of distance the kitty has to travel, so
are waiting to hear on the San Diego option - which sounds promising
(just lost a 17 year old cat a few months ago) and then will work our
way back up to Seattle if necessary.

So the indignantion isn't so much that Conan was going to be kept in a
CAGE (despite Mary's constant bellowing) but that he wasn't placed in
San Diego.

With a good man who would have cared for him.

Do you somehow imagine that anyone thinks you care about this cat?

Try to understand this, Lynnie: almost everyone is quicker on the uptake
than you are. Now think about it for a minute. Now think about how
you have presented yourself over the past few months. Get it?
Hmm?