Posted by tealady on August 5, 2006, at 5:18:16
In reply to Re: what name would u call this, posted by Estella on August 3, 2006, at 18:54:45
> yeah census... this saturday - right?
>
> http://www.the-brights.net/
>
> trouble is that some people object to it because of the name...
>
> the notion is that just how gay people reclaim the word 'gay' (which has nicer connotations) all the godless heathens out there decide that it is nicer to be characterised for something positive rather than an absence.
>
> works for me (kina kinda)
>
>
I know what u mean bu kinda;-).. only problem with that idea is, I do feel a spiriual sense .. quite strongly especially if I allow myself to .. that doesnt mean a 'being' as such.. just spiritual ..If I went into what I sense .. everyone would think I was a ... .well better not finish that sentence methinks;-)
I've occasionally tried edging around it .. but I get shot down.. anyway I relate to this spiritual stuff.. but dont understand what I feel..and definitely dont believe it has to be as any religion attempts to define it ..and know ITS BEYOND me to define it.. so I'm just content to sense and use that feeling for support too:-).. so that rules out the atheist stuff anyway.
now to get back to politics:-)..
When was Eisenhower Dec.. I forget.. actually I try NOt to follow US politics. Ok, I'll guess it was shortly after WWII though as it makes sense that the US suddenly strongly increased support for Israel after then.. due to the fact that somewhere was felt needed for the Jews to be safe...and ya wouldnt want it in the middle of the US now.. way better to support placing it where it didnt interrupt the US citizens as much.. and what better place to encourage the Jews to relocate than around the promised land??.. That's safely far enough away not to directly impact..thing is, if Israel was located in the middle of the US just consider.. would they be acting the same regarding border security issues??
I think it would be far better for all.. except those displaced of course.. but that affect far less people in the less densely populated US countryside than in an already densely populated country.(unless one picks the middle of New York)
and I suspect terrorism would also die down too.. The US citizens are hardly going to become terrorists.. no need is there? The US has enough strength to control its borders very effectively:-)
OK.. I went and googled it!!
http://www.danielpipes.org/article/610
and as I suspected the US involved in Israel after WWII ..
http://www.mideastweb.org/us_supportforstate.htm
it was Truman, although the Brits were in it too.. what a surprise there Dec.. the US and the Brits..and , the Arabs getting no say...
"Free lands must be opened to them" Truman
poster:tealady
thread:669484
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/poli/20060610/msgs/673892.html