To: Fred Schlomka: on "armchairs and nonsense."
Reader comment on item: My Testimony before the House Subcommittee on Israeli-Palestinian Negotiations
in response to reader comment: To Mariana from an israeli

Submitted by mariana (United States), Apr 1, 2007 at 12:50

posted by an American: mariana 4/1/07
To: Fred Schlomka: on "armchairs and nonsense."

Sorry about the armchair, but a bug has had me in bed past few days, so forgive me if my energy level is down a bit. Firstly, I'd like to refer you to two of my posted responses [above] :

↔ To: Kenneth Besig re Ross v Indyk [597 words] March 19, 2007,
↔ To Daniel and Gabriel: on "Winning" [522 words] Mar 20, 2007 00:49

They are as good a place to begin as any, and energy level being what it is, and with them in mind:

Cross cultural relationships are wonderful, healthy, and definitely contribute positively to any Utopian future we would want to live in; however, it would be good to look at them for exactly what they are: Interpersonal relationships between individuals, which do not represent [even] their own world at large, and, while one might argue that if EVERYONE participated, it would be a beautiful world, everyone does not, will not and in fact, will never participate. Ask them.

I'm delighted to hear that you like "being Middle Eastern." There are over 220 million Muslim Arabs "being Middle Eastern" in your neighborhood. In most cases, their treatment of women is not only disgraceful, but quite disgusting. These "honour killings" would be hilarious if they weren't so tragic. Imagine, the "honour" of all of the men of a given family being controlled by the "perceived" behaviour of one female, and this "perception" justifying murder or blackmailing the female into becoming a murder/suicide bomber. What power!

What does it mean to you "being Middle Eastern?" Does that mean: as opposed to being part of Western Civilization and the Enlightenment? Scientific method [or "religious concensus?]? Freedom to worship your G*d in your way? Freedom of speech, and to read or study whatever you will? To pursue a life according to your "own drummer?" Are you talking about foods? climate? clothing? Or the tradition- bound, Muslim Umma, where you're just one speck of sand in a great desert, "destined" to follow Imams and Mullahs? Are you prepared to follow the Rabbis in your community down to the nnth degree? Or Mullahs or Ayatollahs, for that matter? Or does "being Middle Eastern" mean something else to you?

You may feel that I've exaggerated: that "being Middle Eastern" doesn't "necessarily" mean the few things I've mentioned, but out of 220+ million Arab Muslims, polls say more than 80% [along with a "majority" of M.E. Persian Muslims], want to hold onto that crap.... I mean, after all, maybe if I was a man, I'd want to treat my mother, wife, and girl children worse than I treated my cattle [if the society permitted me to be sufficiently prosperous to own any]. It would certainly enhance my self esteem - if for no other reason than by comparison. After all, if one side gets to 'fix the game' so they've got 90% of all the goodies and perquisites, and the 10% crumbs allowed to fall off the table are under their control [to allow to drop or not], and if that was all I knew and my Mullahs were saying it was the "natural order of things," I, too, might want to lie, cheat and kill to preserve it.

In Iran in 1979, ignorant, filthy bumpkins and street animals given guns could prove they were superior to a cultured and educated woman with a PhD. They could force women to throw a black sack over themselves with only eyes showing, rape them, stone them; they could force women to stay home unless accompanied by A MAN, any man, ignorant, filthy, retarded.... didn't matter: Just had to have a male organ.

Khomeini and his animals gleefully sacrificed FEMALE doctors, lawyers, professors, architects, etc., sent them home or killed them on "morals" charges, leaving their "society" exposed to the expected diseases, backwardness and predations. They had this clever thing: rape a woman or girl who didn't tow the line, call her a slut then stone her in the "arena." Even better sport than lions and Christians.

Just whose LAW do you prefer to live and raise your family under? And under whose law do you believe your son's Arab friends will better prosper? You mention a 16 year old son; well, I had a daughter. Perhaps that makes a difference. My daughter was born in the early 60's and was part of "integration" in urban America, in a W. Coast city which fast became "majority minority." There were difficulties interfacing cultures in the generic [our family never had racial problems specifically or individually]. There was a great deal of crime, violence, burning and riots [certainly nothing to compare with bombs and 'suiciders']. During her entire childhood, we drove her and picked her up; she NEVER played outside in a park, on the sidewalk or in the front yard unattended, and around the tiny back yard, there was an 8' wooden locked fence one could not see through, protecting her and the neighbor kids.

I'm sure your son's Arab friend is a lot safer living under Israeli law than he [or certainly you] would be living under Palestinian Law [if "P.Law" is not an oxymoron, as I've seen no sort of law at all besides the law of a very, very sick jungle].

I found your colloquy with Linda Moore quite interesting. In your response to her "Rot or prosper" piece, you say:

"The elimination of the hope for peace has come from Israel's refusal to seriously negotiate for years before Hamas was elected."

I thought it was Arafat who said NO to Ross & Indyk and Clinton. Now WHAT, will you NEGOTIATE with Hamas? Their absolute, explicitly unalterable [and apparently now acceptable] position is that they WILL NOT RECOGNIZE "the Zionist entity," will not recognize any previous agreements with "the Zionist entity," and they WILL push "the Zionist entity" and all Jews into the sea. I'm sure this is a serious weakness on my part, but I don't see a "negotiating" position here; and Rice and Peres & Olmert's fantasy that they can have these "final settlement" negotiations without the 3 bases US & Israel [here-to-fore] always insisted upon as a starting point, I see as dangerous in the extreme, bordering upon catastrophic.

I'm not smart enough to see any distinction between Saudi Arabia's great NEW plan and exactly what they and the rest of the Muslim Arabs have been demanding FOREVER!! They have never kept their word in any negotiation; never fulfilled their side of any "bargain," and the best you can come up with is that: "It was Israel's fault..no matter whatever, It's Israel's fault." The trick of it is that you have to HEAR the WORDS, and understand that they mean what they say, and not substitute your Utopian dreams into their meanings.

Do you believe that you "will be considered one of the 'good Israelis' who will be permitted to live in peace with Hamas and the rest of the Umma as a Jew when they win?" This has an awful familiar ring to it, as, at least twice in my lifetime, Europe and USSR had their "good Jews," and my recollection of the results for even the "good Jews" is not as hopeful or sunny as yours appears to be. But then, I'm here in my "armchair," and maybe sitting in an armchair facilitates thinking, remembering, and being able to project the probable effects certain actions might cause [particularly when one bothers to compare them with what has happened in the past under similar circumstances]. "Learning" is an interesting process.

No one has suggested that there aren't "good Palestinians;" the salient point is simply that over 85% of those polled want the status quo of Jihad and Intifadah; and even MORE of them would vote for Hamas today than actually voted them into office.

I do not need to tell you what's going on in the madrassah schools and summer camps throughout the Umma; I'm sure you've seen the "proud daddys" in Gaza and W. Bank, holding up their babies with green shahid rags on their heads and dynamite belts on their waists; and I know you've heard about those 2 sterling muslim gentlemen who got past security in Iraq last week with 2 young children in the back seat, only to park the auto-bomb, leaving the kids in the car to be blown up. This is Sharia in action, sort of.

I'm sure a treatise can be written on the glorious sacrifice these young "shahids" have made, but as a mother and grandmother, there's only a nausea so deep that it rocks me. But, even though you see these generations of mentally mutilated and indoctrinated young people [did someone say 75% of the pop?] ahead of you, you have high hopes.

I wish you Joy Fred Schlomka, and Luck also. Meanwhile, I can not help it that all the things in my mind and memory are waving red flags and blinking bright red lights, saying: "Been there, done that!" and wondering why Rice, Peres, Livni, Olmert and you, think it will be "different" or "better" this time.

Since the stakes are so high and Israel is so small - and since 220 million Muslims can now believe that they are "almost there," just what will we do if you're wrong? Who will do it? And at what cost? mariana

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened for relevance, substance, and tone, and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome, but comments are rejected if scurrilous, off-topic, vulgar, ad hominem, or otherwise viewed as inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the Guidelines for Comments. For informational purposes, we identify countries from which comments are sent.