Prince Charles to plead Islam's cause to Bush

The Prince of Wales will try to persuade George W Bush and Americans of the merits of Islam this week because he thinks the United States has been too intolerant of the religion since September 11.

The Prince, who leaves on Tuesday for an eight-day tour of the US, has voiced private concerns over America's "confrontational" approach to Muslim countries and its failure to appreciate Islam's strengths.

Prince Charles, who is about to embark on his first official foreign tour since his marriage to the Duchess of Cornwall, wants Americans - including Mr Bush - to share his fondness for Islam. He has agreed to attend a seminar on religions at Georgetown University, Washington, on Thursday: the only event where he will not be accompanied by the Duchess.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/10/30/nchas30.xml&sSheet=/portal/2005/10/30/ixportaltop.html

...NOT.

meeting? Like to see Bush answer some questions about Islam AND Libby!

:rofl:

endanger the Prince's reelection chances.

because they are sympathetic to the terrorists :sarcasm:

:rofl:

to pronounce.

Bush, and his NeoCOn handlers, could care less if you are Muslim, Buddhist, Hindu or Jewish. If you are in the way of their plans for profits or empire, they'll kill you in a flash.

The Muslims just live on top of the oil.

...because I think he might stand a fair chance, if that's what he has in mind. Good luck, Chuck.

Yet, they are the SAME generation. Charles doesn't believe in a State RELIGION, unlike BUSH who seems to think we are a CHRISTIAN Theocracy. He has said many times he doesn't want to be the head of the Church of England. All religion is the same to him. As far as "traditional marriage", the Price is hardly the poster boy for that one too.

It is looking more and more than the USA is ALONE in the Western World on these issues of morality, religion, and marriage. Yeah, everybody is "crazy" but we are "right"? Want to buy a bridge?

Prince Charles will used the traditional "Defender of Faith" phrase in the coronation oath and will instead have it said that he is the "Defender of FAITH"?

I'd like to think that Prince Charles can talk some sense into old Dubya but I think I know my pRez, who'll really be wanting to say, "Gee, Prince, we got us somethin' in common. We is both in a family dynasty."

On a more cynical note, Dubya and Charles do have mutual good buddies in the Saudi Royal Family.

British head of state is the head of the Chirch of England (Anlicans). His mother is currently the head of state of Great Britain, and when she dies or abdicates, Chuck will be the Head of the Anglican Church.

Fun fact: Q of E is the head of state for Canada. She has supreme power.

Q of E is the head of state for Canada.

... by virtue of the 1982 Constitution of Canada, which was the subject of broad, lengthy consultation in Canada and was adopted by the Parliament of Canada with the agreement of all the provinces (with the exception of Quebec, based on specific objections unrelated to this).

The authority of the Queen of Canada -- royal assent, given by the Governor General (currently a bilingual black woman who immigrated to Canada from Haiti and became a documentary filmmaker here) being formally required for the promulgation of legislation -- is final, under the democratically adopted constitution. Everybody knows that neither the Queen nor the Governor General actually has any power, of course.

Interestingly, there is a branch ("province") of the Church of England in Canada (as I just discovered), established by royal letters patent granted by an earlier Queen of England. But the Anglican Church of Canada, the first or second largest protestant denomination here, and counterpart of the C of E and Canadian member of the international Anglican Lambeth Conference (rather shakily at present, because of the Canadian church's stance on same-sex marriage), does not seem to have the Queen at its head.

The (Anglican) Church in Wales doesn't have the Queen as its head, and neither does the Episcopal Church of Scotland. She is, however, a member of the (Presbyterian) Church of Scotland, so she changes denomination when she crosses the border. The monarch already has a complicated religious existence.

On edit: I thought she was the head of the CofS - she's not, just a normal member. It is, however, still the 'established' church in Scotland.

I'd assumed that her non-affiliation with the Anglican Church of Canada was generalizable to other member churches of the Lambeth Conference world-wide -- but I never knew HM was a Presbyterian too!

The long-standing obstacle in ecumenical/merger talks between the Anglican Church of Canada and the United Church of Canada -- an early 20th century amalgam of Presbyterian, Methodist and some other sects, and the most progressive Christian church here, not to mention in the world -- has been the whole bishop/Peter thing.

I wonder whether anyone's ever told them that Liz & her forebears have had that problem whipped, and actually been Presbyterians themselves, for all this time? Ignore it; that seems to do the trick, eh?

She does the formalities of appointing bishops in the C of E; perhaps she just plays ladies' auxiliary to the Presbyterians. ;)



grammar fixed

Didn't they have a war to settle that a few hundred years ago? I thought the C of E won that one.

When the Catholic Mary, Queen of Scots was ousted, the Scottish Presbyterians insisted her son James VI was brought up in the Church of Scotland. So he was Presbyterian first, and then became James I of England, and thus head of the C of E. The Presbyterians won the civil war in Scotland. Eventually, the Act of Union between England and Scotland said the Church of Scotland was the established church there, and the Church of England there. So which she is a member of depends where she is.

Like we had to learn about the US Civil War? (The North won, btw).

Thanks for the info

but there's been quite a few good TV documentaries on British history around that time recently that filled in the gaps. But the English Civil War did loom large in my schoolboy history - I can remember thinking "why on earth should I care who was in command of the Royallist right flank at Marston Moor? I don't think I'll learn anything more useless in my whole time at school". I may well have been right.

why on earth should I care who was in command of the Royallist right flank at Marston Moor?

Because it might have been one of my ancestors. ;)

I don't think Gen. George Monck, 1st Duke (that time around) d'Albemarle, was in charge of that particular endeavour, but he does get the credit for restoring Charles I -- on the instruction of a Parliament, of course.

And he isn't really my ancestor, since his line died out shortly after that, but he and I unquestionably do have a common ancestor -- William Le Moyne who accompanied the Conqueror.

Now if I could only figure out how my own great-grandfather born in Cornwall in 1852 figures into it all, I'd be getting some work done instead of playing at genealogy on line ...

And has publicly said he supports this change. So, I'm sure he is stuffy , somewhat bigoted, and definitely classist... but he's more Progressive than most executive branch people on this side of the pond!

tampon, and with that in mind...."

I seem to remember Brazillian republicans using the recording of that phone call in adverts during the referendum campaign on restoring the monarchy there- masterstroke!

... should just shut up and go away.

Now, for extra points: am I referring to George or Charles?

Rocks don't grow on trees.

..exception...

you might just pull it out...

while you're looking for one o' them "free speech zones".

Oh wait. They don't have them in the UK ... or Canada ... or in any other constitutional monarchy that I'm aware of ...

Better get good directions if you're in that former colony though. You wouldn't want to end up getting arrested for criticizing His Imperial Holiness George Bush II where he might see or hear what you say.

Chimp-God-Emperor counts

"…and don't forget how many times I've repeated, 'Islam is a religion of peace.' 'Doesn't that count for anything?"

when half the Muslim world believes Diana was murdered in order to avoid the humiliation of the Heir to the Throne have a Muslim step father and gasp! perhpas even Muslim siblings.

I'm not saying I buy that theory, but many Muslims surely do.

Prince Charles is going to ask them to lay off their Islamophobia a bit. Hmmm... Does not the I-word explain IWMD, Oil4Food, etc?

to the ground and fill his head with hot lead but, hey, who hasn't? The thing is we are being ever so tolerant right up to that point...'

And my point being that I do not see how the U.K. is in any position to preach about tolerance.

authoritive figure on Islam?

chimp language...

maybe then bush will get it....

Maybe Prince Charles can invite Tony Blair to the meeting. He needs the same lecture.

.. our own breed of fundamentalists (and others) demonstrating in opposition?

It's about oil and * doesn't have to care.

considering they come from the tongue of a reptile.

Islam is just another damn religion stealing the minds of people. I really don't care which religion disappears from the planet first, as long as they all eventually wither away into utter meaninglessness, such as the religions of the ancient Romans, Greeks, and Vikings did.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

that British bubble headed comb over boy coming to your shores.

or maybe they asked him to talk to *....

:wow:

Is this really Charlie's reason for coming to the US?

Plus, he's practically one of the family.