Link

Details: My girlfriend and I have been together since March. She is 19 and I am 22. Mary is a sophomore in college and I am a college graduate planning on returning to graduate school in a year. Our relationship has been long distance since the middle of August, with her being 1.5 hours away. I visit her two to three times a month.

Our relationship: I have never known love as I do with her. Mary understands me in a way that no one else in the world knows. We have started to speak of marriage and even of the kids we would have. We have a mutual sense of humor that causes both of us to laugh together for hours at a time and we connect spiritually, and there is no one else who makes me as as happy as she does. Mary has said the same and has shown her love for me too.

What happened: A couple of nights ago, Mary and I were on the phone talking in the late evening. I had just come home from work and we were having a delightful conversation as always. Mary was telling me about her day and how she had also been so excited to receive my written letter to her in the mail. We were both super excited for the weekend, when I would be coming to visit her and because Mary wanted us to celebrate my birthday belatedly together.

Towards the end of the conversation, I told Mary that I had to leave and wake up for work in the morning. Right away, her tone changed. Her voice became sad and I could tell she was emotional. I asked her what was wrong and to talk to me. She said nothing was the matter and that she would be fine in the morning. Mary genuinely sounded emotional. This had happened before, but the first time it happened while we were apart by distance.

I refused to hang up the phone out of concern. Mary started to cry and would not say anything besides the fact that she "would be fine in the morning". I continued to stay on the line, continued to ask her, and it was not until some time later that we did hang up the phone, with her crying audibly on the other end as we said bye and hung up. Afterwards that evening (10-15 minutes later), I send her a text saying that I am always there for her, and that her worth to me is infinite, and that I love her.

Since then: We have not spoken. I have not heard from her. I sent her one text in the morning after to tell her that I had to cover an early shift for work in the morning, and that we would not be able to wake up together and have our morning conversation over breakfast as we do when Mary is at college. No response at all.

My Mistake (?): Mary has said before that she does get emotional at times and will start to cry for no reason. She has said it is a mix of hormones and that causes her to make a bigger deal out of things then they really are. This has happened before, and always I have respected her space and did not press her any further.

Did I make a mistake in pressing her further? Part of it is the fact that we are long distance - I wanted to "make up" for the distance and be there for her and to talk. I wanted her to open up and make her feel that even though we are miles apart, that if Mary was struggling with something, that I would be there for her. I feel that I should have recognized that asking her and not hanging up the phone only stifled her and suffocated her, when she simply needed a good cry.

Request: Did I do something wrong? What do I do now? Should I wait before contacting Mary? Should I wait for her to contact me? Should I apologize for what I did, acknowledge that I did not give her space? What should I say to her?

Thank you for your time, I really need the help as I am so uncertain and hurt right now.

...The theme of a 'Phoenix'? My girlfriend's name means "phoenix" in her native language, and I was thinking of giving her a birthday present based on that somehow.

Any suggestions on what might be on a good, creative gift based on that? Thanks ahead of time!

This is for my undergraduate degree in Math. I need to pick one of these courses for next semester. (I will actually have to take both Analysis and Abstract eventually, but for now my schedule allows only one).

Which one should it be? Anybody's taken these classes before? Thanks!

I have been wondering about this for sometime. We all know that housing prices have fallen drastically, it seems every week we get reports about the 'slumping house market'.

Forgive me if this is a bit simple a question to ask, but how is this necessarily NOT something to take advantage of? If you're a first time buyer or if you have a growing family, wouldn't this be the opportunity of a decade to go and buy a new house? Why is it all gloom and doom?

... that the role of intervention is usually reversed? Specifically, conservatism tends to favor an isolationist stance, one of nonintervention and not surrendering sovereignty to international organizations. Likewise, liberals tend to be the ones who favor intervention in other nations to protect against human rights violations.

These are broad, sweeping generalizations of course, but that is typically the nature of attitudes towards the use of force.

Consider "conservatives" Ron Paul's foreign policy:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_o...

Consider "liberals" Bill Clinton's warmongering: Somalia, Haiti, Kosovo, Iraq, Bosnia, etc.

What do people think?

http://recollectionbooks.com/bleed/images/BB/Remem...

I think it's fairly accurate, wouldn't you say?

http://www.israeltoday.co.il/default.aspx?tabid=17...

"The office of Prime Minister Ehud Olmert admitted on Wednesday that it is allowing the transfer of hundreds of millions of shekels to the Hamas government in the Gaza Strip every month.

Most of the funds enter Gaza in currency exchanges for the dollars and euros Hamas smuggles into the territory following fund-raising trips to Iran and other supportive Middle East regimes."

This is sheer genius on the part of Israel really. Fund money to the entity which you claim is your mortal enemy, have them use the weaponry from said funding to attack you with wildly inaccurate rockets, and use that as rationale to continually oppress and subjugate Palestinians under the guise of "security" and launch massive slaughtering campaigns in the territory you occupy.

This is not even including the fact that the Israeli intelligence agency supported the rise of Hamas in the early 80s as a counterweight to Arafat's PLO.

Thoughts?

We've been hearing about Hamas in recent weeks, and the media has blasted its rhetoric of being opposed to Israel ad naseum. It has undermined the Palestinian cause unfortunately, but to move on to my question:

Why is it never mentioned that the charter of the right-winged Likud party - a dominant force in Israeli politics and the projected winner of next week's elections - does not recognize a state of Palestine?

http://www.knesset.gov.il/elections/knesset15/elik...

Taken from the official Israeli government website:

"The Palestinians

-Declaration of a State-

A unilateral Palestinian declaration of the establishment of a Palestinian state will constitute a fundamental and substantive violation of the agreements with the State of Israel and the scuttling of the Oslo and Wye accords. The government will adopt immediate stringent measures in the event of such a declaration."

-Settlements-

The Jewish communities in Judea, Samaria and Gaza are the realization of Zionist values. Settlement of the land is a clear expression of the unassailable right of the Jewish people to the Land of Israel and constitutes an important asset in the defense of the vital interests of the State of Israel. The Likud will continue to strengthen and develop these communities and will prevent their uprooting.

-Self-Rule-

The Government of Israel flatly rejects the establishment of a Palestinian Arab state west of the Jordan river.

The Palestinians can run their lives freely in the framework of self-rule, but not as an independent and sovereign state. Thus, for example, in matters of foreign affairs, security, immigration and ecology, their activity shall be limited in accordance with imperatives of Israel's existence, security and national needs.

-Jerusalem-

Jerusalem is the eternal, united capital of the State of Israel and only of Israel. The government will flatly reject Palestinian proposals to divide Jerusalem.

The presence of the Israeli police in eastern Jerusalem will be increased. This in addition to the new police posts and reinforcements in the neighborhoods.

-The Jordan River as a Permanent Border-

The Jordan Valley and the territories that dominate it shall be under Israeli sovereignty. The Jordan river will be the permanent eastern border of the State of Israel. The Kingdom of Jordan is a desirable partner in the permanent status arrangement between Israel and the Palestinians in matters that will be agreed upon."

And so forth. Why is this never brought up?

We've been hearing about Hamas in recent weeks, and the media has blasted its rhetoric of being opposed to Israel ad naseum.

However, why is it never mentioned that the charter of the right-winged Likud party - a dominant force in Israeli politics and the projected winner of next week's elections - does not recognize a state of Palestine?

http://www.knesset.gov.il/elections/knesset15/elik...

Taken from the official Israeli government website:

"The Palestinians

-Declaration of a State-

A unilateral Palestinian declaration of the establishment of a Palestinian state will constitute a fundamental and substantive violation of the agreements with the State of Israel and the scuttling of the Oslo and Wye accords. The government will adopt immediate stringent measures in the event of such a declaration."

-Settlements-

The Jewish communities in Judea, Samaria and Gaza are the realization of Zionist values. Settlement of the land is a clear expression of the unassailable right of the Jewish people to the Land of Israel and constitutes an important asset in the defense of the vital interests of the State of Israel. The Likud will continue to strengthen and develop these communities and will prevent their uprooting.

-Self-Rule-

The Government of Israel flatly rejects the establishment of a Palestinian Arab state west of the Jordan river.

The Palestinians can run their lives freely in the framework of self-rule, but not as an independent and sovereign state. Thus, for example, in matters of foreign affairs, security, immigration and ecology, their activity shall be limited in accordance with imperatives of Israel's existence, security and national needs.

-Jerusalem-

Jerusalem is the eternal, united capital of the State of Israel and only of Israel. The government will flatly reject Palestinian proposals to divide Jerusalem.

The presence of the Israeli police in eastern Jerusalem will be increased. This in addition to the new police posts and reinforcements in the neighborhoods.

-The Jordan River as a Permanent Border-

The Jordan Valley and the territories that dominate it shall be under Israeli sovereignty. The Jordan river will be the permanent eastern border of the State of Israel. The Kingdom of Jordan is a desirable partner in the permanent status arrangement between Israel and the Palestinians in matters that will be agreed upon."

And so forth. Why is this never brought up?

Israel has done well to portray itself as the victim in the conflict, trying to shift attention towards rockets being fired from a people that had their homeland taken from them 60 years and have suffered a lifetime of discrimination, dehumanization, and slaughter.

Now, Israel has the most sophisticated weaponry in the world. They have weapons such as the Arrow and anti-Ballistic missile systems - provided by American taxpayers to the tune of $7 million/day.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jericho_(missile)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arrow_missile

These weapons are thought to have the capability of destroying enemy missiles from 50 m away, are thought to be able to carry kilotons of material, and have striking ranges of 7000 km in some cases, powerful enough to reach Europe or distant targets in Asia.

Forget the fact that Israel violated the ceasefire first, forget the fact that Israel has been starving the 1.5 million people of Gaza to near famish. You really would have us believe that Israel's sophisticated weapons can't deal with Hamas' homemade Qassams? Give me a break.

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=4752349n#cc...

60 Minutes with Bob Simon.

It is unbelievably rare for an American based news network to provide coverage into what is going on between the Palestinians and the Israelis. This video presents both sides, fairly balanced.

There is a lot to be said about the brutality of the Gaza bloodshed. One of the staunch pro-Israel's talking points is to repeat the phrase "Hamas uses human shields" ad naseum and expect that to be the end of the story.

So here we have:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleea...

"I can't precisely decide whether these children are being shot at as a target, but in some cases the bullet comes from the front of the head and goes towards the back, so I think the gun has been directly pointed at the child."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/may/20/israel

"Dr Ahmed Abu Nkaria, who pronounced the Mughayar children dead, insists on proving the manner of their killing. He pulls Asma's body from the mortuary's refrigeration unit and fumbles through the teenager's hair to reveal the hole where the bullet entered above one ear and ripped a much larger wound as it emerged above the other.

"The Israeli propaganda is that they were killed in a work accident. These are the kinds of lies they tell all the time," he says. "They say all the dead are fighters. They say they do not deliberately kill children, but about a quarter of the dead from the first day of shooting are children."

And before I get ANYTHING about media bias, here is Haar'etz, an Israeli daily newspaper.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1055574.html

"A significant majority of the children killed in Gaza did not die because they were used as human shields or because they worked for Hamas. They were killed because the IDF bombed, shelled or fired at them, their families or their apartment buildings. That is why the blood of Gaza's children is on our hands, not on Hamas' hands, and we will never be able to escape that responsibility. "

So why were civilians massacred in Gaza? And for the Israeli apologists who unconditionally support this, realize first that this on top of Israel forcing a blockade on Gaza and starving out 1.5 million people, 700,000 of which are children brought to the brink of death.

Israelis in Sderot are apparently so frightened from rocket fire that they are sitting on picnic chairs and watching the bombardment of Gaza, while drinking Pepsi.

http://chris-floyd.com/component/content/article/3...

And this video shows Israelis gathering as tourists to watch Gaza.

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=Tjw8U0AcH4Q

Quotes include "I think they should just clear off all the city, just take it off the ground" and "Yes I'm a little bit fascist."

Interesting, is it not? From the sound of the mainstream US media, I would have thought these people would be too scared to even come out their homes.

But of course, we all know that sipping Pepsi in apparent fear of life compares with:

http://flickr.com/photos/anwarhit/

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=b0d_1231101531

on top of 60 years of oppression.

Comments?

http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=45350

"The proposal to renew the ceasefire was presented by a high-level Hamas delegation to Egyptian Minister of Intelligence Omar Suleiman at a meeting in Cairo Dec. 14. The delegation, said to have included Moussa Abu Marzouk, the second-ranking official in the Hamas political bureau in Damascus, told Suleiman that Hamas was prepared to stop all rocket attacks against Israel if the Israelis would open up the Gaza border crossings and pledge not to launch attacks in Gaza.

The Hamas officials insisted that Israel not be allowed to close or reduce commercial traffic through border crossings for political purposes, as it had done during the six-month lull, according to the source. They asked Suleiman, who had served as mediator between Israel and Hamas in negotiating the original six-month Gaza ceasefire last spring, to "put pressure" on Israel to take that the ceasefire proposal seriously. "

And Israel DOES acknowledge that Hamas approached them with a renewed ceasefire deal:

"The interest of Hamas in a ceasefire agreement that would actually open the border crossings was acknowledged at a Dec. 21 Israeli cabinet meeting -- five days before the beginning of the Israeli military offensive -- by Yuval Diskin, the head of Israel's internal security agency, Shin Bet. "Make no mistake, Hamas is interested in maintaining the truce," Diskin was quoted by Y-net News agency as saying."

And as it should remind people, Israel chose during the 6 month truce from June on to choke off the 1.6 million people of Gaza by starving them and cutting off their food, medicine, and even UN aid. Nearly 50% of the population of Gaza are children under the age of 14, that is 700,000 at least are minors.

Comments?

Current president Bush, former Presidents Carter, Bush Sr., and Clinton all met with Obama today at the White House.

Which, out of these four former presidents, were the "best"? Which do you think most emulates the incoming president's situation today?

My computer crash and I am reinstalling Windows Vista from the installation disc. If I do so, will I still have all my files and data or will they be gone? Thank you!

To find some common ground here, I would like to ask this related to Obama.

- what is ONE thing you support about Obama if you are against him? I know it sounds contradictory, but even if you dislike him, any one thing that has impressed you coming from him?

and likewise

- what is ONE thing you dislike about Obama if you support him? These could be answered in terms of political ideologies, his administration, etc.

Just curious, and thanks.

With all the talk about Ayers and ACORN against Obama, however exaggerated, I think it's fair game to bring out some of McCain's own past associations, don't you?

http://www.stopthinkvote.com/whatsnew/mccainsties....

Jim Hensley, Convicted Felon

G. Gordon Liddy, Convicted Felon

Charles Keating, Convicted Felon

Raffaello Follieri, Convicted Felon

Rick Renzi, Under Indictment

Rick Davis, Freddie Mac Lobbyist

Charles Black, Lobbyist for Dictators

Richard Quinn, White Supremist

Pastor John Hagee, Bigot

Pastor Rod Parsley, Bigot

Todd Palin, Member of Secessionist Group

Andrew McCain, Resigned Manager Savings & Loan

For each of these, fully cited with sources. Some of my personal favorites include McCain paying and supporting a white supremacist who sold T-shirts praising the assassination of Abraham Lincoln, a Pastor who believes Hurricane Katrina was God's anger towards homosexuals, and McCain's current chief strategist and a senior adviser that has supported right-winged extremist dictatorships all over the world.

So McCain supporters, if you can attack Obama on the basis of guilt by association, this is all fair game.

With all the talk about Ayers and ACORN against Obama, however exaggerated, I think it's fair game to bring out some of McCain's own past associations, don't you?

http://www.stopthinkvote.com/whatsnew/mccainsties....

Jim Hensley, Convicted Felon

G. Gordon Liddy, Convicted Felon

Charles Keating, Convicted Felon

Raffaello Follieri, Convicted Felon

Rick Renzi, Under Indictment

Rick Davis, Freddie Mac Lobbyist

Charles Black, Lobbyist for Dictators

Richard Quinn, White Supremist

Pastor John Hagee, Bigot

Pastor Rod Parsley, Bigot

Todd Palin, Member of Secessionist Group

Andrew McCain, Resigned Manager Savings & Loan

For each of these, fully cited with sources. Some of my personal favorites include McCain paying and supporting a white supremacist who sold T-shirts praising the assassination of Abraham Lincoln, a Pastor who believed Hurricane Katrina was God's anger towards homosexuals, and McCain's current chief strategist and a senior adviser that has supported right-winged extremist dictatorships all over the world.

So McCain supporters, if you can attack Obama on the basis of guilt by association, this is all fair game.

We all know that the McCain campaign conceded the fight in Michigan to Obama. We all know that Obama has a strong lead nationally and nearly every swing state, but now:

http://www.omaha.com/index.php?u_page=2835&u_sid=1...

Sarah Palin is tomorrow holding a rally in Omaha, Nebraska? The congressional district of the reddest of red states is actually in play?

Not to get ahead of ourselves here, but having the VP nominee out to defend a Republican stronghold less than 30 days before the election is a telling sign, no?