Sorry, Raoul.
By "not going there," I was saying that the decision for which religion was the "right" religion, and therefore belonged in Jerusalem, was an area I, being merely human, am unqualified to judge. A trip to the fabled city would indeed be a treat.
While station in Saudi Arabia (1991), it had become known that I had opted for an "early out" from the military. The AT&T rep my team was installing the signal site for offered me a starter job at the site. I would be the lowest paid member at a mere $85,000. The drawback was that it would be an unaccompanied job, meaning no family. With a heavy sigh, I had to turn the man down. It was a nice site, and accommodations were unbelievable (in a sober kind of way [it's a dry country, phil]). Telling my wife about it a few months later, she just shook her head.
"We could have moved to Israel," she told me.
Oh, well...
I think it's for the better, though. My wife is a free-spirit, and one who doesn't mind having her say in matters. Were we at that same restaurant with an arms deal going on behind us...
No, I'm sure it's all for the best.
Cheers to ya,
Dan
Current Events » in reply to Re: The place
Re: "Not Going There . . ."
The whole thread (18 posts)
- Rudolph Giuliani and the Saudi Prince. + UN
- Re: Rudolph Giuliani and the Saudi Prince. + UN
- Re: Rudolph Giuliani and the Saudi Prince. + UN
- very well, lets apply some scientific method. . .
- Re: Rudolph Giuliani and the Saudi Prince. + UN
- People forget who Rudy is
