The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
View Poll Results: Is King Abdulah doing good job?
yes 22 100.00%
no 0 0%
Voters: 22. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #61  
Old 05-25-2004, 06:04 PM
papillon's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 329
Quote:
Originally posted by pepep+May 24th, 2004 - 6:46 pm--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (pepep @ May 24th, 2004 - 6:46 pm)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Laila@May 23rd, 2004 - 8:45 pm
Quote:
and can make laws on his own will
that is not true.

that is true, he can make laws on his own will [/b][/quote]
Sure he can. It&#39;s called a Royal Decree.
__________________

__________________
  #62  
Old 05-25-2004, 10:57 PM
Commoner
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 25
i want to be able to do that too
:stuart:
__________________

__________________
  #63  
Old 05-28-2004, 05:33 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 277
Has anyone noticed a concerted effort by the JRF to portray themselves differently that what they are?

3 Examples

A) Q.Rania&#39;s Clothing (be it beautiful or not)
It does not correspond with the dire financial situation of the country she is queen of. She also does not come from an established money-d family that could bankroll her costumes.

B) The very low key public wedding of PHamzah & PNoor
There were many announcements about how PHamzah does not feel now is the time for a great celebration so he had a low key wedding. And then today&#39;s photos came out from the banquet in Aqaba & well it seems that now IS the time to celebrate.

C) PHaya&#39;s showjumping
Granted with her recent marriage this is no longer relevant but hear me out. It is very expensive to run a showjumping team in Europe (much less relocate it every year for the past 3 years.) And yet she campaigned internationally for many years without anyone supporting her besides whatever the palace gave her.

My question

1) Do any of you find this slightly disturbing?

2) Can anyone in Jordan tell us what the avg Jordanian thinks about this?
__________________
  #64  
Old 05-28-2004, 06:13 PM
bluetortuga
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally posted by silver charm@May 28th, 2004 - 4:33 pm
Has anyone noticed a concerted effort by the JRF to portray themselves differently that what they are?

3 Examples

A) Q.Rania&#39;s Clothing (be it beautiful or not)
It does not correspond with the dire financial situation of the country she is queen of. She also does not come from an established money-d family that could bankroll her costumes.

B) The very low key public wedding of PHamzah & PNoor
There were many announcements about how PHamzah does not feel now is the time for a great celebration so he had a low key wedding. And then today&#39;s photos came out from the banquet in Aqaba & well it seems that now IS the time to celebrate.

C) PHaya&#39;s showjumping
Granted with her recent marriage this is no longer relevant but hear me out. It is very expensive to run a showjumping team in Europe (much less relocate it every year for the past 3 years.) And yet she campaigned internationally for many years without anyone supporting her besides whatever the palace gave her.

My question

1) Do any of you find this slightly disturbing?

2) Can anyone in Jordan tell us what the avg Jordanian thinks about this?
I seriously doubt the average Jordanian would be free to express their opinion about these issues anywhere else but overseas. I&#39;m sure they must be pissed off, seeing their royal family living in such extravagance while the people suffer. If the JRF didn&#39;t learn from the Pahlavis and the Romanovs, they won&#39;t learn from anyone until an angry mob runs the Hashemite dynasty back to the Hejaz.
__________________
  #65  
Old 05-29-2004, 07:41 AM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: , Jordan
Posts: 32
Quote:
Originally posted by papillon+May 25th, 2004 - 5:04 pm--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (papillon &#064; May 25th, 2004 - 5:04 pm)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
Quote:
Originally posted by pepep@May 24th, 2004 - 6:46 pm
<!--QuoteBegin-Laila
Quote:
@May 23rd, 2004 - 8:45 pm
Quote:
and can make laws on his own will
that is not true.



that is true, he can make laws on his own will
Sure he can. It&#39;s called a Royal Decree.[/b][/quote]


Laws are the duty of the parliament not the king ( he can not put laws), any law has to get approved by the parliament. After that it should be signed by the king (and this is what is called the royal Decree).

If the king did not approve the law he should specify the reasons and the law should be returned to the parliament within 6 months to be discussed again.
If not approved and not returned to parliament within that period, the law passes without the approving of the king.
If returned to parliament without king signature and with the reason, then if the parliament votes again with the law it passes without the signature of the king.
__________________
  #66  
Old 05-29-2004, 07:52 AM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: , Jordan
Posts: 32
Quote:
Originally posted by bluetortuga+May 28th, 2004 - 5:13 pm--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (bluetortuga &#064; May 28th, 2004 - 5:13 pm)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin-silver charm@May 28th, 2004 - 4:33 pm
Has anyone noticed a concerted effort by the JRF to portray themselves differently that what they are?

3 Examples

A) Q.Rania&#39;s Clothing (be it beautiful or not)
It does not correspond with the dire financial situation of the country she is queen of. She also does not come from an established money-d family that could bankroll her costumes.

B) The very low key public wedding of PHamzah & PNoor
There were many announcements about how PHamzah does not feel now is the time for a great celebration so he had a low key wedding. And then today&#39;s photos came out from the banquet in Aqaba & well it seems that now IS the time to celebrate.

C) PHaya&#39;s showjumping
Granted with her recent marriage this is no longer relevant but hear me out. It is very expensive to run a showjumping team in Europe (much less relocate it every year for the past 3 years.) And yet she campaigned internationally for many years without anyone supporting her besides whatever the palace gave her.

My question

1) Do any of you find this slightly disturbing?

2) Can anyone in Jordan tell us what the avg Jordanian thinks about this?
I seriously doubt the average Jordanian would be free to express their opinion about these issues anywhere else but overseas. I&#39;m sure they must be pissed off, seeing their royal family living in such extravagance while the people suffer. If the JRF didn&#39;t learn from the Pahlavis and the Romanovs, they won&#39;t learn from anyone until an angry mob runs the Hashemite dynasty back to the Hejaz.[/b][/quote]

the JRF has their own money and what Q Rania spends is from her husband&#39;s money not her father,
and as any country jordan has wealthy and middle people as well as poor people , that does not mean that the royal family should be poor because there is poor people. that is very ideal but unfortunatly it does not happen in any country.
__________________
  #67  
Old 05-29-2004, 05:53 PM
papillon's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 329
Quote:
Originally posted by silver charm@May 28th, 2004 - 4:33 pm
Has anyone noticed a concerted effort by the JRF to portray themselves differently than what they are?

3 Examples

A) Q.Rania&#39;s Clothing (be it beautiful or not)
It does not correspond with the dire financial situation of the country she is queen of. She also does not come from an established money-d family that could bankroll her costumes.

B) The very low key public wedding of PHamzah & PNoor
There were many announcements about how PHamzah does not feel now is the time for a great celebration so he had a low key wedding. And then today&#39;s photos came out from the banquet in Aqaba & well it seems that now IS the time to celebrate.

C) PHaya&#39;s showjumping
Granted with her recent marriage this is no longer relevant but hear me out. It is very expensive to run a showjumping team in Europe (much less relocate it every year for the past 3 years.) And yet she campaigned internationally for many years without anyone supporting her besides whatever the palace gave her.

My question

1) Do any of you find this slightly disturbing?

2) Can anyone in Jordan tell us what the avg Jordanian thinks about this?
I can only answer the first question. Yes, I&#39;ve noticed, and your examples are very apt. I can only assume the so-called "low-key wedding" press was an effort to preempt criticism of its lavishness, but one would have to be of very low intelligence not to be able to see for oneself from the photos alone that it was a posh and excessive affair, especially considering the times we are in.

I also share your concern. Even though I am from a wealthy country, the lavishness often offends my sensibilities. I have a sneaking suspicion that my taxes and my support of humanitarian organizations are funding at least some of this excess. Some of the more visible members of the JRF have such a "kid in a candy store" mentality about money. I find it kind of tacky. TRULY wealthy people usually go to lengths to underplay their assets. If I were a leader of a poor country, I could never feel right about consuming so conspicuously when people nearby are struggling so hard and suffering so much. JD100 would go so far for some of them. It sort of casts suspicion on the sincerity of some of the members of the JRF&#39;s efforts to support true economic development. (I&#39;m not referring here to someone like P. Basma, who is such a dedicated public servant.) By this I mean that, if they truly do have this kind of money to toss around, why not strike a fairer balance between their own needs and the needs of their people? KA could&#39;ve taken half the wedding money and spread it around to needy people and still put on a nice celebration for CP Hamzah and Noor.

I also agree with the comment that follows your message that, much as we would like to hear from them about this subject, the Jordanians aren&#39;t necessarily free to speak out. Criticizing the JRF is a crime in their country. In addition--and this I know from having lived there for a while--many people there are either too poor to have much media access or too busy struggling through daily life to be aware of and give much thought to these issues. Although the Internet is alive and well in Jordan, not everyone has access to media that aren&#39;t carefully controlled by the JRF. It costs about JD1/hour (about US&#036;1.40) to surf the Internet at a cafe, which is prohibitively high for many people there. So I think it&#39;s unlikely that any kind of critical mass of people even knows anything more about the JRF than what the local media presents to them, and the local media is controlled by the JRF, so it&#39;s not much more than a publicity machine.

Sorry for the long post. It&#39;s just that I&#39;ve also thought long and hard about this, and it very much bothers me about royalty, especially those who rule in very poor countries. So many people see only the glitz and glamour and never stop to consider some of the underlying moral issues.
__________________
  #68  
Old 05-29-2004, 06:02 PM
papillon's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 329
Quote:
Originally posted by Laila@May 29th, 2004 - 6:41 am
Laws are the duty of the parliament not the king ( he can not put laws), any law has to get approved by the parliament. After that it should be signed by the king (and this is what is called the royal Decree).

If the king did not approve the law he should specify the reasons and the law should be returned to the parliament within 6 months to be discussed again.
If not approved and not returned to parliament within that period, the law passes without the approving of the king.
If returned to parliament without king signature and with the reason, then if the parliament votes again with the law it passes without the signature of the king.
But the King can and does dissolve Parliament for relatively long periods of time, during which he can, in effect, create laws. In addition, he appoints the upper house of Parliament, so he can cherry pick people who will go along with him. They know they are beholden to him for their jobs and for their ability to support their families, so aren&#39;t very likely to go against him. The lower house is elected, so it is harder to control. But KA has influence over it. So, even though your description of the ways legislation is passed in Jordan is, to my knowledge, accurate, it doesn&#39;t really shed light on the greater truth, which is that KA can pretty much have his way with legislation.
__________________
  #69  
Old 05-29-2004, 08:11 PM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 43
Quote:
Originally posted by Laila@May 29th, 2004 - 3:52 am
the JRF has their own money and what Q Rania spends is from her husband&#39;s money not her father,
how do you know what money rania spend?

Quote:
and as any country jordan has wealthy and middle people as well as poor people , that does not mean that the royal family should be poor because there is poor people. that is very ideal but unfortunatly it does not happen in any country.
while Jordan heavily depends on foreign monetary aids rania’s spending is enormous.
__________________
  #70  
Old 05-30-2004, 06:29 AM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: , Jordan
Posts: 32
Quote:
Originally posted by papillon+May 29th, 2004 - 5:02 pm--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (papillon &#064; May 29th, 2004 - 5:02 pm)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin-Laila@May 29th, 2004 - 6:41 am
Laws are the duty of the parliament not the king ( he can not put laws), any law has to get approved by the parliament. After that it should be signed by the king (and this is what is called the royal Decree).

If the king did not approve the law he should specify the reasons and the law should be returned to the parliament within 6 months to be discussed again.
If not approved and not returned to parliament within that period, the law passes without the approving of the king.
If returned to parliament without king signature and with the reason, then if the parliament votes again with the law it passes without the signature of the king.
But the King can and does dissolve Parliament for relatively long periods of time, during which he can, in effect, create laws. In addition, he appoints the upper house of Parliament, so he can cherry pick people who will go along with him. They know they are beholden to him for their jobs and for their ability to support their families, so aren&#39;t very likely to go against him. The lower house is elected, so it is harder to control. But KA has influence over it. So, even though your description of the ways legislation is passed in Jordan is, to my knowledge, accurate, it doesn&#39;t really shed light on the greater truth, which is that KA can pretty much have his way with legislation.[/b][/quote]

The king have the right to dissolve the parliament, and this is necessary in some cases , for example when Israel occupied the west bank in 1967 which was a part of Jordan, the geography and demography of Jordan has change, and the parliament no more was representing Jordan so it has to be dissolved , if the king hadn’t has that right how can that happened?

Quote:
But the King can and does dissolve Parliament for relatively long periods of time, during which he can, in effect, create laws.
The king can not dissolve the parliament for long period, if it was dissolved a new one should be elected and should meet within 4 months, if no new parliament is elected within this period the old one restore its complete constitutional authority and meet instantaneously as if it was not dissolved and continue its work .

And the king can NOT dissolve the new elected parliament for that reason.

Quote:
he appoints the upper house of Parliament, so he can cherry pick people who will go along with him.&nbsp; They know they are beholden to him for their jobs and for their ability to support their families, so aren&#39;t very likely to go against him.&nbsp;
It happened that the parliament votes with law without the approve of the king and the law pass without his signature, and that happened at K Hussein time so the king ( any king ) will avoid disproving of laws that was approved by the parliament, in order not to be in that situation and to let democracy to take place, so that happen very little, and until now K Abdul has not be against any decision of the parliament, because it will pass without his will.
__________________
  #71  
Old 05-30-2004, 03:22 PM
papillon's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 329
Quote:
Originally posted by Laila+May 30th, 2004 - 5:29 am--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Laila @ May 30th, 2004 - 5:29 am)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
Quote:
Originally posted by papillon@May 29th, 2004 - 5:02 pm
<!--QuoteBegin-Laila
Quote:
@May 29th, 2004 - 6:41 am
Laws are the duty of the parliament not the king ( he can not put laws), any law has to get approved by the parliament. After that it should be signed by the king (and this is what is called the royal Decree).

If the king did not approve the law he should specify the reasons and the law should be returned to the parliament within 6 months to be discussed again.
If not approved and not returned to parliament within that period, the law passes without the approving of the king.
If returned to parliament without king signature and with the reason, then if the parliament votes again with the law it passes without the signature of the king.

But the King can and does dissolve Parliament for relatively long periods of time, during which he can, in effect, create laws. In addition, he appoints the upper house of Parliament, so he can cherry pick people who will go along with him. They know they are beholden to him for their jobs and for their ability to support their families, so aren&#39;t very likely to go against him. The lower house is elected, so it is harder to control. But KA has influence over it. So, even though your description of the ways legislation is passed in Jordan is, to my knowledge, accurate, it doesn&#39;t really shed light on the greater truth, which is that KA can pretty much have his way with legislation.
The king have the right to dissolve the parliament, and this is necessary in some cases , for example when Israel occupied the west bank in 1967 which was a part of Jordan, the geography and demography of Jordan has change, and the parliament no more was representing Jordan so it has to be dissolved , if the king hadn’t has that right how can that happened?

Quote:
But the King can and does dissolve Parliament for relatively long periods of time, during which he can, in effect, create laws.
The king can not dissolve the parliament for long period, if it was dissolved a new one should be elected and should meet within 4 months, if no new parliament is elected within this period the old one restore its complete constitutional authority and meet instantaneously as if it was not dissolved and continue its work .

And the king can NOT dissolve the new elected parliament for that reason.

Quote:
he appoints the upper house of Parliament, so he can cherry pick people who will go along with him.&nbsp; They know they are beholden to him for their jobs and for their ability to support their families, so aren&#39;t very likely to go against him.&nbsp;
It happened that the parliament votes with law without the approve of the king and the law pass without his signature, and that happened at K Hussein time so the king ( any king ) will avoid disproving of laws that was approved by the parliament, in order not to be in that situation and to let democracy to take place, so that happen very little, and until now K Abdul has not be against any decision of the parliament, because it will pass without his will. [/b][/quote]
Seems like we are in agreement.
__________________
  #72  
Old 03-27-2005, 06:26 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: , Canada
Posts: 3,220
This poll does not work due to software changes, so please disregard the numbers and votes at the top -- it is no reflection of actual member sentiments.

But by member request, I thought that at least the discussion could be carried on.

Please keep in mind our Forum Posting Rules & Guidelines and to have respect for the opinons of others even if you do not agree with them. In the least please express your opinons civily and politely.

Alexandria
Royal Forums Administrator
__________________
  #73  
Old 03-27-2005, 09:22 PM
papillon's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 329
Quote:
Originally Posted by shelley
The reason Jordan has such high literacy rates compared to many other countries in the area is becuase the country has had compulsory education for boys and girls since 1951 - the credit for this decision must go to the late King Talal, father of King Hussein, Prince Mohammed, Prince Hassan and Princess Basma.
Not to nitpick, but you left off P. Sarvath.
__________________
  #74  
Old 03-28-2005, 01:46 AM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by papillon
Not to nitpick, but you left off P. Sarvath.
But she is not King Talal's child.
__________________
  #75  
Old 03-28-2005, 04:55 PM
papillon's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 329
Quote:
Originally Posted by shelley
But she is not King Talal's child.
Oh. I was reading it wrong. . .more like King Talal (father of King Hussein), Prince Mohammed, Prince Hassan and Princess Basma. But I still have to get in my plug for the unsung P. Sarvath, who has done much to improve education and literacy in Jordan, at all levels.
__________________
  #76  
Old 03-29-2005, 10:27 AM
papillon's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 329
I think this is a very interesting--but worrying--assessment of KA's character and modus operandi. :(

From The Washington Post

Playing Both Sides in Jordan
By Jim Hoagland
Sunday, March 27, 2005


Pop quiz: Which Arab ruler is to George W. Bush as Yasser Arafat was to Bill Clinton?

Congratulations if you said King Abdullah of Jordan. And a tip of the hat to all those Iraqis who came up with the answer so fast. You know your neighborhood, and your neighbor.

Abdullah emulates Arafat in possessing special, drop-in-anytime visiting rights to the White House and in merchandising that access to puff up his influence at home and with other Arab leaders. The Jordanian monarch seizes every opportunity to see and be seen with the U.S. president and his senior aides. Rather than attend an Arab summit to support his unconvincing, warmed-over version of a "peace plan" with Israel, Abdullah was again stateside last week, basking in the glow of meetings with Bush and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.

And, as Arafat did, Abdullah works against U.S. interests in Iraq and elsewhere while pretending otherwise. The youthful Jordanian autocrat pulls the wool over the eyes of a Republican president as the deceased Palestinian revolutionary did with Bush's Democratic predecessor.

If there is a difference in the comparative equation, it is likely that Clinton distrusted Arafat more. In Abdullah's case, Bush again displays a disturbing tendency to overinvest in the swagger and guile of people who run or who are close to spy agencies. (See Tenet, George, and Putin, Vladimir, for details.)

I stipulate the obvious: Bush is obliged by realpolitik to work with Abdullah and with Jordan. One of only two Arab states that have peace treaties with Israel, Jordan has long been an important link in the Middle East peace process as well as a platform for U.S. covert and military activities.

But a few senior U.S. officials, less impressed with Abdullah's Special Operations background and his deep connections to the CIA, fear that the president's lavish embrace is overdone. They point to the nasty public row between Iraq and Jordan over a suicide bombing and to the apparently protected presence in Jordan of key operatives in the Iraqi insurgency. These are troubling signs being ignored by Bush.

Iraqis have not forgotten that Jordan supported Saddam Hussein in the Persian Gulf War in 1990 and afterward. Iraqi resources were drained by the massive breaking of sanctions and other corrupt dealings that enriched the Jordanian establishment at the expense of the Iraqi people.

Abdullah's meddling in Iraqi affairs since the overthrow of the Baathists has rekindled those resentments. The king has exacerbated tensions with his aggressive championing of his co-religionists, Iraq's Sunni minority, who provided the base of past Baathist power and of the present insurgency.

Abdullah publicly warned against the coming to power of Iraq's Shiite majority as he sought to get Bush to postpone the Jan. 30 elections. He has portrayed Iraq on the edge of a religious war. He has channeled support to CIA favorites among Iraqi factions.

So when Iraqis heard on March 14 that the Jordanian family of Raed Banna had thrown a huge party to celebrate their relative's "martyrdom" -- which consisted of killing himself and 125 Iraqis in the Shiite town of Hilla -- they said "enough."

Angry crowds sacked the Jordanian Embassy in Baghdad and forced it to close.
"Iraqis are feeling very bitter over what happened," Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari said. Shiite leader Abdul Aziz Hakim called on Jordan to acknowledge "the meanness and lowliness of people who celebrate the killing of honorable Iraqis" and "to stop the incitement, recruitment and mobilization of Jordanian terrorists to Iraq."

Hakim should not hold his breath. Former Baathist lieutenants who are now key operatives in the Iraqi insurgency still move themselves and money around Jordan without interference. In an incident that Bush should probe, U.S. officials a few months ago identified two such Iraqis and asked that they be questioned.

But the king waved the Americans off, saying that the two were minor figures who did not have blood on their hands. "We came to know that wasn't true, as he no doubt knew back then," one U.S. official told me.

Abdullah has publicly suggested that Syria should consider Bush's demand for a withdrawal from Lebanon while privately sharing with other Arab leaders his fears that such a move would be destabilizing. And he has been more supportive of the president's push for democracy in the Arab world in Washington meetings than he has been at home.

This does not win Abdullah the world-class laurels for duplicity and deception garnered by Arafat. But then the king is still young.
__________________
  #77  
Old 03-29-2005, 10:32 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Dallas, United States
Posts: 1,505
Yes. I I am equally disturbed at Prez. Bush's degree of warmness and acceptance of KA. He just gets too trusting sometimes.:(
__________________
*Under Construction*
  #78  
Old 03-29-2005, 10:39 AM
papillon's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 329
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reina
Yes. I I am equally disturbed at Prez. Bush's degree of warmness and acceptance of KA. He just gets too trusting sometimes.:(
But I don't think it is a one-way street. I think they use each other. But P. Bush is the more powerful leader, so he will probably wash his hands of KA when it serves his purpose. In that sense, I think KA is being the more foolish party, because he seems to be staking his entire country's future on his relationship with the U.S. In my opinion, he is too cocky and confident given his relatively weak position. It is as though he is living in a fool's paradise, not quite understanding that the U.S.'s interests and his are not in perfect alignment.
__________________
  #79  
Old 03-29-2005, 11:07 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Dallas, United States
Posts: 1,505
Quote:
Originally Posted by papillon
But I don't think it is a one-way street. I think they use each other. But P. Bush is the more powerful leader, so he will probably wash his hands of KA when it serves his purpose. In that sense, I think KA is being the more foolish party, because he seems to be staking his entire country's future on his relationship with the U.S. In my opinion, he is too cocky and confident given his relatively weak position. It is as though he is living in a fool's paradise, not quite understanding that the U.S.'s interests and his are not in perfect alignment.
Yes This is very true. And he better watch it if a democrat takes office b/c I don't think they would be too keen to rely on Jordan for much or give alot of aid. Whew!
__________________
*Under Construction*
  #80  
Old 03-30-2005, 11:21 PM
Gentry
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Earth, United States
Posts: 98
Playing Both Sides in Jordan


By Jim Hoagland
Sunday, March 27, 2005; Page B07



Pop quiz: Which Arab ruler is to George W. Bush as Yasser Arafat was to Bill Clinton?

Congratulations if you said King Abdullah of Jordan. And a tip of the hat to all those Iraqis who came up with the answer so fast. You know your neighborhood, and your neighbor. More is in here:



http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A2218-2005Mar25.html
__________________

__________________
Closed Thread


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Sarah Ferguson, Duchess Of York: News and Photos Jacqueline Current Events Archive 170 09-23-2004 03:30 PM




Additional Links
Popular Tags
birth charlene chris o'neill crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess letizia crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit crown princess victoria current events duchess of cambridge style fashion grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri hohenzollern infanta cristina infanta elena infanta leonor infanta sofia jordan king abdullah ii king carl xvi gustav king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander luxembourg ottoman pom prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince constantijn prince felipe prince floris prince laurent prince maurits prince pieter-christiaan princess princess alexia (2005 -) princess anita princess ariane princess beatrix princess catharina-amalia princess charlene princess claire princess elisabeth princess laurentien princess letizia princess mabel princess madeleine princess margriet princess marie princess mary princess of asturias queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen paola queen rania queen silvia queen sofia royal russia spain state visit wedding william


Our Communities

Our communities encompass many different hobbies and interests, but each one is built on friendly, intelligent membership.

» More about our Communities

Automotive Communities

Our Automotive communities encompass many different makes and models. From U.S. domestics to European Saloons.

» More about our Automotive Communities

RV & Travel Trailer Communities

Our RV & Travel Trailer sites encompasses virtually all types of Recreational Vehicles, from brand-specific to general RV communities.

» More about our RV Communities

Marine Communities

Our Marine websites focus on Cruising and Sailing Vessels, including forums and the largest cruising Wiki project on the web today.

» More about our Marine Communities


Copyright 2002-2012 Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:00 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014
Jelsoft Enterprises

Royal News Delivered to your Email!

You can get the latest Royal News right in your inbox.

unsusbcribe at anytime with one click

Close [X]