WHAT DO YOU KNOW ABOUT JORDAN? Do you remember the King coming here to the U.S. for cancer treatments?

This is a very timely book as the Middle East is in all the news and in our minds - let's learn together more about one of the friendly (or used to be) countries in that troubled area.

JOIN US - WE HOPE TO BEGIN AUGUST lst. Post a message if you are interested!

Ella, this one is a huge best seller. I was surprised at the public response. It is quite topical. Will look into it. I'll bet we get a response here too...gosh she's pretty.

Hey, Ella and Harriet, I'll read yours if you'll read mine! Hahahaha! No, I am all ready to order this book as I wanted to read it before you mentioned discussing it. The Muslim culture and politics are married so it should be extremely timely and a fun thing to learn more about the Middle East.

Ann, I've already posted that I'll be in your book discussion - it will be hot in the deserts of the Middle East this summer - what are you planning to wear? Must we put on the (what is the garment called the women wear?)?

I don't know about Iran, but Queen Noor of Jordan, as you can see from her picture above, does not wear it.

ARe you familiar with what our soldiers call these women with the complete body wear (oh, darn!) - MBO's (Moving Black Objects). Could that be a reason they are not that popular in those countries? A bit of G.I. humor that may not be appreciated.

Hopefully, they don't say those things out loud in public, Ella. Oh, but they are so young and sometimes unaware of the impression they make. Its my understanding that our service personelle were well trained on the idiosyncracies of the Middle East. One can hope!

Do come join us in the discussion in June about Iran and an American family's search for their old friends.Searching For Hassan

I'm glad you've been able to arrange this discussion. It certainly is timely. Ella, the head (and sometimes full body) covering of many (but not all) Muslim women is call hijab. In Afghanistan, many women still wear the burka, which covers the body from head to toe, including the face with a small "grid-type" insert over the eyes. A similar garment is found in Saudi Arabia.

Wonderful, Mahlia! We are hoping for an August lst date with this book discussion, that will give us plenty of time to enjoy a lazy summer and read a few in between.

Harriet and I both bought out books from B&N and got a very good price - I'm told that this book is: NUMBER #1 ON THE NYTIMES NONFICTION BESTSELLER LIST

My book arrived yesterday and I've almost completed reading it. It's really well done, combining interersting family history and events with the Middle East history, conflicts, central problems, and the life-long commitment of King Hussein to peace. Beautifully written with just enough glimpses into the personal lives to be interesting, but not enough to be uncomfortable. I'm enjoying it!

Oh, that's good to hear, Mahlia! Mine is sitting on a table with about 3-4 others I'm reading now and then. But I will have completed it by August lst - am so looking forward to this discussion. Thanks for posting!

My book has just arrived also.

I'm looking forward to our discussion very much. I'm eager to read this #! bestseller for myself. The book has been generating some controversy on a number of TV talk show circuits recently.

Harriet

What are they saying, Harriet? I don't have much time to watch the TV talk shows so must rely on others. In our paper a couple of days ago was an article about a woman in Florida (I think?) who is suing the state because she cannot get a drivers' license unless she is unveiled.

How is that going to be solved?

Ella. I've heard it said that the book slants toward the Arab point of view by carefully omitting a few selected historical facts.

However, Queen Noor has NOT been claiming to write a scholarly dissertation of the various Mid-east crises. I'm sure her book reflects HER understanding and that of her advisors on the times she lived through.

Part of the fun of the discussion will be those pages of the book where we agree and/or disagree with her point of view. Part of the challenge in our reading may well be the detection of any passage where she has omitted some facts selectively...IF she has actually done that.

Harriet

I just finished reading the book and was struck by how carefully Queen Noor blends historical fact with her own (and the late King Hussein's) knowledge and participation in various events. Certainly, she has presented the Jordanian/Arab view of world events as they pertained to her adopted homeland. But that's to be expected.

However, throughout the book, she has been rigorous in her descritpions of her "own personal and emotional feelings," wehther they meshed with King Hussein's (and often they did not!)or that of others in the Jordanian/Arab/world community. Personally, I think Noor was not only adept at her descriptions of awkward or painful events and conversations, but very loving in her follow-up forgiveness of often brutal attacks on her and her family - not only in the Western press, but often in the Arab press (especially in Egypt)as well.

Anyone in the public eye must quickly learn that the media (of any country) is brutual in their commentary and foraging for gossip. Noor had to learn that, but it was a struggle. Personal and family attacks were often heartbreaking, yet she learned to deal with them. And Noor's American birth, upbringing, education, ethics and morals comes through loud and clear in a family and culture that functions differently than one would expect in America. To me, Noor is a brave and courageous woman, who never lost sight of what's right and how to go about making substantial societal contributions to her adopted homeland, while not forgetting her own personal strengths and what she brought to her marriage, her family and ultimately to Jordanians.

This book is one of the best I've read in a long, long time!

Apologies for joining you here late.

I'd love to (and actually am quite keen on) joining the discussion. IMHO there is a desperate need right now to understand other religions and viewpoints from a tabula rasa , i.e. a clean slate, lily-white, totally free from preconceived notions, age-old prejudices and, simply, misconceptions.

Thanks Harriet and Mahlia for your observations.

AND WELCOME TRAUDE! We are tickled to have you and with your appearance we now have a quorum and will move this discussion to the Upcoming Discussions.

It will begin August 1st. Looking forward to it!!!

Sounds great to us!

Welcome, HORSELOVER !!

We're looking forward to discussing LEAP OF FAITH with you. What a nice summer of reading you've planned for yourself!

Harriet

I am well into the book and find it fascinating, even heart-breaking, at times humorous, and always sincere- I believe. Since my book is a short-term library copy, I am taking notes in order to be prepared for the discussion.

Super, TRAUDE. It's great to see you here. We'll look forward to your comments.

My library allows 2 renewals by computer and/or phone. Also, when no more long distance renewals are allowed, they consider a book to be a fresh, new loan if it's presented at the library again for check-out, but only if no one else has requested it.

Just hoping...is it possible that YOUR library has any similar liberal policies? Am I the only lucky one?

Harriet

Harriet, our library's policy is not quite as liberal. This is a two-week book taken out by a friend, the leader of our live book group, who had it for less than a week and passed it on to me. I have been reading like mad. On principle, two-week books cannot be renewed. The due date is July 5th, after which there is the tacit understanding of a one-day grace period. I count on being prepared !

I am buying my book today and will be able to relax and read the rest of the month. Delightful! Can't wait to compare it to the other ME books that I have. See you all on Aug 1st---if the good Lord's willin' and the creek don't rise!! Tee hee!

Hi Ann: Where did you buy the book? Online at a used book site? Please let others know if you did as it is rather an expensive book otherwise.

ANN, ELLA --

with only 60 pages left to read - I find the book fascinating, and then some.

The book does presents a political perspective very differnt from our own, and I sincerely hope we can conduct this discussion without immediate polarization.

TRAUDE, it was my understanding BEFORE we decided to present this book that the Jordanian view of world events might not be consistent with everyone's point of view.

I agree with you heartily that we should discuss this book with respectful care for the opinions of ALL participants.

Harriet

I'm confident that this discussion will be as collegial and culturally rich as the one we've been having in SEARCHING FOR HASSAN and WHEN RELIGION BECOMES EVIL.

I noticed in the Washington Post's Obituary section that Najeeb Hallaby, Queen Noor's father, died recently. As you'll have gathered from the author's comments in the book, her father was a very interesting man; former head of the FAA and Pan American Airlines, as well as an early pilot. His mother was a Christian Scientist, whose "power of positive thinking" was a life-long encouragement for him as he developed his professional interests and undertook new responsibilities.

Certainly Noor's comments may seem unusual at times, since she was dedicated to helping the people of Jordan as much as possible, assisting her husband and his outreach for peace (which was a life-long passion with the late King Hussein). But afterall, she is an American - thinks like one most of the time - and has a very strong "can do" attitude about helping others. I don't think you'll be uncomfortable with her comments, although you may be surprised about some of the politics and events in the Middle East, which the American press has NOT highlighted or presented in a quite different manner.

Regardless, the book is well written with considerable thought given to its presentation by the author and publisher. It's a fine read about an American woman's love and respect for her husband, as well as her strong commitment to helping and respecting others.

I got the book at B&N online. It was $15 which is a bit high but I was too busy this weekend to look around for a used which I doubt can be found at this time as the book is too new. I just took a look at B&N and they are selling is for $15.57 so I looked at the used copies--only one and its $19! Sometimes, new is cheaper.

But an interesting note here about Queen Noor's other book, published in 1999, titled "Houses of Jordan". Now its a little over my budget but I would love to see it. Maybe the library has it. $78.95!! Whoa!

Another quick note on the prices. I noticed when I was in B&N's site that the book will be out in paperback for $7.99 in October 2003.

Not to worry or rush, dear HORSELOVER. Please don't feel pressured. LEAP OF FAITH begins in August, but DA VINCI CODE doesn't.

Since you own LEAP OF FAITH and don't have to return it to the library, you can read it leisurely, in its weekly segments during August (please see the reading schedule in the heading) and fully enjoy your July PIANO TUNER discussion this month.

After August you'll be able to concentrate on DA VINCI.

A lot of people prefer reading a book in weekly segments as a discussion progresses anyway, so no need to feel that it MUST be completed before the opening date. The important thing is to enjoy your summer and your reading.

We're soooo glad that you have the book and want to join us.

Harriet

Horselover,

alas, I missed all of Queen Noor's appearances when the publicity began, including the interview on the Larry King show. I think I said as much before, so please forgive my being redundant. I would so have liked to see and to hear her. Yes, her father died just a few days ago at age 87.

I returned the book today - reluctantly, I must confess. If it had been MY book, MY check-out, I'd gladly have risked keeping it a few more days, never mind the fine. But this was different : the book had been checked out by my good friend, the leader of our live book group and dedicated library volunteer, so I was anxious. Yes, the grace period of one day applied. But this was not a matter of money but of principle. For what it is worth, there were 108 holds on that book as of today, would you believe ?

To your question : the book ends with King Hussein's death. Nothing else is mentioned, except the fact that the proceeds from the book sales will go to the foundation furthering King Hussein's life-long commitment to peace-building, sustainable dedelopment and cross-cultural understanding.

I'd love to join the discussion group for Queen Noor. Is it done in chat or by posting here. Im new to Senior Net, but not book clubs or computer chat. Look forward to joining you.

Welcome KYLEA! You join the discussion by posting here and you just did when you introduced yourself. The discussion of the book starts on August 1.

Welcome, welcome, KYLEA!!

We're so delighted to have your company. Just come to your computer and express your thoughts starting August 1st and you'll gladden all of our hearts.

Please note our reading schedule above. For the sake of clarity we all try to discuss the same segment of pages together each week. Other than that, our goal is to share our ideas respectfully and have fun.

Eagerly looking forward to talking more with you and hearing your thoughts about our book.

Harriet

Last night CNN carried an interview of Queen Noor with Larry King, made following the death of the Queen's father. She is a remarkable, indeed an ecceptional woman, I think.

Looking forward to August 1.

TRAUDE, I tuned in during the last five minutes of the interview and was sooo frustrated because I thought I'd missed out..

Then I checked my TV guide and discovered that Larry King's interview replayed again in the wee hours of the morning, at 3AM...so I taped Queen Noor's interview on my VCR.

I haven't had a chance to watch it yet as I'm leaving the house shortly. I hope I set up my VCR correctly because I'm eager to watch Noor's taped interview later today.

If all goes well I'll pass on anything interesting.

Harriet

Harriet,

the interview was very interesting, I thought. The Queen is an experienced public speaker, as clearly indicated in the book, and did not need prodding questions to convey what is on her mind. Larry King showed great restraint, I thought.

He did not ask questions about any of the children- not the Queen's own four, nor was there mention of King Abdullah, only a picture here and there. The interview was handled well and with tact, which I found commendable and comforting.

I did watch my VCR tape of Queen Noor's interview earlier today and I agree that the Queen is an experienced public speaker and a charming woman.

It was almost as if Larry King was interviewing her from an outline of LEAP OF FAITH and Queen Noor had an opportunity to repeat much of the personal, family material that was in her book. There were numerous photos and film clips that were new to me and they had obviously been prepared to coincide with the personal, NOT political aspects of her book.

I do feel that her public facade never slipped...and Larry King, after trying to press her once on a personal point that had not been discussed in the book, retreated.

Of course the interview was taking place in close proximity to the death of Queen Noor's father and I would think that Larry KIng was grateful to her for making the time to appear on his TV show under those difficult circumstances. He didn't seem to be inclined to try to break any ground that hadn't been covered in her book.

Harriet

Harriet, I agree on all points. Larry King did indeed retreat at least in one instance regarding the Queen's residences in this country. She did not answer. I believe she was in total control of the interview and knew exactly what she wanted to convey. None of the children were mentioned by name, nor the other royal spouses.

Unless my ears deceived me, I believe the Queen misspoke once referring to Blair House in "New York". Of course Blair House is in Washington; it is the official residence for visiting dignitaries and foreign heads of state, located right across from the White House. I walked by there often when I worked in Washington, years ago. I miss it still.

I have seen Queen Noor several times on television and I saw a sort of biography of her once comparing her to Princess Diana and Edwards wife I forget her name just recently married ( they both work in television). I have been considering getting her book. If I do I will come here to discuss what I think about it. I hope I can get over to Borders. I dont like ordering books. Faith

Many welcomes to you, FAITH!!

Please do get the book, FAITH. I know you'll enjoy it and we'll all be delighted to have the pleasure of your company.

I also was fascinated by the one appearance I saw of Queen Noor on television. If you have any impressions from your viewings of her interviews I hope you'll share them as our discussion progresses.

I think Prince Edward's wife is named Sophie Rhys-Jones and they hold the title of TRH the Earl and Countess of Wessex.

Harriet

I just startted this book a few days ago and have enjoyed reading about Queen Noor's childhood and learning about her family. So it was sad, while exploring the web sites listed above, to learn of the death of Najeeb Halaby earlier this month. My sympathies are with the Queen and her family.

I'll be travelling for part of August, but hope to participate in the discussion.

Welcome to you, PEDLN!!

We'll look forward to your comments. It's such fun as opening day gets closer and closer for Leap of Faith. Glad to have you aboard!

Harriet

I'm waiting for the book to be returned to the library. Hopefully, it will be in my hands soon, and I will be able to join you all in this discussion. I very much enjoyed Jehan Sadat's autobiography and it whetted my interest in this book. ..Babi

Welcome BaBi!!

Hope you get the book soon. In any event, Queen Noor does touch on Sadat in her book. Her perspective may prove to be quite different from Jehan Sadat's view of the same events.

I hope you'll fill us in on on any differences. How fascinating a comparison of some events could prove to be.

Harriet

Hi, I'm only on page 232 of our book but I'm enjoying reading about the middle east.I've forgotten so much of what took place in the past and my mouth dropped when I read about the 7day war-unless I misunderstood, I thought this book said the Israelis attacked the Arabs and destsroyed them -but I thought the Arabs attacked first on a holy day of the Jewish people.I also appreciated another picture of Sadat-I had thought he was unifying the whole the whole region. In her writing, did any of you think it strange that she refers to the King as my husband, or Hussein but not by any sort of first name or is that part of their culture? The references to Sadam Hussein are interesting too I thought.This is a good book to read especially at this time and I certainly am glad I have it.I think it is great to be able to read something from the Arab point of view since I think our press has a tendency to emphasize the complaints of the Jewish people. Tudy

WELCOME TUDY TO OUR DISCUSSION:

We are so glad you are enjoying the book - please note the Schedule of Discussion in the above heading and for our first week we will be discussing the book through Page 125 only.

We attempt to stick to that schedule so that all of us can be "on the same page," so to speak, and talking about the same issues.

As you have already read these pages, do join us tomorrow when we begin our discussion of this fascinating autobiography.

See you then!

Hi Ella and Harriet,

I would love to join the discussion. Unfortunately, every book is checked out or on hold at the library. I am number eleven on the waiting list. This is a disappointment.

I alway enjoy and learn from the nonfiction discussions. I have been busy getting dusty in the archives reading Savage Beauty(smile). I am getting off the topic.

In this discussion, the questions in the heading are very interesting. I would love to know the answers and hear the opinions of each poster. Please cross your feet and fingers in hopes that I might be called by the library.

Welcome HATS!!

I'm crossing my fingers and toes, HATS. I'm even willing to cross my eyes if it would make your copy of Leap Of Faith appear faster.

We'd love to have you join us. Hope you stick around and participate whenever you can.

Harriet

WELCOME TO OUR DISCUSSION OF LEAP OF FAITH, ONE AND ALL!

Isn't Queen Noor a fascinating woman? She's an all-American girl who grew up to become a queen. She always claimed she was shy, but she has learned to make speeches, appear on television and live an extremely public life. Even after the death of her husband, King Hussein, she still continues to arouse international interest in the political causes that are meaningful to her through her memoirs in LEAP OF FAITH.

HOW DO YOU FEEL QUEEN NOOR'S EARLY BACKGROUND MAY HAVE CONTRIBUTED TOWARD HER ADAPTATION TO HER FUTURE ROLE IN LIFE?

In other words, what goes into the making of a queen? Noor describes her childhood in the book and it wasn't always a particularly idyllic time for her, but there must have been some aspects of it that formed her personality into a woman that could adapt to being a royal personage in an Arab country. As you read her accounts of her early life, is there anything that "grabs" you as being significant?

Also, Noor seems so forthcoming...but, what is YOUR opinion? As you read the book, do you feel that she's really as open as she first appears to be?

There are many sections of this book where Noor discusses politics. As interesting as it is, it may be a DIFFERENT interpretation of events than some of us are accustomed to. Let's all feel free to interject our opinions and/or disagreements with Noor's vision of mid-eastern history...BUT, let's do it within a cordial framework that preserves the congeniality of our discussion.

Please...LET'S ALL AGREE TO DISAGREE WITH EACH OTHER. We can all state our feelings and still RESPECT AND LEARN from the opinions of those who differ with us. The greatest courtesy is to be aware that NOT EVERYONE HAS TO AGREE WITH US.

Ella and I are eager to hear your opinions. We're so excited to be launched on this fascinating au courant book which was the New York Times number 1 best seller for many, many weeks. Please feel free to choose any question in the heading for discussion or any other point that interests you within the first 125 pages of our book. Do come and join us. We'd love to hear what YOU have to say.



Harriet

I think the King brought out the best in her and that is what enabled her to be more outgoing. And she was rising to her station in life. Their love for each other was a beautiful story in itself. She also had a few women friends who may have helped her get to know the ropes of being a woman leader in an Arab country.

Linda

I was delighted to find "Leap of Faith" awaiting me at the library this morning. I read the first chapter immediately on arriving back home. Already, I am wishing I could see some of the places the author the author describes. With, of course, enough funds to buy some of that beautiful cobalt and amber Hebron glass.

All I have learned so far about Queen Noor's background as Lisa Halaby is that she has Arabic family roots. That may be why she felt such a sense of 'belonging' on her first visit to Jordan, and could certainly make her more sympathetic to the Arab viewpoint.

I can see some posters are already well into the book, so I have some catching up to do...already! ...Babi

HELLO EVERYONE! HARRIET AND I ARE SO DELIGHTED TO SEE EVERYONE POSTING TODAY, OUR FIRST DAY. SOME OLD FRIENDS, SOME NEW FRIENDS, IT'S JUST GREAT TO HAVE YOU ALL HERE!

I keep asking myself as I read the book why was this such a popular, a bestselling book? What is different about this book than, say, one about Grace Kelley - who also was born in America and married royalty?

Could it be that it is about the Middle East toward which all our eyes have been directed for the last decade?

Could it be that Queen Noor wrote the book or could it be that some of her opinions are controversial and may make Americans unhappy?

I have opinions about all of that as I am sure you do, too. We will take our time on this first section as there is so much to talk about.

First of all, it is hard for me to understand an American girl marrying a King who has been married three times before and is much older and has numerous children (I made a list of them somewhere but now I can't find the list). I believe the King was 41 and she was 26 (if I remember correctly), and furthermore, to agree to marry him after only knowing him a few weeks.

What did she know of the culture of the Arab world? What did she know of the position she would be assuming? Having read about Grace Kelley's life some years ago I remember she was very depressed after a few years of marriage at the lack of privacy and the role she had to play constantly for the public, attending numerous functions as the wife of the Prince.

To answer the first question above - DO YOU ALL SEE THE QUESTIONS IN THE HEADING ON THIS FIRST SECTION? - I have the impression that this young woman was a loner, very independent with a good education, and fearless; all qualities that she could put to good use in such a marriage. She uses the phrase "intellectually engaged" to describe the times of her life when she is happiest.

She was emotionally involved in the politics of America during the 60's - the Vietnam War particularly, President Kennedy's assassination, and the Civil Rights movement - all had a profound effect on her as well as most Americans.

Have you noticed that she rarely refers to herself by her right name of Lisa Halaby? It seems to me that she lost her identity when she married and that she lost her American roots also.

But, as the same time, I learned only recently that she is now living in McClean, Virginia and I can't remember where I saw that article. Perhaps it will come to me in time.

I'll be back later, have so much to do today.......

So happy you are all with us!

I was intrigued by the description of Arabian horses (p.49), so I looked up a couple of sites on the Internet. They do have a distinctive "mark" on their foreheads and thick manes and tails, but I can't see the short backbones that the book describes. Don't you love what the Bedouins call them - "drinkers of the wind" - how descriptive!

Arabian Horses

Arabian horses

Here is a link to Queen Noor's web page, which offers detailed information about her background, education, marriage to the late King Hussein, and her many international projects. The information should also answer some initial questions about Queen Noor's familiarity with the Arab world (in which she traveled extensively for professional reasons prior to her marriage).

http://www.noor.gov.jo/personal_profile.htm

It NOT uncommon at all for women in the Arab world to marry men much older than themselves. And since King Hussein was well known for decades for his continued work in humanitarian issues, his interests and efforts certainly fit right in with the former Lisa Hallaby's when they married. He was also well known to Queen Noor's father and family friends in the USA, who had business and family intersts in the Arab world.

Nor is it unusual for Queen Noor to have given up her birth name. She has not been Lisa Hallaby since her marriage. To the Arabs, she is Noor, Queen of the Hashemites (now Queen Mother), a much loved, respected and admired woman whom God chose to be born in the USA, but who served the Arab people for many years alongside King Hussein. And to her husband, she was his equal partner in serving the Jordanian people and others in the Arab world who needed help. The marriage customs of the Arab world are NOT those commonly found in the West. But within the Arab culture, the marriage was well accepted.

Just as Madame Farah Diba, widow of the late Shah of Iran, makes her home most of the year in Paris (but spends time with her children in McLean, VA and New York City), and Madame Jehan Sadat, widow of former Egyptian President Anwar Sadat, who also spends much of the year teaching and living in Virginia and as a guest professor at universities in Washington, DC, but returns to Egypt in the summer and in October to recognize the anniversary of Sadat's assasination, Queen Noor makes her home most of the year outside of Jordan. She and King Hussein owned a home in McLean, VA for many, many years and it was their custom to vacation here and take brief respites from the rigors of their responsiblities in Jordan.

I'm not sure that the comparison between Queen Noor and Grace Kelly is apt, since the latter was known as a Hollywood actress first and foremost. And, unfortunately, that continued throughout her marriage.

Hi Ella and all - I seem to have such bad luck with library copies of books scheduled for discussion that I want to join in on. Usually they come in just after the discussion is completed. In this case, the book came in over a month ago so I've already read it, and a few others between. But I'll do my best.

My overall impression I think I'll wait till the end when everyone has had a chance to read the whole book.

Queen Noor's own father was Arab, right? But I don't remember her writing much about how that affected her upbringing. And I also wanted to know more about her early impressions of becoming a "royal". It's got to be such a transition. I do remember her saying on Larry King's interview that she did not say "yes" in answer to a proposal by a king but rather in answer to the man she loved. I liked that.

But gosh, so many changes - step-children, previous wives, new and big responsibilities, a new country and a new faith. I wish she had said more about her previous (if any) faith and how difficult, or easy, it was to become a Muslim (Muslima?). Or did she and I'm just forgetting.

I had no idea she was living in Virginia - I would have assumed that she would have chosen to stay in Jordan.

By the way, did anyone else see the interview this morning on CNN with Saddam Hussein's two eldest daughters? They've been taken in by the royal family in Jordan (that would be the late king's son by a former marriage) where they claimed to feel very much like members of the family, having known and been close to them before. I thought how proud King Hussein would have been - he was such a gentle, peace-loving man and would, no doubt, have done the same thing.

Mahlia - you answered my question regarding why Noor has settled in Virginia. NOW I remember that part!

Hello All.

Thank you, Mahlia. I too think that Queen Noor is a remarkable, indeed an admirable woman and human being. She entered Princeton when women were admitted to class the first time; she was exposed to and interested in feminist issues but certainly no radical. She graduated wih degrees in journalism and urban planning and worked in Iran for a year.

As she says in the book, she ceased to be Lisa Halaby when she married King Hussein; even members of her American family called her "Noor" henceforth. But why would that mean she was giving up her identity or suddenly foreswore her American roots? Isn't it possible to embrace a new life and culture, to grow new roots and still feel an indestructible bond with heritage and past? Must we be either one OR the other?

May I say, with due respect and from my own personal experience, that the two are not mutually exclusive.

Coming from a multicultural background myself (although born in the USA), yes, indeed, I believe it is possible to function in more than one environment.

I don't believe that Queen Noor gave up her American birthright. Rather, she developed them as she matured, understanding that the education, training and professional experiences she had prior to her marriage worked well in her efforts to partner with King Hussein's many peace-related projects and also to develop new ones under her own patronage.

Through her father's professional contacts and those of classmates who later became well established in various professions, Queen Noor was able to draw on a world-wide assortment of resources. As she settled into her new life as King Hussein's wife and partner, she also developed strong resources in Europe. At the level on which she functioned - the wife of a Monarch with a long history of humanitarian interests - Queen Noor's American educational and cultural background certainly contributed to her success.

DIANE - By offering asylum to Sadam Hussein's two eldest daughters, King Abdullah is definitely following in the footsteps of his late father, King Hussein. In the public statement about their relocating to Jordan with their children, it was clearly stated that "these are Arab women who have run out of opportunities for protection."

Within Islam, Muslim women (and their children) are to be protected unconditionally and offered sanctuary and their basic needs met by ANY Muslim man who is aware of their plight. Thus, King Abdullah was also responding to one of the core tenets of Islam.

TUDY, I'm so glad you're reading along with us!

In 1973, Israel was indeed attacked on Yom Kippur, the holiest day on the Jewish calendar. However, the Six Day War occurred in 1967, some years earlier. In 1967 Syria had been launching attacks on Israel from the Golan Heights. When Israel retaliated, Syria and Egypt, united by a defense pact, joined hands. King Hussein of Jordan signed into the defense pact a few days before the initiation of hostilities.

The following quote comes from the Jewish Virtual Library concerning the days shortly before the 1967 Six Day War.

"Nasser (of Egypt) challenged Israel to fight almost daily. "Our basic objective will be the destruction of Israel. The Arab people want to fight," he said on May 27.(11) The following day, he added: "We will not accept any...coexistence with Israel...Today the issue is not the establishment of peace between the Arab states and Israel....The war with Israel is in effect since 1948."(12)

Nasser made the following declaration on May 30 in a further quote from the same source:

The armies of Egypt, Jordan, Syria and Lebanon are poised on the borders of Israel...to face the challenge, while standing behind us are the armies of Iraq, Algeria, Kuwait, Sudan and the whole Arab nation. This act will astound the world. Today they will know that the Arabs are arranged for battle, the critical hour has arrived. We have reached the stage of serious action and not declarations.(13)

Israel was simultaneously facing four hostile Arab armies mobilized on her borders. She did not wait for their inevitable attack to occur. Israel made a first preemptive strike, citing her rights of self defense.

Of course in the Mideast, interpretation is EVERYTHING. Queen Noor gives an account of those same events starting on P.70 of her book and she sees it all quite differently. If anyone cares to compare both accounts of the 1967 war, it makes for interesting reading.

You know, in some ways I feel Queen Noor's book is like a jigsaw puzzle. We have to find missing pieces to put together a complete account of many historical incidents. It's hard work and it's emotionally draining if our loyalties lie firmly with one side or the other. We have to accept that some of us may NEVER agree with an alternate reality to the one that we prefer.

---

I wonder if Lisa Halaby felt very connected to her own past before she became Queen Noor? She tells us about wanting to run away from home at nine years of age...but she doesn't tell us why. Her home was probably a stressful environment because her younger sister also made an aborted attempt to run away some years later. Noor even longed to go to boarding school so that she would be away from home. She encouraged her parents to divorce some years before that actual event took place because she felt their marital tensions made her home life so difficult. There's not one word in the early part of the book about any dates or relationships with men.

What on earth was going on there? I felt that even though the Queen seems so forthcoming and candid in her book, sometimes the most revealing passages occur when we read BETWEEN the lines and try to reconstruct the events that are omitted.

This inexperienced, naive girl with no prior history of male relationships consented to marry King Hussein after only a few weeks of courtship. Hussein, the veteran of three prior marriages, is definitely NOT naive and inexperienced. Yet we are given to understand that he fell in love with Noor instantly because "he saw something in her eyes" when she attended a royal audience His Majesty granted to Marietta Tree and her father. Within a few days, Hussein has introduced Lisa Halaby to his three youngest children and is courting her seriously.

There are many fairy tale elements here, but I do believe that Queen Noor is telling us ONLY what she wants us to know. Did this book have a wide publication in the Arab world? Is it possible that the romantic portions are tailored to Arab sensibilities and the late King Hussein's royal dignity?

I wonder...

Harriet

Hi, I'm a slow reader and so having gotten this book ahead,I plunged in since I've always been interested in Queen Noor and reading the Arab point of view I found very refreshing(I apologuze for getting ahead of schedule). I had not known that the Queen had a father with Arabic roots and I thought since her father had various highlevel government positions,this might have prepared her for upper level protocols and such. when she told about her father's resistance to the fact that she had to begin wearing glasses-he would not tolerate any "imperfection"-it reminded me of a struggle I had when i was about 12 and had to start being a four eyes.Also I identified with the Queen when she told her mother the man she was going to marry had beautiful eyes. This has always been a main attraction for me in meeting people. I wish she had described more fully her marriage ceremony. Would that not have been quite elaborate-like Queen Elizabeth's marriage? Tudy

HARRIET, these are interesting questions, and I agree with your conclusion that Queen Noor tells us in this book only what she thinks readers need to know - but that is her prerogative. She is articulate eloquent, and clearly aware of her role -

She is a convert to Islam, a devoted mother, the widow of a much beloved reigning monarch, the stepmother of King Abdullah, Hussein's eldest son, and a keen promoter of peace and understanding in the Middle East. Queen Noor is known and respected throughout the world. I for one applaud her for keeping intimiate details personal.

As for the political events : I think we should consider the perspective Queen Noor presents ---- in the spirit of my old unforgettable Latin professor in what seems like another lifetime in the "old" country :

When squabbles arose in our all-girls high school classes, he would say audiatur et altera pars , freely translated as 'now let's listen to the other party'. How we loved that man!

The little book club I belong to here in Dover are also reading "Leap of Faith", so this is working out just great.

I think that Noor was very influenced by her Father's Arab background, and was very comfortable working in Iran, visiting Jordan while her Father was there, and when the king was ready to marry again, what a treasure she must have been. She is beautiful, bright, comfortable in Jordanian surroundings, and so poised. I think he was a very lucky man.

Just think she married a man with 8 children, and then had 4 more children.

I loved the Larry King interview, but was disappointed that nothing was said about King Abdullah ll and his beautiful wife. I wonder how she gets along with them.

Speak to you soon....Love, Fran

I was very happy to hear that Sadam Hussiens daughters were granted asylum in Jordan with their 9 children. What a traumatic time this has been for them. Sadam is their father, and this must be a very painful time for them. Today is my brother's birthday, and I can understand how awful it must have been for them to lose their brothers in such terrible circumstances.

Speak to you soon....Love, Fran

I note that under "Acknowledgments", Queen Noor comments briefly on the purpose of this book. She writes: "I always imagined that if I were to try to tellmy story that I would do so in a quiet relective period toward the end of my active life when there might be an almost complete story to tell. However, after my husband's death, many people encouraged me to share my memories and my perspective on Hussein's legacy at a time when it might be of particular relevance. (Italics mine.) Hussein's legacy before the world does appear to be a key element in the writing of this book.

I closely identified with one aspect of Noor's early life. My family also moved frequently, apparently even more so that the Halaby's. I remember well always being the newcomer, the outsider. By the time I had made friends and become accepted and comfortable, we moved again. This kind of childhood does leave one shy in social situations, unsure of a welcome. I, too, did not enjoy 'parties', having no social chatter and detesting gossip. I understand clearly what she is saying here, and what it meant to her to form a few close friendships. ...BAbi

This is such a fascinating book and I'm learning so much from your posts also. I had just assumed the Queen was still in Jordon, so it was a surprise to learn that she and the King had had a house in McLean.

The three week courtship really floored me. In the reading prior to Q Noor stating that it seemed like it had been a continuing, on going courtship. Isn't it interesting that the King saw something special in those eyes that her father deemed imperfect.

Her telling about the 6-day war brought back memories. We were living in Puerto Rico at the time, and attending the annual Casals Festival. At the beginning of the concert an orchestra spokesman said that due to the current hostilities the scheduled program was inappropriate, and they would be performing more somber music.

DIANE – you mentioned Queen Noor’s father and none of us have said anything about the remarkable history of the two immigrant brothers, her grandfather and great uncle, coming to America at the tender ages of 12 and 14 and knowing no ENGLISH!!! Also with them were their mother and several younger siblings; all hailing from Syria! It’s an astonishing story of success in America, and we get very little details of that story which is fascinating too me – almost as remarkable as Lisa Halaby marrying a King.

HARRIET made the comment that “there's not one word in the early part of the book about any dates or relationships with men” I thought of that also, and I agree with Harriet that there is much left out of the book concerning Lisa Halaby’s early life – certainly this beautiful girl had men in her life, is she not willing to tell us that for fear of her Arabian family? Is it not true that in Arab countries a man may punish a wife if he finds out she is not a virgin when they marry?

MAHLIA – we are so happy you are here to tell us of Arab customs, I’m far from knowledge about Arabs, as is most Americans – sad to say!!!! Please feel free to correct any misstatements I may make! I do agree with Queen Noor when she made the statement that there is a “fundamental lack of understanding (of middle-east culture) in the United States, but we are learning – having to learn very quickly, too. We did in Japan also after WWII and you all know of our success in learning their culture and turning that country around into one of the major economic success stories ever.

As HARRIET said – “in some ways I feel Queen Noor's book is like a jigsaw puzzle. We have to find missing pieces to put together a complete account of many historical incidents.” I need to know more, much more, about the history presented in this book – of course, she tells only one side of the story – the Palestinian story – and the wars that have taken place in Israel! And I think we all ought to air our opinions about these wars if we have one! Don’t be afraid to be honest – I need to read over and study a little about the Balfour Declaration of 1917 which King Hussein called “the root cause of almost all the bitterness and frustration in our Arab world today.”

We put some links in the heading but I will look that up and place it there also.

FRAN – golly, it has been ages since I have seen you posting! SO HAPPY YOU ARE WITH US AGAIN!!! I think we can all agree with your statement “She (Queen Noor) is beautiful, bright, comfortable in Jordanian surroundings, and so poised. I think he was a very lucky man.” Yes, indeed, he was; this marriage lasted until his death!

BABI – was your father in the military by any chance? So many children who have had the childhood you described do end with those traits in character; however, not all. A couple of well-known actors (their names escape me) have told of a similar childhood which forced them to make new friends, accept losses, etc. It can’t have been easy.

HELLO PEDLIN! Many of us were surprised also that the Queen is living back in America; having played such an important role for many years in Jordan as Queen, wife, mother, friend, it’s surprising she doesn’t end her life there – but perhaps she visits often? I do believe that all the stories she tells of buying a house here, there, everywhere does not ring true with a statement she made in some part of the book that she was attempting to economize in order not to burden the people of Jordan with unnecessary expenses! Where does all the money come from anyway? I’m sure the King owns property, but am also sure he gets allowances from the people – plus all his children being taken care of royally.

My impression from this book is that Jordan is not a wealthy country – is not oil-rich as some Arab countries are – is that your impression?

I apologize for this extensive post! All of your remarks are so interesting that I feel I must repond to each! THANK YOU SO MUCH!!!

Sorry - it's me again, but here is the text of of the Balfour Declaration (also in the heading).

"Dear Lord Rothschild,

I have much pleasure in conveying to you, on behalf of His Majesty's Government, the following declaration of sympathy with Jewish Zionist aspirations which has been submitted to, and approved by, the Cabinet.

"His Majesty's Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country."

I should be grateful if you would bring this declaration to the knowledge of the Zionist Federation.

Yours sincerely,

Arthur James Balfour"

If we take this history one step at a time we may understand it!

Next, Queen Noor tells us that absentee landlords in Syria and Lebanon sold large tracts of land to the Jewish National Fund. Apparently this was done legally! If so, what is the complaint?

Taking one more step (my last for today) I explored web sites about Deir Yassin which Queen Noor describes in her book on pages 61-63 and I have tried to find a site that is not partial to either side of the conflict. This site is excellent I believe (I have no opinion about the truth of any of these sites!) but this statement bears repeating at this point in our discussion:

"It is long past time for Israeli Zionists, like myself, to apologize. The Israeli government has never apologized for the massacre of Deir Yassin, though the Jewish Agency apologized to King Abdullah in April 1948."

I will put this site in the heading also.

Professor Edward Said (Columbia University) speaks of the issues that have separated the Jewish and Arab interests for decades in his presentation on the 80th anniversary of the Balfour Declaration in 1998. Said is one of the most (if not THE most) respected voices among Arab intellectuals and academics. As a Palestinian, whose family relocated as immigrants to Cairo after 1948, he speaks from first-hand experience. Throughout his professional career, he has worked diligently to bring about better understanding between Jews and Arabs, address the inequities fostered on the Palestinians who were NOT the rich, absentee landowners who sold their properties in Palestine, and as a long-time resident of the USA, attempted to balance American thinking about how Jews and Arabs can live in peace in Israel. Here is a link to the full text of his address.

http://www.washington-report.org/backissues/0198/9801019.htm

Just as the 16 words in Bush's speech have caused great consequences for the Americans (especially military families), these are the words from the Balfour Declaration which prompted such heartache and turmoil among Arabs, since they were NOT adhered to in reality.

" . . .it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, . . . ."

Additionally, what may not be known to the American general readership (and NOT well covered in the media) is that there are numerous Jews in Israel, as well as in the USA and other Western countries, who very much would like to see peaceful co-existence in Israel for Jews and Arabs. The summer camps which are sponsored for the sole purpose of bringing Jewish and Arab youths together in a safe environment to learn about and enjoy each other is one very clear indication of this.

Another way to look at the disparity is through literature (as we are doing here with Queen Noor's book). The highly respected Egyptian writer, Naguib Mahfouz, has stated in interviews that "literature is formed by its social context and by the attitudes of its readers, and that since Egypt (and by reference the Arab world)is still undergoing the industrial and social revolution which Europe passed through more than one hundred and fifty years ago, Arabic literature must use the technique and subject-matter of the nineteenth century." Thus, there has not been the freedom of thought or expression (particularly the latter) in the Arab world, given that it has been ruled primarily by leaders who are predominantly concerned for their purses first.

So in the West, much is still unknown about the Arab world. We recognize King Hussein as a man committed to peace for many decades and he certainly proved repeatedly that he was sincere in this regard. Other Heads of State have not been so consistent in their governance. And the Palestinians remain "a people without a home."

My sense is that in reading Queen Noor's book, SN readers who may be unfamiliar with the Arab world will have a better insight into many issues - not only those within the Queen's family, but throughout the Arab world.

It is important to remember that whereas much is known about the European Holocaust, less is known and/or understood about the Nakba (the Palestinian catastrophe of 1948).

IMO, reading and discussing this book together will not encourage additional anti-semitism, but encourage readers to learn about and understand the many societal complexities of the people, countries, and governments involved without fostering undue judgement.

MAL - certainly the public comments of the two eldest Hussein daughters were crafted carefully. Indeed, they were living apart from their Father (although not their Mother), since their husbands were murdered on their return to Iraq from exile. These women are intelligent enough to know that along with the many non-Iraqis watching and listening to their comments, there were undoubtedly individuals and groups still supportive of their father. However, their safety and comfort is now the responsibility of Jordan's King Abdullah. In the Muslim Arab culture, they have turned to him as a brother. Once they did this and Abdullah accepted the responsibility, it is his duty to protect them and their children - even from their father.

I am so glad to see so many familiar names! I haven't been to Senior Net in quite a long time. Just too busy with other areas online and in life in general.

Somewhere early on in the book Queen Noor says while writing the book there were many "helping" her write it correctly. There was much squabbling and screaming until they could all agree the book was giving the correct viewpoint. I accepted that at face value and read the book with no problems - I was not offended. This is their side of history - that's valid - it's a viewpoint. It is also a history of Hussein, his spirit of kindness, gentleness, love, and that never-ending mission to bring about peace in the Arab World and Middle East.

And I'm glad, very glad to see Queen Noor is dedicating her life to that same mission. I only saw her toward the end of The Larry King Show but was totally impressed. The next day I bought the book.

Again, it sure is good to see you all!

Linda

LINDA - and it's really great to see you posting once again. I've missed you!

Malryn, I think reading and discussing this book can only increase our understanding and give us much-needed other perspectives. As has been pointed out, we know much about the World War II Holocaust, so much more has been written about it. I think about the high school where I was librarian -- while we had books about the Middle East, very few, if any, were written from an Arab/Palestinian perspective.

Regarding Saddam's daughters -- I don't understand their love for their father, when he ordered the death of their husbands. But they have said they love him, and it must be awful when a loved one is perceived as evil by much of the world. As for the sons, I'm glad they are out of the loop, no longer with any power. But I can't cheer and dance in the street for anyone's death -- their mother probably loved them.

I'm not very far into this book, but I do hope Queen Noor will talk about her relationships with her children and stepchildren.

WELCOME HORSELOVER! DO YOU HAVE THE BOOK! IF NOT, GET IT AND JOIN US! WE NEED EVERYONE’S VIEWPOINT!

As evidenced by LINDA here:

“This is their side of history - that's valid - it's a viewpoint. It is also a history of Hussein, his spirit of kindness, gentleness, love, and that never-ending mission to bring about peace in the Arab World and Middle East.

I think we can all agree with that, I remember quite vividly his trips to the US for various reasons and the Americans welcomed him warmly.

And as TRAUDE said”

”She (Queen Noor) is a convert to Islam, a devoted mother, the widow of a much beloved reigning monarch, the stepmother of King Abdullah, Hussein's eldest son, and a keen promoter of peace and understanding in the Middle East”

We can all agree with that statement, also. Thanks, Traude!

And as MAHLIA summed it up in her initimitable way:

”reading and discussing this book together will not encourage additional anti-semitism, but encourage readers to learn about and understand the many societal complexities of the people, countries, and governments involved without fostering undue judgement”

You’ve all put the issue of this discussion in wonderful terms and we thank you.

However, it behooves us to attempt to come to terms with this author’s statements of America’s partiality toward Israel. Are we? Has not President Bush, just recently, proclaimed that peace will only come when there is a Palestinian state? Have not other presidents attempted to get the leaders of these two countries to the table where they can discuss their differences and try to resolve them?

And I must admit, at times, that as an American I do not know why this country must involve itself into problems of other peoples; why we must try to solve their disputes. Are we asked to do this by the Jews or Arabs?

WE ALL HOPE FOR PEACE IN THE MIDDLE EAST AND HOPE THAT JEWS, ARABS AND CHRISTIANS CAN LIVE TOGETHER AGAIN, but attempting to understand the history of the conflict can hurt neither side.

I’m not sure that historically Queen Noor is correct in the statements she has made, are any of you?

I will just look up one more site and then halt my attempts to understand what she is claiming Israel has done – I will put UN General Assembly Resolution 181 in the heading for all to peruse.

I’m also going to see if I can find some photos of Aqaba which the author refers often in the book and will put these in the discussion somewhere. I would love to see this lovely city.

What an interesting document! Please read the UN General Assembly Resolution 194 that I just put in the heading. And may I ask where the other two nations of France and Turkey have been and what they have done in their duty as part of the United Nations Conciliation Committee?

Pedln wrote, "But I can't cheer and dance in the street for anyone's death -- their mother probably loved them." I agree. And their dad just might be a little miffed about that, too. Wasn't a 14 year old killed, too? A grandson?

Linda

I have reached the section of Noor's story where King Hussein, once more a bachelor, is making her uncomfortable with his attention. Isn't requesting that she drive him through the public streets in this bright blue convertible guaranteed to start all sort of gossip and speculation? Who wouldn't be uncomfortable with that?

She made a statement that I think is particularly relevant to our better understanding. She remarked that the Arab culture stresses interdependence. That is something we Westerners, with our emphasis on independence, need to keep in mind. ..Babi

Aqaba is beautiful, ELLA. Thanks for showing us all a location discussed in the book.

HORSELOVER, I heard the same TV newscast that you heard, (74) and it seemed to be based on an ongoing translation of Saddam's daughter while she was being interviewed by the Arabic press. I have no way of knowing If she mentioned the death of her brothers or 14 year old nephew in that interview. We are all dependent upon the film clips and translations selected for us by the various news media which sometimes are contradictory.

Everyone, I do wonder if those deaths might have been averted if Saddam's sons had chosen to surrender instead of fight when surrounded? Was it wise for one of them to bring HIS 14 year old son into hiding with him? It's a pity that this father made such dangerous choices for his minor son as to put him in harm's way during a war. All times of war are devastating and I feel much empathy for the families of American young men who have also lost their lives and continue to lose their lives in Iraq.

PEDLN, I too enjoy hearing about the relationships in the Jordan royal family. I understand that Queen Noor's eldest son, Hamzah, has been designated Crown Prince of Jordan by his step-brother, King Abdullah. The King's own son is very, very young.

Here is an interesting article from shortly after King Hussein's death which hints at the difficulties Noor must have faced trying to reconcile Hussein's older and younger children by his several wives. In her memoirs she does briefly mention her hope that all intrafamily problems will eventually be resolved in time. However there is no hint of what these pressures might be.

This article says that K. Abdullah hoped that the designation of Noor's son as Crown Prince Hamzah, (which surely must be intended as a temporary measure during his own son's minority) is designed "to bond divided loyalties in the royal family." I thought it was an interesting glimpse into a part of the reality of the fairy tale marriage.

http://www.s-t.com/daily/02-99/02-08-99/a01wn008.htm#cut

Noor tells us that she truly wished to become a Muslim. Her official conversion occurred on the morning of her wedding. Her sister remembers that she "glowed with happiness." TUDY, Noor described her marriage ceremony as extremely simple, lasting only five minutes...but of course the surroundings and accoutrements were very royal. It is worth noting that K. Hussein was one of the few monarchs who considered marriage to a bride not originally of his faith. She says he made no demands on her to convert, but she herself wished to embrace Islam.

If only the whole world could embrace alternate religions with equal tolerance!

Harriet

Thanks, Harriet, for that article. The phrase "divided loyalties" in the royal family is briefly touched upon in the book when Q.Noor's father warns her that the Royal Court is full of intrigues and it can be vicious; she replies "there are no intrigues here." And further writes "I would look back on that conversation in later years with wry amusement." (p.68)

Human nature would dictate that there were many problems with divided families, but she did not intend that the purpose of this book was to air all the family linen, so to speak.

MAHLIA, is there a middle class in many of the Arab countries? Possibly Egypt? In the little I know of the region it appears to me that there is a wealthy and a royal class and then there are the poor.

Storms, storms and I sneaked in here for just a moment to see what all of you were saying.

THANKS, BABI, for your remarks! By "interdependence" do you mean on family members? Or what?

Where is everyone today?

I am hoping FRAN will come back and tell us what some of the members of her book club said about this book.

May I add that the mother of King Abdullah, Princess Muna, also converted to Islam. She is the daughter of a British officer (who was stationed in Jordan, if memory serves), and her name before her marriage to the king was Antoinette (Tony) Gardner. She had two daughters and two sons with King Hussein, Abdullah being the eldest son. Princess Muna is in one of the family pictures in the book, taken on the birthday of King Hussein's mother : she is at the far left in the third row, I believe.

The question about royal succession will come up again later in the book when King Hussein (unxpectedly and surprisingly) decided to nominate Prince Abdullah his successor : 'surprisingly' because King Hussein's brother had been Crown Prince for decades and was replaced only weeks before the king's death.

May I briefly emphasize here that the role of an interpreter is more important and also much broader than that of a translator. After all, a translator does written work that can be checked. But who can judge whether an interpreter does his job "properly", renders faithfully whatever is said, including nuances, adds or omits anything, or muddles the meaning, deliberately or not?

My one disappointment with the otherwise excellent book Bel Canto by Ann Patchett is that she refers to the multilingual Japanese interpreter consistently (and incorrectly) as "translator."

It is an important distinction. Unfortunately, most media sources in this country are completely unaware of that distinction and make the same mistake day in day out.

Here's a link to some interesting information about the late King Hussein's marital history. Notice that although Princess Muna has been divorced for many years, she still bears the respectful title and continues with her own humanitarian and patronage work.

http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hussein_of_Jordan

And here's a second link to photos of Princess Muna: http://www.who.int/multimedia/Al-Hussein3/photo.html

NAMING THE CROWN PRINCE: My sense is that King Abdullah named Hamza as Crown Price specifically to tone down any discontent in the Royal Family. That doesn't mean that Hamza will eventually be named King, but for now, it is a grand gesture (and one that I'm sure his father, the late King Hussein is smiling at).

MIDDLE CLASS: The Middle class in Arab countries is often made up of "intellectuals" (educated people) without their being as wealthy as one might expect. Jordan and Egypt are both desperately poor countries - the latter especially because of govt. corruption which has been ongoing for decades.

INTERDEPENDENCE: Babi's comment about Arab interdependence in the family is really a key to understanding Arab culture and Islam. There is enormous dependence on families in Arab countries; loss of a parent or elder sibling is a true catastrophe (especially an elder brother who may be contributing financially to the entire family). The American sense of independence (often to the extreme of breaking families apart) is simply not understood by Arabs, let alone valued. It is truly a foreign concept, since in Arab culture one's success is the success of the entire family. One's financial worth is for the entire family, not an individual or only husband/wife/their children.

The sense of interdependence also extends to former classmates, neighbors, former servants, etc. In Muslim culture, particularly Arab Muslim culture, when someone seeks assistance from another Muslim, they are assured that they will receive help. If not from the one to whom the request is directed, than from someone in his/her family. It is a responsibility and a joy to help others. This is one of the core values of Islam and also in the Arab culture.

THE DEATHS OF THE HUSSEIN BROTHERS AND YOUNGER SON: There was truly no way that the two brothers would allow themselves to be taken alive in the circumstances in which they found themselves. It was not only a matter of pride (and the pride of an Arab regardless of his station in life is absolutely enormous!), but knowing that if they were captured alive they would have to undergo public scrutiny and imprisonment.

Regarding the 14 year old son, who also died. In Arab culture, he was a man, not a child. His father was obviously keeping him close by to train him, just as Sadam Hussein began training his sons in their early teens. Notice that the son (also armed) would not allow himself to be captured either. It is the pride of the tribe, the clan and the message from his father. Once his father and uncle were dead, it was up to the teenager, as the remaining man on the scene, to fight to the death. And that is exactly what he did.

In the Arab concept, it would have been far worse for him psychologically if he were captured and Iraqi citizens saw him in custody of the American soldiers. If that had happened, he would have felt great shame in betraying his father, uncle and grandfather.

Regardless of how much they may have hated the Husseins, to see an Arab "give up" would have been much worse. The only other people I can compare this with are the Afghans, who are vicious fighters!

There are only 5 members of our bookclub, and we next meet on August 22. Until then we don't discuss the book at all, but we are all reading it, and probably other books also.

We meet at different members homes, at 10:30 am to discuss the book for just one hour and a half.

Then we go out to lunch localy, and sometimes we are still discussing the book, but often we talk about politics, personal issues, etc. We are all very good personal friends, and have been through good and bad together, and are very supportive of one another.

This all started when one of us lost her husband, and we decided to get together with her for lunch once a month as a show of support. We found that one of the things we talked about was the books each of us was reading, and how much we liked it or didn't. Then we decided we would all read the same book.

By the way we give each book a numerical rating betweek 1-10, and keep track of the rating that each book gets. I'll let you know what rating Leap of Faith gets.

This is a wonderful site for anyone reading the book should be aware of.

Speak to you soon....Love, Fran

I guess I'm an incurable romantic-I had forgotten Queen Noor said her marriage ceremony was simple-but I'd like to know how simple-Was it like just going to city hall and getting a marriage license.? I would think at the time you know you are becoming part of a nation's history as a queen you would be more descriptive of the event.Did she have to wear a particular gown? Was a tiara placed on her head? I also wondered if any of you had a surprise second look at Sadat after the Queen's presenting the Jordanian view of his actions?

Here's an excerpt from an article about the marriage of Queen Noor and King Hussein. Given the modesty of the former Lisa Hallaby and King Hussein's interests in humanitarian issues in Jordan, especially improving the lives of the poor residents, this type of ceremony seems especially fitting.

"Upon their marriage in 1978, Halaby converted to Islam and took the name Noor Al-Hussein, meaning "Light of Hussein." The traditional ceremony joining the brainy American beauty and the regal descendent of the prophet Mohammed lasted only four minutes and was performed with just a handful of male family members present. The money saved by keeping the wedding small went to Jordan's poor.

Muslim marriages are traditionally brief (a matter of a few minutes), often attended by only the male family members of both the bride and groom. In extremely orthodox families or in rural areas, the bride and her female relatives are in a separate room. In this case, the bride's father, brother or other male relative speaks for her.

Readings from the Qur'an are common, the Imam asks whether the bride freely agrees to the marriage and the bride's male representative answers for her, more Qur'anic verses are read and a final pronouncement that the groom and bride are married. In some cases, mention is made of the dowery for the bride, but not always.

For those who can afford it, there is often a large reception - quite often separated into two events: one for men and one for women guests. In Jehan Sadat's book, A Woman of Egypt, she speaks proudly of the fact that she was actually in the room during her wedding ceremony, although her Father spoke on her behalf. Like Princess Muna, Jehan Sadat was half British, but raised as a Muslim.

Whereas Anwar Sadat was considered a brave Statesman in the West and by Israel, attempting to achieve peace in the Middle East by his journey to Israel and presentation to the Knesset, in the Arab world he was considered a traitor and many attempts were made on his life. He was ostracised by other Arab leaders and scorned by Arabs throughout the Middle East.

I right-clicked on the beach scene at Aqaba and now it is my wallpaper! Mmmm. How sweet!

Linda

I think we are so used to seeing the elaborate weddings of British royalty that it certainly was a shock to read of Lisa Halabys wedding, but a welcome relief that both Hussein and Noor opted for a simple ceremony.

You ask...2. Noor wrote: "Everyone I knew, including my new friends in Jordan expressed horror at the realities of the Holocaust. But they resented, as I was growing to, how Arabs were cast as the aggressors in the dispute between Israel and the Arab countries."(59) What are your feelings about this comment from Noor?

I am not surprised that Arabs have different feelings than I do about the dispute between Palestinians and Israelites. They have both suffered terribly over these years, and have lost so many young people in the name of peace. I am surprised the mothers of both countries don't put a stop to it, and be more willing to go the extra step to share rather than lose more of their children.

Speak to you soon....Love, Fran

TRAUDE, thanks for explaining the distinction between an interpreter and a translator. It's appreciated.

TUDY, there's a photo of Noor and Hussein's wedding in the center of our book.

Weren't those wonderful photos of Princess Muna in the links that MAHLIA provided? It makes the alignments of the royal family into two separate family groups far more understandable. The older ones from K. Hussein's first two marriages were roughly contemporary in age, and the younger ones of Q Alia and Q Noor shared the common bond of having been mothered by Noor.

I find myself wondering about the exact status of Abir, the little orphaned Palestinian girl adopted by Q Alia and Hussein. I understand that Q Alia was herself Palestinian in origin? The adoption of Abir from a Palestinian refugee camp was a generous and caring move that should be applauded. It was also an brilliant political public relations move that must have excited the press tremendously at the time. I wonder if the Arab press still follows the progress of the grown-up Abir?

That gesture certainly turned the child's life around and Noor talks about Abir during her courtship with Hussein in the same tender tone that she discusses Princess Haya and Prince Ali, the late Q Alia's other children. I'm puzzled though, if Abir is Hussein's adopted daughter, shouldn't she share in the same royal titles as her sisters and brothers? In her book, Noor always refers to Abir without any titles?

MAHLIA wrote about the Hussein brothers:

"Regarding the 14 year old son, who also died. In Arab culture, he was a man, not a child. His father was obviously keeping him close by to train him, just as Sadam Hussein began training his sons in their early teens."

Among other things Saddam Hussein murdered other Arabs with chemical warfare and invaded Kuwait. I do believe that he trained his sons in HIS own violent footsteps because, like their father, they were already engaged in the unscrupulous use of wealth and power. If the next generation was getting the same training passed on to them, that was bad news for Iraq and the rest of the world. I did not know the teenager was armed.

Nevertheless the fourteen year old was a youngster. Had his father permitted him to surrender, AS DID SO MANY OTHER IRAQIS during the short war preceding the takeover of Baghdad, he could now be alive and, due to his age and lack of participation in the criminal events of the Hussein regime, he surely would not have suffered the same penalties as his father or grandfather might.

Why would the national pride of the Iraqi people present an obstacle to the survival of this child? I'm sure the Iraqi love their children and might understand at least one tender gesture from the Husseins? His mother and grandmother might have rejoiced in his return. Besides, doesn't anyone who suffers captivity feel shame at such a trauma REGARDLESS of religion or nationality?

I do agree with you, MAHLIA, about the importance of understanding the close bonds of the Arab extended family. Wasn't that warmth one of the things that attracted Noor in both Iran and Jordan?

Harriet

edit: Just caught your post, FRAN. Will return later.

This book has certainly been an eye-opener. It must be difficult for Middle Eastern countries, especially those like Jordan, with intelligent, educated, and compassionate leaders to know who are their enemies and who are their friends, whom do they trust. Just being Arab and Muslim doesn't make one your buddy -- just look at the way the PLO treated Jordan. And yet Jordan wanted to do right by their Palestinian brothers. How can peace and unity ever be achieved when your friend one day is your enemy the next?

I did not realize that Jordan and Egypt were both considered to be very poor nations. Another misconception being cleared up.

Regarding Abir, the adopted daughter, perhaps there is something in Jordanian law about who can and cannot be considered royalty. In one of the readings listed in the heading, she was referred to as MS, while all the other women were Princess. I wondered about that too, at the time.

Did anyone see the 60 minutes rerun Sunday night about Qatar, a small Arabic country on its way to becoming one of the richest nations, and also to becoming a democracy? There are elections and everyone can vote, even women. Like Queen Noor, the Sheik's wife is an independent thinker who works hard for civic projects and human rights.

TRAUDE, that is an astute observation on your part and I’m wondering what brought that to your mind in this book. Could it be that Palestinians and Israelites interpret the words and actions of the United Nations in their various resolutions in different ways? To me the language at times is vague and little provision is made for enforcement; even though I know that much laboring over each word, each sentence, was done, and possibly it was meant to be vague. I’m just curious as to what you meant and I don’t want to go into past actions of the UN again as it would require a discussion of its own and this is not the proper instrument for such a debate.

Thanks, MAHLIA, for answering our questions. In your opinion, is Israel economically and politically more sound that the Arab countries and, if so, why?

Later in the book we will discuss in more depth the value of interdependence and independence and so I choose to wait until that time to comment on this subject.

HAHAHAAAA – BABI! Can you sit in one of those comfortable chairs now that it is straight in front on you? And are you getting seasick from the water on your monitor?

FRAN – what a delightful group of friends you have! And what an excellent idea and, of course, I need to know how you choose the books? Why choose this one? Simply because it was on the bestseller list – does that always make a book good in your opinion or are you just curious as to why it is there? You must come back when your group talks about this one and give us the benefit of some of the remarks!

Several times Noor writes of her desire to have a confidant, someone to share her thoughts with but in such a society where gossip is rife and wealthy/royal women have nothing else to do (they all have servants to do their bidding), she found herself to be quite alone. Wouldn’t that be disturbing for most of us?

She speaks of this again by stating “what I found most unsettling from the beginning of our marriage was the drip, drip, drip of gossip about Hussein’s friends and family.” In America most of us would have been able to cut this off immediately by several means, but these are friends and employess of the King and she is unable to do it.

On pgs. 86-87 Noor states how surprised she was at the “tense and distant” King as he was preparing to entertain royal guests from Iran; how much being the perfect host meant to the King and, again, most American women would have been concerned at their husband’s attitude, particularly when he had servants to do everything – what could he have been so worried about, particularly as they were old friends who had been supportive of the King.

A warm, loving atmosphere? Interdependence on family members? Various ways of looking at that I think.

PEDLIN - we were posting together and no, I missed 60 Minutes Sunday night - one of the few I missed.

Isn't Qatar that friendly little country where we had a base in both the Gulf War and the Iraq war? Being oil-rich certainly helps a nation in many ways; but not always in becoming a democracy. Saudi Arabia is an example of a country that is very wealthy, everyone shares I believe in that wealth, but it is not a democracy. I know of two Americans who went there because the country has so few educated people - one couple taught school and made fantastic money and the other did the same as a nurse. It was their opinion that Saudi Arabia hires most of their talent from other countries which I cannot understand.

ELLA - Qatar certainly is "that friendly little country" to which much of the former American military presence in Saudi Arabia is being transferred. Whereas the Saudi Royal Family is enormously conservative and traditional in their outlook (even in the youngest generation of technocrats), Qatar is quite different. The country is smaller, does not have the large Bedouin presence as does Saudi Arabia and the leadership is much younger than in Saudi Arabia. Look for good things to happen in Qatar.

In trying to understand why King Hussein took a personal interest in the preparations to entertain the Shah of Iran, remember that Jordan was (is) an enormously poor country vs Iran's ostentatious wealth at the time of the Shah's rule. And whereas King Hussain was known throughout the Arab world for his humility, Shah Mohamed Reza was not. Although not an Arab country, Iran contributed at various times to projects in Jordan, for which King Hussein was extremely grateful. It's hard to be "the poor brother" in the Middle East.

". . .what I found most unsettling from the beginning of our marriage was the drip, drip, drip of gossip about Hussein’s friends and family. . .

This comment reminds me very much of the early years of the John and Jackie Kennedy marriage, and then the latter's travails after President Kennedy's death. And although Queen Noor is much loved by the Jordanians, they are fully aware that she is not an Arab. And that counts against her in some quarters, just as I'm sure Princess Muna must have faced similar issues in her earlier marriage to King Hussein.

Regarding the economic and political stability of Israel vs the Arab countries, I would certainly say that Israel's economy is in much better condition. Remember, it receives a couple of billion dollars each year from the USA govt., as well as equally enormous sums from the American Jewish community through various organizations, has a strong leadership in the Knesset (although they hardly ever agree with each other),and well educated and highly trained senior govt. officials in place in most of the ministries, and has been able to keep close control of the fundamentalist, orthodox religious faction of the country.

Arabs are nowhere near as well organized as Israelis, either at the independent, business, or govt. levels; do not have the culture of working together in a cooperative format for the good of the nation - this is truly a concept which is alien to many Arabs - and tend to speak in one manner "for public consumption" (which many politicians do anywhere in the world), but mean something totally different in reality. In Persian, this trait is referred to as "taroof," (exaggerated public politeness). The best examples of this are the Revolutions in Egypt, which although were fully supported by the people never really brought about much of a change. A new leader took over (Nasser from the Monarchy, for example) but then went right back to partisan politics.

Arabs do not have a strong united voice (except within their own families - remember Babi's comment about "interdependence") and attempts to create such a voice have ended tragically. Generations of desperation and poverty tend to make people ultra-suspicious of others and willing to expend their own energies for their families.

King Hussein was atypical of Arabs and Arab leaders; much loved, respected, and appreciated by those who knew him for many decades. He was a special man, not only among Arab leaders, but among men. Hussein was first and foremost a Hashemite - a man of the desert, who knew the ways of his beloved people in the same way he knew his own heartbeat. He was courageous, whereas many other Middle Eastern leaders have not been. And he was not afraid of trying to deal with Israel directly. (For many years, Hussein met and talked with Israel leaders without much public attention.) His vision was for peace in the Middle East - for everyone! And I think that is what was in Queen Noor's mind as she wrote about her Leap of Fai

Mahlia said, "King Hussein was atypical of Arabs and Arab leaders; much loved, respected, and appreciated by those who knew him for many decades. He was a special man, not only among Arab leaders, but among men. Hussein was first and foremost a Hashemite - a man of the desert, who knew the ways of his beloved people in the same way he knew his own heartbeat. He was courageous, whereas many other Middle Eastern leaders have not been. And he was not afraid of trying to deal with Israel directly. (For many years, Hussein met and talked with Israel leaders without much public attention.) His vision was for peace in the Middle East - for everyone! And I think that is what was in Queen Noor's mind as she wrote about her Leap of Faith."

Very well put and I agree wholeheartedly!

Linda

Ella and Harriet, I tried to list the good guys and the bad guys and found I could name but few Middle Eastern countries, let alone locate them. This confirmed and dedicated map lover would like to request that someone please put the site below (or something similar) in the heading, for easy referral. Thanks.

http://www.mideastweb.org/maps.htm

And here's another link to a map which you might consider for easy reference. It includes a few more details and a link to individual Middle Eastern countries, which is helpful if you want to follow Queen Noor's comments about other regions in the area.

http://www.infoplease.com/atlas/middleeast.html

ANN, this is just speculation, as I do not know the legal ins and outs of the matter. I suspect that 'royalty' is a matter of bloodline descent and adoption would not meet that criteria. Abir would be legally a child of the royal family through adoption, but she could not be 'royal'.

You are all still way ahead of me in the book. I'm still trying to figure out how an intelligent, modern young woman could miss all the "obvious signals" that she says were going over her head. These private in-family dinners, (with no mention of a chaperon), in an Arabic, Muslim society? Jordan must have been more modern than I realized, if all this did not compromise Miss Halaby's reputation. Mahlia, I'm sure you can straighten me out here.

I need to spend some time today catching up on my reading. ...Babi

Dear Ella,

You asked how our book club picks the books we chose to read. Usually there is a discussion, and either a friend, daughter or publicity draw our attention to the book, and a vote is taken. They are rarely on the best seller list, but if they are we have a local bookstore that sells books on the New York Times bookseller list for 40 % off, and we buy them there.

Thank you so much for all of your postings. I learn a lot from each of you. Thanks so much for the maps. That certainly adds to my understanding of the book.

Speak to you soon....Love, Fran

Hi Fran - I'm curious whether your book club has read Jehan Sadat's book A Woman of Egypt or Sattareh Farmanfarmian's book A Daughter of Persia? Both are excellent and give some interesting background on the history, culture, people of the Middle East.

BABI, I also wondered about the late courtship hours Noor and the King kept after tucking the three children into bed and dining together. Noor tells us she came home from the palace every night after midnight. She was plainly a woman who knew how to keep her privacy then and now and discussed her royal relationship with no one. I believe the King must have cared about her very much because he carved out huge amounts of time each evening for them to grow to know each other. Later, after their marriage, Noor found their time together interrupted by phones, people, and events, but this was an idyllic quiet period.

I love a romance, and though I may have conflicting feelings about some of the things Noor writes, I also enjoy the happiness that she projects once Noor finally decided to marry Hussein.

"Looking back on that period before our marriage, I realize that those were the most golden, carefree weeks of my life. The King and I had little to do with the details of the wedding, which spared me all the frenzy that so often accompanies such occasions."

Goodness, I wish someone else had been available to handle all the details of my wedding. Don't you?

The custom of having male relatives speak for the bride during the wedding ceremony is hard for me to imagine. Don't you think it was a sign of the caring between Hussein and his bride that Arab custom was bent in this respect? Noor and Hussein were not only in the same room during the marriage, but she spoke her vows in her own voice. Later on, Noor would prove to be the only Jordanian Queen to have her own office and staff and generate many of her own ideas for the improvement of Jordan. Hussein had to be a forward looking man to be open to these innovations.

MAHLIA, I was very impressed by your description of King Hussein. I didn't know that he quietly initiated peace-keeping attempts in the middle east. By orthodox Arab standards he also certainly exhibited flexibility and forbearance toward his American bride-to-be. Noor wrote that he went out of his way to wear his royal titles with consideration toward all.

PEDLN, the maps are interesting in that they show the relative sizes and locations of all the countries discussed in this book. I agree with you that it makes it much easier to understand our book. I don't know how to insert them into the heading, but I'm sure ELLA will do so as soon as possible.

Hi FRAN. Can't wait to hear conclusions your group comes to when you have your discussion. It's funny, but I've gotten so accustomed to SN book discussions that a face-to-face book talk of an hour and a half sounds short to me now. I'm glad we have BOTH kinds of book discussions.

Harriet

Speaking of face-to-face book discussions, does anyone know if SN will have a presence at this year's National Book Convention in October on the Mall in Washington DC? Everyone seemed to have so much fun last year that I thought there might be a repeat this year.

Mahlia, Everyone -- yes, yes -- Please go or come -- There will be a presence at the Book Festival. The Harrington is waiting again, and if you check Joan's posts in the site below, the Festival has moved closer to the hotel -- on the mall. I am sorely tempted, even if I go East in early September

Joan Pearson "--- National Book Festival 2003" 7/24/03 12:17pm

Now I am heading West to Seattle tomorrow, so will just be a lurker for a while, if I'm lucky enough to do that.

PEDLIN AND MAHLIA, I put both maps in the heading and thank you for suggesting them. It does make it easier for us to place these various countries when we are discussing them.

MAHLIA, I differ with you about the “gossip” surrounding the Kennedys and later Jackie in particular. Most of their problems stemmed from the media, particularly Jackie after her husband’s death; whereas when Q.Noor speaks of the “drip, drip, drip” of gossip that was difficult for her, she is speaking of family members and employees of the King. The two are vastly different groups to deal with and each would be a problem for anyone – I doubt any of us here have worry to about those problems or is there a celebrity among us?

Harriet mentioned two ways in which Queen Noor might have influenced other royal couples (or perhaps just the women in Jordan) in the future when she mentioned Noor speaking her own vows and establishing her own office and staff members. The last question in the heading asks us to note the influences that Queen Noor might have had on Jordanians, or possibly other Muslim women.

Harriet also referred to the “fairy tale romance” of Noor and Hussein and I smiled at the incident in which Noor, while in London, took a cab to get home and couldn’t think of the address of the house in which she was living! Her expression is “I was wondering if, having exited the rabbit hole from the surreal world surrounding the King, I could reenter-and even whether I actually wanted to return. Was it all just a strange dream?”

Of course, we all had such thoughts when we were first married – I did, but to put these thoughts, and many others similar, in a book which will be read by Jordanian women and friends of the family and the deceased King seems awkward somehow to me. Does any one know if this book has been translated into Arabic to be read in middle east countries? And how they are responding?

What did all of you think after reading of the battle of Karameh, which word I believe means “dignity” in Arabic? What would you have done if you were in the position of King Hussein?

And the biggest question of all if what to do with the PLO? And ARAFAT? That question concerns the whole world and not just Jordan! This has been going on for so long and there must be a way to settle the situation that exists between Israel and its neighbors?

Any opinions?

HORSELOVER! We were posting together, but in reference to your post let me tell you of an incident at the United Nations last December. My daughter and I were taking a tour of same and our guide showed us a big chart on the wall explaining the amount the whole world spends on such things as health, education, weapons, etc. She explained to the group that if the monies spent on weapons could be spent on the health and education of the world's people what a difference it would make.

The amount spent on weapons was a fantastic figure and one of the group asked what percentage of the weapons figure was spent by the USA and the tour guide said 78%.

Need we spend that much? Are we expected to secure the peace of all those nations you mentioned? What interest do we have in Bosnia? In Somalia? In Palestine? In Israel?

I know the world believes we went to war in Kuwait in 1990 and in Iraq in 2003 for oil - did we? Did we sacrifice the lives of our young men for oil? If so, shame on us!

Ella - to continue your question - what was the purpose of Americans being in Vietnam, in Korea, and during the two World Wars? Today our news is filled with information about Iran building a nuclear arsenal with equipment and techniques provided by Korea. An Iranian scientists as been "consulting" with Korea. Is this frightening to Americans or just something that is "the business of people in the Middle East, but not in the USA?"

For decades the USA was known as a Christian country (although there were people of many other faiths living within our borders). And as Christians, we a taught to "do unto others. . ." In the Qur'an, Muslims are taught not to pray for benefits in their lives without also praying that everyone will have them from the Lord.

From the political and economic standpoint - as was clearly indicated by the British during the Raj and their colonization of countries far-removed from their small island nation, it was important to "control" and given the European heritage of the majority of Americans (until just recently), that control factor has carried over.

Of course, it's easier to control the flow of oil from already well established oil fields, rather than begin seeking it on our own continent, which would cost multi-millions and ruin the ecology of the North American continent. Is anyone in the USA worried about the ecology in the Middle East. And if American companies don't have major control (perhaps not 100%, but major shares) of the world's oil flow, then it's going to cost a lot more to purchase.

Now that the enormous largess from oil in Saudi Arabia is lessening and the Saudis are realizing that their once never-ending funding may be being squeezed, its time (past time, actually) for American businessmen to look elsewhere. There are enormous oil resources yet to be fully developed off the North China Sea, but the Chinese have been adament about American input there. Countries with less sophisticated infrastructure (like Azerbaijan, also the site of large oil resources) have turned to Americans for assistance. But Iraq was not intered in having Americans control their oil fields. Iran taught them a lesson about American presence in their country and the depletion of their oil fields.

As far as Somalia was concerned, how did it look that America was willing to help European countries or those with large oil resources, but not promptly get involved in Africa? Whether the average American realizes it or not, racism is STILL alive and well in the USA, particularly in Washington DC politics. Think how long America stood by and allowed the atrocities in South Africa. And although America had hundreds of Christian missionaries throughout the African continent, the political pressure for change in the African leadeship took many, many years. Think how long Nelson Mandela was imprisoned! Needlessly.

There is a tremendous amount of political and economic hypocrisy in the USA - in both parties and throughout Congress. And although we may not like to admit it, as the world's "super power," less wealthy nations turn to us in desperation for assistance. Sometimes we respond and sometimes we don't.

Keep your eye on Liberia and see what happens in the next few weeks. Today, "American civilian contractors" entered the country to fulfill Pres. Bush's promise of assistance. A small number of American Marines are there, while others sit abord ships off-shore. We are bogged down in Afghanistan; the battle continues in Iraq; and so it seemed wise to send in "contractors," rather than deal with American anguish about "sending more troops" into a conflict zone. Well, those contractors are American spouses, sons and daughters, loved ones, just as much as soldiers are. Talk about hypocrisy!

Here is the NYT article about yesterday's bombing of the Jordanian embassy in Bagdahd.

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/international/AP-Iraq-Jordan-Attack.html?hp

Mahlia, you can go back decades and ask home many Holocaust refuges did we allow to enter the US in the 30's and 40's.. But I have hopes that in all of these instances our collective consciousnesses are being raised.

I was puzzled to read of the attack on Hussein's plane by Syrian fighter pilots. Why was Syria hostile to Jordan, to the point an action that could have led to war? I realize Syria did not have the stability and leadership that Jordan did, but if they were at war somewhere in there I've forgotten it.

Hussein was fortunate to have a wife that could be understanding about having their honeymoon so thoroughly disrupted. She showed the ideal of service in which she was raised in resolving that she would make every effort not to add to his burdens. She pays Hussein a tremendous tribute when she says that his life and his work were devoted to bringing about peace. ...Babi

MAHLIA, I do agree that America should be seeking a source of energy and fuel within the United States or working to develop alternate sources. You're right that we are too dependent on purchasing oil from the Mideast. I would think that's more advantageous to Mideast countries than to us. If all of the nations that purchased their oil were eliminated, there might not be much left to some Mideastern national economies but sand? It's true that most of the world's oil wells are dug in the Mideast, but wasn't their ecology primarily desert at the time that those oil wells were being developed?

Yes, our country has exerted control over others, usually to advance American security and American interests. So do most nations, don't you feel? As far as nations conforming to the Christian or Muslim code of religious ethics, maybe sadly, we're all falling down on that job. Hypocrisy is not a uniquely American trait and maybe it's necessary to survive in today's world.

Sometimes we in America have backed the wrong political horse, but hindsight usually provides the most accurate picture of a situation and too often hindsight gives us the answers too late to correct things. We backed the Shah in Iran and that was a mistake. He wasn't good for Iran or for us in the USA, but truthfully, WHERE IN THE MIDEAST CAN WE FIND A BENIGN ARAB DEMOCRACY TO SUPPORT? I feel that international politics seems to universally consist of nations mouthing pious speeches about humanitarianism and then doing what most benefits themselves. It's sad and scary in my opinion. Yet, if we had to go back in time and choose between the Shah's regime and the upsurge of radical Fundamentalism, wouldn't the choice still be a difficult one?

I researched a whole lot, but I couldn't find any clear information about the USA and the depletion of Iranian oil. Am I correct in reading the implication that during our period of influence in Iran we used up Iranian oil in some way?

What happened in Iran? What do you feel will happen with Iraqi oil?

Goodness, you're all great! I find I have to read and research to keep up with the things being posted. I wanted to discuss several more comments from all of you, but I'm going to try to catch up on my information first.

I think you're all wonderful!

more...

Harriet

Our book club has not read either of the books you mentioned by Arab women, but since we are now having our consciousness raised we might do so.

We read "The Red Tent" some months ago, and loved it, but we didn't decide to read more books that have a biblical background. We read all kinds of books.

I was shocked this morning to hear about the Jordanian embassy being bombed, and was surprised that Iraq considered that country being on the side of the United States.

This book has certainly opened my eyes to how unfamiliar we all are with the countries of the Middle East.

Our group discuss the book on August 22.

Speak to you soon....Love, Fran

FRAN - perhaps in future your Book Club might consider the two books and if so, I'm confident you'll enjoy them. N.B. Sattareh Farmanfarmian, the author of DAUGHTER OF PERSIA, is NOT an Arab. She's Persian, descended from a long line of Qajar royalty and high-level government officials. Satti writes beautifully of the history of her beloved Iran and the many family members (including former Prime Minister Mohamed Mossadek) who worked to bring it into the modern world.

BABI - Syria had had less than close relations with Jordan's King Hussen for many years. President Asad became more suspicious of him as relations deteriorated in the Middle East, especially as King Hussein continued to work closely with the USA and Western European governments to bring about peace. As Queen Noor writes, there were many, many assasinations attempts against King Hussein and protecting him was one of the major issues ALWAYS in her mind.

HARRIET - yes, the land area was primarily desert, but even so there was a tremendous amount of wild life throughout the region, underground sweet water wells around which various oases sprang up on which the caravans depended, and when the desert bloomed, there was a wide swath of grazing land for the Bedouin herds. People not of the desert are often not familiar with what the desert offers and how easily its natural phenomena can be thrown out of control, destroyed or wasted.

RE "the depletion of Iran's oil," it was not only in the product itself, but also in the American administrative control of those sites. Yes, the USA supported the former Shah and why not? The USA's intelligence agencies and military trained the Shah's military and SAVAK (the Iranian secret police) and had a strong presence in the government ministries.

The Shah was basically a shy, hesitant man by nature and surrounded by sycophants who seldom allowed him to learn the true nature of a situation. His health was never strong and he "lacked a backbone" in most controversial decisions - which were made for him by others and offered to the public in his name. Several of those "advisers" were neither shy nor hesitant, but they allowed the Shah to have a public persona that gave the world the idea that he was in control. He was NOT, as King Hussein was in Jordan.

I don't think there is such a thing as "a benign Arab democracy" and if there were, it wouldn't be doing much good for its people. My sense is that the USA needs to educate itself (at all levels, but particuarly in govt.) about the culture and customs of the Middle Eastern countries so that when partnerships are possible, there will be a REAL sense of working together, not just "controlling."

There is an enormous sense of mistrust, betrayal and shame (a sense of lost dignity) in the Arab world focused on their own leaders, as well as govt. officials at all ranks. And there has been (with the exception of King Hussein, who was truly an unusual and kind man)decades of repeated "kow towing" to corrupt officials, who fill their own purse first and then think about how they can obtain the crumbs left over for their relatives. The level of corruption is enormous and often leaves Americans (businessmen and govt. officials) totally in the dark and average Arab citizens with the sense of "what's the use," since things change so slowly in that region of the world.

As we learn from Queen Noor's comments, except for the period of Camp David, Jordan has had strong relations with the USA for many years. And that was known in the Arab world. Thus Jordan's Embassy in Jakarta (or elsewhere in the world) is considered a target just as much as American interests are.

Whereas relations with Saudi Arabia have taken a turn for the worse - see this article linked below to an article by Jim Hoagland in today's edition of the Washington Post - and may continue to deteriorate, relations with Jordan have remained strong. King Abdullah is, afterall, King Hussein's son and he learned his craft from a Master.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A26192-2003Aug6.html

And King Abdullah was educated in the United States and, no doubt, will continue to have good relations with the USA, I would think.

MAHLIA, you state "That the USA needs to educate itself (at all levels, but particuarly in govt.) about the culture and customs of the Middle Eastern countries so that when partnerships are possible, there will be a REAL sense of working together, not just "controlling." What Arab country have we controlled?

This task of "educating ourselves" cannot be an easy one.

You have related to us how corrupt the Arabian officials are and we know how often their governments change (or should I say dictators?) from fundamentalists to more liberal and back around they go.

Furthermore, you stated that "Arabs do not have a strong united voice and attempts to create such a voice have ended tragically. Generations of desperation and poverty tend to make people ultra-suspicious of others."

You also said that Arabs "do not have the culture of working together in a cooperative format for the good of the nation - this is truly a concept which is alien to many Arabs - and tend to speak in one manner "for public consumption" (which many politicians do anywhere in the world), but mean something totally different in reality"

All of which certainly makes it very difficult to try to educate ourselves about the culture of these people! Each of the countries is very different from the other, and inside each country can be one or two or three different beliefs, e.g. sunni and shiite Muslims.

On behalf of the country which I love, I have to say that at this moment our forces are scattered throughout the world as peacekeepers, humanitarians and as soldiers attempting to right the wrongs of such as Saddam Hussein.

Perhaps you didn't know that often our reserve units which for two weeks every summer must practice their scheduled tasks use that time to perform humanitarian relief in othe countries. My daughter's reserve unit, which is a medical one, just returned from Ecuador where they set up a clinic in the poorest sections of the country and gave medical help to those in need.

There is so much going on in our government that is never broadcast throughout the world! I cannot help but refute your statement that we are hypocritical in sending only contractors to Liberia; I don't know the circumstances of that sitation, but perhaps we are running out of forces to send - couldn't that be possible? ARe we to liberate every country in the world? Where in our constitution does it say that we are to give world-wide assistance to anyone that asks regardless of their type of government?

But we are far off the topic of our book! I think we should return to Queen Noor and her accounts of the war in 1964.

WE have much in common with Jordan when we can both agree that Arafat is not to be trusted and that we believe the PLO to be a terrorist organization. One can only feel sorrow for King Hussein who, in 1970, had to wage a war with fellow Arabs in order to get them out of his own country.

I'm not a historian, just an interested person in learning more, can anyone tell me what is Jordan's particular affiliation with England? The royalty of Jordan visit there often and Noor tells us in this book that they have a home there and I believe an apartment in London (am not sure of the facts as I don't have the book in fron of me).

Thank you all for your comments, it is you and you alone that make this discussion one that is fun to read every day. Keep your questions, your comments, your opinions coming - THEY ARE SO APPRECIATED!

ELLA - as Americans I'm confident that we all share your love for our nation. Yet it is sometimes important for us to look at (and admit to ourselves) that we do have "warts."

Yes, I'm aware of the work that is done by the American Reserves. My son, David, was in the Reserves from 1985 until he was called to active duty in 1992. They are a special community, do wonderful work in natutral disasters within our country and, as you mentioned, give unstintingly of their time and effort abroad.

Re your question about which Arab country has the US controlled. Let me be clear: I do not mean that we have appointed the leadership (except in the case of Iran, where the USA had a major role in unseating Prime Minister Mossadek and bringing the Shah back from exile), but only that through our financial contributions (which often include training of foreign military and police, and other sectors of a society, as well as politically leaning hard on the leadership, the USA had "controlled" other countries.

Certainly learning more about the Middle Eastern countries, their leaders, cultures, traditions and people is NOT an easy undertaking, but it MUST be done if there is to be peace in the region. Just as the USA needs to understand the Asian cultures more than we do now, it is imperative that we have a better understanding - a REAL understanding - if we want peace throughout the Middle East, that more Americans fluently speak, read and write Arabic, Turkish, Farsi (Persian), Dari (Afghan's main larguage and its second language, Urdu)and any other dialects that might be helpful. AND that Americans (male and female) understand the cultural taboos.

In reference to the "differences" which you mention among Arab countries, religion is NOT the primary toppic of difference, although this has been the topic that the Western media has stressed. IMO, that is because so little is known about Islam. Yes, there are differences between Suni and Shi'ite, but excluding those countries which are NOT Arab (Iran, Turkey and the Arabs of Israel), there are much among the culture and traditions that are quite similar. When I think of differences in the Arab world, I think of Egypt, which is QUITE different. But then Arabs think of Egyptians as liars and Egyptians think the same of Syrians!

As for Liberia, until this week, the Washington Administration has been quite clear that America will send "on the ground" assistance. There was no mention of civilian contractors and it was assumed (which is always dangerous in Washington) that "on the ground" meant military. That's why the American public (including me) became so alarmed that we would stretch our military even further than it is already. And it's tightly stretched right now!

This is no time for the Administration to become involved in "he said, she said," but that is exactly what is happening in Washington with the rumors about Colin Powell leaving and Condi Rice taking over as Secretary of State. And this nonsense is unending at a time when we need to wrap up our presence in Afghanistan, proceeed with the training that is necessary in Iraq, keep a close eye on North Korea AND see how best (and quickly) we can help Liberia.

Now aren't we glad that we have Queen Noor's comments to enjoy!

MAHLIA, let me thank you for the background information, your explanations and the links - to Princess Muna, for example. I wonder what Princess Muna and Queen Noor may have thought of one another, but that would be tantamount to prying, of course.

ELLA, there are covert means of influencing and "guiding" (=interfering in and ultimately controlling) another nation's governments, means and methods which are not sanctioned official foreign policy, are not announced to the public, and often do not become public knowledge - if at all - until decades later. Guatemala and Chile (the assassination of Salvador Allende) come to mind. There the curtain has been lifted in recent years, partially.

ELLA, King Hussein was educated also in England, and King Abdullah as well as Queen Noor's two sons with King Hussein attended military schools in England.

Very interesting posts. I don't have the book as we have not got it in the library here.

One or two comments and please don't take offence.

Many Americans can only see the world from America's perspective. It is a fact that today many countries including my own disagree with your foreign policy because we see the world differently.

Saddam Hussein was an evil man there is no doubt about that BUT I think its a big mistake to expect a Western Style democracy in a country like Iraq. Iraq is made up of three main groups of people. There are the secular Iraqi's and two main groups of followers of the Islamic faith. These two groups oppose each other. One group are the Sunnis and I am sorry I cannot remember the name of the other. To top it all these sects are broken into clans as are the secular Iraqi population. You can see how difficult it would be to unify a country made up from so many diverse groups. I can see why Saddam Hussein ruled with terror although I can not condone his actions. I have no answer as to how you unify such a country. I know it will not be by might by the West. We can compare this task to when Tito was deposed and the Baltic States reverted from totalitarian rule. What a mess. Another case of ethnic differences and hatred.There is still that historical division there which was instrumental in the start of WW1 and the Bosnian conflict. I have no answers to this huge problem.

I have always had respect for King Hussein of Jordan. A man who was educated at the best British schools, intelligent and yes a man wanting to bridge the gap between East and West and a man who had a lifetime hope for peace in the region in which he lived and ruled

I saw an interview with Queen Noor and was very impressed with her dignity and intelligence. I hope that before too long I can read her story. As for me I take no sides except against terrorism. There are many innocent people embroiled in the conflict in the Middle East. Like King Hussein I wish only for peace and understanding but at this time I have no hope of it.

Carolyn

Carolyn - your diplomacy deserves a warm BRAVO! One of the best rewards of reading Queen Noor's comments together, IMO, is that we Americans have an opportunity to learn about the views of others from outside the USA and Western Europe. It's important to understand that there are, indeed, several ways of looking at issues, and how the actions of one group (country or leader) affects others in distant lands. But you're absolutely right that overall, regardless of our backgrounds, religions, cultures, etc. PEACE is what we're all striving for.

Amen to that!

Harriet

We have "skirted" around many issues here and Harriet and I both would like to have more opinions about a few issues that are not in the book but are pertinent to our discussion. Therefore, we have put new questions in the heading and I think it will be a more productive discussion if we can answer them truthfully.

They are hypothetical in nature, but let's talk about them!

The first one:

During the 6 day war of 1967, Jordanian troops were ordered into Israel by the Egyptian Commander-in-Chief. The small Jordanian air force completed a bombing run on Israel. If those incursions had been successful:

Do you feel the Arab coalition would have returned the conquered Israeli territory at the end of the war? SHOULD they have?

How do you feel the Arab forces might have dealt with conquered Israeli settlers and settlements?

WHOEE!! (How does one whistle via e-mail.) The answers to Ella's hypothetical questions seems plain, but I think it is an excellent point to bring out.

WOULD THE ARAB COALITION HAVE RETURNED THE CAPTURED ISRAELI TERRITORY AT THE END OF THE WAR? IMO, highly unlikely.

HOW WOULD THE ARABS HAVE DEALT WITH THE CONQUERED ISRAELI SETTLERS AND SETTLEMENTS? Given the long history of bitterness and harsh feelings, I don't doubt they would have dealt with the Israeli settlers very much as Israel dealt with the Palestinian settlers.

The point is, whichever side won, the actions taken would have been very similar, and the world's reaction would have equally condemnatory. Guilty and victims abound on both sides of this quarrel. The only hope, however faint, either side has lies in a joint decision to stop pointing fingers and leave the past in the past.

...Babi ...Babi

You bring up interesting points, Babi.

Do the rest of you feel that the world's reactions would have been even-handed no matter WHICH side won territory? No matter which side KEPT the conquered territory?

Preceding the 6 Day War Nasser of Egypt made several public speeches describing the bloody fate awaiting Israeli settlers. Could those statements have been merely rhetoric or public posturing? WOULD Israeli settlers have lived long enough to become refugees?

In 1967 the Arabs still did not concede that Israel had a right to exist.

Harriet

I think that the World attitude at least from the West has been pretty much Pro Israel that is until the settlements began spreading so far into the West Bank. Attitudes now are that Israel should give up these territories. I believe that they should be a buffer zone with no one building on them.

We have many fascinating points in the pages of our second week of discussion. Queen Noor wrote: "I had married into my husband's life much more than he had married into mine." She felt the main obligation to adjust into married life with Hussein life fell upon her.

WHICH OF THE ADJUSTMENTS QUEEN NOOR HAD TO MAKE WOULD BE THE MOST DIFFICULT?

I was amazed at the difficulty Noor had in trying to make nutritional changes in the palace's kitchen. The doctor had suggested dieteary changes to lower King Husseins's cholesterol and triglycerides. When she worked on that modification, the Palace Controller, who I guess took his title VERY literally, responded to her with a patronizing: "Oh, come on, your Majesty."

Prince Albert ran into problems adjusting to his wife, Queen Victoria's household. I once read that all of the not-so-merry wives of Windsor, Princess Diana and Fergie, also had major problems.

Very hurried as I'm off to an appointment and I have to be brief. I'll return later. Please feel free to discuss anything in the heading or in the book to page 244.

Harriet

KIWI LADY, I agree that a buffer zone would be helpful. However, the West Bank is territory that the Palestinian settlers were ousted from, and which they want back. Current political planning apparently plans to do just that. With a hard history of fedayeen infiltrating and establishing bases in Palestinian villages from which to attack Israel, I can understand Israels reluctance to see this happen. There is no perfect answer; only a compromise.

On pg. 136, Noor makes two observations that caught my eye. "I learned early on that, faced with discretion [ie., Noor didn't want to talk about their private life] some people would speculate even more. In the absence of information, they would simply make things up to give the all-important impression of having insides access and influence."

On the same page: "Some people were capable of looking you in the eye while saying with absolute certitude that they had witnessed an event that later would prove to have occurred when they were not even in the country."

I am flummoxed by a mindset that would let people say things that they not only knew to be false, but that could easily be proved to be false. The person(s) who made such statements were, in effect, establishing that their word could not be trusted. I mean, this is really short-sighted, folks. What's going on?

..Babi

Golly, everybody is off today for the weekend - it's going to rain here again and we must put off working outside and we have much to do.

Before we go on to the next section of the book, I thought, in relation to the above questions in the heading, we could set down a few facts pertaining to Israel and Palestine. Here are mine and do tell us what is/is not correct in your opinion:

1. The Palestinians, at present, have no cohesive government and until they do it will be impossible to make any kind of peace. The PLO must change its tactics and get a new leader.

2. Before the British turned over this territory to the United Nations Arabs and Jews lived together peacefully.

3. The Palestinians are Arabs and would feel more comfortable living among Arabs; the Jews are a separate culture and do not feel comfortable among Arabs.

4. Israel is a small country and if you look on the maps above (whoops, our mid-east maps have disappeared!) you will see how vast is the territories that belong to Arab states.

I have done a bit of research (not enough, actually), but here are the results and when you a bit of time you may be interested:

Palestine History

UN Resolution 242

Camp David Accords

In answer to the questions in the heading, my opinion is: No, the Arabs would not have returned any territory they won in a war just as Israel has not. They would have pushed the Jewish settlers into other lands if possible; if not possible, expelled them from the country.

Neither Arabs nor Jews want to live side by side; the past 50 years have shown us that fact.

What would it take to make a peaceful settlement? Will there ever be one? Many Palestinians have made their home in Jordan and, no doubt, in other Arab lands. Would it be possible for the UN, with help from other midde-eastern countries, to make monetary reparations to Jordan and other countries for the settlement of the Palestinians.

However, I doubt this would satisfy the Palestinians.

I believe Israel wants peace and would pull back from expanded territories if they could be assured that this would be a final settlement.

Let's go on to the next section beginning with pg. 127.

Oh, dear, the last two "Yale" sites quoted above have been taken down, they were there just yesterday - I'll be darned!!!

When I have time I will find similar ones and put them back one, there several to choose from in regards to the UN Resolutions and Camp David - must run.

ELLA - I appreciate the time and effort you've spent to research the various issues pertaining to the conflict and the links you've provided. However - and as unfortunate as it truly is - the statements you post are really not as clear-cut as they appeer. For example:

3. The Palestinians are Arabs and would feel more comfortable living among Arabs; the Jews are a separate culture and do not feel comfortable among Arabs.

Neither Arabs nor Jews want to live side by side; the past 50 years have shown us that fact.

With great respect for you, I believe this is not correct. AS you noted in your #2 (above) for centuries the Jews and Arabs lived "side by side" on land that was inherited and beloved by families throughout Palestine. They cooperated collectively, supported each other's families, helped each other in emergencies, celebrated each others joys and commiserated with the sorrows, and attended each other's celebrations. Local issues were dealt with by consensus of the respected elders of both communities.

With the departure of the British, the advent of the 1948 creation of Israel and the Zionist-infused take-over of Palestinian lands, the age old customs of both Jews and Palestinians were torn apart ("rent asunder" comes to mind). For some of the land, Palestinian absentee landlords were offered nominal payment; in other cases, Palestinians living on the property were simply forced off, threatened with physical danger and the destruction of their houses, and had their orchards and crops destroyed.

Whereas earlier generations lived amicably, the Zionists (the majority comprised of Eatsern European Jews - at times unfamiliar with the customs and culture of the Middle East communities) were not as willing to accept the time-honored traditions.

N.B. The only example that I can think of which would be similar and to which Americans might relate would be the American leadership in the 1800's forcing the Native American tribes to relocate from their ancestral homelands across the American Plains to swamplands in the Southeastern USA (see Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee and the relocation of the Cherokee Nation).

You are certainly correct in mentioning that it is way past time for Arafat to relinquish his role in the PLO, but that's not going to happen, IMO, until he dies. The issue of his voluntarily steping aside has been a topic of conversation (and negotiation) for a long time. Arafat IS the PLO; he would have no other role and thus would not step aside. As long as he and the elder leadership are still alive, the younger members can talk and negotiate as much as they want, but Arafat will NOT step aside. And as the new "public face" of the Palestinians appears in the news and talked with Pres. Bush at the White House recently and with other Western leaders, it must also be understood that as he himself said: bottom line is that he "works for the PLO."

RE the Palestinians in Israel relocating to Arab countries. We have seen through Queen Noor's detailed comments the enormous burden Jordan assumed when many thousands of Palestinians (and other nationalities) sought refuge in Jordan. Other countries have been suggested by the UN and Western agencies, but there have always been the enormous costs involved and the issue of the Palestinians NOT wanting to leave their ancestral homelands. Certainly many have chosen to immigrate, but there have been enormous emotional and psychological consequences. (I have worked with many Palestinians in the USA and abroad and I've seen these breakdowns and cultural shame firsthand.)

America is a young nation, certainly in the context of the ancient land of Palestine/Israel. And Americans are a mobile culture, moving frequently (often abroad)as professions (or other reasons)demand. However, for those who have lived in their homes for many decades - perhaps even living in the houses they were raised in as children - think of the absolute devastation and heartbreak one would experience if FORCED to move. Especially, if the homeowners had absolutely no control over that demand or their homes were broken into in the middle of the night by armed men and then had to watch as their homes were demolished in front of their eyes by a huge piece of equipent which simply leveled their home (and all their belongings to the ground). Again, the only similarity I can think of is a natural act of nature, such as a tornado or hurricane. But even with that devastation, the homeowners would STILL own their land and could rebuild with the help of their homeowners insurance. That option is not available to Palestinians.

As the elder Palestinians die, the dream of their families reclaiming their ancestral land becomes less. But from the Palestinian standpoint, there is always hope. Without hope, what else is there?

Mahlia - Your perspective is one which I hold - except because of extremists on both sides I cannot see coexistence in my lifetime. There is still interaction between Jews and Palestinians - humanitarian work by moderate Jews such as the group of Physicians who go into Gaza to work with the sick there are other groups but its even difficult for the Physicians as they get held up at all the roadblocks too and even sometimes get turned away by the Army.

CAROL - its certainly true that even the humanitarian efforts aree often unsuccessful due to numerous roadblocks. But don't despair compeltely. There is still consistent interaction at the level of the people - not the government or the military especially among - which we seldom hear about from the press. The second and third-tier communication levels are active, not just made public.

One of the very best classes I ever taught was in an information American Culture seminar at my former home institution, where there were several American Jewish students and two Palestinian students. After a couple of sessions, we all saw a great opportunity and although we kept the same title of the course and indeed discussed various aspects of American cutlture, we also spent an enormous amount of time talking, discussing, arguing and coming to some consensus about the Israeli/Palestinian issue. My money's on the young folks!

Thanks so much MAHLIA and CAROL for those opinions, it is exactly what we were hoping for - very interesting!

MAHLIA - what was the consensus that the young students in your seminar agreed upon in regards to the Israel/Palestine issue?

Yes, indeed, let's all look to the young people who have seen the suffering of their parents' generation and grandparents. Perhaps they can come to a reasonable solution that will satisfy all!

I have put the missing links in the heading, don't know what happened to them overnight!

See how very small Israel is territorially compared to the Arab lands, it seems logical that room could be found for the Palestinian Arabs, and, yet, I realize the cost involved for those nations who would have to resettle them into their midst. AS Queen Noor pointed out, it was a tremendous burden on their poor economy when the Palestinians fled and settled in Jordan.

Jordan, as we will read about later in the book, has few resources and is not an oil-rich nation. Tourism is what they are hoping to build on and the infighting among their neighbors and the whole conflict in the area is prohibiting the expansion of a tourist-based economy.

ELLA,

it would seem that Arafat is no longer considered a "player' in the conflict. He is said to suffer from Parkinson's disease. What role Mr. Abbas plays is not altogether clear; he was received at the White House recently, if am not mistaken. But from what I have read in Swiss newspapers, other emerging Arab leaders are vying for control.

In light of the new questions you have raised in the header it is necessary IMHO to go back all the way to 1947 when, exhausted by seven years of war and eager to withdraw from overseas colonial commitment, Great Britain decided to leave Palestine and called on the UN to make recommendations. Therefore I believe with due resect that the present circumstances, i.e. the endless spiral of violence and the barely flickering spark of hope for a peace that seems to become more elusive with each passing day, cannot be truly understood unless we begin at the historical beginning = the events of 1947, 1948 and the subsequent wars.

Meanwhile, the construction by Israel of a tangible "wall" to separate Israeli and Arab lands, which has come to light only recently, continues despite the reservations President Bush voiced during Mr. Sharon's state visit.

TRAUDE - your comment that the events in Israel ". . . cannot be truly understood unless we begin at the historical beginning = the events of 1947, 1948 and the subsequent wars is absolutely true. Without that knowledge (from the British, Jewish and Palestinian standpoints)it is just too complex to understand. Although I read Queen Noor's book several months ago when I first bought it, I have re-read it twice since then, checking and rechecking her comments, dates and the interaction among the players. She offers a fascinating look at history from the Arab side, which has not been easily understood in the West.

Another issue that perhaps will come up in future questions is WHY haven't the Palestinians been more willing to deal with other Arab countries on the topic of relating outside of Israel. Although the never-ending squabbles and violence in the region make the issue seem overwhelming, it really is simple. Just as the Jews believe that Israel is the land that God promised them, the Palestinians believe that the same land is where their forefathers back to Biblical times have lived and they want to remain there. Those who have relocated - to Jordan or other countries, always maintain in their hearts that "Palestine is our home."

Arafat has indeed lost much of his political power, but he is adament that he will be part of whatever political process is ongoing - even from the wings, rather than center stage. His physical stamina has certainly dwindled, but as long as he breathes, he will be "part of the game," if not a very effective player.

There is so much tragedy on both sides of the Arab-Israeli conflict that it's hard to find a victim who DOESN'T have a legitimate claim on our sympathies.

I lost a lot of family during the Holocaust. My father had immigrated to the US in the 1920's, but many of his large family of sisters and brothers with their children had remained in Poland and were caught in WW II. All but three were killed in concentration camps. Two of the surviving women, sisters in their teens, fought in the Jewish Polish resistance and now live in Israel. The remaining boy, a teenager when the war ended, survived a German concentration camp and eventually lived with my family. Of course they all had lost everything they ever had during the war...family, home, physical possessions. There was no way to get back their original homes or belongings and the parents they had loved were gone forever. Nowadays, I try to phone Israel to make sure that all is well with the children and grandchildren of my Polish Resistance cousins when Arab suicide bombings or terrorist raids occur anywhere near their homes.

My father sponsored our cousin Bernard's entry into the United States after WW II. I remember the day his boat arrived and we took my cousin home with us. He had few civilized niceties left. When he saw a bottle of milk in our refrigerator, he grabbed it and instantly chug-a-lugged it down to the last drop. Although he has made a life for himself here in America, the emotional repercussions of his concentration camp experiences remain with him to the present day and so does the serial number the German's tattooed on his arm during his imprisonment.

Both Jews and Arabs have a long history in Palestine. The Jews lived in biblical Israel 3500 years ago with Jerusalem as their capital. The Arabs arrived @ 600 A.D. It may sound strange to say, but the thought has often come to me that if the literal definition of a Zionist is someone who longs to live in Palestine, (Zion) then we have a lot of Arab Zionists as well as Jewish ones.

In the period between 1917 and 1947 the British had the unpleasant habit of promising everything to everyone in Palestine and keeping their word to no one. They promised homelands to both Arabs and Jews, but the Balfour Declaration was so short and distressingly vague that the meaning is still being fought over hotly to this day. By the 1940's the British needed Arab oil and shipping lanes so they became increasingly partisan to Arab interests. They abstained when the UN voted to create Israel.

Did you know that the British deliberately pulled out of Palestine ahead of the UN schedule during the transition period in 1947? They timed their departure to coincide with a Saturday, the Jewish Sabbath day? They knew very well that all the surrounding Arab countries were preparing a deadly party to welcome Israel into the neighborhood.

more...

I understand that both Arabs and Jews have perpetrated terrible things on each other in the Mideast. Extremism has become the norm and each side points to previous grievances to justify themselves. I don't condone the Palestinian refugee camps, but I don't know what to do about them either.

Look, I'm going to say something that may be offensive so I'll apologize in advance. After WW II, there were many Jewish refugee camps in Europe. We all take it for granted that their occupants have long dispersed to resume their lives elsewhere. Most of us would be astonished if those camps were STILL in existence and were trying to serve the increased needs of the children and grandchildren of the Jewish Holocaust survivors while they waited to get back to the homes the Nazi's confiscated.

WHY then are the tragic Palestinian refugee camps still filled with the descendents of the original occupants 60 years later? How can each of the surrounding Arab countries, with their common heritage of Islam, be willing to kill Jews or die FOR the Palestinians...but NOT be willing to each accept a quota of these Palestinians for citizenship? Only Jordan made a try at integrating them.

Part of the problem is that the PLO has just not recognized the existence of Israel. It seems to me that too many Palestinian children are encouraged in a hate that inhibits their coping/adaptive skills to the world around them, and keeps them locked into those refugee camps waiting to "get" Israel and claim their heritage. Have these children been taught that Israel has "stolen" their land?

Yet, Israel is now a legal reality, endorsed by the United Nations in 1947. At her inception Israel offered citizenship and voting rights to Arabs who remained within her borders or who returned in 1948. Now the offensive/defensive spiral of hatred and mistrust has canceled out such hopeful gestures.

When a Palestinian state is formed, and I believe it should be, there has to be a generation of Palestinians willing to live peacefully side by side with Israel. After all, with the total amount of land available, the Palestinian state and Israel will have to live in close proximity. I pray that the education of both Jewish and Palestinian children prepares them for this eventuality.

It is a tragic situation with too many victims and too much violence and very little communication between all of the participants in this sad, sad story.

By the way, MAHLIA, I'm eager to know the consensus reached in that seminar you taught also.

Harriet

I boot up my computer and there is Aqaba. There is the beach, the water and some chairs and tables. Let's put the chairs in a circle, bring some coffee, soda, pop, refreshments and our books. Now we can discuss to our hearts content and enjoy the region as well.

Sound good?

Sorry I haven't been here for a couple of days. AOL is living up to its diminishing reputation for me recently. All I have been able to do is use e-mail; I haven't been able to get to any sites unless they are AOL sites.

I am seriously considering moving to another carrier.

A few days ago someone asked if we have any ways that we could understand what Queen Noor experienced when she was first married.

Absolutely! I married a man 13 years my senior who had three sons. His wife had died two years previously.

One of the sons was 7 and the other two were 15 and 17. Queen Noor mentions privacy many times in the beginning. Oh yes! Oh yes! Oh yes!

I was an only child and used to a relatively quiet home with plenty of privacy to read, play, study, do papers for school etc., etc.

I later lived in an apartment by myself and enjoyed solitude.

Moving into a home the day of our marriage was a "leap of faith" for us, too. The privacy, solitude were to be no more and it took quite a while to learn to live with it. Teenagers coming and going, a curious 7 year old asking questions and following me around constantly. Of course we didn't have maids and security people helping us and watching over us or a country to run - but we had plenty of adjustments!

In a couple of years we had a son of our own and two years after that a daughter. So, we added to our family, too. With such age differences,the children weren't always together much. But through the years we've developed into a family. I have a picture in our home of five ducklings swimming in a line and underneath it says, "God Made Us A Family". Indeed he has.

Not too long ago our youngest (the only daughter) was married. All but one of the boys were able to come into town and be at the wedding and reception. It was heavenly seeing us together in one place. The oldest of our "children" gave me a huge hug toward the end of the evening and said, "You've done a good job."

That was a wonderful compliment. We're certainly not a Royal Family, but we've become a rather Loyal Family.

Linda

LINDA - that is a lovely family story to share with us and indicative of the fact that not only a Royal family can be successful in sharing children, adding new ones, and embracing some already existing family customs while blending in as a new spouse. Indeed, congratulations, Mom, you did a good job!

HARRIETT & ELLA - the consensus of my students so many years ago was that they (the younger generation) just simply had to "keep talking" making sure that a dialogue was opened (and stayed open); talk with whomever would listen (and some who fought against listening); express the view (which both groups shared) that people COULD live in harmony if they respected each other, learned about each other and worked hard 24/7 "to make it happen." In the beginning one of the Palestinian students kept saying to the American students "you don't understand." He repeated it so often that one of the Americans got fed up, stood up and yelled "I do understand - my grandparents and my great-uncle survived the Holocaust!!!!" We immediately switched topics so that we could talk about the Holocaust - bluntly and directly - and things settled down a bit.

A few days later, the American student brought his Uncle to class as a "visitor." The uncle immediately went to the Palestinian students and gave them a huge bear hug and told them quietly, "WE will work this out." That evening our class went 2 hours over time and we didn't stop talking until the building janitor poked his head in the door and flicked the light switch. The Uncle came two more times during the semester and he was absolutely great. One of his sons also came in with him one evening, carrying a huge platter of sweets! The students often went from tears to cheers as we talked, but they listened, talked, argued, discussed and decided that "our generation will work it out!"

WHAT FASCINATING STORIES HARRIET AND LINDA HAVE TOLD US AND THANK YOU BOTH SO VERY MUCH!

HARRIET, I had no idea of the holocaust touching your family in such a way. What a tragedy, what a horror, unimaginable to most of us, that was. Thanks for telling us and for being, despite what your family has gone through, hopeful for a peaceful solution!!!

LINDA, I would love to go to that beach with you right now and we could sit and talk and talk and you could tell us of the wonderful loyal family you brought up and the fun times, the amusing times, and probably a few incidents that were difficult.

Wouldn't that be grand if we could sit together and talk it all over! It's difficult to write of it at times and we could communicate so much better in person.

TRAUDE, thanks for your remarks. I think most of us are aware of the early history of the partition of Palestine by the United Nations and what has occurred since. It is not a complex story if one has the interest to educate themselves, to be aware of what has gone before. If not, they can be learned easily on the Internet. I thought I had put links to that in the heading, but obviously I did not. I can, certainly, if needed. I can make the heading a yard long if necesssary, haha

Harriet has added to our knowledge of the earliest history of the Jews and Arabs in that contested part of the world and we do need to ask the questions that Harriet posted. Why are the children being taught to hate Israel? We see the pictures of them throwing rocks, we see the hatred on their faces. What can that do to these children other than prolong a solution.

Jordan and Egypt each received a small amount of the land that originally was Palestine (look it up). Enough of the land that it would seem to me the two nations could attempt to help their fellow Arabs - as Harriet suggested!

MAHLIA - do tell us of the solution that the young people, both Palestinia and Jewish, concluded might be helpful.

WE were posting together, MAHLIA! Let us hope the younger generation can do it! Thanks for that story.

Please note I have put a new link in the heading - titled "History, UN Documents, Road Map to Peace."

This will give anyone all the information needed to understand what has gone before in the Israel/Palestinian conflict and do read Kofi Annan's proposal marked "Road Map to Peace." Let us all hope and pray.

What wonderful stories, LINDA and MAHLIA! We all need the kind of hope and love that they represent.

LINDA, you did a wonderful job of turning two families into one loving household. You are SOME mother and wife!

MAHLIA, you created the kind of atmosphere in your class that can promote understanding and peace. You did good!

As ELLA said, LET US ALL HOPE AND PRAY.

Harriet

HORSELOVER, we were posting simultaneously. Thanks for your encouraging post about the Arabs and Israelis. Hope you'll have a chance to join us more frequently.

Harriet

In responding to the question about why other Arab countries have not encouraged the Palestinians to relocate, my sense is that the cost is prohibitive (as we have already witnessed in Queen Noor's comments), even with international contributions; the multiple thousands of families would place a tremendous burden on the country's infrastructure (education, housing, employment, health, etc.); religious and tribal/clan customs differ significantly (this was a major issue for Saudi Arabia); and the govt's of the adjoining countries (excluding Jordan, which as we have seen accepted the Palestinians in great numbers)simply were not willing to work with international organizations to make a massive relocation work.

I've always wondered why the Saudi and Egyptian deserts could not be made to bloom and flourish with various types of agriculture like that in Israel, thus giving the Palestinians an opportunity to live, work and educate their children in a more settled and conflict-free environment. Certainly if the numerous agriculture and acquaculture projects that have been established in Israel over the years were taught to prospective new residents in Egypt and Saudi they, too, could benefit.

However, there seems to be a strong negative feeling among some Arabs about Palestinians living among them. It reminds me of the "not in my backyard" response in America about various projects that might infringe on settled neighborhoods or communities. One of my Arab friends told me several years ago that "Palestinians are the Gypsies of the Arab world. Unfortunately, no one wants them. They "talk the talk" publicly to support a homeland for Palestinian, but when it comes down to the actual acts, they just don't want them." Egyptian friends have spoken of the Palestinians "creating havoc if they relocate to Egypt. They wouldn't fit into our culture." Saudi friends have said "Palestinians would not be comfortable in Saudi culture and we would not be comfortable having them there. They are too disruptive." Perhaps the younger generation will have different ideas.

As far as the Palestinian children being taught to continue the hatred and conflict, my sense is that desperation and hopelessness in itself is the teacher and the culprit, supported by whatever personal family experiences the children have witnessed or heard about. Children with no hope of avenues of escape to a better life will do desperate things - witness the increased gang warfare in our American cities. In today's issue of Parade Magazine, there is an article about the rock star Sting, who speaks about the hopeless of his childhood in a lower working class British neighborhood. He felt that he was being suffocated, but had the initiative to break away when he won a scholarship to a private school and went on from there, basically divorcing himself from his childhood environment and parents. Unfortunately, the Palestinian children are unable to "break away," due to border constraints, lack of funding for better educational opportunities, etc. For a long time, their situation has also reminded me of what young Black Americans experienced in the South and the poor sections of major American cities for many decades.

We have posted new questions in the heading! What do you all think of Question #10? Remember the old TV program called "Queen for A Day?" How about becoming Queen for the rest of your life?

MAHLIA wrote:

I've always wondered why the Saudi and Egyptian deserts could not be made to bloom and flourish with various types of agriculture like that in Israel, thus giving the Palestinians an opportunity to live, work and educate their children in a more settled and conflict-free environment.

What a very excellent idea, MAHLIA! If that plan were ever agreed upon by all the parties involved I would think that even Israel, freed from the expenses of constant undeclared war, might be willing to help out with money and/or technical know-how.

Yet, if the most flexible and educated of the Palestinians have found their way out of the camps on their own, then those who remain are perhaps the most helpless, uneducated and needy? Generations of Refugee Camp life might have produced a cultural mindset and anger in them that goes beyond the original catastrophes of 1947 and 1967? If I'm understanding you rightly as I try to read the nuances of your last post, for the first time I get a strong glimpse into the true level of the tragedy of these people because I'm beginning to understand how difficult it would be for them to find their way back into the mainstream of life, even after a successful relocation.

Your similes are resonating with me when you compare their problems to:

"what young Black Americans experienced in the South and the poor sections of major American cities for many decades."

They will need massive help after relocation? Their children need the BEST educational facilities to break the deadly cycle of poverty and helplessness? It would take several generations of "quiet stability" to reduce the anger?

What a major problem!

Harriet

ELLA, I'm not so sure I would enjoy being Queen for life. Even with all of her generalized influence and power, Noor is helpless in the most unexpected personal ways.

For instance, she can't buy her husband a tie without a major hassle. She can't modify the nutritional diet of her family without a battle royal. Vacations are filled with other people almost every moment. Opportunities to talk to her husband seem to be easiest to find in the privacy of her bathroom.

Harriet

Hello all from wet and windy Auckland.

May I just congratulate everyone on the wonderful way they put their points of view. Oh the joy of being able to give ones opinion without being attacked! You are indeed a great bunch.

I agree with so many of the points posted. Yes indeed would it not have been wonderful to give life to the desert for the Palestinians. I agree with the poster who pointed out the disgraceful way Britain handled Palestine. I am not proud of the actions of my ancestors including the way they treated the indigenous peoples during the expansion of the British Empire. Having grown up with a British father and British relatives who were old enough to be alive in the heyday of the Empire I knew the attitudes of the day. Then I had the Scottish side who taught me of the atrocities the British did to the Scots - gave me quite a lot to think about as a kid! My great granny taught me about Bonnie Prince Charlie. I think over all it gave me a balanced perspective and probably my radical views about life and the world and an open mind.

I am really enjoying this discussion. How much we are going to learn!

Carolyn

HARRIET - when I think of the Palestinian children, I realie that if ever a community needed Special Education and being taught about the basic principles of conflict resolution within a community, these are the ones.

In today's Washington Post, there is an article about a new small plaza which opened recently in Ramallah. One of the numerous children who was racing around enjoying the children's section (games, rides, etc). said that in his lifetime he'd never had a chance to play in a safe environment like the plaza, but that as nice as it was, it was much more fun to throw stones in the street at Israeli soldiers. I wanted to hug the kid and smack him at the same time, but I also realized I was close to tears at the futility of his last comment.

I remember a few years ago being asked to be an Observer at a conference on conflict resolution at my former home university. The participants were adults from Russia, Georgia, Azerbaijan. For me, it was an interesting and awful experience at the same time. To see the hatred up close and personal in a small conference room; to hear the remarks and hated spewed forth by the participants towards each other; to see that the Facilitator was losing his grip on "managing" their comments; and to witness only a few feet away the looks of pure dislike on the faces of these men and women. At one of the breaks, I told the Facilitator that I was going to leave. He replied "No, I'm leaving" and he picked up his things and left the building. I was so shocked that I stayed and eventually assumed the role of unofficial Facilitator, simply because I could not tolerate the hatred. We stayed in that same room for the rest of the day and way into the early morning hours. I checked with the program sponsor and the next day, I invited the participants to my home, where we continued the dialogue. It was fatiguing beyond belief, but so important to these people, two of whom I'm still in contact with.

Thus, I have great respect for the people from various countries who have tried to work with the Palestinians (either through the PLO or other organizations), counseled with the Israelis, and given of their time, energy and effort to try and bring about peace. And one of the top ones who absolutely never made excuses was the late King Hussein.

Earlier someone commented that there were anti-American comments in Queen Noor's book. Indeed there are, but I think we as readers might think of them as not anti-American in the sense of wanting to belittle or mislead the Western readers, but simply as a description of what happened in the halls of politics in Washington DC and other locations during the efforts of King Hussein. President Carter's ignoring King Hussein was a shock in many quarters; I remember that period clearly. Sadat's ignoring the other Arab countries and working to commit to an Egyptian/Israeli peace was not unexpected among - it was typical Sadat. And Washington "leaning" politically to garner the level of cooperation has continued in ALL Administrations which I can remember - and continues to this day.

However, if Washington were to use that "political currency" and "lean" on the Egyptian and Saudi leadership to open their deserts to development as a homeland for the Palestinians (or lose their American support), I think the deserts would bloom. American agriculture and acquaculture scientists from USDA and their counterparts in Israel, as well as university colleagues would certainly help. It's amazing what can be accomplished when people work together. And if that were to happen, I can just see King Hussein smiling that big wonderful happy smile of his from Heaven.

What beautiful, meaty posts! Very impressive! I think the King and Queen would be proud of us. (Anyone know her e-mail address?)

Would I want to be Queen? No. And the reasons were all in a previous post before Mahlia's. No privacy - lots of obligations and social functions. When would I ever be able to hang out around the house in my slippers and robe when I felt like a day off? And always in the public eye being scrutinized... Not my cuppa tea.

Mahlia, I give you a lot of credit for the fortitude and stamina to stay with your group until you got your points across. Even if we can turn two around forever, it's worth the effort. Even planting seeds.

I was in a book group when things were getting hot again with Palestine and Israel. One of the gals had lived in israel for a while and we began discussing the conflict and situation over there. The gal, who had always been calm, rational and very insightful when discussing books, turned into what seemed to be a totally different person. She got so angry and called the Palestinians names that I would never expect her to say and had descriptions of them that were horrendous.

I joined another group that was totally Pro-Palestinian although I didn't know it at the time. When I heard comments against the Israelis I finally began expressing the need to be caring for all people. We spent about a week discussing and in the end the leader of the group told the rest of the group that from then on he would not allow anyone to remain in the group if they indulged in derogatory remarks about Israelis or Palestinians. I gave the young man a lot of credit.

Linda

LINDA - yes, indeed the topic is a hot one, extremely emotional (especially in face-to-face discussions), often psychologically fatiguing and can (as you described) bring out a totally different side of a person. Funny how some topics just really hit home. My husband (an Egyptian Muslim)laughs at me and often complains that in the same conversation I defend and criticize BOTH the Palestinians and the Israelis at the same time and have little patience with his more quiet assessment of the situation. Years ago, I mentioned in one of my public presentations that I wished I could ask God to send Golda Meir back from heaven and collect a group of Arab grandmothers so that we could all sit down over a cup of tea and "get this whole mishmash sraightened out." One of the people in the audience called out "where do we grandmothers sign up?"

On a much smaller scale, I think any of us who have worked on State or local community, church or school projects where there is a lot of emotional debate or disagreement can understand how Queen Noor felt as she eased into her role as King Hussein's partner in peace. Quite truthfully, I'm proud of her ability to understand how she could develop programs by utilizing her professional training and background. Her personal reticence, keen observation skills, willingness to listen and learn, and her quiet intelligence and natural dignity worked very well in the diplomatic community.

Mahlia said, "Quite truthfully, I'm proud of her ability to understand how she could develop programs by utilizing her professional training and background. Her personal reticence, keen observation skills, willingness to listen and learn, and her quiet intelligence and natural dignity worked very well in the diplomatic community."

Yes! I hope she writes another book teaching others how to bring this peace about. If each could turn others views around, what a new world we would have. Hey! We've got a lot of grandmothers here!

Linda

Look, look in the heading!

WHAT A GOOD GROUP WE ARE! LET'S ALL GIVE OURSELVES A PAT ON THE BACK FOR DISCUSSING WHAT COULD BE A DISTRESSING SUBJECT. WE DID GOOD! LOVE YOU ALL!

As I read over the chapter titled "A Young Bride in the Royal Household" I made a list of adjustments that our author had to make; some of them might be fun for a short while but wouldn't it get old very quickly? Yes, indeed, so here is my list. Being called “Your Majesty”


Defining your role in not only a marriage and a family, but in a country


Negotiating with a staff of your husband's employees


Being guarded day and night


Realizing you are not in control of either your personal wardrobe or your husband’s choice of clothing


Publicity in tabloids


Fulfilling ceremonial roles


Being gossiped about and watched when in public


Entertaining some of the world’s famous personalities


The second question in the heading is which would be the most difficult?

Thanks again for such a stimulating discussion, you are all just wonderful!

I was greatly impressed with Queen Noor's approach to a project. She would began with asking the persons most knowledgeable to explain to her, for instance, the Jordanian building code. (There wasn't one.) She would ask experts to tell her what problems they encountered and what they felt needed to be done. She never came in with a 'take charge' attitude, and she accomplished a great deal. She best defined her role herself: "I learned a valuable lesson about one role I could play as Queen --- as a catalyst for consensus building and action." She used that role to bring about improvements in the lot of children, education, conservation, health, construction...the list is a long one.

...BAbi

". . .as a catalyst for consensus building and action." She used that role to bring about improvements in the lot of children, education, conservation, health, construction.

It's interesting to note that two other women (both wives of Heads of State in the region)were also able to focus many of their energies on the same types of projects in order to help their citizens. Both Jehan Sadat (Egypt) and Farah Diba (Iran) spent enormous amounts of time and energy using their talent and resources to establish a better life for their countrymen and women, often drawing on the natural beauty and cultural aspects of their respective countries. Even in the rarefied atmosphere of being constantly surrounded and with little privacy for reflection, these 3 women accomplished so much for their respective countries.

"I learned from watching Hussein and tried to trust my instincts, sensing that I would be able to strike my own balance."

Interesting statement, Noor's belief that she would be able to "strike her own balance", especially for such a young girl in the complex situation of defining her role as Queen of Jordan. Where did all this confidence come from?

BABI and MAHLIA's reflections made me wonder about what elements go into the personality of a woman like Noor. Early in her marriage, Noor had asked Hussein for specific suggestions about how she might be most helpful in her public role as Queen. Hussein answered:

"I have complete faith in you. You have never made a mistake."

That's very flattering from the man who loved her...but still, no useful answers there. Noor was on her own, breaking ground in a situation where she was on public display and couldn't grope through potential errors privately.

I find I have to go back to her work experiences after college to get some notion of the young woman Noor was when she married Hussein. When Noor was only about 24 or 25, she accepted a short-term job filling in for the MANAGER of Arab Air Services in Jordan, which was run by her father.

I have to admit how cynical I felt when I read this. I underlined this sentence in my book and thought to myself, "Just imagine! Talk about starting your working career at the TOP!" I figured that her Daddy was taking care of his little girl.

Yet, that job had to be an administrative position that involved both learning a broad overview of her father's airline, and learning how to deal with people and delegate duties. In the course of that position she apparently must have also learned how to distinguish the right people with whom to network and how to "pick brains." It was surely a useful preparation for her future role.

Eight months later when the original manager, health restored, returned to work, Noor receives another job offer. This time it is NOT from her father. She is to head up a department for Jordanian Airlines and coordinate design and maintenance facilities throughout the world. I wrote in the margin of my page, "What a job!" and again felt cynical, attributing the new job offer to Daddy's connections.

Now I'm reevaluating my original judgements. The role of Queen required much tact and administrative know-how, and Noor's success proves she had learned the knack, possibly in the past 18 months while she held those administrative positions? She also had the confidence. How many 25 year olds would even feel comfortable dealing with many older male employees in such a high-powered position?

However, an interesting point to consider is, could all of the necessary skills have come together without the opportunities provided by her father? Could she have ever met the King of Jordan if her family connections had been less distinguished?

Fate certainly lent a hand in placing a crown on Noor's head.

Harriet

I have read all the posts, and they are interesting in their praise of the writer and her husband. Not being a fan of kings or queens of any description, and considering it the worst possible government a country can have especially with the only contenders being the offspring of whoever the current king is at the moment.

Since King Hussein came to power because his father was mentally ill and unfit to govern when he was only 17 years old; I would think anyone considering marriage to him would certainly think twice about the gene pool.

King Hussein's first wife was his cousin, and all the inbreeding that has gone on in the world of kings and queens does not bode well for the gene pool. He did take two wives who were outside this pool, so he may have thought about it himself.

I do not believe fate had anything to do with Lisa Hallaby meeting King Hussein. Her father arranged the meeting and as everyone knew the King would be taking wife number four at some time. What older man would not be flattered and enamoured of this beautiful young woman's attention. Since she had worked in Jordan in a high level position of air travel, I am sure the king was aware of her long before the introduction. As a matter of fact he may have brought the introduction about himself.

A lot of the book seems to be simple propaganda, but I can understand her reasons since her own son has been named prince regent. She would be very careful not to jeopardize him in any way. According to the royal watchers his odds of ever becoming king are nil.

She kept a home in the USA however and I am not surprised at all that she lives here. She may be fawned over here by the society crones but I see her with little or no standing in the halls of power in Jordan. She is no longer the queen or the queen mother, and her son is not on the throne. I'll bet she couldn't pack fast enough to get back to the good old USA.

King Hussein must have made arrangements for her and their childrens care, and with kings and queens and twelve children and all the children of past kings to take care of, Jordan probably has a big budget in the king, queen, and offspring department.

I remember reading some time ago about a huge celebration in Jordan that cost in the millions of dollars, all the while they were petitioning this country for aid, and the press exposed their extravagance. It has been so long that I forget what the celebration was about but will try to look it up if possible.

To me being a queen in any middle eastern country would be worse than living in a prison, and marrying a man with three ex-wives and eight children who had mental illness running in his family, would have immediately sent me off in the other direction so fast it would make your head spin.

There was a film clip on television recently of Queen Noor's trip to Iraq to visit the Saddam Hussein's. Mrs. Hussein met her at the airport and her young daughter presented her with flowers. Kisses were exchanged, and everyone seemed happy. Of course this video came from the private family belongings of the Hussein family, and was probably not meant for public viewing.

One day a peacock, next day a feather duster.

......

One previous experience she did was working in Iran with a City Planning crew of young people. This may have helped prepare her for later projects and having an "overall view" of the big picture of a small country.

Linda

While looking for the celebration, I found the first wife.

http://www.egy.com/landmarks/99-02-18.shtml

......

Sorry, problems involving urgent repairs and too-long-delayed maintenance work, not to mention the contractors who have appeared on the doorstep, have kept me distracted.

LINDA, Happy Days! It is truly great to find you in this discussion! It's been a long time.

As I've said before, I raced through my library copy of the book, took notes galore of page numbers and wish I had he book itself right here, right now, for reference purposes.

It is understandable (and was to be expected) that the book might polarize readers; it obviously has. For my part I'd like to say that I admire this remarkable woman and what she has accomplished in a country where age-old convention kept women in the background (or in a harem). Her book is written quite well and without a ghost writer-- that too is remarkable IMHO, and all profits will go toward the Queen's personal charity.

I don't think I can answer the essentially political questions in the header, except for # 16 : There I think Queen Noor has a valid point.

What wonderful posts about this book. I have learned a lot, and appreciate the different points of view.

And thank you all so much for the questions, and maps. It helped my understanding much better.

Would I like to be a queen? No, I am much too independent, and not willing to sacrifice quite as much.

Speak to you soon....Love, Fran

Nice to see you, too, Traude! I agree with you on Question 16. I think the Queen did a great service in writing this book. There is not enough written about Arab culture in such a relaxed, easy style and yet quite literate. It may help educate some, inflame others, unfortunately. If one keeps an open mind, there is much to learn in other areas besides the Jordanian view of history.

She seems to be a very all-together person and able to get her ideas said in a strong and clear, yet pleasant manner. I am delighted she has such a strong desire to bring peace to the Middle East. Linda

Hi TRAUDE, hope your repair problems become resolved and you're able to join us more regularly. There's a link in the heading to prior questions that you might have missed. If you have a chance, do take a look at them and give us your opinions. You are missed!

FRAN, thank you for your comments. It's always great to see you.

LINDA, I agree that every job Noor had probably contributed toward helping her in her future job as Queen. THANKS for reminding us of her planning job in Iran.

WELCOME TO FIFI LE BEAU!!

Do you have the book, FIFI? Come and join us, all opinions are welcome and if you read all of our posts...WHEW! and THANK YOU!...that would certainly indicate a good deal of interest.

If you're cynical or frustrated about royalty, you have a lot of company. Many of us feel that royalty is mostly an imperfect breed of humanity, but so are most politicians and SO ARE ALL OF THE REST OF US also. As we read the book, Noor and Hussein seem to be emerging as people who TRIED their best for their country according to how they saw the right of things.

I for one, feel that there are a lot of gaps in Noor's version of historical events that we'd need an Israeli history book to fill in, and she definitely sees the world from an Arab nationalist viewpoint, BUT...I'll give her points for Jordanian patriotism and an attempt to put the WHYS of her husband's reign and legacy in perspective. FIFI, come and help us untangle the jigsaw puzzle of what is REALLY happening in the Mideast the way YOU see it. ALL opinions, courteously handled, are welcome.

Of course you're right...it's hard to distinguish between what constitutes public relations and what represents the real woman when we're dealing with a queen. I saw a Larry King interview with Queen Noor and I longed for King to ask her a few questions that she couldn't answer with a pat sentence from LEAP OF FAITH, but that didn't happen. It wasn't that I wanted to hear titillating tabloid stuff...I think what I really wanted was for Noor to be unguarded enough so that I could get a handle on the real woman. Her public facade never faltered. Her book, and her choices of what she emphasized in it, comes as close as we can get to gauging the woman's true personality.

As to the film of Noor visiting Iraq, do you really believe it was possible that there would have been NO state visits between Jordan and a neighboring Arab state over the years? I always wondered if King Abdullah offered sanctuary to Saddam's daughters because he knew them personally and played with them during childhood? The children of both families might have grown to know each other during various cross-national events. King Abdullah made a specific choice about where to offer his protection when he held out his hand to those two women, didn't he?

"One day a peacock, next day a feather duster." hahaha! Thanks for the laugh, FIFI. I sure hope that will turn out to be the final summary on Saddam's history,

One last thing about Queen Dina, the first of King Hussein' wives...one evening, as I played with the computer, I ran into an article about her life after the divorce. It seems she married a Palestinian guerilla who rose to be a Commander in the PLO ranks. Isn't that interesting? Noor also mentioned elsewhere in the book, I don't remember where, that Hussein's eldest daughter (who would be Dina's daughter) was the only one of his girls to attend Sandhurst, England's military academy and return to Jordan as a trained military officer. I wonder if there are any connections between her military interests and her mother's second marriage? Just conjecture...

This is getting too long....

Harriet

FIFI! I’m so happy you posted as you did, because I had believed I was the only cynical one in a group that admires everything about Queen Noor. Thanks for being an ally! I think we must remember that Noor wrote this book herself - it is not one written about her by a biographer! That I would love to read. Of course, she is going to present herself in the best possible light – she’s an intelligent and educated person.

As you stated, FIFI, “A lot of the book seems to be simple propaganda, but I can understand her reasons since her own son has been named prince regent.” I was going to say today that this book is self-promoting and self-aggrandizing.

I do believe she is “playing up” to an American readership when she writes about missing wearing casual clothes, such as beloved jeans, and her modesty in wearing jewels, I can’t swallow all of it.

She does have good viewpoints every now and then – this is one: “It has always puzzled me that a woman in the public eye is judged first for her appearance, then for her achievements.” But I believe that to be true only for the young and beautiful. Better to be just plain Jane, stodgy but smart, and you will be listened to – don’t you agree?

She does manage to bring in all the various royal families that she has met or visited – talk about name-dropping!

Before I get into the questions in the heading (which I would to discuss one by one starting with question No. 12) I wanted to call your attention to an article in the NYTIMES today by my favorite columnist, Thomas L. Friedman (he and I usually agree!). On a recent visit to Baghdad he was invited to interview two rising Iraq Shiites who eloquently advocated separation of mosque and state! He goes into detail about this – isn’t that interesting! A couple of statements made by them:

”Secularism is not blasphemy. I am a Muslim. I am devoted to my religion. I want to get it back from the state and that is why I want a secular state.”


If the U.S. wants to help Iraqis, it must help them the way it helped Germany and Japan, because to help Iraq is really to help l.3 billion Muslims. Iraq will teach these values to the entire Islamis world. Because Iraq has both Sunnis and Shiites, and it has Arabs, Kurds and Turkmen….If it succeeds here it can succeed elsewhere.”

I would have admired Queen Noor’s book considerably more if, instead of bashing Israel and the USA, she could have presented ideas for peace!

Let’s talk about Question No. 12 and No. 13: -

Why do you think the USA left Jordan out of negotiations with Israel on several occasions, especially as King Hussein was known throughout the mid-east and the world for his peace-keeping efforts?

why would President Carter assist in a separate peace between Anwar Sadat and Israel and why did Sadat want it?

FIFI - AND ANY OTHER LURKERS, PLEASE STICK AROUND AND POST YOUR OPINIONS ON THIS SUBJECT OF THE MIDDLE EAST, IRAQ OR JORDAN! WE WANT AND DELIGHT IN ALL YOUR POSTS!

One more thing, I finished watching a two-part video on Mahatma Gandhi last night (which Ginny and I will be proposing to discuss in December, watch for it) and one of his last pronouncements was I am a Hindu, a Muslim, a Jew, a Christian - I AM AN INDIAN!

Oh, for an attitude like that in the Middle East! We have racial strife here in America, true, but we punish those that enforce it through violence! We have a constitution that grants freedom of worship to all.

ELLA - I would have admired Queen Noor’s book considerably more if, instead of bashing Israel and the USA, she could have presented ideas for peace!

I'd like to respond to your statement (above) from my more than 30 years of working with international issues focused on the Middle East (in the USA and abroad). IMO, each of the projects that Queen Noor undertook in Jordan (whether through her Foundation, the King Hussein Foundation, as co-sponsor or Patron of those already established) can be viewed as "ideas for peace," not only in Jordan among the various sectors of the society, but also to be used as "models" for other countries in the Arab world.

Again, IMO, I think it would have been strange if Queen Noor's comments had focused more on her American background. Although American born, her investment in the major part of her professional adult life (prior to and during her marriage)dealt with issues in Jordan and the Middle East. Her introductory comments about her American family life certainly give the reader (even a non-specialist in Middle Eastern isues)a clear idea of where she's coming from.

In the West, many people are simply not at all familiar with the Arab world - the names (which seem unusual and hard to pronounce), regions, leadership, history and culture of the countries and the distinctions between the educated elite and their overwhelming control of politics or the desperate poverty of the lower-classes. Tribal and clan culture is not something on most American's radar (except perhaps among our Native Americans), thus it is truly hard for some readers to understand the importance of King Hussein's relationship to his forefathers or the cultural importance to Jordanians that Queen Noor was from an Arab family.

Additionally, the public vs private behavior, beliefs, thought patterns and communication stles of the Arab world are still a mystery in the West. Aside from the British (who learned through their many years of colonization) and a few specialists in the American State Department, it is hard to understand the behavior in the Middle East.

All this is to say that, yes, indeed it may very well seem to American readers that Queen Noor was "bashing" the USA and Israel, although I read her comments from my own professional background as being quite forthcoming about the events she mentioned. The "trickery and betrayal of the Arabs" by Anwar Sadat is still an "open wound" in the Arab world, while his manner with Carter in the USA is applauded by Americans. The behavior of Carter in ignoring King Hussein and deling directly with Sadat is as much disliked (and perplexing) in the Middle East as his behavior in refusing to assist the late Shah of Iran when he was fighting his last battles with cancer.

My sense is that Queen Noor learned throughout her marriage that there is a major difference in perception about world events (especially those that pertained to the Middle East) by Americans (and their Israeli allies) and those in the Arab world. And she wrote about the Arab perception, infused with knowledge from her regular interaction with the major figures and long discussions with her husband and those she sought out for advice.

From my own experience working in the diplomatic sector in Washington DC, it is a totally different world. Not only are the protocols quite exacting vs American daily communication styles and general interaction, but the political agenda is always upfront. And it is enormously fatiguing!

For those of us with multiculture backgrounds which include Middle Eastern heritage(in my own case, that includes Persian Jews, so I'm particularly interested in the Israeli viewpoint), it may not be as surprising to read Queen Noor's comments as it is to other readers with primarily European backgrounds. In any event, I think we've done a smashing job in this discussion to keep on track and offer comments in a collegial and gracious manner. BRAVO for us!

ELLA, I can only offer speculation in answer to Q.#12 & #13, but it may at least offer an opening for response.

I am thinking that Pres. Carter felt it essential to at least get something accomplished in the direction of peace...a toe in the door as it were. King Hussein was known to be adamant about the necessity of addressing the Palestinian refugee problem in any settlement, and he was also strongly against any Arab country making a unilateral peace. He felt Arab unity was the strongest bargaining tool they could bring to the table. Therefore, he was excluded from the Camp David accords.

I read the biography by Jehan Sadat that Mahlia has often recommended. I am persuaded that Sadat knowingly took a great risk in signing the Camp David accords, but that he did so for much the same reasons I attribute to Pres. Carter. A first step toward peace, however weak. ...Babi

Questions # 12 and 13 are pertinent as well as puzzling. Based on what is officially known, we can only speculate. BaBi's comments in # 169 sound reasonable to me.

As suggested I went back to the earlier questions and now have a follow-up question on # 5 :

I wonder, is there an inference in the wording of the question to the effect that Jordan's aerial incursion into Israel was the start of the Six-Day War? A clarification would be helpful. Thank you.

TRAUDE, there was NO implication intended that Jordan's aerial raid was the start of the l967 6 Day War. It definitely was NOT.

That question was a hypothetical attempt to "put the shoe on the other foot" so to speak, and see how the military scenario would look if the Arab forces were winning Israeli territory and were then required by the rest of the world to give back their new territory after the war.

What do YOU think? If the Arabs were winning in 1967, would they have returned all conquered territory? Should they have?

Harriet

HARRIET, thank you for your clarification.

Jordan stood no chance, of course, and it would have been foolhardy to launch an aerial attack just like that.

On June 1, 1967, Israel formed a new Government of National Unity with Levi Eshkol as Prime Minister, Moshe Dayan as Secretary of Defence, and Menachem Begin & Joseph Sapir as ministers without portfolio. On June 5, 1967, Israel attacked Egypt, Jordan and Syria simultaneously.

The Six-Day War left Israel in possession of Gaza and the Sinai Peninsula- taken from Egypt; the West Bank- taken from Jordan; and the Golan Heights- taken from Syria. The land under Israel's jurisdiction after the 1967 war was about four times the size of the area within its armistice frontiers. The occupied territories included at that time an Arab population of about 1.5 million.

An upsurge of Palestinian Arab nationalism was the result, and so was the formation of several guerilla organizations within the PLO which carried out terrorist attacks -- and, Lord have mercy, they are still at it more than three decades later! HAMAS was apparently behind today's horrible separate suicide bombings near Tel Aviv and on the West Bank, respectively.

My heart aches for the victims and all those who live under that perpetual threat.

TRAUDE pointed out that "On June 5, 1967, Israel attacked Egypt, Jordan and Syria simultaneously." You're right, TRAUDE, and I wonder why that occurred?

PRIOR to that sad event Egypt, Syria and Jordan, united by a defense treaty, had massed their armies along Israel's borders. Nasser of Egypt clarified the hostile intentions of the three massed armies with several colorful speeches.

"Our basic objective will be the destruction of Israel. The Arab people want to fight," he said on May 27.(11) The following day, he added: "We will not accept any...coexistence with Israel...Today the issue is not the establishment of peace between the Arab states and Israel....The war with Israel is in effect since 1948."(12)

Israel had contacted King Hussein and offered to respect Jordan's borders if he would agree to remain neutral, but King Hussein refused. Instead he put the Jordanian Air Force and Jordanian troops under Egyptian command.

Here's another hypothetical question for anyone who cares to consider it. What would America do if three hostile armies massed on OUR borders?

Harriet

I essentially agree with Babi about why King Hussein was excluded from the Camp David talks. Also, Noor writes, on p. 200 of LEAP OF FAITH, that Carter "put too much faith in Sadat's assurances that the Arabs would fall in line with him." However I'd also like to add a few puzzling personal conjectures.

If Hussein had been present, Noor implies that he would have insisted on Palestinian representation. Since the PLO refused to acknowledge the existence of Israel, how could any constructive progress in negotiations have taken place?

Noor felt that President Carter had snatched away an initiative from King Hussein by nullifying his hoped for Pan-Arab-Israeli conference. That conference might have been a noble effort IF Palestine was willing to talk to Israel, (a BIG if!) and IF Egypt, Syria, Jordan, the PLO and Israel could be brought to the same conference table at the same time without the presence of a neutral moderator? I wonder if Hussein could have realistically accomplished that conference?

On p. 175 of our book, Noor describes the possible difficulties of negotiating with the "fractured" Arab world. . During the eleventh Arab Summit in Amman, everyone seemed to agree on an adopted strategy. However, when the Arab leaders left Jordan and went home, "everybody seemed to forget what they had agreed to do." That happened after an Arab Summit that was a meeting of friends and allies. Many Arab nations would have had to come to substantive agreements with Israel and with each other if ALL had attended Camp David as Hussein so earnestly wished. Would there be any way of assuring compliance to agreements that President Carter had brokered while putting the reputation of the United States on the line?

The Arab world needs a more cohesive unity and it's easy to condemn Carter's and Sadat's attempts if we do not consider the difficulties the Arab world has sometimes had in working together. All of the nations King Hussein might have brought to Camp David with himself might have proved too volatile a mix for even the highly motivated, gentle-natured President Carter.

Finally, Egypt derived a tremendous individual benefit from the Camp David Accords. Israel agreed to return the Sinai to Egypt in return for a promise of future non-aggression. So far, that treaty continues to be honored. Therefore, Sadat had much self-serving reason to be willing to engage in individual negotiations.

Harriet

MAHLIA, thanks much for your remarks and I believe you are correct when you state that we have much to learn about the Arab mind, culture, etc. Proof of that is what is happening today in Iraq. President Bush and his cohorts thought the country would be delighted in their freedom from S.Hussein and his sons, but the killing of American soldiers continues and the country is far from peace. Someday??????????

BABI, years ago I read a bio of Sadat and all I remember of it is thinking he was a strong leader - have no other recollection of it, but I agree that Carter meant well and thought the agreement was “A first step toward peace, however weak..” Do you remember anything about Sadat's assassination – why, who, etc.?

I am going into the Internet and try to find something in regards to this – Isn’t it amazing what you can find there?

And to think that the Internet is so young! What – 10 years or so? We can find almost anything there and with such a past, what will the future be like?

HARRIET – no need to answer your question about armies on our borders, we all know what the result would be. It is a sad commentary that religions separate the Arab and the Jew from each other; both of them, so I understand, springing from a common ancestor, Abraham! Why, OH, WHY!!!

Harriet and Mahlia both have pointed out the difficulties that the Arab nations have with each other, but I will repeat Harriet’s statement here because it does answer the questions above I think:

”The Arab world needs a more cohesive unity and it's easy to condemn Carter's and Sadat's attempts if we do not consider the difficulties the Arab world has sometimes had in working together. All of the nations King Hussein might have brought to Camp David with himself might have proved too volatile a mix for even the highly motivated, gentle-natured President Carter.

Finally, Egypt derived a tremendous individual benefit from the Camp David Accords. Israel agreed to return the Sinai to Egypt in return for a promise of future non-aggression. So far, that treaty continues to be honored.”

Meanwhile, let’s go on to the next question:

”14. Have you ever traveled to any of the Middle Eastern countries? Would you feel comfortable doing so today? Knowing that several of these countries, e.g. Jordan and Israel, depend on tourism for economic reasons, what suggestions would you have for them?

Gosh! Where did everyone go? Did the "WORM" get you?

Oh, I hope not!!!! There was an article about it in our paper this morning, but I have already gone to the Microsoft site and, hopefully, have taken care of it, but I don't know if I really have - HOW CAN ONE TELL?

Anyway, when all of you pass this way do answer the "blue" question. I would love to know if any of you - MAHLIA CERTAINLY YOU HAVE???? - been to any of the MIddle Eastern countries.

I would love to go - Jordan sounds beautiful - and so does Israel - they all have their attractions. I'm sure they are hurting from the lack of tourists!!!

Isn't the picture of Noor with her children lovely? They are gorgeous young people - but how does Noor stay so thin??????????? I'm so jealous of anyone that is thin!!!! I want to immediately ask them what they eat - or if they eat???? Aren't they ever tempted to eat desserts now and then - a hot fudge sundae???

I loved the picture of Hussein and Noor on their bicycles with little Raiyah (wonder how you pronounce that?)

And that picture of the whole family - I mentioned before how expensive it must be for the Jordanians to support all those Royals in the manner in which Royals like to be kept.

One must admire King Hussein to allow a picture of himself at the Mayo Clinic when he looked so ill. At that stage of life does it matter though?

Shall we move on to the next section of our book - pages 245-350?

First chapter- love the title - WOMEN HOLD UP HALF THE SKY!!!

HOPE ALL OF YOU ARE STILL AROUND - WE ARE HALFWAY THROUGH THE BOOK AND OUR DISCUSSION AND IT'S BEEN A MARVEL - ONE OF OUR BETTER ONES ABOUT THE MIDDLE EAST, I THINK!

What do you think? As MAHLIA said, BRAVO TO US ALL!

After looking at the photos of serene Aqaba, it would be a treat to visit in Jordan. I would love to go. Best of all, I've always loved to think about places that have history in them. All of the Middle East is filled with history and Biblical lore for three religions, Islam, Christianity and Judaism. Jerusalem has the Wailing Wall which is a remnant of the second Temple and the Dome of the Rock from which Mohammed departed for heaven. I understand they are located THATCLOSE to each other.

I love the sense that history is all around. From the Egyptian pyramids to Jordan's Petra, it makes me breathless to think about looking at artifacts touched by hands that are now dust and walking in paths that were known thousands of years ago.

Isn't it impressive that Hussein can trace his family tree back to Mohammed? Many others in Jordan also know their lineage for sooo many generations. Goodness, here in America, some of us are lucky just to be able to look back past our grandparents!

As I look at the photos of Noor and Hussein, I am struck by the warmth of some of them. I've loaned books from the library about the British monarchy and I was struck by some of the formal photos of Queen Elizabeth and the Queen Mother holding the new babies in the family. The infants are artfully arranged on the laps of the British royals, but it seemed strange to me that neither woman usually touched the infant they held in some of the photos. How is it possible to hold an infant without caressing a head or touching a small leg?

In the family photos of Noor and Hussein they TOUCH their children. Even in the formal photo of Raiyah's naming ceremony, Noor tenderly touches the infant over the flowing white fabric, Hussein touches the shoulder of one of the boys and the other boy holds the shoulder of his sister, Iman. That pattern continues in the formal family photos of the children as they grow older.

I do agree ELLA. Gorgeous young people in that family! So nice to see.

Harriet

ELLA, as I recall, Sadat was assassinated by members of the radical element in Egypt. It was a tragedy, as he was replaced by a man who is nowhere near his equal.

I have noticed two or three mentions of agreements or accords reached between Jordan and other Arab states or leaders, which were not honored. There would be no follow-through on plans, support promised would not be forthcoming, or worse. I didn't go back and check the details of the events which left me with this impression, but I believe Noor mentions such happenings on at least three occasions. How does one deal with Arab nations and leadership if one cannot count on agreements being honored? Am I discerning a pattern where none exists? MAHLIA? You're the expert here. ...Babi

Babi, I think you're right about Sadat's assassin being a radical Egyptian. What puzzles me, as I understand from the book and our posts, with the Camp David Accord, Sadat regained Egyptian land. So, he was doing what was best for HIS country, but ignoring the rest of the area. I would think that Egyptians would have been happy with what he did. No doubt I'm missing something here; please enlighten me.

A couple of things that I found interesting in this section 2 -- the language. Were you surprised that even the stepchildren learned English before Arabic? I had assumed that QN was fluent in Arabic before her marriage, but apparently not. No doubt many of those emplyed at the palace spoke English, but not being fluent in Arabic would be another obstacle for the new Queen.

The Kind sounds like a daredevil. No doubt if he had lived elsewhere he'd be one who would try to climb Mt. McKinley or shoot rapids in a kayak, etc. What floored me was taking Noor motorcycling when she was nine-months pregnant. I was also a bit surprised that in view of his anti-coagulants his doctors allowed the motorcycling. They probably didn't have a say.

Harriet, good point about the pictures and the touching. They were lovely photos, and the whole royal family sounds like a very closeknit one.

Not so long ago I saw a doco on Egypt. It was interesting that the locals in Cairo all knew where NZ was and used the term Kiwi. They went out into the desert and there was an old Camel Trader who rented camels for desert treks. He had lots and lots of postcards from Kiwis and Aussies who had met him on their travels. He must have made an impression. The presenter spent 3 nights in the desert with the Bedouin. If I was able to travel that is where I should like to go. To experience a complete contrast to my own country where rain is plentiful and I am surrounded by the sea. The Bedouin were extremely knowledgable and to my surprise they also knew exactly where NZ was also. I guess they have had quite a few Kiwis through. I know Vanessa's friend Theresa did the trip.

Carolyn

Since we've been so comfortable sharing our perceptions of the book under discussion, I really do think that we should plan a trip to the Middle East together. Kind of like a "SN Middle East Bash" or more in tune with the Middle Eastern cultural respect for women our age (Ahem!), "Lady Visitors from the West" - Carolyn what regional term do you use in relation to your location and the Middle East.

Egypt has been an enormously popular tourist site for decades, although in the past couple of years (due to 9/11) the tourist trade in the Middle East overall has decreased significantly. I'd love to see SN have a strong presence in the Middle East - there are certainly enough people with computers and an interest in numerous topics to garner such a development.

In the meantime . . .Carolyn you would be most welcome in Egypt! My husband has always said that if I refer anyone to visit Egypt, they should consider that they are the guests of his family. Two of my Maryland university colleagues have visited for professional conferences and returned to tell me that they were absolutely inundated with affection, attention, food, offers of transportation and sightseeing, shopping, etc. And they stayed in my husband's home in Cairo.

I'm not surprised about Queen Noor not having fluent Arabic language skills prior to her marriage. Even though her father was an Arab, remember that he worked in the Washington and New York bureaucracies during a period when "foreigners" were often discriminated against. Remember Queen Noor's comment about the distasteful question in a publication asking "What is a Najeeb Halaby?" And since her Mother was not Arab, nor was the family raised as Muslims, the lack of language fluency is understandable. Although I do recall that Noor mentioned she had studied Arabic ever since she first arrived in Jordan and doubled her efforts after her marriage. And at the level of the Royal household, I'd imagine that some servants and advisors spoke some English.

Arab culture (in particular) is extremely focused on the family, thus the close interaction with children and youth is an everyday, every family occurance. King Hussein was an especially warm and caring individual with a great warmth for almost anyone who came within his sight. Always gracious and cordial, interested in the lives of others (especially children!)with a marvelous sense of humor.

I'll never forget how shocked my husband was when he first saw a woman in a restaurant reprimand a child who was misbehaving. The mother (I assume) slapped the child and jerked his arm. My husband was absolutely enraged, stood up and called out to the woman "Stop that! What are you doing to your son? He's a child and God loves him! Stop!" The restaurant manager came rushing over to ask what was wrong and my husband turned to him and said THAT WOMAN IS BEATING HER CHILD!" When the manager tried to get my husband to calm down (he wouldn't), the woman said "mind your own business!" That enraged my husband even more and he said "where is the telephone? I'm going to call the Police."

Yes, I've traveled in the Middle East and always enjoyed my adventures. I encourage others to do so, too, within their own levels of interests.

As far as Sadaat was concerned, he was certainly working on behalf of what he thought would benefit his country, AFTER long years of trying to bring the other Arab countries together. He was an intelligent man with a long history of dealing with the "corruptions" of the Arab world and the malcontents (and there are many!) throughout the region. My sense is that although he recognized that it would be preferable to have a united Arab voice in negotiations with Israel, he also recognized that it was not to be. And since he was the President of Egypt, he took his separate truce with Israel VERY seriously as his responsibility to the Egyptian people. Egyptians are quick to criticize and to voice the negative in almost any situation - that is the same to some degree throughout the Arab

OH, MY GOODNESS, WHEN I ERR I DO IT IN A BIG WAY!!! I had the "worm" on my mind this morning and could think of nothing else.

We haven't finished the questions in the heading and we are NOT to the next section yet - we will be soon!

BABI AND PEDLIN - I looked up some stuff on the Internet about Sadat and here are some clickables:

Assassination of Sadat

Within that clickable is this:

"The agreement with Israel brought peace to Egypt but not prosperity. With no real improvement in the economy, Sadat became increasingly unpopular. His isolation in the Arab world was matched by his increasing remoteness from the mass of Egyptians. While Sadat's critics in the Arab world remained beyond his reach, increasingly he reacted to criticism at home by expanding censorship and jailing his opponents. Sadat subjected the Egyptians to a series of referenda on his actions and proposals that he invariably won by more than 99 percent of the vote. In May 1980, an impressive, nonpartisan body of citizens charged Sadat with superseding his own constitution.

In the months leading up to the assassination Sadat had lost much of his support at home and in the West due to a brutal crackdown on fundamentalists. In June 1981 tensions between Muslims and Copts in Egypt exploded into a gruesome round of violence in the overcrowded Cairo slum of al-Zawiyya al-Hamra, precipitated by intense summer heat coupled with frequent cutoffs in the water supply. Men, women, and children were slaughtered.

And another:

Camp David Accords

At that site this statement is made:

"Two agreements in principle arose from the Camp David meetings. The first included a statement on eventual self-government for the West Bank and Gaza Strip areas as well as the inclusion of Jordanian and Palestinian representatives in future talks. The second agreement consisted of diplomatic recognition of Israel by Egypt in exchange for the return of territories occupied since 1967. As negotiations toward a formal treaty ensued, Carter continued his personal involvement in the process. On March 26, 1979, Sadat, Carter, and Begin signed the Egyptian-Israeli Peace Treaty, which formalized the specific details of the arrangements agreed to at Camp David. However, the Camp David Accords and the subsequent treaty did not include a comprehensive settlement of the problems in the Middle East."

Thanks, CAROLYN, for that story. I have a little one about the Bedouins. When my daughter went to the Gulf War in 1990 the reservists were placed in lovely apartments in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia for the first night until they joined that trek across the country to the west (remember it all?). She said these apartments were built for the Bedouins but they could not get them to come in from the desert and live there. They were empty!

HEY, MAHLIA - WONDERFUL IDEA! LET'S ALL GO ON A TRIP TOGETHER TO THE MIDDLE EAST! I WOULD JUST LOVE IT! WHEN'S THE BEST TIME OF YEAR? Thanks for the invite - hahahaha Ladies from the West, and they will spot us immediately as Americans unless - unless we put on the "chador" and don't open our mouths. Did I spell that right?

What a story about the woman beating her child, thanks for that! I feel the same when I see young women in public berating and at times spanking their children. I want to say to them your children are young for such a little while, do enjoy them and if you must reprimand them do so at home.

FRAN - wow! That is so good of you put all that history here in our discussion. Thanks so much. I'm not a historian as I've stated before so will let others discuss the details of the statement.

I'll check that book out at the Library! I remember the movie - EXODUS - years ago, do any of you? And, again, I don't know the truth of it all, I would imagine the truth is often in your own perception according to which you are, Arab or Jew.

Can we talk about Question 16 above? This is quite true - we do change officials, namely, the President and the Congressmen often. Is Noor correct in her statement that this hinders our relationships with the Middle East? And with other countries? Is this a fault of our system of government, our Constitution?

FRAN - indeed it was really wonderful of your friend to spend the time and effort to provide such a lengthy explanation of the historical aspects of how Israel came about. As a woman with a multicultural background (which includes Persian Jews), I always appreciate an opportunity to learn.

However, I would caution (with respect)that your friend left out a very important point: the Jews and Arabs lived together and often side-by-side on adjoining land for centuries before the Zionists began thinking of a State of Israel. In the generation of my parents and in previous ones, Arab and Jewish landowners were lifetime friends, interacting peacefully on a regular basis.

Comments like those from your friend, while interesting, must be read carefully, especially for individuals who do not have a strong background in Middle East issues. Granted there has been a systematic attempt by Palestinian terrorists groups (PLO, HAMAS, etc.) to "rid the land," and in quite an organized manner using the desperation of the Palestinian residents in the camps throughout Israel to achieve their goals. On the other side, there is the still burning memory of the Sabra and Shatilla massacres.

Yet, thanks God, there are also Arabs and Jews who remain friends, work together collegially and hope for peace.

ELLA - I really laughed when I read your comments about the modern apartments in Riyadh, where the Bedouins refused to live. Of course, they refused, since freedom is their No. 1 priority! And as "people of the desert," they certainly would not want to live in an isolated apartment (regardless of how "modern" it was, which is a relative term to the Bedouins. Some of the Bedouins, especially those who engage in substantial trade or are better educated have relocated to an urban environment, but they don't like it and take every opportunity they can (like weekends) to return to the desert.

As far as #16 is concerned, it makes perfect sense to me that every four or eight years, the American leadership begins AGAIN to try and deal with the very complex situation in the Middle East. And as we switch from Democrat to Republican leadership (in the White House and/or Congress), "political currency" comes first and foremost to the new leader in the White House or to the powerful committees in the Congress. So any long-term understanding or benefit is truly not achieved; benefits that have been negotiated by one Administration are set aside, ignored or revised under a new Administration. And the Middle East continues to suffer greatly - NOT the government so much, but the people suffer enormously.

Thus, I think it's time for the GrandMothers and Aunties to put their dainty feet on the ground and wrap things up with a stern "You are NOT listening to what I just told you to do." No need for chadors; we're Americans and American women do NOT wear chadors (unless they are Muslims and choose to do so). And although you notice from the photos that Queen Noor occasionally wears a light scarf, she certainly does not wear a chador. Neither did Jehan Sadat or Farah Diba of Iran. It's just not done!

MAHLIA - exactly. Our "system is based on a continuous uninterrupted process of election campaigns" , as Queen Noor opined, which- sadly- does not make for a consistent policy, neither in foreign affairs nor the domestic agenda.

I have always been ready and willing to travel at the drop of a hat, as they say, and taken frequent trips for regular family visits, reunions, emergencies, and the burial of a family member as well as for professional reasons and research. But joint replacement surgeries brought an abrupt halt to my frequent flying and imposed limits on me I had not anticipated. Yet hope springs eternal ...

TRAUDE - you're going to laugh. I've traveled alot, too, but on one of my overseas trips, I spread two pillows on the floor of the plane and laid down for several hours, since I absolutely could not stand sitting any longer. The flights to Asia are SO long! (I did remember to notify the steward so he would not think I'd passed out or worse).

Oh, I beg to differ with you, MAHLIA! Again, I will reiterate we do this in our discussion courteously, but we can disagree. I don't think any agreements, treaties, and the like are ignored by incoming presidents or Congressman - that is not our policy at all.

Any incoming President, no doubt, spends the first 4 months of his first year being briefed on the policies of the government - those made before him - and the same goes for any incoming freshman Congressmen. Congress has many committees, as I'm sure you are aware, and each member is appointed to a committee or two. Those that have seniority on the committee will take the newcomer into hand and teach him the ropes - what has gone before in the way of foreign policies, aid, etc. will be fully outlined to the newcomers.

Of course, now and then, due to budget restrictions, conflicts in regions, cutbacks on our defense systems, etc. will determine new policies in the future.

I do believe our government attempts in every way to make good on their promises; we make mistakes, sure, but on the whole this government makes less mistakes, and does more good, than most in the world! Perhaps you can give us instances where policies have changed overtime due to new administrations?

As I listened to the TV this evening and the news of the power outages in the various regions, I'm hoping that none of you were caught too far from home - what a chaotic thing to go through. But so far everything is being handled well.

In my country the two major parties do have different foreign policies the only thing neither of them have dared yet change is our nuclear free zone policy.

Carolyn

ELLA - Perhaps you can give us instances where policies have changed overtime due to new administrations?

Right off the top of my head, Carter's refusal to support Iran's late Shah (after many years of a very close relationship with the country and its govt; withdrawing intelligence support; and refusal to allow him to remain in the USA for medical treatment while he battled cancer). And, as Queen Noor comments, the same Administration refusing to include Jordan at the negotiating table. King Hussein had had an extremely close relationship with the USA for many, many years under several Presidents.

Another example would be Bush's absolute refusal to meet/talk with Arafat, throwing Abbas into a very peculiar situation at home.

And perhaps, Johnson's absolute refusal and "muddling" around trying to figure out just exactly what benefit the American military presence in Vietnam gave to the USA.

Perhaps more recently, the refusal of the Bush Administration to acknowledge that North Korea has been selling (and regularly delivering) missiles to Yemen. The intent was "not to upset our close ally." Right.

The worst damage that we in Maryland suffered from the Blackout on the East Coast was complete loss of electricity campus-wide at the University of Maryland. There didn't seem to be any other area of our State that was affected, thanks God.

MAHLIA, indeed new administrations often set policies different from those of the previous administration, may focus on a different agenda and relegate some issues to the back burner. Let's not forget the lobbies and corporate interests, and the significant role they play in the perpetual fund-raising.

I cannot help feeling that the relentlessly escalating violence in the Middle East might have been at least slowed, if a roadmap for peace had been drawn up months ago. Just my opinion as one of We The People.

MAHLIA, yes I smiled at your mention of lying on the floor of the plane on pillows, and I can empathize. But would that still be possible in these tense times, I wonder? When I last flew to Switzerland with Swiss Airlines, known for flawless service, people looked grim, pushed and glared. Sic transit gloria mundi, I thought. They have folded since, and the successor is in dire financial straights, hanging on for dear life.

Seems to me that the only political systems that are NOT "based upon a continuous uninterrupted process of election campaigns, stretching out year after year" would have to be monarchies and dictatorships.

Does Noor feel we might be better off with one of those in America?

A nation with a political system of free elections and universal sufferage often has to accept the burdens of the electioneering process along with the benefits derived from politicians who defer to the interests of their constituencies to assure themselve reelection.

I daresay there are quite a few regimes in the world, including the Middle East, that DON'T have electioneering or changes in leadership, much to the detriment of their population. Iraq was once a case in point.

Do any of you feel that an absolute regime pays better attention to internal and external human suffering than America?

My neighborhood was OK with electric power yesterday, thank heavens. Today the comedy of blame has begun in the attempt to pacify those who suffered from the outages. America says that the power grid blackouts began in a Canadian power plant and Canada says that the fault belongs to America. The president was quick to address the nation on TV.

One of the things I get out of all these political machinations is that both America and Canada want the approval of their citizens. They may dodge around a few corners furtively, but the intent is good. I LIKE my government hustling for my approval. It's a heckuva world, but sometimes I enjoy the human comedy.

Harriet

This statement was made by Queen Noor in our current book discussion. Would you answer this question - give an opinion, please! I won't quote you unless you come into the discussion and give it yourself, but I need an opinion. (Ella)

16. What is your interpretation of this statement: "For all its considerable merits and inspirational principles, the American system is based upon a continuous uninterrupted process of election campaigns, stretching out year after year. Lost in the perpetual scramble is any long-term vision capable of addressing the complex tangle of causes at the root of human suffering, especially in the Middle East."

Ella: I will offer the following quickly conceived comments on the issue of your question 16!

This is the consequence of our constitution that essentially adopted the English pre-Parliamentary System as it existed in the late 18th century. Our Founding Fathers democratized the existing system by replacing the hereditary King with a democratically elected president serving a very limited 4-year term but having much the same power as the 18th century king (short of a right to dissolve congress). There were other revolutionary changes such as the creation of a federal system with significant sovereignty sharing with the States and of course, the creation of an independent Federal Judiciary and the rejection of the English Class system.

The natural effect of the limited term terms was to define an incoming 1st term President's planning horizon as 4-years, ie until the date of the next election. If he/she wins a second term the planning horizon is extended another 4-years. At any point if an opposition party wins, radical new plans may replace the work of the previous administration.

The system has both favorable and unfavorable aspects. First provisions are at hand to correct the mistakes of any administration; they are voted out of office and a new administration is elected to try their plan. On the other hand, necessary serious long term planning to meet serious future issues is difficult to come by. An example of failures of this type is the absence of any really meaningful long-term environmental protection policy. The Electorate too has quite short term planning horizons putting much more importance on the short-term affect on their lives rather the long-term effect. The U.S Mid-east policy too may be another example of our limited short term horizons; is Mid-East policty the result of short-term political interests rather than long-term National Interests?

Obviously a less democratic constitution with a President for life would enable the lengthening of the planning range though this has even more serious consequences including the creation of a Nazi type police state. Under the existing circumstances perhaps it is true, at least for us, that our system as imperfect as it is, is far better than the alternates. Having arrived at this conclusion I note that perhaps other cultures might arrive at different conclusions as to what is best for them though I would expect that any resulting goverment would stop short of subjecting their people to Nazi style terror controls.

HARRIET - IMO, I don't believe that Queen Noor feels that the political electrion process in the USA should change; she is simply pointing out that the system we have does not allow for long-term planning. And that's quite true.

A monarchy or dictatorship would not be feasible for the USA. Americans are too independent (as a culture)and want to have ready access to their leadership. We're forthcoming with compliments and complaints and many are regularly in touch with their State's politicians regarding important issues. But we should realize also that Lobbyists - not just constituents - have a heavy say in what Congress does. Anyone who has worked in Washington DC knows that only too well.

One issue that I do think works against USA and could be easily corrected is the enormous amount of money spent by candidates during their campaigns. Even those multiple millions of of dollars were directed instead to eliminate (or reduce) some of the poeverty in the USA, they would be better spent. We have enormous poverty in the USA; the lack of a higher standard in our educational system is appalling for an otherwise advanced country; the low salaries of our teachers, police and fire officers is something to be ashamed of; helpless children and women, as well as men, in homeless shelters or begging on the streets is an affront to what this country stands for. I'd vote in a minute for a candidate who refused to spend such exorbitant sums of money to "get his word out" if he also had a plan to alleviate some of the problems inside the USA, as well as develop sensible foreign policy planning.

Americans are big-hearted people. Noor knows that and shows that she does as she turns to various individuals and organizations for advice and support for her many humanitarian efforts. She also is a product of her times and her marriage. No one can function at the international level she did (in partnership with King Hussein and her own many projects) without realizing how truly valuable a good relationship with the USA is.

However, as wonderful as our country is in many ways, "Political Washington" is NOT "Mainstreet America" - not even close. The American lack of understanding (or in many cases even interest in) other areas of the world (not only by the average citizen, but by elected officials as well) does not bode well for the future.

Whereas it is widely seen that the Arab world has a bad case of "self-delusion" (think Egypt, Libya, Iraq), America has its own "warts" to contend with. A case in point: the Blackout yesterday across the Eastern Seaboard of Canada and the USA. Two years ago, Congress was cautioned about the possibility of this happening - AGAIN! - and paid little heed to the warning, refusing to authorize funds to replace old and malfunctioning equipment throughout the USA. And although the computer technology is sophisticated and interactive, the equipment on the ground is not. Windmill farms are fine and much in use these days, but they are not the answer to antiquated equipment which if replaced could have preveneted what happened yesterday and may happen again.

Now . . . where are we in the discussion of LEAP OF FAITH?

Ha if you had waited long enough you would have had Independance anyhow and the Queen would only have been a figurehead as she is with us. She has no power! Our PM cannot act undemocratically either and she is not looked at as a Queen. It has always puzzled me how America fought to get rid of the Monarchy and ended up with a President who seems to us to have the same worshipful subjects as a Monarch! There are no people more independant than the Ozzies yet they still are a Constitutional Monarchy.

Carolyn

WHEEEEEEE!

We have all discussed that question thoroughly haven't we? Wasn't it fun exercising our minds, as it were - and I even involved Harold in the question as I admire his knowledge of the government and historical perspectives.

So many angles to government, all kinds of government! Even Carolyn's Constitutional Monarchy and the Queen got in the conversation.

Carolyn, you think we "worship" our President? Come on over and listen to a group talking about him!! Hahahaha

A good example of that is the current argument as to whether President Bush "doctored" the report of weapons of mass destruction, which reports sent our armies into Iraq, into a "bloody mess" of what appears to be at the moment confusion and chaos.

Harold's question - " is Mid-East policy the result of short-term political interests rather than long-term National Interests?

That is what all America is debating at the moment!

Or we could say is Bush's policy in Iraq a result of short-term politics or will it benefit America in the long term.

But THANKS TO YOU ALL FOR YOUR WONDERFUL COMMENTS ON THIS QUESTION! We may not have come to a conclusion, we could be debating this for months, but we can do that freely without fear of censorship.

At the moment I'm in a dreadful hurry as it is starting to storm outside and I must shut this computer down.

THANKS TO ALL OF YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS! I LOVE THIS DISCUSSION AND THE VARIOUS VIEWPOINTS! MORE TOMORROW!!! DON'T GO AWAY!

I think your Middle Eastern foreign policy is short sighted and the decision to go into Iraq frought with adverse consequences. As I have said in a previous discussion- Saddam had been contained. We cannot bring about Western style democracy by force. People have to hunger for change as they did in France and as they did in Russia whatever we thought about the type of Govts that ensued as a result of the Revolutions. Eventually I believe even the Iraqis would have revolted.

CAROL - what we are seeing in the USA now is that more and more people, organizations, and elected officials are questioning seriously the need for the American presence in Iraq and the Administration's decision to send them there. Along with that question is the natural one about our earlier chasing the Taliban out of Afghanistan, but then not remainining in country in enough force to prevent the warlords from coming back to power (as they quickly did) and negotiating with al Qada to return.

Folks whom I have worked with for many years and have lived and worked in the Middle East are asking "why is the USA so focused on Iraq, when Iran is the one dealing with the North Koreans about nuclear weapons." They're much more fearful of that alliance than the danger posed to the USA by the former Ba'athists in Iraq.

These same folks several retired from various USG agencies with extensive experience in the Middle East shake their heads in frustration and wonder "what will it take" for the USA to understand the Middle East. An highly respected American Islamic scholar, Daniel Pipes, has recently been nominated by Pres. Bush to the board of directors of the U.S. Institute of Peace, but this nomination is raising all kinds of problems with Democrats in Washington DC. Pipes makes it clear that "Militant Islam is the problem, and moderate Islam is the solution," opening up another question: could the USA have spent the time and enormous amoung of funds that the war in Iraq is costing daily (billions?)on efforts to develop stronger relationships with "moderate Islamic" countries? Sounds like a plan to me, but then as long as my son and other Amerian soldies are in Iraq, I'm definitely biased.

Gee CAROLYN, I never thought of that possibility before! Maybe in some alternate universe King George never lost the colonies and both here and "across the pond" you and I are ALL subjects of Queen Elizabeth. What a strange, novel thought for us Americans. Now...how DO I feel about supporting the Royals...hmmmm...never had to worry about that before!

FRAN, thanks for posting that WONDERFUL history. It certainly sounds right to me! AREN'T YOU ALL SURPRISED THAT I FEEL THAT WAY? I made myself a promise when I undertook this discussion that I would state my feelings and, if others didn't see things my way, I would just accept that we see the Arab - Israeli conflicts from different angles. Yet, it's SO GOOD to see your post which agrees with so much of my own feelings.

We've had passionate debates in this discussion from bright people and there will probably be more to debate as our book goes on. EVERY CONTRIBUTION IS A WONDERFUL LEARNING EXPERIENCE! LET'S ALL CONTINUE TO POST OUR VIEWS, NO MATTER HOW DIVERGENT. WE'LL KEEP THE LINES OF COMMUNICATION OPEN IN OUR SMALL PART OF THE WORLD, RIGHT?

A special thanks to Harold for joining us with your opinion. I loved reading your post. Come by just any old time.

PEDLN, You brought up an interesting point that I thought about quite a few times as I read about Noor and Hussein's marriage. Noor said that Hussein found it hard to talk about painful marital subjects like Noor's miscarriage because he "felt it too much." He turned on her when she tried to tell him about her devastation. He also had a reckless side to his personality. In the pages we read for Week 3, I felt there might be nuances to read between the lines when NOOR concedes "distance" between them at times. I guess they had a REAL marriage as opposed to a fairy tale one and they had their share of problems.

MAHLIA, I didn't know you had a son in Iraq. I hope and pray for his safety and well-being. About Iran, I hope that someone in our government is working on it quietly behind the scenes. That situation holds the potential for lots of trouble and maybe publicizing it, adding public anger and fear to it in both countries, could hinder a solution?

TRAUDE, like you I hope we get favorable results from a roadmap for peace. I know we can all agree on a prayer for peaceful resolution of problems throughout the Middle East and the world. THANKS FOR POSTING!

I'll quote ELLA who wrote: "We may not have come to a conclusion, we could be debating for months, but we can do that freely without fear of censorship."

I'M GRATEFUL FOR THE INPUT OF EACH AND EVERY ONE OF YOU!

Harriet

TODAY WE BEGIN WEEK 3 OF OUR BOOK! There is much to discuss and possibly much to debate as we read onward.

In the chapter "Women Hold Up Half the Sky" Noor describes her attempts to make a difference in Jordan in her role as Queen. Can we consider the following question?

In September, 1985, Noor formed the Noor Al Hussein Foundation (NHF) to integrate efforts to tackle Jordanian problems like poverty, unemployment, health, and education, etc. Which of the many projects that she tackled impressed you the most? Why?

Harriet

The most interesting one to me was when she had the ladies make rugs and how the popularity grew for the Jordanian rugs. And they used the money to improve their lives. Book is not with me right now so I am at a loss for more details. Or should I say my memory is not with me right now either!

Linda

Linda

You're doing very well, Linda, without the book, I wouldn't complain about your memory. I liked the weaving of the rugs also. I'm going to quote a paragraph which I found most interesting for those who might not have the book:

"Successive droughts in the south had forced some 400 Bedouin families to resettle around Bani Hamida, a mountain community an hour or so from Amman. The village was on a spectacular site, looking out across a deep wadi, at King Herod's hilltop fortresss, where Salome had danced and John the Baptist was beheaded. The tribe itself was very poor. There were very few men at Bani Hamida. Many had been forced to seek unskilled work outside the village, leaving their families behind to tend the family goats and eke out a marginal existence at best. The government had put in roads and built a health center and schools, but the people had no way to support themselves. Many women were in poor health and looked much older than their years."

The Biblical sites! Isn't it fascinating to read of these historical places - awesome! It's unreal and I felt that way in July when I was on my first trip to London and we were in places that the Romans had conquered and built fortresses - I had to sit and think for a while of all that went before, it's mind-boggling! Our country is so new!!!

Such a project as the handicrafts that the NHF started must have been a thrill for all involved.

I bet most of us know of a similar project in our area of the country. We have traveled to Berea, Kentucky (from Ohio) several times over the years and bought handicrafts made by Applachian students working their way through college; most would never have had a chance at higher learning if not for that project.

I wish Queen Noor had told us in more detail of the Quality of Life project which she says has spread throughout the Arab and Islamic world. What she did say is vague - "And for the most part, the projects (of a village development council program) were self-supporting, generating income for a revolving credit program that would then be used to initiate other projects." What were they?

The National Music Conservatory and the Jubilee School were certainly great projects, successful, and a wonderful effort on the Queen's part.

All worthwhile programs, I couldn't say which was my favorite and I would like to congratulate the Queen for giving birth to and promoting such wonderful ideas for the people of Jordan.

You might/might not be interested in the site of Berea, Kentucky, but here it is:

Berea College, KY

And the statement there is as follows:

"Today, Berea College provides a full-tuition scholarship to every student, admits only low-income students, and requires all students to work in a college job. In addition to carrying a full academic load, students work 10-15 hours per week, which permits them to earn a portion of their educational expenses.

Founded with a commitment of educating black and white students together, today the college has students from more than 60 countries and many faiths and is continually ranked as one of the leading liberal arts colleges in the nation."

Impressive isn't it? Students from 60 countries and many faiths.

Just as a point of interest, Queen Noor's Quality of Life programs follow along the same path as those established earlier in Egypt by Jehan Sadat; in Iran by Farah Diba; and throughout India and Central Asia by committed field staff from USDA and USAID. Especially the micro-enterprise projects which give women an opportunity to use their handicraft and agricultural skills have blossomed in some very remote regions of the world. My 7 year old grandaughter has demanded that she be allowed to "buy an ox" through USDA's VOCA program and then donate it to a small community abroad. Recently, she told her parents "OK, I'll save my own allowance and THEN I'll buy an ox." She is very serious about this issue and wants to make sure that "her" ox goes to a women's cooperative.

I particularly like the arts and culture projects. Several years ago, I visited a small traveling project that came to Washington DC and some of the handicrafts were absoluttely gorgeous.

Berea College is well known in academic circles for the wonderful multiculture student body it attracts (and supports with various types of financial assistance), and the solid, non-judgemental educational opportunities that it fosters among its students.

Wasn't it interesting that Noor had a harder sell popularizing the beautiful rugs and embroidered dresses produced by the handicrafts projects to those WITHIN Jordan than to international markets?

Unfortunately, it is human nature to turn a nose up at merchandise produced by those whom the wealthy might have always considered pathetic. Within Jordan, the rugs and cushions initially shared a flawed "charity case" identity. Let's not forget that Noor succeeded in overcoming that image and endowing the work of local artisans with an exclusive Jordanian "heritage charisma." That had to have been one of her more notable accomplishments inside and outside of Jordan.

I understand Noor was photographed with the rugs and cushions decorating her own office and home. She was also photographed at public functions wearing the beautifully embroidered, colorful dresses produced by these artisan women. Noor had the kind of "star power" that made affluent Jordanians want to do as she did? Publicizing the work of these local artisans helped Jordan's image at the same time that it improved lives.

I was looking at the photograph in the center of the book that starts out with the blurb "All our children..." Almost all of the women are wearing gorgeous embroidered prints. I wonder whether those were produced by local artisans?

Isn't Princess Haya (in front of King Hussein wearing a green print dress) stunning? WOW!

MAHLIA, ELLA, many years ago I bought a wonderful leather purse at a crafts fair of young American artisans in upstate New York. It became my favorite purse for years and years and years and...

At the time I felt I was paying a lot for it, but as years went on I began to appreciate the thickness, flexibility and richness of the leather, the durability of construction and the creativity of design. It was a one-of-a-kind purse and I've never seen its equal before or after. Everybody I knew commented on it, somehow aware that they were looking at something unusual.

I used it for more than 10 years and I still wish I could find another like it. In today's mechanized world it's easy to forget the uniqueness of hand-made, beautifully crafted products.

Harriet

I found reading of NHF's many projects encouraging; a refreshing change from the more discouraging political events. I particularly applaud the goals of the Jubilee School, which "promotes creative thinking, leadership and conflict-resolution skills, scientific and technological expertise, and social responsibility". The foundation that established the school appears to have done an excellent job of identifying the knowledge and skills most needed.

While American schools have long since taught scientific and technological expertise, it is only recently that some have been incorporating conflict-resolution skills in an effort to curb the student violence. I'm not sure how we rate on "social responsiblity". I have long thought we have bent too far in the direction of providing narrow-gauge work skills. I am amazed at the huge gaps I see in the general knowledge of some of our young people of the current generation. ...Babi

I noticed in our local news reports this summer that conflict resolution skills were included in several inner city educational camps with varying results. One source indicated that the campers dediced very quickly that only "force" or "knowing someone important" were the solutions. Other youth indicated that they were happy to find our there was such a thing as learning how to resolve conflicts, but wary that "that wouldn't work where I live."

IMO, Noor did an excellent job in contacting and developing international resources to assist in establishing a wide range of projects that would help Jordanians throughout the country and also establish a broad base of future resources to lead these programs into the future.

Queen Noor's promotion of Jordanian artisans, most of them women, is testimony to the fact that she had embraced the country as her own and was intent on showing and promoting its beauties. Of course she supported her husband, and how could she not?, but her interests and concerns clearly extended beyond the political.

And yes, I think that one of Queen Noor's most significant contributions was to bring the attention of the world to Jordan and all it has to offer despite its precarious location amid sometimes feuding Arab nations (see map).

My central a/c system is not working and I long for the repair man due early tomorrow.

MAHLIA, we posted around the same time and were apparently on the same wave length <g>.

TRAUDE - my sympathy for your lack of AC. A few years ago, when we thought we would both be in Egypt for several years, I moved into my son's former student apt. for what I thought would be 3 months. We don't have AC here, so I've learned to be extremely grateful for fans and cold showers - sometimes several a day in our high humidity. Just focus on how comfortable you'll be when the AC fellow does show up.

HARRIETT - I think it was you several posts back who mentioned that you'd promised yourself to write what you thought, regardless. And I applaud that promise! We're all from differnet backgrounds with each having different opportunities to view the world in different ways. But as one of my former colleagues once said "If WOMEN ruled the world, there wouldn't be such hatred and violence, nor all the time wasted on politics and shouting that 'my way is best.'" I laugh when I remember her words, but actually they have a lot of truth to them.

As we see in Noor's reflections on her marriage and the public role she assumed during her partnership with King Hussein, she just went right to work to better the life for the Jordanian people and when possible, for others in the region. And I bet there were a lot of private discussions between the two as Noor acclimated herself to her new life.

I can't help but think of the vast difference with which Noor approached her efforts in Jordan compared to the earlier female British Arabist, Gertrude Bell, who (according to her biographer) "didn't really like Arab women, unless they were of the upper classes." Noor went right into the heart of some of the poorest and most desperate enclaves in Jordan, offering humanitarian assistance and suggestions for future financial and educational support for tribal women. I'm really proud of her for that!

At this point I think we could add one more item to the question of Noor’s influence in the country of Jordan. She has promoted women’s rights in many ways (e.g. women networking) which may lead to a higher realm of women’s rights in Jordan.

In discussing Question #18 above here are the facts as I have reviewed them in this chapter:

l. In 1986 both America and Israel had agreed to an international peace conference organized by King Hussein in his ongoing peace efforts.

2. Arafat, head of the PLO, would not agree to the conditions of Resolution 242 which states that Israel has a right of existence and the cessation of violence.

3. King Hussein decided to sever relations with Arafat and the PLO after six years of attempts to arrive at a peaceful solution.

We’ll try to keep those developments in mind as we go along in the book; sometimes it is difficult to follow Noor’s explanations as they are chronologically stated and it is easy to forget where and what took place in Jordan over time.

What are your reactions to Noor’s statement that ”In our part of the world one violent incident after another reinforced the sterotype of Arabs as terrorists.”

Is she saying that this sterotype only exists in the Middle East? Does it exist in the U.S.? Do we separate the various Arab countries in our minds?

In my opinion most of us do, although we think of the whole area of the Middle East as one of conflict and turmoil, without blaming one country or another. That is, no doubt, why tourism is suffering tremendously there.

Noor mentions that affair of the sale of weapons to Iran in exchange for American hostages. That whole business with Oliver North is or has been very confusing to me as it was denied by the Reagan administration – does anyone here know the complete truth of it? I know some of it is true – skullduggery was involved somehow. I never followed that story in the news to its conclusion.

Meanwhile, Noor does tell us of her troubles in the royal household (p.271-272) which all of us believe she should have realized at the very beginning of a marriage to a man who had been married three times before and had eight children. She states “Had I ever imagined the total helplessness I would feel with my stepchildren, I might have reflected more deeply on the advisability of marrying their father.” And she speaks of the “hostility” in the household and her feelings of being very alone.”

Did she ever confide her problems to her mother, father, sister? Couldn’t she have come to America on visits occasionally for a vacation? She rarely speaks of her own family and I wonder why not?

.

MY sense is that Noor was NOT particularly close to her parents (her earlier comments about the strife in their marriage and choice of schools which she did not wish to attend give a good indication of that relationship). That kind of relationship does NOT encourage confidences. Also she was particularly mindful of the need for maintaining as confidential her conversational exchanges with her husband and family members. And anyone who has raised teenagers - especially when they are stepchildren - will recognize the agonies she describes.

After her marriage and parenthood, Noor seemed to have developed a closer relationship with her sister, who comforted her on several emergency occasions and would have become the legal guardian of her children if anything happened to either parent.

Unless one is born to a Royal family, how would one "prepare" for such a life style with the constant surveilance from security personnel, servants throughout the living quarters, and sychopants who wish to only stay in good relations with the King. There are many "administative levels" in such a household that the average citizen in the USA simply does not have to deal with and may not even be aware of in other countries. The closest example I could think of here would be at the White House.

I've found it helpful to "flag" the pages of the book where dates are listed or special events are detailed, so that I can easily return to those pages again. I tend to do this with most of my books; a carry-over from the classroom, I guess.

Noor writes openly of her parent's difficult marriage, which finally ended in divorce, and of the tensions she and her siblings sensed, as children always do in such cases. The young Noor once tried to escape but returned a few hours later, chastened, having realized the impractibility of this 'flight'. If I remember correctly, her sister tried the same, only she came back much sooner. The mother was of Scandinavian descent.

As MAHLIA said, she developed a close relationship with her sister who is often mentioned in the latter part of the book.

I believe Noor is an intensely private person; I also believe that, more than anything else, the book is a tribute to her late husband and his quest for peace. Significantly, it ends with his death. We do know that she carries his work forward.

The interview with Larry King after her father's death ended, again significantly, I thought, with a brief earlier video of the late King Hussein.

There is a lot of material available on the net about the Iran-Contra Scandal. I remember watching, incredulously, the trial of Colonel Oliver North on TV, his lithe secretary (but not her name), the admitted shredding of compromising material and a lot of other unsavory details.

Iran was holding the hostages, President Reagan would not negotiate with them; at the same time the CIA wanted financial support for a rebel army, the Contras, in the overthrow of the Nicaraguan government. Congress refused.

Retired Navy Admiral John Poindexter, President Reagan's National Security Adviser at the time, together with Oliver North went behind the President's back (!), (illegally) sold weapons to Iran and funneled the money to the Contras. Accrding to Peter Kornbluh and Malcolm Byrne, editors of The Iran-Contra Scandal: The Declassified History , ... " the policy decisions, covert operations, and subsequent cover-up ... created the most serious constitutional crisis of modern times."

Oliver North eventually emerged as a political commentator and if memory serves, ran for office in Virginia.

John Poindexter lost his job as National Security Adviser, was convicted of conspiracy, lying to Congress, defrauding the government, and destroying evidence. His five felony counts were overturned on appeal.

John Poindexter was appointed to the IAO (Information Awareness Office) newly created in the aftermath of 9/11. His appointment was not widely announced.

It was he who conceived of the now-defunct TIA (Terrorism Information Awareness) program, a scheme under wich our government would collect every bit of information available on each of us in a mind-boggling exercise of government control that makes one shudder.

Thereafter Poindexter conceived of another insane scheme: the market in terrorism futures. Mercifully, it was scrapped after Senator Daschle spoke up.

TRAUDE, thanks so much for that information on Poindexter. I was not aware of these things, and your post has put me on alert to watch out for anything coming from that source. The man is a menace, IMO.

Speaking of menaces, I was relieved to read that King Hussein finally gave up on trying to deal with Arafat. That man has shown himself about as reliable as a broken walking stick.

MAHLIA, I was surprised to learn that Noor's sister Alexa was appointed to be legal guardian of Noor's children in case of her death. I would have thought, as the children of Jordan's king, their legal guardianship would be in the Hashimite family.

I was somewhat puzzled when Noor started using the term "NGO", with no explanation. I am now assuming that it simply means 'non-government organizations'. Somebody please correct me if that's wrong.

...Babi

A PS NOTE: I forgot to say how heartily I approve of Noor's respect for the confidentiality of her conversations with her husband and her reticence in private matters. Does anyone remember the shambles that accompanied Martha Mitchell's volubility? ...Babi

BABI - I've lived in the metropolitan Washington DC area since 1966, so I certainly do remember Martha Mitchell's wild outbursts and how they affected her busband's work and reputation here. I share your approval of the way Noor protected the little privacy she and King Hussein had by being circumspect about their conversations/decisions. IMO, it was in her nature to do so, but also politically wise.

The guardianship of their children (should anything happen to Noor and Husein)assigned to Noor's sister, Alexa, was wise, given the strife among the Royal family. The sons, of course, could have chosen to remain in Jordan (and that was probably understood by Alexa), but for their daily care until they reached adult hood, a "back-up" plan was the thing to do.

TRAUDE - thanks, indeed, for the synopsis on John Poindexter. By the way, he resigned last week from his job at the Pentagon, after so much concern was raised about his latest project. But in his usual style his letter of resignation, which was in the Washington Post, clearly accused others of "simply not understanding the importance of the project" and turning it into a political shambles. Oliver North continues his radio program and did run for public office, but was not elected.

I'll add my thanks, also, Traude for your information on the Iran-Contra scandals. It seems so long ago, but as you stated John Poindexter is still aspiring to public office of some kind.

Gosh, Mahlia, if problems between parents, and parent-child relationships in the maturing years were any indicator of future happiness for all concerned, my daughter would not at this stage of her life be speaking to us - hahaha. Oh, the arguments we used to have and now we could not be closer as a loving family.

Certainly, Queen Noor would have matured enough to forgive any disagreements between family members and vice versa, but she may not have wanted to disclose this in her book for some reasons. Strange that she never came to America for a visit until several years after her marriage and it makes me wonder if the King would have disapproved of it. Often there are cases on TV and in books of Arab husbands not permitting visits to relatives in other countries for fear of losing his children or spouse.

Have just a few moments to type at the keyboard before running errands, so will continue later..............

ELLA - my sense is that Noor did not come to the USA more often simply because she was so busy adapting to her marriage, responsiblities and learning how to manage on a daily basis at a level which would give most American women major migraines! Any of us who have raised teenagers (our own or step-children) can certainly appreciate the constraints that stress must have played in the family relationship. (I remember with some humor the summer I consigned my teenage son to a tent in our back yard until he could "behave as a civilized person" and tossed his clothes out the window after him.)

And, since King Hussein was open and loving to ALL of his children, he, too, must have been pulled in several directions. Noor was exceedingly circumspect in her comments about the Royal family - as well she should be even today - as a gesture of love and respect to her late husband, but also because it seems to be her nature: very private and one who keeps deep emotions to herself.

I wanted to comment on one anecdote that Noor tells about her mother and herself. Somewhere in the beginning of the book Noor told us that her mother persisted in calling her "Lisa" shortly after she married King Hussein. Noor reproached her, citing her own commitment to her new identity and her desire to be called only by her new Jordanian name of Noor.

It SOUNDS good, but I believe it's an indication of the distance between Noor and her mother. If, when they spoke together, her mother had used her birth name intimately and only in privacy, Noor's rejection put her mother in the SAME category as everyone else surrounding her. She was telling her mother. "Hey, you're not special to me!" She COULD have allowed her mother to adjust in her own time.

Who knows, maybe Noor's mother deserved that put-down. There must have been reasons for Noor's adverse feelings while she grew up.

Ideally, a mother/daughter relationship can go beyond such formalities. Noor made no allowances for the memory associations and love that often accompanies a mother saying her child's name. I thought it was a rather cool rejection of their past family relationship and was a way of telling her mother that Noor was "QUEEN NOOR" and maintained her royal titles even with her own mother.

DO YOU THINK HER MOTHER DIDN'T FEEL PAIN TO READ THAT ANECDOTE IN THE BOOK? I think she did. She was being put in her place...ROYALLY and publicly. I also think that Noor would not have included that anecdote in her book if she had really already forgiven her mother. Yet, by the time she wrote LEAP OF FAITH, Noor had experienced suffering through the reasonable and unreasonable expectations of her own stepchildren. You'd think she'd have picked up a little pity.

Have to do dinner...back later.

Harriet

Indeed, it's interesting how quickly Lisa accepted her new name of Noor and how proudly she adapted to its use, even within her own family. In contrast, Jehan Sadat mentions in her book that within her own family (from the time she was a child), she was called Jean and that continued to be the name she was known as to her relatives.

I don't think that Noor was trying to impress on her Mother that she was QUEEN NOOR, only that she had chosen to be known by the Arabic name which her husband selected for her, and it annoyed her when her mother insisted on using her birth name - one which she confirms that she'd "never related to." But, yes, I do think that she could have left that out of the book as a loving gesture to her Mother. No doubt that Noor is a complex individual (as her book clearly shows).

THANKS FOR ALL THOSE GREAT COMMENTS, EVERYBODY!

Let's take a look at Arafat, if you all would. What a convoluted relationship between Arafat and King Hussein!

According to Noor, Arafat rose to popularity among the Palestinians in 1968 by falsely claiming victory for a battle that was actually won by Jordanian troops at Karameh. Afterwards he tried to overthrow K. Hussein, and had no compunctions about making assassination attempts against him and other members of the Jordanian royal family. It makes me wonder if, in attempting to oust K. Hussein, did Arafat consider Jordan to be an appropriate potential Palestinian homeland with himself as the leader?

There may be some historical precedent here. In 1923, the British divided the "Palestine" portion of the Ottoman Empire into two administrative districts.  Jews would be permitted only west of the Jordan river.  The other 75% of Palestine was formed into an Arab Palestinian nation called Trans-Jordan. At that time the British intended this to be the Palestinian State. In 1946 this land later became Jordan instead of the site for a Palestinian state, as originally intended.

K. Hussein's armies had to flush the PLO out of Jordan, city by city. Yet even with this history between them, Hussein forgave Arafat.

I just don't get it!

In almost all international dealings, Hussein allied himself with Arafat who lied to and back-stabbed the King of Jordan every single time. Yet his foreign policy stances seemed to constantly link him with Arafat who, according to Noor, caused Hussein so much stress that he became ill from it all.

After a brief break in diplomatic relations, Jordan and the PLO resumed their strange partnership. Noor doesn't explain why in the book.

DOES ANYONE KNOW? The PLO did a great deal to malign the Arab image throughout the world. King Hussein's insistence on PLO representation in peace settlements constantly linked the two in the eyes of other nations, an unfortunate happenstance which surely tarnished K. Hussein's image. If Hussein had used his prestige as a moderate Arab to represent the Palestinians, might there not have been a greater opportunity to advance the Palestinian causes?

Harriet

HARRIET, it does seem that Arafat was bad news for everybody, and it would seem that 'everybody' should have dumped him long since. Unfortunately, Arafat and the PLO have been the only group acting as representatives of the Palestinians in the on-going political and military maneuvering. Hussein had a deep commitment to achieving some resolution to the Palestinian problem, and the PLO was the only game in town. He did try again and again to persuade the Arab community as a whole to unite and act on their behalf, without success. Pity. ...Babi

I think your mention of the misunderstanding that Queen Noor with the name her Mother called her was very interesting. After all her Mother and Father were divorced, and here was her daughter aligning herself with her Father's people, Muslims and Arabs rather than her Mother's people, American and whatever religion they were. It was almost as if she had chosen sides. It must have been very hurtful.

Speak to you soon....Love, Fran

aHow to Invest!!!

HARRIET - I just don't get it!

In trying to better understand King Hussein's repeated attempts to work with Arafat, it might be helpful to re-read some of Noor's comments about how strongly her husband felt about easing the plight of the Palestinians; how much he wanted peace in the region and devoted himself to that goal; and to remember that Jordan, as an Arab country, is not the West. Forgiveness and willingness to work together, regardless of what wrongs have already been committed, are a major part of the Arab psyche (there are others, of course, but in the context which we are now speaking, this is relevant).

Understand clearly that Arafat controlled through threat: murder and pillage were his keys. Whether he personally pulled the trigger, he was the figurehead and everyone in the region knew it. King Hussein carried a weapon and had one close at hand on his desk for very understandable reasons. But he was also big-hearted and saw first hand on a regular basis the desperation in which the Palestinians lived; how they had lost their dignity in becoming refugees; and how they (and their children) had less opportunity for education, employment, health care and comfortable homes than others around them. It may be that this is one of those things that Americans truly "have to see to believe."

And, finally, there was always the glimmer of hope that Arafat "might" be willing to keep his promise; work collegially for peace with other Arab leaders; and make the compromises that would foster a better relationship with those around him who also wanted peaceful relations. King Hussein was a great optimist and his heart NEVER closed against those who had maligned him in the past. He was always willing to take another chance if it meant the possibility of peace. (That was clear in his comment about regardless of how ill he was and what the medical personnel said, he "WOULD BE THERE" to help reconcile any differences if his presence could make a difference."

Various places in the book the fact is stated that the Palestinians had become a burden on Jordan, overwhelming their economy, and getting a place where they could settle and claim a homeland was the paramount reason, I believe, that King Hussein worked constantly with Arafat to come to some settlement.

As someone stated he was the only game in town, no one else was representing them; consequently what else could the King do?

HARRIET, I thought it interesting that you mentioned the Queen informing her Mother of her new name - Really! And yet this same Queen Noor said at one point how difficult it was to get used to being called "Your Majesty."

Some of the time she claims to be very humble, but when you read between the lines (as a good reviewer of a book should) you find another personality hidden there.

Another home in England (how many does this make?) and a lovely 10th anniversary letter from her husband, plus meeting S.Spielberg and the filming of INDIANA JONES, makes this chapter on "PARENTHOOD" fun to read.

later, ella

I will never do this again but I was involved in 2 other book groups and trying to keep up with the deadlines of 3-I felt like my school days were back.I've enjoyed catching up with some of your wonderful posts.I may be overlapping, but did any of you think the Queen's style of writing changed toward the end of the book-I thought it became more "human"She always referred to her husband as the King or Husein but toward the end I noticed she used another Arabic name for him.When she described her husband's reaction to her first miscarriage telling her of all his troubles and worries and saying that this set a precedent for the future, I wondered about that.Of course it helps to have someone tell you about troubles greater than yours, but between husband and wife? After reading this book I wonder if there ever can be a peace in this area of the world.It seems that land belonging to a central part of each adversary's religion is in contest and I wonder how something as vital to each as that can ever be solved.

As Queen Noor mentions President Reagan's lack of responsiveness in a telephone call with her husband, I would like to ask if any of you have read anything that would confirm the fact that Reagan's ability to comprehend or to make decisions toward the end of his last term in office was diminished by his disease.

Should we have known this? If we had known, what should we have done?

Another question concerning President Clinton. Somewhere in the book (I think we are coming to it soon), the author mentions the fact that America was engrossed in Clinton's morality (or lack thereof), and I have another question concerning this president.

Is immorality of a president a reason for impeachment? Or I should ask that question in this manner: is public knowledge of the immorality of a President a reason for impeachment? Is lying about it a reason?

Just a short pop question here for a little while and then we'll get back to our book.

HI TUDY!!!!

We were posting together. We have not come to the end of the book yet (see READING SCHEDULE in the Heading), but when we do we will certainly take note of your question about the Queen's style of writing.

We all have the same question on our minds - will there ever be peace in this area of our world. We can keep hoping is all any of us can do. I believe I heard on the news tonight there was another bombed bus in Israel with casualties. The violence must end before peace can begin.

King Hussein was not a Palestinian, but the country he ruled is Palestine and its population is composed of majority Palestinians. The British set up the country of trans-Jordan out of Palestine for the Palestinians, and I could understand why the Palestinians resented him when he was throwing them out of their own country.

Remember King Abdullah the first King of this newly named country made entirely out of the ancient land of Palestine was assassinated shortly after being named Emir by the British. His mentally ill son was named Emir, but could not function so his son the late King Hussein was named Emir. Jordan is Palestine and has only been around under the new name for a little over 50 years.

Finally though Jordan has a Palestinian in power by the name of Queen Rania. She was born in Kuwait of Palestinian parents, educated at American University and worked for Citibank and Apple Computer before marrying Prince Abdullah.

There is an article in Vanity Fair on the new queen, and I tried to find a website to put here but was not successful. She has been queen for four years and is now only 32.

Unlike Queen Noor she tells her friends and family to call her by her given name. She says on being queen, "I didn't grow up thinking I was going to be queen. For me, queen is not something that I am. It's something that I do." I like her attitude and she had founded a home for abused children, and has spoken out about the abuse of children in her homeland.

King Husseins brother was the prince regent, and was expected to be named king, but on King Husseins death bed he changed it to his oldest son Abdullah, who Queen Rania says was not raised to be king. He had English as his native tongue, and does not speak Arabic well. He was educated in Britain and America. Rania however speaks Arabic fluently and also speaks English.

The article describes him as a short, rotund man with a round face. Queen Rania is described as a dazzler and head turner. One of the pictures of her with her young daughter caught my eye. The youngest girl age 3 looks very much like Queen Muna, King Abdullahs British mother. She has blonde hair and is cute as a doll.

The King and Queen still live in the same home they have always had, but they are building a new palace for larger public rooms. I think it was probably Queen Ranias idea not to move into the main palace with all the old backbiting and gossip mongers who worked there. She has a much different relationship with her husband than Queen Noor had with hers. She considers the relationship to be one of partnership. They have been compared to Bill and Hillary Clinton.

Rania is a clothes horse and is called the "handbag queen" for her love of expensive purses. She has her own foundation and has her fund raising parties at Versailles with a roster of 600 guests. She like Queen Noor court the international crowd, and both are media savvy and certainly welcome the attention.

Even though Noor was allowed to keep the title of Queen, the place was not big enough for two queens. According to the article there is much resentment about the amount of money King Hussein left to Queen Noor and their four children, while short changing his other 8 children by other wives. Of course Abdullah his eldest got the crown and the law of succession in Jordan is to the oldest son. This would be King Abdullah and Queen Ranias son who is nine.

In a recent survey the people of Jordan have a 99% disapproval rate of America. Only one percent gave us favorable ratings, yet the United States of America gave Jordan over $1,000,000,000.00 last year. Thats one billion dollars, and I can't see that we have gotten our moneys worth. Over one third of the population is in extreme poverty, and the unemployment rate is high. About the same as here, and I believe in taking care of your own home first and then you can give to charity. I know the price of Chanel couture, and noone deserves that off the back of the American working man and woman.

Send just enough for a BMO (black moving object) according to U.S. Rep. Kirk she would look good in anything.

Read the article and judge for yourselves, but I think for the Palestinians she is much more authenic than Queen Noor whom I have dubbed the "Ice Queen."

......

ELLA - not only was there another bombing in Israel today, but the UN Headquarters in Baghdad was bombed, resulting in the death of the Head of the UN Mission there, Sergio de Mello (a highly respceted UN diplomat)and several others who were attending a conference. And further to the East, more than a dozen people were killed by a bombing in Afghanistan - the Taliban has obviously returned, the War Lords continue to be in control in the Provinces outside Kabul, and terrorism is alive and well.

RE President Reagan: there were numerous instances in which he was observed not to be paying attention during meetings, fumbling with his papers, adjusting items on his desk or the table in front of him, smiling at where he thought the camera was located (and it was not) or simply not understanding what was being said to him directly or around him. Several colleagues of mine worked at the White House during the last few months of his Presidency and they were greatly saddened by what they observed.

RE President Clinton: Motions for Impeachment were not brought about because of his immorality, but because he lied - to Congress, his family and the American people. Just as Nixon did, albeit on a different topic.

Harriet says, "K. Hussein's armies had to flush the PLO out of Jordan, city by city. Yet even with this history between them, Hussein forgave Arafat." Guess my question would be -- Did Arafat ever forgive Hussein? And too, I wonder what would have been the outcome had K. Hussein been included in the Camp David talks. Would he have been assassinated?
Reading both the book and your posts have certainly helped my understanding of this very volatile area, but I still feel stuck in the primary grades and wonder if I'll ever get through Middle East 101. (Mahlia, what would we do without your input?)
And after today's tragic events one again wonders if there will ever be a solution. So many initiatives, accords, roadmaps, and efforts by many, only to have the principals play the blame and revenge game.

Ella, in answer to your earlier question -- I can't say I would choose an intelligent immoral president over a moral not-so-smart one, but I do believe that leadership abililty, intelligence, and perceptiveness are more important in a president than fidelity.

Unless Clinton was having an affair with a national from a nation not friendly to the USA he should not have had to be questioned about his private life. That was up to his wife and between him and his wife. NZers could not believe he was asked this question in congress. I think I would have refused to confirm or deny if I had been Clinton. How many Congressmen would tell the truth about extra marital affairs if they were asked in Congress? Not many I am bound!

PEDLN - you make a good point in your comment ". . .I do believe that leadership abililty, intelligence, and perceptiveness are more important in a president than fidelity." Afterall, our country was administered in its early years by men who were slave owners - what could be more immoral than that? Yet they are revered today. The nonsense with Clinton - and it certainly was nonsense, given the amount of time spent on it by Congress, thousands of dollars it took to shuffle through the whole thing (which should have been resolved between he and his family privately)and the distress that it caused both the Clinton and Lewinski families.

I've been re-reading an excellent book by Robert D. Kaplan, entitled THE ARABISTS: The Romance of an American Elite, which gives splendid background on the history of the elite, East Coast American Arabists who served in the State Department, as they followed in the footsteps of many of their forebears who were Protestant missionaries in the Middle East. The historical information is astonishing - much of which may be totally new to the general American reader - and certainly supports much of what Noor describes from the Arab standpoint.

Noor makes some observations that are worth attention, I think.

p. 286: "...in the Arab world, lies and character assassination are just part of the nasty cycle of gossip, but sexual innuendo about a man's wife involves his honor and is considered an altogether different order of magnitude"

Two points struck me here. First, that 'lies and character assassination' are the norm and were accepted as such. Second, the Arab view of the importance of marital fidelity (on the part of the wife at least) and how seriously any 'sexual innuendo' was taken. It certainly doesn't help the Islamic perception of America as an immoral and licentious nation.

Then, on pgs. 294, on Noor's visit to Iraq and the 'disturbing' things she found there. She found most of the contemporary art "was dedicated to the glory of Saddam Hussein", and reminded her of German WWII propaganda. Then, on a visit to a kindergarten in Baghdad, she found the young children were being taught to "idolize" their leader (Saddam). "Rather than promoting a sense of national identity, the state was indoctrinating children to view their country through the persona of a single, all-powerful leader."

It has seemed to me that the lack of an overriding national identity if one of the chief reasons it is so difficult to establish a government in Iraq. People identify first with their own clans and leaders, and seek their own interests above those of the nation as a whole. This is something that is not likely to change without a change in how the next generation is taught to perceive themselves, IMO. ...Babi

BABI - "People identify first with their own clans and leaders, and seek their own interests above those of the nation as a whole." This is very common throughout the Arab/Muslim world and it is indeed a great injustice to those who are working to try and establish some type of national unity and to the individuals who would benefit the most from this release from traditional customs.

As far as the Islamic perception of America, the USA is often viewed as an "open cesspool" of sexual licentiousness with little respect for family, traditional values. When Clinton's dalliances were made public and then took up so much time of the Congress, the ridicule in the Arab world jettisoned 100%. Although Arab leaders are not so pure themselves, the "public" display and commentary in the USA was something they was ridiculous.

Mahlia - the clan connection is something that the Bush admin did not take into consideration in its dealings with Iraq. As I wrote before the invasion. Iraq is a very complex society. If a grandmother in NZ knows this fact why was the admin so ignorant? It is beyond my understanding. We must make it our business to understand the Middle Eastern culture to begin to make progress in the quest for peace.

FIFI - WE MUST FIND THAT ARTICLE ON THE WEB!! I'll look tonight for it, am in the middle of dinner preparations at the moment. Often a recent article must be at least a week old or more before it is released to the Internet, but I'll try.

YOUR POST WAS ABSOLUTELY STUNNING INFORMATION!!!

HARRIET alluded to the information you gave us about Trans-Jordan but I did not understand the history clearly!

And this statement about the present Queen bears repeating and certainly offers proof that all of us are discerning readers!

"Unlike Queen Noor she tells her friends and family to call her by her given name. She says on being queen, "I didn't grow up thinking I was going to be queen. For me, queen is not something that I am. It's something that I do." I like her attitude and she has founded a home for abused children, and has spoken out about the abuse of children in her homeland."

AMEN, FIFI!

THANKS SO MUCH!

And thanks to all who gave an opinion about Reagan and Clinton, I agreed with all of your opinions!

later, ella

FIFI - I just read your comments about Queen Rania. Certainly, as a Palestinian, she lends more credence for some to her role than Noor did coming from an American/Arab/Christian background. And Rania certainly has continued to serve as patron of humanitarian projects and take a personal interest in establishing new ones, like the home for children. She is serving Jordan and the Jordanian people well.

The article to which you refer is written to appeal to a non-Arab/Muslin audience, particularly Americans. Regardless of what Jordanians feel about America and the USG now, they certainly were supportive and proud of Noor's efforts when King Hussein was alive.

King Hussein's decision to allocate funds for Noor's income and that of his children when he knew he was dying was a personal matter he made out of love for his younger family and the knowledge of what would happen (culturally speaking) to Noor and the children upon his death. Jordan is not like England with a place for a "Queen Mum." King Hussein was aware of that and so was Noor. Thus as a committed and loving husband and father, he made financial arrangements for her before his death.

Aside from Queen Rania being Palestinian, she and Noor are of entirely different types of personality. Certainly she uses her family name with friends and family. Why not? Rania is her birth name; an Arabic name for an Arab woman in an Arab country. IMO, it was a beautiful (and culturally wise) gesture on Hussein's part to give Lisa Hallaby the Arabic name of Noor upon their marriage.

Noor was no slouch when it came to fashion; she just took longer to accept that it was past time for her to give up the jeans and Dr. Scholl's. (Must have been the California influence!) In her photos, she conveys the glamour and elegance one expects from someone of that rank, just as Rania does today. And her sense of partnership with King Hussein was never in question.

I see two committed women of different personalities, different backgrounds, different ages, and different communication styles, but both committed to a partnership role with their husbands and undertaking the unexpected title of Queen as part of their job.

Here is the web site for VANITY FAIR, but the article you are referring to, FIFI, is not in this issue.

Vanity Fair

Wow! The USA gave Jordan 1 billion dollars last year and they hate us? Wonder which palace or palaces that money built? I know, I am cynical, sorry about that!

The majority of the population is Palestinian, the country was formed from a Palestinian state - so why are they bombing Israel? Why cannot they be happy in Palestinian-Jordan?

I don't get it either, Harriet (I reread your last post)wherein you gave us the history of Jordan also.

Here is an interesting site: JORDAN

It asks the questions "If Jordan's majority population is Palestinian why are we trying to give them a second homeland?"

It was either in that article or another one I read on the Internet that said there are 2l Arab states whose territory is double that of the U.S.A. while Israel is about the size of New Jersey.

And people still wonder why Israel needs to arm itself?

---

Queen Noor must have been well aware of the Palestinian/Jordanian history; she never writes anything about this history does she? Or have I missed it?

She does tell us the history of Iraq, at one time the cradel of civilization. How far it has fallen!

Let's try to answer Question #20 in the heading.

I have made a checkmark by one paragraph and have written in the margin - "A reason at last!" It is this one:

"There was also some support in Jordan for Saddam Hussein's complaints about Kuwait's overproduction (p.303) of oil in contravention of OpEC's agreements, a breach that was driving down the price of oil and crippling Iraq's ability to recover financially from the cost of the Iran-Iraq war. His charge that the Kuwaitis were drilling laterally into the Rumaila oil field on the Iraq-Kuwait border, a border that was itself in dispute, also reached a sympathetic audience."

Who knows if this is true, but weren't there other avenues to pursue before Saddam Hussein marched into Kuwait to seize the country?

ELLA - In reference to your comment about Palestinian/Jordanian history (". . .she never writes anything about this history does she? Or have I missed it?"), my reading of Noor's book is that she incorporates history throughout the entire book.

And to follow-up on your inquiry about "other avenues for Sadam to follow before he marhced into Kuwait" - my sense of having worked in the area and with Iraqi govt. and diplomatic people for many years is that the excuse of oil being surreptiously re-routed was simply an excuse to invade Kuwait, which Iraqis have always considered to be a part of greater Iraq. This is detailed significantly in Robert Kaplan's book THE ARABISTS; well understood by Arabist specialists at State and former Ambassadors and other Foreign Service Officials who were posted to Iraq; as well as business CEO's and CFO's who dealt with Iraq regularly. And Kuwait being a part of greater Iraq was always a topic of conversation introduced by the recently deceased former Iraqi Ambassador Nizar Hamdoon in his many visits throughout the USA when he was posted to Washington.

Re : Trans Jordan

In an early post I said, with due respect, that "IMHO we cannot really comprehend the ongoing Middle East conflict and the deteriorating situation unless we outline the history of Palestine". I was promptly told that we "know all there is to know", or words to that effect. So I desisted.

Yes, Queen Rania is the wife of King Hussein's eldest son, Abdullah, who succeded him.

Queen Rania's husband, King Abdullah, is King Hussein's eldest son. Hence Queen Noor is the stepmother of King Abdullah and the step mother-in-law of Queen Rania.

King Abdullah named Prince Hamza, his stepbrother and Queen Noor's older son, crown prince. But that is hardly a guarantee : After all, King Hussein's brother had been crown prince for decades, yet shortly before his death King Hussein changed his mind. It is not known whether Noor had anything to do with that decision.

In Europe there is constant tongue-wagging and relentless, meticulous (often vicious) gossip about the goings-on in the households of the remaining royals, who are no longer "governing" as in times past, but rather traditional, glittering, bejeweled "decorations".

Re: the structure of Queen Noor's book. As I read it, the first part is warmer, looser, if you will, less formal. We know Noor kept a diary later on, carefully recording what happened, because she refers to it often and quotes from it, sometimes verbatim.

The royal visitations are carefully listed - to Sweden and to Spain e.g.; but I can't remember offhand whether she mentioned visiting the other remaining monarchs in the Netherlands, Denmark, Norway, and Belgium, about whom we don't hear a lot. How many Americans know that there ARE monarchs in those countries, or where those countries can be be found on the map?

In parentheses : Sadly, geography is a neglected subject in the curriculum of most schools; why-- a few years back, do you recall?, some college students had a hard time naming the capital of Florida (!). I find that not only appalling but sad.

The tone of the book changes after Noor became queen. She was acutely aware of her position, and it shows.

As for demanding to be called Noor, even by her mother : She MUST have known that every single detail in the book, the personal and especially the political, would undergo a thorough, microscopic inspection. It is not up to me to decide why she did include this particular detail. But that was, after all, her prerogative, was it not? How could I presume to chide her for it?

ELLA, I agree that the net is an enormous technical advance and convenience. However, in my research I found sources that were inaccurate in vital details, incomplete, just plain wrong, and even biased. For purposes of reliability and neutrality I keep my encyclopedias within reach.

MAHLIA, Dr. Hannan Ashrawi has not been heard from recently. She served on the Palestinian Legislative Council and as spokesperson for the Arab League; she was often a guest on the MacNeill/Lehrer News Hour. Since Robin MacNeill is long gone from that program, that must have been long ago - perhaps during the endless Lebanon war. Hannan Ashrawi was passionate about the cause of the Palestinians, as Arafat was, but she broke off any connections with him. Please correct me if I am wrong.

Hanan Ashrawi (who has family here in the metropolitan Washington DC area) was "the light at the end of the tunnel" for the Palestinian people, until she became too much "out front" in the news media for Arafat's tastes. Her work as an academic was highly regarded in the international academic community and whenever she spoke about the Palestinian people - NOT the govt. issues per se, but the PEOPLE - folks listened. She indeed was passionate, as she had a right to be; her passionate commitment to try and bring about peace cut into her family life and her professional work, but she persevered.

I've always thought that if Hanan Ashrawi could have sat down over a cup of tea with Golda Meir, Israel/Palestine would have been a better place for its residents.

I will absolutely never forget Dr. Ashrawi's comment to a young American journalist who thrust a microphone in front of her (during one of the breaks when the Palestinian delegation was in the USA) and asked something about "the Holy Land." (I've forgoten the exact question.) Dr. Ashrawi turned to him and said "Young Man, I AM from the land of Jesus Christ." For such a tiny woman, she was most definitely a strong voice and I miss seeing her. And perhaps best of all, behind the scenes, she was NOT intimidated by Arafat, but like all good political advisors, she knew when to remain in the background.

Hello Ella, I know that any book group with you in it will be interesting and lively. Thanks for the welcome.

Yes, those Jordanians hate us, but they love our money. U.S. Congressman Mark Kirk a Republican from Illinois was quoted in this article extensively, and said he had known Queen Rania since she was an Arab yuppie working for CitiBank. I intend to write my congressman and see who is working to authorize a BILLION dollars to a country that hates us.

The Bush regime is sending billions of dollars all over the middle east to buy off dictators. They think bribery is the way to conduct foreign policy, but you can only rent an Arab, and the minute the money stops, you're back to square one. At least that is the thought of some in the CIA, who have spoken publicly.

I use the word dictator instead of Emir or King except when speaking of them directly, such as in this discussion. A King or Emir is simply a dictator dressed up with a more acceptable name to westerners.

Mahalia, thanks for your insight. You say this article was written for the American public. That may be true, but the article quoted Jordanians, and the Queen posed for several pictures for the article, and discussed not only her work but many personal things also. Since this entire issue was about royalty, (which is not my favorite subject) I thought hers was the most interesting of the lot for what I call the "Parasite Patrol".

The article did say that Queen Noor had disappeared from the Jordanian scene, and her children were no longer visable there. She has chosen to come back to America, and I assume her children who are Jordanian are with her. I resent her criticism of our country's form of government, she must like it very well or she would have stayed in Jordan and raised her children there who after all are not Americans.

As for that group of rich Americans who became Arabists, I met one of them and actually read his book before he died. His honest appraisal at the end of his life was that every American male wants to live the life of an Arab male, he's king of the hill even when he lives in a tent in the middle of the desert. They take their women as they please, each wife getting younger as they age. It's a type of mans world that American males could only dream of, hence their admiration.

This fellow made the mistake of marrying one and failed to keep her in the middle east under their customs. He not only got a wife who said I'm an American and I have rights, he got her mother also as an added bonus. His conclusion, they're pushy, arrogant, and the mother-in-law was crazy. Of course this was as an older man, and I'm sure he didn't feel that way in the beginning.

The ones I have met were all ex-CIA or involved in the Intelligence community in some fashion, and what a waste of the American tax payers money. No wonder the world is in a mess.

......

CAROLYN,

it is not my place to make a general statement here, but a personal one may well be permissible.

So, let me thank you for your candid, refreshing contributions in this folder; I appreciate them and greatly admire your courage. Bless you.

T

I've also met Foreign Service Officers like the man you describe, Fifi, from many world regions, not only those specializing in the Middle East. Yet I've also worked with specialists who are keen on the culture, language and people of a region, who do not embarass either their families or the USA when they are posted overseas and indeed use their positions to represent positively the values of the USA. In all cultures there are the negative "bad onions," who polute the entire produce stand.

I laughed at your description of the fellow's wife and her mother. Middle Eastern women tend to be assertive (not always well understood by Americans who tend to focus on the head scarves or chador more than the personality).

I've seen two detailed TV interviews focusing on Queen Rania and she is indeed a focused woman with tons of responsibility, just like Noor was when she and King Hussein worked together.

While you're checking with your Congressman about who is responsible for sending such large sums to Jordan, it might also be intereting to inquire about the reasons for similar amounts sent to Israel and Egypt.

Indeed many intelligence officers were posted to the Middle East; some were "declared" (their host countries knew who they were), others not. These folks are a community unto themselves (not only in the Middle East, but throughout the world), just like the previous generations of Arabists were in the State Dept.

Evidently, I've been fortunate in meeting and working with people who were well educated about the customs of their host countries, articulate in representing American interests abroad and worked hard to earn their salaries, well aware that as government employes, the American people paid their salaries.

However, instrumental in setting the political stage for the lifelong commitment to mutual understanding and peace among nations, undertaken by King Hussein (not only in Jordan but with other Arab leaders) were other remarkable individuals like Leopold Weiss, an Orthodox Polish Jew, who went to Arabia as a journalist in the 1920's, converted to Islam, adopted the name of Mohamed Asad and rose to become advisor to Saudi King Ibn Saud (and other Hashemites, who were the forebears of King Hussein)and a Deputy Foreign Minister of Pakistan, whose Islamic Constitution he helped to write. Among other eminent Jewish Arabists of Asad's generation were Francis Turner Palgrave and Ignaz Goldziher.

But these men were way before Noor's time, although most assuredly their efforts were known to King Hussein in his dealings with the British, Americans, and Israel.

CAROLYN - I'd like to second TRAUDE's comments. I've very much enjoyed your comments in this discussion. We all have wonderful ideas and perceptions to contribute. As I said earlier, BRAVO for us!

Such tragic news in the headlines again in the aftermath of the Homicide Bomber who blew himself up in a bus filled with innocents, including small children. Why should it be that whenever peace begins to make some inroads, another Palestinian terrorist bombing occurs? It has happened several times that hopeful periods were initially destroyed in this way.

The Israeli's have retaliated by killing a Hamas leader and his bodyguards. Now the Palestinian radical organizations have said in this morning's news that they no longer feel obligated toward the Road Map for Peace. They claim it is the Israeli's who broke the truce?

How can we all ever find our way out of this morass?

ELLA, you asked if there was any evidence that Reagan's capacities were diminished during the term of his presidency? After reading MAHLIA's comments from witnesses who dealt with him, I'll pass on this sad/funny joke that was making the rounds considerably BEFORE Reagan announced his Alzheimer's Disease diagnosis. Of course it would no longer be funny AFTER his diagnosis, but this joke had its circuit when he was considered to be merely an absent-minded ex-president.

Shortly after finishing his presidential term of office, Reagan was talking politics with a friend. As they discussed some foreign policies initiated in Reagan's administration, Reagan said to his friend thoughtfully, "You know, I never particularly agreed with that line of thought."

"Sir," said the astonished friend, "I thought you did. Have you changed your mind now? You certainly seemed enthusiastic about those policies when you were President!"

A baffled look spread over Reagan's face. "President?" he asked wonderingly. "You mean I was President?"

Hahaha! Apparently a lot of people were noticing that Reagan had lapses of concentration during his presidency because it became a subject of humor, but back then the lapses were generally attributed to his age.

more...

Harriet

I do believe that an analytical reading of any book should encourage us all to be skeptical of an author's presumptions, particularly when the author is presenting herself, her husband and her husband's legacy in, as ELLA once phrased it, the best light possible. I feel that sometimes we HAVE to read the nuances between the lines and look at what the author does NOT say to get a more complete picture.

For instance....our book has only one bland comment about Princess Muna, the mother of King Abdullah. Whenever Noor has something pleasant to say about her extended family, she says it. We have only silence about Princess Muna who, as the mother of the new King, must now hold an extremely powerful place in the Jordanian court. Now I draw a few implications from that.

Remember the sway and influence held by Queen Zein, the mother of King Hussein, while Noor was the Queen? If Abdullah's ascension to the throne has enhanced his own mother, Muna, in the same way, Noor's influence must be much diminished, particularly since there may not be any long standing friendship between the two women. Where does she fit into the divided Jordanian family when the BIG THREE among the women are now surely Rania, Muna and Zein? Remember, we have no fond anecdotes from Noor about any of those three ladies except for Rania.

No wonder Noor lives in America.

She never mentioned her children in her Larry King TV interview. Do they visit? Isn't it unlikely that the Crown Prince Hamzah should live anywhere but Jordan? I sure hope that if any of her children continue to live in Jordan, that they visit itheir mother more often than Noor visited HER mother while she was Queen. She seemed awfully fond of them in the book and, if she is not seeing them much, that must be a source of heartache. The last photos of the children included in LEAP OF FAITH coincide with King Hussein's death. Does she have any more recent ones?

At one point Noor writes in LEAP OF FAITH of her despair during the adolescent years of her stepchildren. The children were hostile, she had no one to talk to, including her husband, and she felt so alone and unprotected that she wondered if she was being used as a family scapegoat. But, she didn't bear any resentment towards her husband and tells her readers:

"Had I married anyone else, I cannot imagine that I would have found within myself the patience and the faith to prevail. Because my husband always focused beyond himself on the greater good, I found myself trying to follow his example."

Right... for goodness sakes, isn't that the way ANY wife would feel about a busy husband who is non-supportive to his wife about his children by a former marriage, and distracted by outside events? Isn't Noor wearing an awfully shiny marital halo?

I mean, she obviously loved Hussein and I think the spin is ON to make him look as good as possible while Noor writes about her own life. I feel the same spin happens in some political events too and I feel I sometimes have to read with caution.

Truly, I'm sympathetic to Noor for her loyalty to King Hussein, but I wouldn't dream of believing her written interpretation of all events about herself or her husband uncritically. That little passage about "greater good" was written with history in mind, but it doesn't have much reality in it, don't you think?

How can we understand the REAL Noor without reading behind the lines? She has a perfect right to tell us only as much as she wants to about her real life, but WE have a right to take it all with a grain of salt.

Harriet

I look at the origins of Jordan, a new nation created by the British, supposedly to be a home for the Palestinians. However, except for large numbers of refugees, it is not. I look at Hussein, a compassionate man who worked all his life for peace, but whose agreements with his Arab counterparts seem almost invariably not to have been honored. Could that be why Western and European governments consistently left him out of negotiations and 'peace initiatives'? Was he seen as ineffective? He was a good man, but perhaps for the purpose of international politics, he was too good, and too forgiving. ...Babi

Harriet, I think you point about the Big Three (women in power) is well-taken,and for the most part I agree with it, but may I play Devil's Advocate a bit. Perhaps little was said of Muna in the book because Noor may not have known her well. And just how much would Muna want to extend social overtures to Noor?

As for Noor's relationship with her mother, the name incidents do not necessarily indicate a breech. Also,I doubt Noor would write of each and every time her mother visited in Jordan, but I would guess she visited often. It's a lot easier to pack up one, than a household of large proportions. When we lived out of the country we made it home about every 3 or 4 years, but my mother and aunt visited us all the other years -- and stayed for six weeks. I think all the speculations are interesting, but I wonder if sometimes we read too much into a few statements.

PEDLN, you may well be right because there IS a lot of speculation in my last post...BUT...at the height of Noor's difficulties with her adolescent stepchildren, Princess Muna was the mother of FOUR of them.

I'm not saying that Muna provoked her children because I don't know, but if she had tried to help maybe things might have been easier for Noor? Noor never mentions that she was able to talk with Muna for help in understanding her stepchildren better either. Silence can speak volumes?

I believe things did improve between Noor and her family after her personal visit to the United States BUT she continued to maintain she had no time for any prolonged absences from Jordan. Her beloved grandmother died ten years after Noor became Queen and Noor's first personal visit to the USA was for that funeral. Did she see much of that old lady before her death?

However you make an excellent point about the difficulties of the Queen going to the US as opposed to her family visiting her. I hope you're right. THANK YOU for considering my comments enough to play devil's advocate. You made some terrific points. I loved your question about Arafat and Hussein from a prior post. You asked, "Did Arafat ever forgive King Hussein?" when the PLO retreated from Jordan. Hahaha.

Noor did seem to have the time to spend several weeks in New York, away from Jordan and her children and Hussein when Hussein's young relative, Prince Talal was seriously ill. She provided emotional comfort for Talal's wife and went to the gym and hospital with her supportively each day during her husband's illness.

I think Noor may have preferred to make her own choices about when and with whom she chose to spend her time.

Harriet

WHAT A TREAT TO COME TO OUR DISCUSSION TONIGHT AND READ 12 NEW POSTS! IT’S WONDERFUL, MARVELOUS AND I REVEL IN OUR GOOD CONVERSATION! I HOPE EVERYONE IS ENJOYING IT ALSO! THANK YOU ALL!

MAHLIA, the book you mentioned - THE ARABISTS: The Romance of an American Elite by R. Kaplan – sounds like one we should discuss sometime. Thanks for bringing it to our attention. It is true that Americans cannot, at times, understand the Arab mind, but wouldn’t it be helpful if the Arab attempted to understand our viewpoint occasionally? Americans are generous people as witnessed by all the aid we give to undeveloped countries, but I wonder if any of it is ever accounted for – where does it go? Would it be too much to ask how the governments (for the most part dictators) spent the money?

THANKS, BABI, for those excellent points you drew to our attention from the book. As I was reading your comments, the news in the background was focused on the governor of Alabama (I think?) refusing to obey an order to take the Ten Commandments off the wall of the State House and thereby inflicting a penalty of $5000 a day! What are Arabs to think of this? Can they understand our separation of church and state at all?

MAHLIA,did any of the those young people who were at your seminar (and who are badly needed in the world of today) believe that the Arab countries could possibly separate government from religion? Did they talk of this at all?

CAROLYN, indeed there are many questions in the current situation in Iraq. Perhaps one of them is our misunderstanding of the culture and wouldn’t you have thought, that with all the experts that Bush could have called on (actually anyone in the world, including Arab leaders and our own population of Muslims) we would have been better prepared?

Thank you, TRAUDE, for your astute observations about the book and the European “remaining royals, who are no longer "governing" as in times past, but rather traditional, glittering, bejeweled "decorations.” Is this true in the Middle East do you believe? And I agree that the “tone” of the book changes drastically at times. Who do you think she is aiming to instruct with the writing of this book?

HI FIFI!! I do like “lively” discussions and I often play the “devil’s advocate” to keep it such and, also, to keep a balanced view when necessary and to give everyone a chance to voice an opinion! I will take that as a compliment and hope you will come along in our discussions that are scheduled for the rest of the year!. And when you write your Congressman/woman (Congressperson?) do ask if America, when giving monies to other countries, ever request an accounting.

HI HARRIET! Yes, a sad joke – and a sad situation we have now with the Palestinians and Israel. Violence again and terrible stories and quite possibly the end of the Road to Peace in 2005.

WHY? WHY? They all suffer so much, it could be anyone’s mother, child, father, relative who is getting killed. Why do they persist in the killing and the hatred – where does it lead?

Good point, PEDLIN! I don’t recall Queen Noor mentioning her mother, father and sister coming to Jordon to visit, but it is certainly possible they did

On page 308 Queen Noor states that King Hussein, who had opposed the Iraqi occupation of Kuwait and called for the withdrawal of Iraqi troops, was stunned when the USA and Britain misunderstood his motives (his meetings with Saddam Hussein?) and cut off aid to Jordan.

Is this another case of America misunderstanding the Arab mind? Or did we have good cause for suspicion?

Sorry for the length of the post. Am closing down, truly........

Hello everyone. Thank you, Ella.

HARRIET, it has never occurred to me while reading the book that the teenagers to whom Noor referred were Princess Muna's four- simply because they did not LIVE with King Hussein and Queen Noor. At least that is my impression.

Noor had her hands full with the three motherless children of King Hussein's previous wife who died in a helicopter accident. Noor was married in 1978; King Abdullah, born in 1962, was 16 at that time. He has, we know, an older stepsister from King Hussein's first marriage.

I simply cannot believe that ALL of the children lived with Hussein and Noor, nor do I recall any specific reference that would confirm it. Those of you who still have the book, please check and correct me if I am wrong. Lord knows, it would be difficult on anyone's marriage to become an instant parent to three young children !

It would have been extremely tactless IMHO if Noor had commented/remarked in any way about her husband's former wives, living or dead; I give her high marks for not doing so.

Moreover, I give Noor immense credit for immersing herself so readily and fully in the culture of her adopted country and especially for learning Arabic, an excruciatingly difficult language.

In parentheses : Masses of documents were recovered after the first attack on the World Trade Center and then stored, unread for years (!). Even if it HAD occurred to those in authority that those documents might well contain valuable information, a search for translators fluent in both English and Arabic would, lamentably, not have produced many qualified people. The same goes for interpreters whose role is even more crucial, as I've said before : e.g. urgently, right now, in Iraq.

Noor's book is meant to be, I believe, a testament of and tribute to the work of her late husband. The book ends with his death. She tells us that she is faithfully continuing his work.

Why then would she have been expected to reveal where her grown children live, what they do, whether and how often they visit her ? Can't we give her the right to the privacy she seeks ?

ELLA - As I read through your very sage comments (including the sad ones),I was reminded that it really made no difference whether Arafat ever forgave King Hussein (especially publicly), since Hussein was doing what he believed in his heart was the right thing to do. And he has approached Arafat from that standpoint repeatedly. But even Arab-to-Arab, there comes a point when you "fold."

From King Hussein's standpoint, it not only was a "slighting" of him as the head of an Arab country, but I'm sure it broke his heart, when he was NOT included in the negotiations (i.e. with Sadat and the Israelis)and invited to talk with the Americans.

From the American standpoint, there is the cultural equivalent of "you've got one more chance, Buddy" in an argument or disagreement and then "the cold shoulder" (i.e., Bush's refusal to deal with Arafat at any level). That is NOT the custom in the Middle East.

"Memories are long and daggers are sharp," (and old proverb), but "forgiveness" is part and parcel of the culture. You don't have to love someone to forgive them; you don't even have to like them (although it helps!) to make the forgiveness sincere. But forgetting is altogether a different aspect. Islam teaches forgiveness, so does Christianity; but humanity being what it is, we are often mighty deficient in the forgetting aspect.

RE the young people in my seminar. They were convinced (as Youth usually is) that THEY could make a difference, whereas their parents and grandparents could not. And they were specific about HOW they would go about it. One fellow suggested that all weapons should be "tuned in." Not confiscated, but willingly turned in. Others laughed at him, but when he said that each weapon turned in could bring the owner some $$$, the laughter stopped. There is such desperation among the Palestinians, that it just might work.

Another student said that if he "were in charge" he would make sure that men had jobs - even minimal wage - so that they could recharge their dignity, take care of their families, provide for their parents and grandparents and relieve some of the horendous financial burden.

One of the female students said she would "get the women togther; start crafts programs, establish a micro-loan program, teach women who were unskilled how to work at something to earn a bit of income. But she also noted that she would first make sure that the men of their families had employment, so they would not be ahsamed if their women worked and earned $$$, but they did not. Pride and dignity are enormously important in the Middle East, even for those who have absolutely nothing! For example, there are beggars on the streets, but when one makes a contribution, there is also an accompanying word "not from me, my Brother (or Sister) but truly from God for your well being" or "I am only the messenger, the gift is from God."

Yes, the Middle East is aware of the money that comes to the various countries from the USA. But they are also awre that at the same time that the USG sends monies abroad, they also support an American culture where women and children are abused; alcohol and drugs are consumed in vast quantities, leading to more abuse; slavery is rampant in some of the Southwestern and Eastern American cities, where Asian women and children are "sold" into prostitution and slavery as those they were non-human; and the sexual exploitation is highlighted in films, TV, and electronic games. So the thought process is "yes, we need your financial support, but we certainly don't want your cultural habits."

Certainly there is an accounting mechanism for the billions of dollars in aid sent to the Middle East. There are units within the World Bank, USAID and IMF who monitor the funds and their use, but little of that information (except for weapons and military purposes) ever reaches the media. Americans have a very short attention span when it comes to "foreign policy," unless one happens to be a govt. employee, and even then, area specialists are NOT interested in other regions. So most of the information about allocating and purchases remains within the community of Middle East area specialists.

Yes, Middle Easterners do try and understand Americans, but the hypocrisy of what our govt. does vs the goodness and openness of the American people usually gets in the way. Individuals who have worked with Americans on a personal basis understand much more, but then their comments to the community at large are often not believed. Or the actions are viewed suspiciously by individuals who may not ever have known Americans personally.

It takes time and a commitment to education, reading, learning and talking about differences to REALLY understand a different culture. Americans are NOT patient; they want instant gratification is most things. And this is NOT going to happen in terms of understandint the Middle East. Syrians are not Iraqis; Jordanian Palestinians are not like those in Gaza; Lebanese (Muslims, Christians or Jews) are not like those from communities elsewhere in the Middle East. And the Egyptians are a culture unto themselves! (Trust me on this one.) And the Arabs of North Africa are unlike any of the other Middle Eastern communities, just like the Black African Muslims are not like the Arabs.

Now we're going to have a quiz on Monday!

TRAUDE, I went back and reread the book in the chapter on Parenthood to see if it would clarify some of your questions in your post # 252. On P. 272 Noor writes:

"The hostility in the house was becoming palpable. I could not come home after a hard day's work and find any peace. The family dynamic was further complicated by the fact that as the younger stepchildren in our household grew up, they were being infected by the adolescent restiveness of their older half-brothers and half-sisters...The large group of children traded grievances until their collective reaction blew out of proportion.

Extended family members often became involved with varying intentions, which only complicated our quandary. I suggested that we try to talk it all out together...but that required trust, which, sadly, was in short supply."

I don't know in what household the older step-children lived, but the above passages would seem to indicate communication between all of Hussein's children during this time?

TRAUDE, thanks for your comments. You are just remarkable in the way you contribute to the discussion. I know how hard it is to cover a book from memory and every comment that you make is appreciated and valued. You must be SOME note-taker! I respect your point of view and always enjoy reading your literate observations.

Harriet

MAHLIA, THANKS for that eloquent post. Yes, I agree that pride and dignity and jobs are vitally important. Fascinating comments about America and Americans in the eyes of the world. When, oh when will we finally succeed in bringing this difficult, multicultural world together?!!

ELLA wrote:

On page 308 Queen Noor states that King Hussein, who had opposed the Iraqi occupation of Kuwait and called for the withdrawal of Iraqi troops, was stunned when the USA and Britain misunderstood his motives (his meetings with Saddam Hussein?) and cut off aid to Jordan.

Last night I did a lot of reading on my computer about the 1991 Gulf War. I looked for any articles I could find about Jordan's role and I tried very hard to find articles that were representative of more than one country's point of view. It's turning out to be a complex history.

I have to admit that I felt cynical when I began. I believed that surely there had to be good reasons for all of the censure that King Hussein endured during this period. To my amazement, the longer I researched, the better King Hussein seemed to look. He apparently tried to balance himself in a slippery crevasse between ALL of the parties involved in a sincere search for peace. I don't say he never made a mistake, but he certainly seemed to have a heavy amount of integrity on his side.

Some articles seemed to feel that Hussein had sided with Iraq, but more of them felt that Jordan had tried to remain neutral. By straddling the fence of war, King Hussein made many enemies and few friends.

I also learned that Jordan and Iraq had a common bond dating back to the modern origin of both countries. I didn't know that the British not only supported King Abdullah, Hussein's grandfather, as the original King of Jordan...but they also supported Abdullah's brother, Feisal, as the King of modern Iraq. I was surprised to learn that, and it explained some of the predisposition of the Jordanian people toward Iraq and the economic ties that evolved between the two countries over the years. Originally those two bordering states of Jordan and Iraq were kind of a "family" corporation?

To this day, no passport is needed to travel to Jordan from Iraq?

later...

Harriet

Thank you, HARRIET, your quoting the pertinent passage in Noor's book; it is much appreciated. The paperback is due to be published in October, says BN, and and I am in line!

The Map of the Middle East in the header is a great convenience and very helpful.

In haste.

HARRIET, that's fascinating material that you posted for us - no passport from Iraq into Jordan! Hmmmm Makes me wonder if there is any other countries anywhere that do not require a passport - Oh, well, I just answered my question. You do not need a passport to go to Canada - or at least, you didn't need one some years ago. Don't know now - anyone? And how about Mexico?

We'll be putting new questions in the heading tomorrow as we wend our way to the end of the book. It's been an eye-opener and a very good discussion! Have enjoyed it immensely.

MAHLIA! I lay in bed last night thinking over our discussion and I said to myself - YOU DID IT AGAIN, ELLA! You lumped all Arabs together and you should know better! So I apologize for that, but then I thought to myself - EVERYONE IN THE WORLD SPEAKS OF "AMERICANS" as if we were all alike.

We are more multi-cultured, probably, than any other nation in this world, wouldn't you say? One reason being that we are such a large country, but endless religions and races abide all together here and we seldom have a conflict over it!

So why is that? Couldn't it be our Constitution that separates religion from government and ENFORCES IT!!!

Benjamin Franklin once pronounced that America's cause is esteemed the cause of all mankind. I wouldn't go that far, but religious freedom for all is worth achieving and you can only do that if it is separated from government. Instead of identifying a country as Muslim, or even as Arab, we should do away entirely with those words and call citizens of Jordan, Jordanians, citizens of Syria - Syrians, etc. and the media should do the same.

An article in today's paper quotes "THE ECONOMIST" of London: (note that this paper used the words "Muslim countries")

"In less than two years, the United States has occupied two Muslim countries with a combined population of more than 50 million. Afghanistan remains a failed or nonexistent state where the government's writ does not extend much beyond Kabul.........In Iraq, where a U.S. general says the current condition is 'war, however you describe it,' there are 161,000 occupying troops of which 148,000 are American........It might be time to pause in pushing the American project....."

I would second that motion, let's get out of all the countries we are now in as peacekeepers or whatever!! And refuse aid, refuse to sign treaties, refuse to help in world organizations; and thereby we might be able to make a few friendships all around the world!

The organization that provides the Mid-East map (in the heading) also has a forum -- shown below, for those interested. Their guidelines appear to be fairly strict, but one appropiate topic is books you have read pertaining to the Middle East.

http://www.mideastweb.org/mewdialoglist.htm

"The MidEast Web dialog list is an e-mail discussion list run from an automatic listserver. You can join it for dialog, and comments about Middle East-related subjects. Your posts are moderated initially. If you follow list guidelines, moderation is removed after a brief time. Please read the guidelines below and make sure you agree to all of them. This is a private list, and members must obey privacy rules to protect other members and follow the guidelines. This list is not for anonymous "lurkers." You cannot join unless you send us a brief letter, telling us your name, where you live and your interest in Middle East peace. That protects you and other group members, and it also helps us to know each other. We hope you will also contribute to the list from time to time."

This web site appears to be an offshoot from MidEast Magazine, of which I am not familiar. Its sponsors appear to be German.

Actually, ELLA, the Constitution states that Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, ie., Congress shall not establish any one religion as the State religion. It has never done that. On the other hand, every time Congress passes a law affecting any religion (except where in violation civil or criminal laws), they have, IMO, violated the Constitution. However, this digresses from our subject.

I was moved by the account of King Hussein's welcome back to Jordan after five weeks in America, an unwelcome diagnosis and surgery. I wonder how many leaders in the world today would receive that spontaneous outpouring of love from their people in similar circumstances?

I also found significant Noor's story of how she handles crisis..by going through her possessions and culling out everything she felt wasn't needed. This is a woman who does not at all treasure possessions for their own sake, and refuses to be bound by them. She finds it liberating to get rid of them. Think of those you know whose lives are chained to supporting and maintaining a raft of possessions, and Noor's approach appears immensely wise and freeing.

...Babi

BABI - I can relate to Noor in several ways, but definitely "cleaning out the closets" when I'm thinking or distressed about something. It's liberating for me and helpful to the recipients of my donations. She's a smart lady!

So...what do you think?

WAS IT WORTH IT FOR KING HUSSEIN TO HAVE TRIED TO ACT AS A PEACEMAKER BEFORE THE 1991 GULF WAR? WERE HIS GOOD INTENTIONS MATCHED WITH GOOD JUDGEMENT?

In trying to make peace, the king was dealing with Saddam Hussein.

Gorbachev, President of Russia at that time, was interviewed about the 1991 situation. Gorbachev felt that Saddam was NOT insane, but that he lacked judgement and an adequate capability to handle himself.

Q: What was your initial reaction on hearing Kuwait had been invaded by Iraq?

Gorbachev: A surprise. An absurd decision. That action could have been done only by an adventurer or a person who did not have a sense of reality.

Saddam was the man that King Hussein set himself the task of influencing. He's the same Saddam who, currently, within the past twelve months, had his Minister of Information issuing reports of Iraqi victory AT THE SAME TIME THAT U.S. TROOPS ENTERED BAGHDAD. If his personality remains consistent, he probably is sure...RIGHT NOW...that he will be restored to power soon. A flawed sense of reality, indeed! Should King Hussein have kept trying?

There is hardly a line to be found in print about Jordan's attempts to hold off disaster with America and Britain.

Once the other Arabs joined hands with America and Britain, President Mubarek of Egypt leaked malicious, untrue rumors to discredit King Hussein.

The King paid a terrible price internationally and economically.

IN THIS WORLD, CAN A MAN TRY TO STICK HIS HEAD OUT FOR PEACE WITHOUT HAVING IT CHOPPED OFF?

Harriet

IMO, King Hussein was certainly true to his search for peace by continuing to try and work with ALL the participants. Mubarak is no certainly no Sadat, nor does he have the BIG HEART which sustained King Hussein throughout his own efforts. He was sophisticated in his role; he knew the players well (especially the Arabs leaders) and all their manuevering and back channel corruption; he was by no means naieve about how things would play out in the Arab countries; nor did he think that Sadam Hussein was insane. Wiley, sneaky, a pathological liar, sociopath, yes, but none of these character traits of Sadam's kept King Hussein from continuing to try and influence him (positively) to seek peace. Afterall, remember how long King Hussein had known Sadam - all of Sadam's adult professional life. The same with Nasser and Sadat, as well as Pres. Asad of Syria, the Saudi Royal Family and the 16 or so leaders of the other Arab countries.

King Hussein was a visionary, who never gave up, even in the last weeks of his life. He just simply believed so deeply in peace that he NEVER GAVE UP!

HARRIET,

King Hussein acted as peacemaker long before the 1991 Gulf War; he was sincere in his passionate belief that peace was possible (I'm using the past tense deliberately here). He displayed enormous courage in the face of adversity, slights, treachery and repeated attempts at his life and I admire him for that. Was it worth it for him ? Only he could answer the question.

I don't know enough to evalute the King's judgments in either political, domestic or personal matters. As the effective leader of his impoverished country he certainly must have had his hands full.

Yesterday I came upon the National Geographic issue of October 2002 which carries an article by Andrew Cockburn titled Lines in the Sand : Deadly Times in the West Bank and Gaza , beginning at pg. 102. The article has pictures, photos, statistics and small maps of each country in the Middle East; it is certainly pertinent to our discussion. The bonus is the supplement : large maps and information on Population, Settlers, Roads, Aquifers, Archeological Sites.

The history, the timeline if you will, of the Biblical Land, is shown in the article (pg. 106-107) in concise columns with small maps showing how the land looked during the respective period.

to be continued

Not in the Middle East, Harriet, in my opinion. Am rather tired tonight having been out all evening, so shall not go to the book to see how many times King Hussein met with Saddam of Iraq, but it was numerous times and it's hard to believe that he was not able to discern in Saddam's behavior traits that bordered on insanity. Or possibly did he think the man was joking? All dictators have delusions of grandeur - remember Kruschev (sp?) telling us that he (Russia) will bury us? And then there was Hitler? Shall we go on - I think not!

And all these braggadocios just in our lifetime!

Yes, I can believe Saddam thinks he may rule again in Iraq! He is, no doubt, gloating over our unsuccessful attempts to get the country up and running smoothly, get the infrastructure guarded against terrorism, and get a council of Iraqis working on a new government which might please all the various factions.

For many years King Hussein was a friend to America, a friend to many countries - perhaps, he tried to be friends with too many? Do you have to choose sometimes in life?

Here again, I must go to the book but I don't remember Q.Noor quoting the King as rebuking America as she has done numerous times and I must say I do resent her inferences. Perhaps someone can find a statement made by King Hussein (not by Noor) critizing policies of our government.

See you all tomorrow!

The article Lines in The Sand in the October 2002 issue of National Geographic begins on tripartite page 102. On the overleaf is a black and white photo with the following caption

To shelter Palestinian refugees after Israel's 1948 War of Independence, the UN and volunteer agencies raised a tent city near Nablus. Six decades later the refugees remain.

The following are statistics, not direct quotes.

Population

2.2 million Palestinians in the West Bank and East Jerusalem;

1.1 million in the Gaza Strip . More than half under age 20, living their entire lives under Israeli occupation.

Living among them : 383,000 Jewish settlers.

Nearly half the Palestinians in the territories in refugee camps. 2.5 additional million Palestinian refugees sheltered in neighboring Arab countries.

Settlers

Systematic population by Israel of Arab land occupied in 1967. 150 Israeli settlements in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, about a dozen in annexed East Jerusalem. Since signing of the Oslo Accords in 1993, increase in the number of settlers just over 50 percent.

Aquifers

A third of Israel's water supply from aquifers underlying the West Bank, aquifers strictly controlled by Israel since 1967. Permits for wells hard to obtain; Palestinian per capita water consumption : one fifth of that of Israelis.

Peace efforts:

1978 Camp David I

1993 Oslo I

1995 Oslo II

2000 Camp David II

2001 Taba

The future ? Peace seems more elusive than ever.

The map supplement shows each country in the Middle East in enormous detail, which is very interesting. Kuait and Qatar are on the small side.

Here is part of the data on Jordan :

Population 5.3 million; Crude Oil Reserves : none or negligible.

Created as a buffer state by Britain and wedged in among Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Syria, and Israel, Jordan is caught in the crosshairs. More than half its people are Palestinians, many of them refugees from wars with Israel, yet Jordan made peace with Israel in 1994. Only skilled statecraft by the late King Hussein and his son King Abdullah II has kept this constitutional monarchy on course. Meager resources and reliance on regional trade and international aid make Jordan's balancing act difficult to maintain. (emphasis mine)

Among areas of conflict are Oil and Water. 65 percent of the known petroleum reserves are in the Middle East. Iraq had (in October of 2002, when the afore-mentioned article was published) the second largest oil reserves in the world (!!) Supplies could be exhausted in about 85 years.

But water is possibly the most critical resource, a source of past (and possibly future) conflicts. A key issue dividing Israel and its Arab neighbors is control of the tributaries of the Jordan River and West Bank aquifers. Rainfall is scant and undependable. In sum, without oil, the Middle East cannot live well; without water it cannot live.

Thanks, Traude, for those interesting statistics. Certainly there is more trouble ahead for that region of the world, as oil and water diminish. And it occurs to me, and you also I'm sure, that it might be difficult for Jordan to hold onto the monarchy and the rule of Jordan as the Palestinians are increasing in numbers in that country. Will it eventually overpower the rulers that be and control the country?

We have new questions in the heading and the first one may pertain to the future of Jordan:

"22. If King Hussein thought a “monarchial democracy” and political parties would be good for Jordan why did he wait until a threat of his own mortality materialized to put those policies into effect?

Who knows why King Hussein became more liberal as he realized his life was ebbing? Can anyone tell us if the Palestinians have any political power in Jordan? Do they have an interest in political power?

Actually, I was purely speculating in the above post, but out of curiosity I searched Google for "Jordan and Palestinian" - you should do the same, there are some fascinating articles.

One of many is this: Jordan and Palestine

This is particularly interesting:

"Although there's huge poverty amongst the refugees, many Jordanians regard them as a threat. After all, at least 35% of the population are of Palestinian origin. Some estimates even put the figure at 50%. And while the native population growth has declined gradually in recent years due to emigration, the Palestinian population is increasing at a rate of around 4% per year. The Palestinians also control business. Even in the financial sector they are over-represented. Jordanians, who are employed especially in the army and by the government, are afraid the Palestinians will dominate the economy. A growing Palestinian population that controls business could be the first step towards a Palestinian takeover of Jordan.

Take a peep in the streets of the Palestinian refugee camp Ba'kaa in Jordan, and in the crowded waiting room of a health centre in the camp. The centre is run by the UN refugee organisation UNRWA. Duration 23".

Because of the huge financial burden of the refugees, Jordan regularly calls for Israel and the international community to let them return to the Palestinian lands. One year ago, an agreement was close. The then Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak wanted to give a larger part of the West Bank to the Palestinians, so that there would be room there for refugees from Jordan. But before the agreement could be signed, Barak had lost the general election. Ariël Sharon is much less easy to negotiate with.

Jordan Needs the Palestinians Many Palestinians see a clear signal in Jordan's efforts to get the refugees to go home: they want to get rid of us. UNRWA Director William Lee doesn't believe that. "Jordan simply wants a solution to the Palestinian question. The Palestinians have made an important contribution to the country's economy. They want to work, despite the high unemployment rate amongst them. Above all, with their relatively high level of education, they have a lot to offer this country in the future. Jordan couldn't manage without them".

This statement is rather alarming don't you think? "The Palestinians also control business. Even in the financial sector they are over-represented. Jordanians, who are employed especially in the army and by the government, are afraid the Palestinians will dominate the economy. A growing Palestinian population that controls business could be the first step towards a Palestinian takeover of Jordan.

PEDLN, what an interesting site you provided for Mideast dialogues in your post #258. Thank you for bringing it to all of our attention! Particularly fascinating was the clickable indicating the importance of seeing the whole picture on pertinent issues.

Do you subscribe? If you've been participating in the dialogues, what issue is currently being discussed?

BABI, please help me out. This is not a challenge, but a request for information. Do you consider the current legal brouhaha over the Ten Commandments sculpture to be an example of law-making enactments concerning religion?

MAHLIA, I just finished rereading our chapter A DAY LIKE NO OTHER. What a wonderful emotional experience!

I can't help noticing that when the King made his peace with Israel, Yasser Arafat was annoyed at the implied acceptance of Jerusalem as an open city. He STILL saw it only as a Palestinian capital of a Palestinian State.

I heard a news columnist opining on TV recently. He was discussing the recent Hamas homicide bombing in Israel which intruded on the Road Map to Peace initiatives. That sad bombing resulted in another escalation of Arab/Israeli "revenges."

This journalist felt that the radical Palestinian groups didn't want peace. He said they didn't even want a Palestinian State. They wanted, he believed, to "push Israel into the sea," and this was why peace negotiations were so often interrupted by homicide bombers. If he's right, is this desire to destroy Israel shared by the average Palestinian?

Does anyone have any opinions on this theory?

Now Hussein plainly WANTED peace and I admire him for it.

---

more...

ELLA, if the King made any anti-American remarks in private, Noor certainly doesn't talk about it. She uses a device of attributing frustrated statements about America to more minor family members. For instance, Prince Talal said he found the reception of the senior President Bush a "raw experience" for Jordanians during the time America was cool to Jordan.

Queen Noor tells us in her book that King Hussein made a controversial speech that Noor claimed was "written for him like one of Queen Elizabeth's Speech From the Throne efforts" in the period before or during the first Gulf War. Noor never clarifies what sentiments that speech contained. However she says clearly that Hussein's instincts went strongly against delivering it. In the end, caught by the pro-Iraq sentiments of the Jordanian population, he delivered the speech...pro-Iraq, and anti-coalition, Noor implies...and harvested a storm of American/British criticism.

I WISH I knew what was said in that speech.

TRAUDE, I'm delighted that you are expressing your feelings about the Palestinian/Israel situation. I wish that article was on the web and I'll try to find it. I know we both want peace with equal passion. I heartily agree with your statement below. (I probably would NOT have agreed before we began our discussion.)

Only skilled statecraft by the late King Hussein and his son King Abdullah II has kept this constitutional monarchy on course. Meager resources and reliance on regional trade and international aid make Jordan's balancing act difficult to maintain. (emphasis mine)

Here are some more difficult areas.

Israeli/Arab relations have been confused for a long time by the definitions of what some call "occupied territories" and what others consider to be land legitimately won by Israel in the 1967 war provoked by the Arabs, even though it was not technically started by them.

Great Britain may have declared Jordan a buffer state in the 1940's, but in 1923 Great Britain claimed it was the Palestinian homeland.

Israel is also on the very small side geographically. Her reputation as a power house was built through the cooperation, determination, and the patriotism of her citizens.

The Palestinian refugee camps are indeed tragic, but what are fellow Arabs doing to help out? Only King Hussein seems to have, as MAHLIA pointed out, "walked the walk" in reference to them rather than just "talking the talk." I now understand that the bulk of these people need very special help educationally and socially and their problems may NOT be solved instantly even when they finally have a homeland.

Isn't this a problem that deserves world-wide concern? And lots of financial help from the wealthier Arab states as well? Saudi Arabia has taken up extensive money collections for the benefit of the families of deceased homicide bombers. I sure wish they would have a few collections for the benefit of the fellow Arabs in refugee camps as well?

Oh well, the Israel/Arab sources of disagreement are still, sadly, alive and well, but, thankfully, our feelings toward each other as we air these views are far more friendly.

New questions in the heading today, folks! Please have a look.

Harriet

ELLA, I'm just surfacing from this very, very long post of mine which I composed off the SN site. I just saw your comments. Will read and catch you all later.

Harriet

Harriet, I have not yet subscribed to the MidEastWeb forum They do not want lurkers and I did not feel that I had the time right now to post there, much as I would like to read others' comments.

I find myself going off in many different directions trying to better understand the Palestinian question and Jordan itself. Why was the current Jordan not considered for Palestinian settlement, before it became Jordan?

Friday's St. Louis Post-Dispatch had an article about ARthur Helton. I had never heard of him, had you? He is in his 50's and has devoted his life to refugee and humanitarian causes. Last week he was to meet with Sergio de Mello, the UN rep. to Iraq. I thought, "he could have told us much about the refugee situation in Jordan." An interview that will never happen. Arthur Helton was also killed in the UN bombing.

While doing a little reserach on Helton, I came across this article from the International Inst. for Strategic Studies.

Jordan: Coping with a War Next Door

"Jordan, already deeply preoccupied by the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, is acutely affected by the impact of war on its Iraqi neighbour. With a common border and some 380,000 Iraqis living there, the country has made humanitarian preparations with virtually no consultation from the US. Jordan’s UN ambassador, Prince Zeid Ra’ad Zeid Al-Hussein, talks about the challenges that will follow war in the most recent Iraq Monitor in Open Democracy by Gil Loescher (IISS) and Arthur Helton (Council on Foreign Relations)."

http://www.iiss.org/iraqCrisis-more.php?itemID=103

ELLA, your question is not a simple one. Since the Alabama Supreme Court Bldg. is a State building, rather than a Federal (or am I mistaken about that?), I am not sure a constitutional restriction against the U.S. Congress would apply. I believe community rights of choice have been upheld in court. Would that apply to a State community?

Is this 'sculpture' simply a carving of the Ten Commandments? I haven't seen a picture of it, so I don't know. I would not personally feel that it was the place of a public building, belonging to all the people, to provide a place for Scriptures sacred to two specific religions, while ignoring those of other faiths represented among the citizens of the State.

On the other hand, laws forbidding the teaching of even legitimate aspects of American history in which the issue of religion played a major role are ludicrous. Forbidding a church to display a creche on church grounds, forbidding children to wear even a symbol of their faith in school,...these are not reasonable acts, IMO. These are laws "affecting an establishment of religion", which the Supreme Court has upheld in the name of separation of Church and State. It looks to me more like the interference in the Church by the State. ..Babi

Back to the book.. I was appalled to learn that the AIPAC could promise Talal that Congress would pass the bill giving Jordan what Clinton had promised, regardless of what the unidentified power in Congress had said. Not just promise, but deliver! A rider forgiving a $70 million debt and delivering a long-denied squadron of fighter planes is attached to an agricultural bill, of all things, delivered to Congress at 1 a.m. and sneaked through passage. What else have they done, I wonder?

...Babi

Question 22. Becasue it takes a very looooooooooooong time to change things in the Middle East!

Question 23. "Family and tribal consensus" is the culturally accepted method. That's how the Saudi Royal Family chooses their leaders.

Question 24. Not surprised at all! It was VERY important to have this signing ceremony done in the USA so that the American leadership (including Congress) could take political credit for "convincing" the participants to come to the agreement. And as America has done all over the world with impoverished countries, they held out the "bait" of an enormous loan forgiven and the "reward" of the fighter jets. Ain't the first time!

Question 25. King Hussein was wise enough to know when he could/could not influence the religious representatives in his country. In this case, he knew it was a losing (and dangerous) battle.

The religious influence in the Arab/Muslim countries is VERY STRONG. Religious leaders (especially those who are elected to, appointed to or have influence in their country's governing bodies) don't give a damn about what the US (or other Western countries) think of their cultural traditions. (Think about some of the most recent comments coming from Iraq!) "Honor killing" is imbedded deeply in Arab/Muslim culture because it pertains to the honor and dignity of the entire family - and will not go away anytime soon. I personally know of two cases IN THE USA where Muslim women were killed by the men in their families for "suspicion" of misbehavior. In one case, my mother's home was broken into because she offered sanctuary to the woman.

Question 26. Who knows why the American leadership does what it does?!!! In the same context, why hasn't the USA paid its UN contributions for so many years or agreed to have Americans come before an International Judicial Tribunal if they are found to be responsible for crimes?

Are Americans REALLY that much better than the rest of the world? Someone in Washington surely must think so and that kind of thinking does irreparable damage to the American reputation around the world.

Question 27. Because there are enough Americans who are familiar with what's going on in Washington and especially in the Middle East to be curious to see how Queen Noor depicted King Hussein and the world events that affected Jordan during his reign. And for those less inclined to politics, it's an interesting read to see how an attractive BLOND American young woman from a well-to-do background gave up her country for that of an Arab/Muslim King.

Remember years ago - before Grace Kelly - when an equally attracive woman gave up her American family and citizenship and married one of the (non-Christian) rulers of a small isolated Asian country - I don't remember her name, but do remember reading how about "shocked" America was at her decision. Although I'm sure that Queen Noor is more dignified and has more respect for her husband's memory, their story would certainly be an excellent sequel to THE KING AND I.

PEDLN

Thank you belatedly for that interesting site. It is understandable that the organizers/facilitators needed to set certain rules in the interest of a civilized discourse to the extent possible so as to avoid a cyber brouhaha. At the moment I don't have the time to actively participate in such a discussion because of ongoing home maintenance and renovations, and all they entail. But I have bookmarked the URL and thank you again.

As has been mentioned before, the seeds of the conflict, unrest and turmoil-to-come were sown at the end of WW II with the Treaty of Versailles when the peacemakers carved up existing countries (specificaly those that were part of the former Austrio-Hungarian Empire), arbitrarily created new ones (to wit the ill-fated Czechoslovakia *) and drew new boundaries in Europe and in the Middle East to suit European interests, often disregarding local history and traditions. Nationalist movements began.

Nota bene *) Czechoslovakia was an artificial construct, the people didn't even speak the same language. The country has since split itself into two nations, the Czech Republic and Slovakia.

In the Middle East, new independent Arab states emerged : Iraq, Kuwait, Syria, Lebanon, and Jordan, sometimes battling over resources and territory. But the most intense struggle arose in British-run Palestine where half a million Jews had settled by the end of WW II, many of them determined to create a homeland, a haven from anti-semitism for the world's Jews. Palestinian protests erupted in violence with attacks on settlements and led to full-scale civil war.

On May 14, 1948 Israel declared independence. One day later, on May 15, the armies of Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon and Iraq joined Palestinian and other Arab guerillas thus started the first Arab-Israeli War, called the War of Independence by Israel. It ended in January of 1949 and, acording to the terms of the armistice, the territory under Israel's control was extended beyond the UN-proposed boundaries from about 15,500 to 20,700 sq kilometers (ca. 6,000 to 8,000 sq mi). The Gaza Strip was occupied by Egypt, the West Bank by Jordan. Of the more than 800,000 Arabs who had lived in Israeli-held territory before 1948, only about 170,000 remained. The rest became refugees in the surrounding Arab countries, thus ending the threat of an Arab majority in the Jewish State (Medinat Israel).

It proved impossible to convert the armistice agreements into a peace treaty. The Arabs insisted on conditions before returning to peace talks : that the refugees be permitted to return to their homes, that Jerusalem be internationalized and that Israel make territorial concessions. Israel charged that these conditions would undermine its security and rejected them. Refugee guerilla bands and Arab military units began frequent incursions, and Israel retaliated forcefully.

Next, Egypt refused to permit Israeli ships to use the Suez Canal and blockaded the Strait of Tiran (Israel's access to the Red Sea); border incidents along the borders with Egypt escalated and finally erupted in the second Arab-Israeli War, aka the Suez-Sinai War, in October and November of 1956. Israel scored a quick victory. Britain and France had joined the war because of their dispute with Egyptian presidet Gamal Abdel Nasser who had just nationalized the Suez Canal.

I don't think that war was mentioned before in the discussion. But it was important inasmuch from then on Arab nationalism sored.

MAHLIA -

In 1979 a group of AAUW members and leaders went to New York to attend a UN session. I remember how tight security was even then.

It seems we turn to the UN only when it is convenient for us to do so, as we did before the first Gulf War withholding millions of our dues. Remember the late Senator Jesse Helms ? I am not sure whether we are "paid up" or not.

Some European countries might join the effort in Iraq, but only if there is "power-sharing" by the UN. That idea has alrady been roundly rejected by the administration. (There were some difficulties back in WW II with British General Montgomery, I recall.) Likewise, the US is keeping NATO firmly in check.

TRAUDE - thanks very much for outlining the details of the Arab/Israeli wars, which contributed significantly to the decades old contention. It is indeed important to bring this aspect of the conflict to the table for discussion, because not only were these events a part of actual history, but a better understanding in the West of why these disputes took place means a better grasp of why there has not yet been peace in the region.

I stayed up last night re-reading Jimmy Carter's THE BLOOD OF ABRAHAM to refresh my memory about the American thinking and actions vis-a-vis the Middle East prior to, during and after his Presidency. I especially appreciated Carter's willingness to include the cultural history of the region (as you have done above). For the general reader, it makes it much more easy to understand the events of the period.

It's true that the USA is adament (at least for now) about keeping military control of the conflict in Iraq, at the same time that they expect troops, humanitarian workers and aid money to be committed to the region. At times like these, I think "how would Americans feel if they were TOLD that their troops would be under the command of a foreign power." Can't you just hear Pres. Bush now? "Not on my watch, Buddy!" I joked with my son once about this topic and he replied (also jokingly) "Mom, it's hard enough to understand our Commanding Officer (a Texan!), let alone someone from a foreign country."

Here's a link about the American payment of UN dues - Finally!

http://www.cunr.org/priorities/Arrears.htm

MAHLIA, many thanks for the information on dues for the UN. Incidentally, the US representative to the UN at the time of our group visit in 1979 was Donald McHenry, successor to Andrew Young and, in turn, predecessor of Jeanne Kirkpatrick.

Before I could edit my two earlier posts, AOL disconected me summarily. Sorry. After that I was on the phone with my California daughter.

By the way, I know exactly whom you mean : Hope Cooke, a New York socialite, who in the sixties married Palden Thondup Namgyal, an older man, and became Queen Hopla of Sikkim, a tiny country high up in the Himalayas. Palden was the last king of Sikkim; the monarchy ended with his death in 1975. The country was then annexed by India.

Hope Cooke returned to New York and, in 1981, wrote Time Change : An Autobiography and, some years later, Seeing New York : History Walks for Armchair and Footloose Travelers , paperback published 1995. I read the auobiography a long time ago and believe she had a son. There was also a daughter, I dimly recall, with the given name of Hope. I'll check the library on my next visit.

Regrettably I have no answer to question # 26 and no idea why this country is not a signatory of the Land Mine Treaty.

Thanks, Mahlia. It is comforting to learn that we have paid our debt to the U.N. I'm old-fashioned; hate debt.

The description of the first Jordanian flight over the Dome of the Rock was very moving. I wish she had included that photograph in her book; I would have liked to see it.

..Babi

Re: Question 25 -- Mahlia has given an excellent explanation -- this horrible custom is so entrenched and such a part of the Arab family culture. But it appears that if this practice is ever to be eliminated in the Arab world, it will in part be up to Jordan.

"In Jordan, home to the most candid talk about the issue, the Government under King Abdullah has promised to join in the fight, following the example set by the late King Hussein and Queen Noor, who helped to lift a lid on public discussion of the killings. At a conference in Jordan in early June, delegates from the region were asked to develop ways to respond "sensitively to the situation in countries of concern." But those engaged in the battle say it would be hard to exaggerate the magnitude of the opposition they face." This paragraph is from a 1998 article. http://www.library.cornell.edu/colldev/mideast/chastity.htm

Traude Thanks for your input about Lines of Sand in the Natl. Geog magazine. I checked it out from the library today, and it has been very helpful, in spite of someone previously tearing out half of the content. The step-by-step maps with their brief descriptions have given me a much better overview. I can't vote for either group -- The Israelis are certainly being hard-nosed with their rigid regulations for living in the occupied areas, but then, one can hardly blame them for being paranoid, when they've had to go to war at least twice to defend their homeland.

And, speaking of paranoia, the road to peace is made even more difficult when principals and sub-principals have to be so careful about who they look at, let alone shake hands with. I'm referring to pages 360 - 66. Queen Noor couldn't even look at Mrs. W from Israel, even tho they were standing next to one another in a GROUP PHOTO. Shake hands with an Israeli? -- forget it, unless he doesn't have any.

What an interesting discussion, thanks to all of you and I'm so happy that the U.S. has paid off its UN debt - BABI, I hate it also. Our generation did not go into personal debt as the young people do today with plastic cards; and to think our government is so overblown with debt!!

In reference to Question #22 above, I searched for a definition of "monarchy" and this is the best I found:

"Monarchy: A government that has a single person who is generally considered the ruler by the title and birthright. Titles include: Czar, King, Queen, Emperor, Caesar, etc... Power is absolute and is either taken through conquest or passed down to family members without regard for ability or appropriateness. Society is formed around feudal groups or tribes in which the ruling family delegates power and authority based upon the desires of a single individual. Power struggles are common. A monarchy is based upon a class system where those of a certain birthright are perceived to be of superior intellect and strength to those not of the same family line. The resources and wealth of a country is generally preserved solely for the hedonistic and self-fulfilling desires of the reigning monarch with little regard for the general population or its welfare. The inhabitants of a country under a monarch are alive to serve the monarch. In contrast the inhabitants of a republic are served by the their leaders"

Jordan has a monarcy or I should say "had" under King Hussein; perhaps his son, King Abdullah, has been able to democratize the government to some extent.

Does anyone know?

Perhaps King Hussein meant to slowly prod his country into a monarchy similar to England with a representative type government. Would it succeed in a population that has never known such a government?

So many questions, so few answers; but I do applaud King Hussein for his thoughts whether anything ever was accomplished or not.

At the moment I am reading Gandhi's Autobiography (we will be discussing it in December, join us) and I read this last night -

"Hate the sin and not the sinner is a precept which, though easy enough to understand, is rarely practised, and that is why the poison of hatred spreads in the world........we are all tarred with the same brush and are children of one and the same Creator, and as such the divine powers within us are infinite. To slight a single human being is to slight those divine powers, and thus to harm not only that being but with him the whole world."

Could Gandhi's non-violent passive resistance philosophy work in the Middle East? The impossible dream?

ELLA,

The entire region of the Middle East is in crisis, the situation is incendiary, so much so that IMHO Ghandi's philosophy of passive resistance is not likely to work there.

Jordan's monarchs are from the Hashemite family and trace their origin in an unbroken chain all the way back to the prophet Muhammed (* 570 in Mecca, †632 in Medina) through Muhammed's daughter Fatima.

Jordan is a hereditary monarchy. The royal family is beloved, as we clearly see in Noor's book. The late King Hussein was open to Western thought and more liberal principles. However, Jordan is not a democracy in the sense we understand it. Neither is any other Muslim country in that volatile region. Change will take time. Much time.

TRAUDE makes an excellent point about Ghandi's non-violent philosophy not working in the Middle East. That is absolutely correct. Not only would it not work, but no one would listen to its adherents in the first place. As has been seen in recent weeks (and since the Intifada began - and even before that), the Middle East is a hot bed of political resentment, deeply rooted tribal and religious customs and traditions which simply do NOT take well to change (in any form).

King Abdullah is NOT King Hussein. He is nowhere near as charismatic as his father, nor does he NOT enjoy the wide-spread and deeply felt love and devotion directed to King Hussein. Abdullah was absolutely NOT trained to take over the Monarchy after his Father and the shock of such a huge responsibility is often telling on him. He is "liked" as a Monarch, but not a "loved" one as King Hussein was. Hussein was not just highly respected because he was a Monarch, but because he opened his heart to "the least of Jordan's residents," sitting and talking with the poorest villagers as though he was comfortably settled in his own living room. He was comfortable with the Bedouins, spending time with them in their camps and listening to their problems; seeking their age-old wisdom; and reinforcing his interest in their counsel.

King Hussein's Arabic was eloquent and as classically articulate as that of the ancient prophets. King Abdullah's Arabic is limited and his lack of fluency is a big negative for him among the tribes, although not so much so with the govt. officials who, like himself, speak English and other European languages.

Personally, I do NOT think it is wise to impose the American-style of democracy in the Middle East, especially on the Arab countries. Our type of democracy works for us - most of the time - but would be awkward in the Arab Middle East. Even in Israel, where members of the Knesset are free to speak their mind, Jimmy Carter notes in his BLOOD OF ABRAHAM how "distracting the free-for-all shouting among the officials" were to an American. When Menachem Begin leaned over and told Carter "see, democracy at work," it was not, in Carter's mind, the kind of democracy that would bring solid results - just continued loud arguments.

As we continue to read and discuss Noor's comments about the Middle East, things are changing rapidly in the USA, espcially in terms of our enormous budget shortfalls and economic instability in large sectors of the Nation. The circus that is going on in California politics is witnessed by countries around the world and I wonder how they must feel to see inarticulate actors, TV "has-beens" and strippers join the fray and declare their candidacy for Governor. Sure we're a military super-power and can prove it (Bush, Rumsfeld and Cheney promised!), but can we REALLY bring about stability in regions like Iraq and Afghanistan, let alone Liberia, when we cannot even get Congress on the same page to support the upgrade of our own electric grids throughout North America.

As I've mentioned before, I'm extremely proud to be an American, but I do see the warts.

AS I know that so many of you continue to pray for our military men and women stationed in Iraq, I thought you would be interested in this link about soldiers being baptized in the Tigres River. Although many Christians may be more familiar with the Jordan River from their reading of scriptures and in hymns, the Tigres is also important in the context of ancient biblical history, which is surely depicted on the National Geographic maps of the region.

The link was thoughtfully provided to me by a SN poster who knows first-hand the rigors of military life.

http://www.azstarnet.com/star/Mon/30825iIraq-soldiersbaptiz.html

MAHLIA, thank you for that link. Our brave young men have gone through their real baptism of fire, facing death and injury every single day in a hostile environment among people whose language they don't understand in cities whose street signs they cannot read. If baptism in the river Tigris brings them solace and relief through a return to a faith they may not have practiced for some time, I can only say Amen to that and hold them in my heart. All of them.

My neighbor's son graduated from high school last year and signed up for training in the military police. He was deployed late last year and has been in Iraq for about 2 months. He is not yet 19 years old.

TRAUDE - a small aside here! I've learned from my son that although the soldiers are ALL well trained, the youngest ones have the most difficulty - not with the Army regs., but being away from home and familiar faces and customs. Let your neighbor's son know regularly - everyday emails (whether he answers for a couple of weeks or not) that he and his buddies are ALL in our prayers. Doesn't make any difference whether he and his family know those folks at home who are praying for them and thinking about them. Just tell him! My son has said repeatedly, "Mom, those prayers from home are what we live by; they help us to do our jobs each day; and help the youngsters to wake up NOT shaking with homesickness and fear." They indeed make a LEAP OF FAITH EACH AND EVERY DAY!

Marvelous quote from Gandhi, ELLA.

I'd be fascinated to learn WHY non-violence worked in India with Gandhi. Gandhi had to deal with large segments of uneducated, poverty stricken people who were also divided along religious lines. Was it HIS personality that held the concept together?

Also, Gandhi's main opponent was the British. If he had been up against the Nazi's for instance, would Gandhi's chosen technique of non-violence had any chance at all?

Fascinating how the course of history can be changed by a charismatic leader pitted against an opponent like the British. England had a long history as a colonial power and certainly didn't PRACTICE humanistic ideals consistently, but she also has a historical tradition of desire for human rights ingrained into her past. She has a national self image that includes DECENCY and could be SHAMED into more fair behavior when her self image was being trashed before the rest of the world?

Harriet

Today I saw an article claiming that the military death toll in the after-war phase of the Iraq conflict has now exceeded the active combat death toll.

MAHLIA, TRAUDE, I know we are all united in our good wishes for our soldiers in Iraq, Afghanistan and all foreign posts

Harriet.

My thanks also Traude and Mahlia.

I send my prayers for the soldiers in Iraq also, it is still a war there.

Yes Ella I would agree that the English do have a sense of decency which I think the mostly British settled NZ has inherited. I feel this shows in our foreign policies of today. I think the word honour would be the most suitable to describe Britains policies in the past. I don't know if Tony Blair has been the best proponent of this sense of honour. We and many other British colonies got our Independance without any struggle. Probably if the USA had not been so impatient there would not have been a war of Independance. In fact the American Psyche may have been a lot different if it had been under British rule for a longer period. This is only my opinion of course. To me as a foreigner America still has a strong frontier mentality - a totally different psyche from any other country in the World. Could this have been that America did not attain maturity as a nation before gaining Independance.

Carolyn

STORMS, STORMS!

Have a few minutes peace from them, so …… a few comments tonight!

MAHLIA, you obviously thought well of King Hussein and I wonder why he was so lacking in judgment to appoint his son, Abdullah, as his successor who as you say “is nowhere near as charismatic as his father, nor does he NOT enjoy the wide-spread and deeply felt love and devotion directed to King Hussein. Abdullah was absolutely NOT trained to take over the Monarchy after his Father”

Wouldn’t you have thought Hussein would have made a better decision, and if so, what would that have been?

And weren’t you a bit surprised that Hussein would believe that a “family council” could succeed? We, who are very much outsiders, could have told it would not, don’t you think? What could he have been thinking?

Certainly Abdullah knew of his father’s interest in promoting a more democratic form of monarchy; perhaps in time he may be able to attain a little of his father’s goals.

And, of course, he is still to be tested in ways that his father had experienced. Let us all hope that he does well.

It was interesting to me that, while in London this past July and on a visit to Windsor Castle, I purchased a video which showed Queen Elizabeth with King Abdullah at a State Dinner. I’m not sure if he was the guest of honor but I definitely recognized him.

TRAUDE, no one, least of all me who has read this book twice now, could have failed to note that “Jordan is a hereditary monarchy…….and that Jordan is not a democracy in the sense that we understand it.” But I think, not having the book in front of you, perhaps you needed to refresh your memory of those facts???? Hahahahahaaaaaa

PEDLIN – your remarks are right on target. “I find myself going off in many different directions trying to better understand the Palestinian question and Jordan itself. Why was the current Jordan not considered for Palestinian settlement, before it became Jordan?” It’s a confusing situation isn’t it? Do you think it possible that with a majority of Jordan’s population Palestinian and controlling the business of the country, that perhaps someday Jordan may be overrun with the Palestinians and have to change? All speculation, of course, but thanks for your remarks.

BABI, I, too, was appalled that the Congress could sneak through a bill giving so much to Jordan!!! Why was it done, who put the pressure on? And, of course, what were the reasons why Queen Noor added this to the book??? Think about it!!!! Veeerrrryyy interesting!

Golly, our month will soon be over. Any other comments on the questions in the heading?

Isn’t it an oxymoron to speak of “The religious influence in the Arab/Muslim countries is VERY STRONG, and also to say that “"Honor killing" is imbedded deeply in Arab/Muslim culture.”

Very strange indeed.

I did read (too quickly I’m afraid) that the Iraqi Council, which the USA is hoping will meet with the respect of the Iraqi people and held guide the country toward a peaceful government (not necessarily a democrary) but one that will be suitable for all concerned has not been recognized by the United Nations. I must go back to that article tomorrow and read it again! Perhaps one of you might have read something in regard to that.

CAROLYN, what facinating viewpoints you have, do stick around! WE need opinions from other countries. While on a train going to France this summer I had a long conversation with a Taiwanese student who was hosteling through Europe and he enlightened with his views of America and was very honest, some good, some bad.

Maybe I should clarify my post and say that several of the admins I have lived through have had in my opinion a frontier mentality. Not all of them! I am not talking about the very ordinary American who I have found to be kind and generous to a fault! I do think some of the admins incite certain people of the population into a state of constant fear of the bogey man without! Please do not take my opinions as a personal criticism!

Carolyn

CAROLYN - I'm chuckling at your comment about "the bogey man." I live 9 miles from Washington DC and my experience has been that we have plenty of bogey men in our Nation's Capital to go around! Indeed, some of our elected officials scare the bejesus out of me sometimes, but then there are others who are pretty smart and work very hard to represent the American people.

ELLA - my sense is that King Hussein made the best choice of a successor among his family, knowing what would face that individual after he was gone. Although the former Crown Prince (whom everyone assumed would take over the Monarchy after King Hussein) had plenty of experience, he is not a young man and had some health issues. Although King Abdullah was not trained for the Monarchy, he is extremely well educated, served as a senior Commander in the military and was responsible for a high level of intelligence within the country. Thus, he was aware of issues that were important to the country. As issues change in Jordan and throughout the Middle East, Abdullah is on a fast learning curve. He's smart and understands the complexities. And as he matures in the job, he may very well begin to gain a deeper level of trust and respect from the Jordanian.

No, I was not at all surprised that King Hussein thought of a family counsel as the means to select his successor. As I've mentioned previously, this is the common practice in the Arab world, especially in tribal cultures. However, King Hussein's rapid decline in health did not provide the time necessary to hold such a gathering. He did what HE thought best for the country.

RE honor killings: I don't think there is any way that Americans will understand this very ancient and traditional aspect of Arab culture, especially since there is such wide-spread sexual promiscuity and adultery in our country, highly encouraged by films, TV, magazines, dating practices (among adults AND youth) and commercial advertisements. It is NOT a "religious issue" at all - meaning that Islam does NOT condone (or even suggest)it, but a cultural one.

Think about this topic in terms of the Salem Witch Trials or the demise of Joan of Arc. Christ did NOT condone this type of barbarous behavior towards women, but the civic-minded MEN responsible for "the good of the community" certainly condoned it. Which is worse: burning women at the stake or stoning them to death? Both are horrifying acts!

The UN has NOW recognized the Iraqi Governing Council.

Religion is one thing; man's interpretation is something altogether different.

I have been finding the final chapters of LEAP OF FAITH very emotional. "I am not ready to lose the light of my life," Noor wrote in her journal about her husband's illness. Unless we've been very lucky, time teaches us about loss as we mature. I believe most of us can empathize with that poignant line of Noor's.

I always find myself fascinated by the human factor within the political equation. That human factor intertwines into the final period of King Hussein's life and Noor's marriage.

Once the King indicated that his final choice about the succession was NOT yet final, Hussein's brother, Crown Prince Hassan "meets late at night with officials from the government, the military, and the intelligence services." (P. 425) NOW WHAT WAS THAT ABOUT?

When Abdullah was designated King, His wife, Rania, needed reassurance from Noor "to calm her intense anxiety and fears about Prince Hassan and others who might attempt to interfere with the succession." DID ABDULLAH AND RANIA FEAR A COUP D'ETAT?

There is even a hint of complex Jordanian internal politics in Noor's denial that she had ever encouraged Hussein to name their son Hamzah as king. The Queen's vehement denials are, perhaps TOO strong? Noor had mentioned several times in the book how close to each other Hussein and their eldest son, Hamzah were, and how ALIKE they were. Unlike the new King Abdullah, Noor's sons had been raised to speak Arabic, a kingly attribute. Hamzah was, however, still in his teens when his father became so ill.

My questions are largely rhetorical, because there is no way to answer them in our own generation. All true history is finally made up of the original documents that reveal the factual thinking of major figures on the world stage, sometimes many years after the fact. If we could all only be flies on the wall in the halls of power...how interesting it would be! MAHLIA, your speculations on the rationale of the succession sounds reasonable to me.

One last speculation...as Hussein's illness became more and more serious, his children stayed close and visited him...but Abir was often not present, being "tied up at school?" She was mentioned less and less toward the end of the book. It must be VERY hard to be the only commoner in a family of princes and princesses? Will we ever know Abir's true story?

Is "Sidi" a name or a title? Somewhere at the beginning of the book, was that term mentioned as an affectionate shortening of the Arabic word for "Lord?" Does anyone know?

Noor has presented a story of a king who tried, as much as was possible in the framework of his own time, to help his country, his people and the cause of world peace. He was true to his identity as an Arab and a Jordanian. I do believe that Noor loved her husband.

Harriet

ELLA, I think Noor made it quite clear that the AIPAC (American Israeli Political Action Comm.) were the ones who arranged for that bill to slip through Congress. Clinton wanted it and the Israelis wanted it. Only Congress was opposing the idea, and the AIPAC managed to outflank their opponents in Congress.

As to why, Noor was also quite clear that the debt cancellation and fighter squadron were Clinton's offer to Jordan, to induce Jordan to sign the new peace treaty with Israel in Washington. Clinton wanted it to appear that the U.S.-- spec. his administration--had been responsible for bringing about this breakthrough. Talk about taking the credit for someone else's work! The offer was one Hussein could not reasonably refuse, as it would so greatly benefit his country. ...Babi

Your posts are all so interesting to read!

Harriet, there are so many questions left in our minds, do you suppose we can gather together 5 years from now and maybe a couple of them might be answered? What will Queen Noor be doing, if anything, for Jordan at that time? Where will her children be? Will King Abdullah become as loved by the Jordanians as his father was and will he be able to modernize his country in any way?

Thanks, BABI, yes, you are quite right that President Clinton wanted the media attention and the credit! I must go back to the book and read again about the AIPAC bringing pressure on Congress - how did Queen Noor know that? Does she know any members of the AIPAC? Just offhand I can't think why the Israelis would want the Jordanians to have that fighter squadron, but must do my homework before I speculate further.

MAHLIA - thanks much, as always for your erudite comments!

Back later, ella

Our book club met today to discuss Leap of Faith, and it certainly was a spirited discussion.

Some of the points made were......Queen Noor wrote a book that was very self serving. But we guessed that was to be excepted since one would hardly expect her to write a book that was critical about oneself.

We thought she made herself look very naive when it came to the time the King was courting her.

We thought she was very instrumental in helping the King in his working for peace, and was wonderful in helping the poor Palestine people of Jordan.

Over all we liked the book a lot. We score all our books, and of the five of us 2 voted it 9, 2 voted it 8, and there was one 7. That adds up to 8.2 which in our book is an 8. Very good, and should be recommended.

Speak to you soon....Love, Fran

HARRIET - "Sidi" (or "Ya Sidi) is the Arabic word for Sir, used affectionately by Noor and family members to (and about) Hussein. "Ya Sidi," used by an employee, govt. official or someone outside of the Family, is used in the same way that someone who speaks English would use the word Sir.

"Sitti" (ya Sitti) is the Arabic word for Lady and is used affectionately towards a spouse or family member in the same way. My husband hardly ever uses my name, but instead calls out "Sitti!" when he enters the house or when I am in another room and he wants my attention.

Prince Hassan's meeting with govt., military and intelligence officials sounded like exactly what he should be doing, knowing that King Hussein's illness was non-reversible and that there would soon be a new Monarch. He needed to alert these officials - people whom he'd worked with for many years - that he would NOT be the new Monarch and make sure that there would be no attempts to disrupt the transition. It was vitally important that as the time approached when a much beloved leader would be called to God that no rash attempts to overthrow the govt. or to create dissension in the country was allowed.

And since the choice of Abdullah (rather than Hassan) to take over the Monarchy was made by King Hussein himself - privately - then few people would be inclined to go against his decision. I cannot stress enough how highly respected and beloved King Hussein was to Jordanians and how important he (PERSONALLY, not just as their King)was to the stability of the country. Although both King Hussein (and Abdullah) was rather small in stature, his son, King Abdullah, has enormous shoes to fill!

In Jimmy Carter's book THE BLOOD OF ABRAHAM, the reader will find answers to many of the political questions posed earlier in these posts. RE how did Queen Noor know about the AIPAC manuevering: Washington and Amman stayed in close contact; mesages were sent and received constantly; "political currency" was earned, deposited,used and withdrawn whenever agreements were made/not made. And as a true partner with her husband in many of his efforts to bring about peace in the region, I'm sure Noor was included in conversations with King Hussein about these topics.

N.B. This month's National Geographic Magazine has a wonderful article about the 25th anniversary of the Camp David Accords and the experinces there of Carter, Begin and Sadat. Interesting to note how Carter thought the quiet, forested, remote region of Camp David (off-limites to the media) would be a calming influence on Begin and Sadat, while they responded in a totally different way. As desert dwellers, they felt "gloomy" in the dense forested site and Sadat refers to Camp David as "a prison." So much for the woods!

Ella, re. how Noor knew about it... You will recall Talal went to Washington in advance with a team to make all preparations for the event. It was he who was assured by the State Dept. that the U.S. would keep it's promise re. the debt and the planes, and then was later told by someone in Congress that Congress would not agree to it. Talal went to the AIPAC, and after checking with Rabin in Israel, the head of the AIPAC personally assured Talal that the measure would go thru. Congress. Talal naturally would have kept Hussein informed of all these developments.

I think it's a great idea for a husband to address his wife as "Lady". Keeps the proper tone of respect going. <bg>

Personally, I find it easy to believe that Noor would not have promoted her son as King of Jordan. She and Hussein raised all the children in the principle of contributing their gifts and talents for the betterment of the country. At the same time, the position of King is highly stressful and required many sacrifices, if one was to be the kind of leader the country needed. Despite the privileges that go with the job, it's not one I would be eager to see my own son undertake. ....Babi

BABI - you've made a good point about Prince Hamzah not being encouraged to serve as successor to the Monarchy in Jordan right away. He was still young when God called King Hussein, and although well educated, he was NOT experienced in govt. affairs. Abdullah, who is much older and served most of his adult life (prior to assuming the leadership role in Jordan) in the senior ranks of the Jordanian military. And not withstanding the love and respsect which Hussein and Noor shared during their marriage, Abdullah IS King Hussein's eldest son.

Thank you MAHLIA, for explaining the two words Sidi, and Sitti. Interesting, your personal explanation gave me a real sense of the word "Sitti." I believe I understand the "feel" of the way the word is used.

BABI, I have heard of controversial bills being attached to popularly supported bills in Congress before. It has happened many times. I always fear that some legal "twist" related to Medicare or Social Security will slide through Congress in this manner. Do you believe, as I do, that these are dangerous times for senior benefits?

In the last few years our government budget has gone from a comfortable surplus to a horrific debt. In these stressful financial times, I worry the government will try to economize in domestic areas that affect the very old and the very young. That seems to be where the axe usually falls. I hope I'm wrong.

FRAN, thanks for updating us on your book discussion. Sounds like you all had fun.

So...the month is coming to an end and we also are almost at the end of LEAP OF FAITH. Thanks to all of you who have participated. We have been having a wonderful, productive exchange of views...sometimes educational, sometimes even testy...but always lively and fun. This discussion is a tribute to the literate, always-thoughtful SN readers who manage controversial subjects so very well.

It has been a pleasure to spend the month with you all. Please feel free to make whatever remaining comments you wish.

Harriet

My sense is that we, the sons and daughters of Abraham, must strive in our own individual ways to make a leap of faith within our own families, communities and regions to support those American values which we hold dear; to speak up about dangerous precedents (like the loss of strategic medical funding for Seniors, the lack of better educational opportunities in our public schools, and the continued relocation of millions of jobs to overseas sites, thus overburdening our already extended economic situation to almost the point of chaos.

As we represent a small segment of American society in this discussion, we also can be a voice in the wilderness to counter-balance the sometimes inane political decisions by our elected representatives; draw attention to essential mores and values upon which this country was built, while at the same time encouraging our children and grandchildren to look beyond themselves - and to the world - at large to share their freedom.

Regardless of our ethnic or religious backgrounds, the location of our home communities or our primary professional or social interests, we can share with another great American - Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr - in his great dream: that someday all within our borders will be FREE and in turn will continue to help those who have not yet been able to walk that path without fear. Many of our young military men and women overseas are doing exactly what Dr. King's dream desribed: stepping forward for freedom, each in his/her own way and with a committed voice. Even in the land of Abraham, freedom is a precious commodity, sought, but not always found. Supported, but not always achieved by those with lifelong commitments to peace.

As Americans, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. raised our awareness and led us towards reconciliation. In the Arab Middle East, the Hashemite descendent of the Prophet Mohamed, King Hussein ibn Talal ibn Abdullah, was the peace maker.

HARRIET, WELL SAID! - “time teaches us about loss as we mature.” This book was about loss, but about love, also. It is a love story, but much more and I think Queen Noor was wanting the reader to be influenced in some way; but I don’t know WHO the reader was meant to be or WHAT the message was and that bothers me!! Who was she intending this book for – her children as they grow older? The Jordanians? Americans? Israelites?

BABI – I did go back to the book and you were certainly correct that it was the AIPAC who got that $700 million debt and the fighter jets through Congress, but aren’t you surprised that she named a man by the name of Steve Grossman who obviously knew the right people to call. Did she have to get his permission to put that incident in the book? Was he angry about it? Could he deny it and sue? How does an author have the audacity to name names? I don’t know how it all works.

THANKS A MILLION, FRAN, FOR THAT REPORT! . That’s a very good score – all of you must have enjoyed the book. I think most of us have also. What are you reading next? Keep in touch with us!!

THANKS, MAHLIA, you added much information and definitions that were badly needed. - THANKS TO EVERYONE WHO PARTICIPATED!!

It has been an adventure, a journey – uphill and downhill - and we got through it very well, don’t you think? If only the countries of the Middle East could do the same, after all the bumps in the road!

PEDLIN – so happy you joined us and I hope to see you soon in another discussion!

And I am wondering if TUDY is still around – are you finished with the book? Any comments at the end of it???

LINDA, thanks so much for all your great contributions to our conversation and DIANE joined us briefy, I see from looking over all the comments. We missed your presence, do come back another time, another book discussion.

And you too, TRAUDE, what discussion are you headed for next? And back there in the dark – hiding – I hope she’s still back there in the dark – hiding – is FIFI!!! ARE YOU THERE? Do come out and say Goodbye, we enjoyed your company so much!

WE THANK YOU ALL FOR BEING WITH US THIS MONTH! YOU ARE WHAT MATTERS IN A DISCUSSION – ALL OF YOU! AND IT’S BEEN FUN TO BE WITH YOU!

Queen Noor ended the book with this sentence, a very good one:

”Politicians and leaders will seek solutions, peaceful and otherwise, to mankind’s ills, but for change to be positive and lasting we must all acknowledge our common humanity and live by the shared values of our faiths.”

Hope to see you all soon in another book discussion. We will leave this open for a few days for any comments you would like to make.

Mahlia - A very good final post from you. Yes I feel deeply for seniors who cannot buy drugs etc. To me the constant turmoil in the world passes my understanding. I cannot understand why people want to hurt others or why they hate. When I saw my husband dying of cancer over a long period of time my philosophy that life is too short for hating was reinforced big time. Wish I could wave a wand and change the world but I think in my latter years I am blessed to be able to see both sides of many situations. It makes me so sad I can't do anything about it. All I can do is to deal fairly with those I come into contact with in my daily life.

You have all been great participants in this discussion. You could teach a lot of the posters in the Political Discussions a lot about respecting one anothers opinions.

Good on you!

Carolyn

Just finished book. Would anything have been accomplished in the Middle East without King Hussein? Queen Noor sure spent a lot of money on flights - money that could have been used in Jordan for worthwhile projects? Felt like the book was written to justify everything King Hussein did.

CAROLYN! THANKS for your post - as we have grow older and have seen so much pain and loss in our lives and others, it does seem so senseless to deliberately kill one another!

GROVEER! Gosh, wish we could heard from you earlier!!! That's a good observation about the purpose of Queen Nooor's book. Do come into one of other discussions; as for nonfiction we are going to discuss books about Benjamin Franklin, who needs no introduction, in October. We would love to have you all there.

Here's a clickable to Ben Franklin, do post if you are interested. It won't be as controversial as this discussion has been, but a few myths about Ben have been proven untrue! Join us.

Benjamin Franklin

ELLA, I also thought that Noor was pretty well putting the spotlight on the AIPAC in revealing their role in getting that rider through Congress. I believe, in spite of the AIPAC's help in this particular instance, they are a powerful support group for Israel. On balance, I suspect Jordan would say they have done far more harm to the Arab interests than good.

I find myself more hopeful for the future knowing about the work of the United World Colleges and the U.N. Univ. International Leadership school. I can only pray these young people will be able to make a difference.

Thanks, ELLA, for an informative, if sometimes uncomfortable, study. ...Babi

Have you heard of that book? That is the book for next month.

We read The DaVinci Code for July, and liked it a lot, but caused a lot of controversy since 3 out of 5 are practicing Roman Catholics, and found some of the passasages not like the teachings.

Speak to you soon....Love, Fran

I read the secret life of bees and liked it very much.

Carolyn

I'm heading out of town tomorrow, so this is my jumping off place. First of all, many many thanks to everyone for your wonderful posts, and especially to Ella and Harriet for leading this discussion.
Mahlia, what would we have done without your insight and explanations of Arab culture that we did not understand, and BaBi, you were always so on target with your questions and interpretations, keeping us on track. Are you both going to be at the Book Festival in DC this year -- hope so?

Someone earlier used the word propaganda to describe this book, and someone else, self-serving, and just above, Groveer, saying it was justification. Not sure I TOTALLY agree, but they do have a point. I think Noor wrote the book as a tribute to her husband and because she had something to say, and definitely to show the Arab point of view. As for her comments about relations with our country, I thought at times she expected too much, that Jordan and the King should be high in the list of priorites of US officials.(US reaction to the Rushie treats, for example, and other times when Jordan wasn't notified immediately following various crises. Guess that's just an example of why we need to look at the other guy's perspective.

Overall, I thought she certainly did make a "Leap of Faith," maybe daring, maybe extreme, but certainly more than most of our acquaintances. She lived up to it well, and I'm grateful she chose to tell us about it.

Sorry I have not participated earlier in the summing up. My son-in-law had cardiac surgery (his third) on Thursday, and I was distracted.

PEDLN, thank you for contributing the helpful links in your posts # 258, 271 and 280. May I add to my earlier comments on the Mideast Website in post # 258.

Prospective participants in that private discussion are required to identify themselves fully, yet there seems to be little reciprocity, if any : e.g. WHO conceived when and where, WHO runs, supervises, and monitors this effort ?

Earlier in this discussion an article in National Geographic was mentioned; it apparently contained a retrospective of the Camp David accord when Prime Minster Begin and Anwar Sadat were brought by President Carter to this remote, rarefied location in the media-free countryside, and their frank reactions to the imposed seclusion. In what issue in what year did that article appear ?

Regarding post # 306:

People who write biographies or memoirs tell their stories from their own point of view and their personal experience. Who can fault them for that ?

But why would Queen Noor have to "justify" her husband's actions ? What actions precisely and to whom ?

Do we read her book with reservations and are more inclined to question her motives for writing it because

(a) she is an American who embraced the family and the new country into which she married and (gasp!) converted to Islam ?

or (b) because her husband was King Hussein of Jordan ?

Why would we scrutinize her every move and political statement in the book ? Is it because her "take" on political events differs from the perceptions we have formed on the basis of familial connections, or from media reports ? How objective are the media ? Have we been conditioned to a preconceived notion about the Middle East ? And is Queen Noor "on the other side" and therefore automatically suspect ?

Here is one courageous, intelligent American woman who became fully engaged in the everyday life of her adopted country and, from all appearances, contributed significantly to further international understanding of Jordan's presence and culture and supported wholeheartedly her husband's (perhaps hopeless???) quest for peace in the region. Can't we give her credit for what she has accomplished in a Muslim country (!) ?

My appreciation goes to Ella and Harriet for leading the discussion, and that extends to every participant here.

I am in total agreement with you Traude. Unfortunately too often only one side of a story is shown and therefore taken as being the right stance on an issue. I think Noor's book gave plenty of food for thought.

Carolyn

TRAUDE - I went back and checked my post about the article remembering the 25th anniversary of Camp David. My error: actually, the article was in The Smithsonian, Sept. 2003, p. 56 (Two Weeks at Camp David by Bob Cullen). My only excuse is that I was reading from both. Mea culpa!

Thanks for your thoughtful comments throughout the discussion. IT has been a pleasure to share ideas and perceptions with you. Hope you SIL returns to full health soon.

Traude, I carefully considered your thoughtful points in your post #313. They encouraged me to evaluate my own attitudes toward Queen Noor. After some thought, I find NO reservations toward her for her marriage or religion or her husband.

I DO find that her version of political events sometimes, but not always, varies, not only from the media descriptions I am familiar with, but from ACTUAL FACTS. She sometimes OMITS important facts that would put her husband's stance in a questionable light politically.

Just as an example, she omits vital provocations such as denial of the use of the Straits of Tiran or the massing of foreign armies on the borders of Israel in her account of Jordan's losses in the war of 1967. It was looking away from such facts that made some of her views "suspect" for me...NOT that she might be "on the other side" of my preferred point of view.

In all honesty, I would "scrutinize the moves and political statements" of ANYONE who was writing an autobiography whether it was Winston Churchill, Dwight Eisenhower, Golda Meir, or Ulysses S. Grant. For myself, I consider "reading with reservations" to be a necessary part of being a discriminating reader of an autobiography. However, I fully respect the opinions of those who enjoy reading an autobiography more with the intent of absorbing the sense of someone else's view of life.

I also completely give credit to Noor, as you so aptly expressed, for being a:

"courageous, intelligent American woman who became fully engaged in the everyday life of her adopted country and, from all appearances, contributed significantly to further international understanding of Jordan's presence and culture and supported wholeheartedly her husband's (perhaps hopeless???) quest for peace in the region."

Greatness is not found only in perfect people. There are, thank heavens, many of us that make significant contributions to the world even while possessing personality traits that might make us vulnerable as an individual. I feel Queen Noor SHOULD get credit for her accomplishments, but I also believe she need NOT be idealized as being FLAWLESS at the same time.

Your contributions have been an important part of this discussion, TRAUDE, and your point of view has been especially valuable to the give-and-take among all of us. Thank you so much for taking the time to join us, especially as so many events have been happening in your life.

I hope your son-in-law is doing well. It has been a pleasure to be in this discussion with you, TRAUDE.

MAHLIA, CAROLYN, BABI, PEDLN, FRAN, TUDY, HORSELOVER, FIFI, FAITH, LINDA, GROOVER, and last, but not least, ELLA...I loved reading your posts. ALL of you who participated have made my month sparkle with your intelligence, wit and interest.

Harriet

I am so glad I had a chance to rub elbows with you all for a part of the discussion anyway. You are a credit to the Internet! I think Noor wrote the book as a tribute to her husband, yes, but also, in maybe a much larger way, to get people to work for peace. Especially the peace in the Middle East. Certainly wouldn't hurt to work for peace in the entire world, too. Why not! Now there's your Leap of Faith.

And we need to bear in mind her book was edited and argued about by people around her to ensure that it gave the Arab view. I understand that and don't hold that against anyone. It's a book by a lady who married the King and she has done much work for the people and plans to try and bring about peace there - to follow the legacy of her loving husband. It's a book about Arabs, their views and hopes for the future. It wouldn't make any sense to give anyone else's mindset. If it did the book would have been about 1,000 pages long.

I'm sorry I had to stay away for a while but we started school last Monday. On Friday I crawled home on hands and knees but felt good about the week and the class. I think we will have a good year. Some are very fun-loving in a good way.

I will begin tomorrow having all 31 of them and myself pray for our servicemen in Iraq and, of course, pray for PEACE.

Anything else we could read?

Linda

This discussion is being archived and is now Read Only.