In message , J G Miller
writes:
On Monday, February 13th, 2012, at 11:06:28h +0000, Bill Wright wrote:

They're lovely old posters aren't they?

You could buy the first one if you like it?

What disturbs me is the reaction from people in this newsgroup
that even though evidence is presented which clearly shows
that the term "United Nations" was in use, based upon
the Atlantic Treaty of 1941, they continue to deny the facts
because they stubbornly cling to the post-1945 United Nations
Organisation meaning of "United Nations".

What depresses rather than disturbs me is how heated some people are
getting about it: surely the _phrase_ "united nations" is one that any
politician with a bit of a feel for language might or might not have
thought of using, at any time before the organisation that now bears
that name (with capital letters) existed? Indeed, it's clear from the
existence of the posters that at least one or two did think of using it.

But why get heated about it?
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G.5AL-IS-P--Ch++(p)Ar@T0H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Intelligence isn't complete without the full picture and the full picture is
all about doubt. Otherwise, you go the way of George Bush. - baroness Eliza
Manningham-Buller (former head of MI5), Radio Times 3-9 September 2011.