This morning I read in our newspaper that Prince Charles is hopping across to visit President Bush to persuade him of the strengths (supposedly positive good points) of Islam since he feels that America is being intolerant of this religion. Prince Charles is reported as believing that the Islamic suicide bombers have done a disservice to the reputation of Islam and the millions of peace-loving Muslims around the world. It seems that the Prince wants to modify the perception of Islam that President Bush may have, and persuade him not to be so harsh in dealing with the adherents of this world religion.

What?! Has the Prince finally lost all of his marbles? He was reported last week as saying that he feared he was seen as being irrelevant in today’s world, but is this going to help him become any more relevant? I certainly don’t think so.

It is expected that one day, since everyone including royalty must die eventually, that Prince Charles will accede to the British throne. According to The Preface to the 39 Articles of the Church of England, the British monarch is ‘being by God’s Ordinance, according to Our just Title, Defender of the Faith and … Supreme Governor of the Church of England’.

I am already despairing of the so-called leadership of the Church of England which is selling out fast to the liberals who believe that stripping Christianity of it’s orthodox Biblical truth claims thereby makes it more relevant in these post-modern times… and now we have the Heir Apparent actively pushing Islam! So whatever happened to “Defender of the Faith”? Which faith? What faith? Islam?

Prince Charles of Arabia ~ our future King is said to have already converted to Islam.

Prince Charles spoke with some senior members of Islam back in November 2001 after the devastating attacks on America two months earlier. If I am to believe Reuters, it is said of him that he has done more than anyone else in the Royal family to understand the history of Islam. Now, I wonder if he spoke with anyone as knowledgeable and as honest as Dr Mark Gabriel whose credentials I have mentioned before but will cite here again…

Raised in Egypt to be a devout Muslim and able to recite the entire Qur’an at an early age.
Bachelor’s, master’s, and doctorate degrees in Islamic History and Culture from the prestigious Islamic Al-Azhar University, Cairo, Egypt, graduating second in his class of six thousand students for his bachelor’s degree. He was one of the youngest lecturers ever hired at Al-Azhar University. He started lecturing after he finished his master’s degree and was working to finish his doctorate. The university sent him as a travelling lecturer to countries around the Middle East to lecture in Islamic history.
He also served as the imam at a mosque in the Cairo suburbs.
When Gabriel began questioning the Qur’an he was kidnapped, imprisoned and tortured by the Egyptian Secret Police, denounced by his own family who attempted to kill him, and was forced to flee to South Africa.
Later Gabriel (who abandoned his Arabic name for his personal safety) became a Christian and pursued a Christian education which included: Discipleship Training School with Youth With A Mission in Cape Town, South Africa; Master’s degree in World Religion from Florida Christian University in Orlando, Florida (2001); Doctorate degree in Christian Education from Florida Christian University in Orland, Florida (2002); Induction as a fellow in the Oxford Society of Scholars, September 2003.

Dr Gabriel would be able to tell Prince Charles about the practice of “taqiya” (”al-taqiya” or “taqaiyya”).

This is the principle of “holy hypocrisy” (taqiyya) whereby lying is condoned to hide malevalent intent. By this practise a Muslim may conceal his true intentions in the interests of progressing the cause of Islam. Islamic universities and imans in their mosques teach that the ultimate goal expressed in the Qur’an is world domination with Islam as the sole religion. Such a goal will be strenuously denied by imans to hide the true nature of Islam, but it is written in the Qur’an and it is taught as true doctrine. Perhaps Dr Gabriel might have been able to stop Prince Charles from falling for this strategy and pursuing this treacherous venture which fosters Islam at the expense of Christianity which he, as future defender of the faith, is supposed to be upholding.

Where Muslims are in the minority they are to practice taqiya in order to get on with their neighbours. It happens that many Muslims actually prefer to live peaceably and lead ordinary lives, uncommitted to jihad (holy war) and the violent Medina surahs (verses in the Qur’an), choosing to follow the Islam of the more peaceful Mecca period. They ignore the principle of nasikh whereby the peaceful surahs are abrogated by the later violent ones, and are often labelled apostates by their more devout brothers. By doing so, these Muslims show the face of Islam to be the peaceful religion that they sincerely but wrongfully claim it to be, and so help to give confusing messages regarding the real voice of Islam. But as the number and strength of devout Muslims build, and their leaders find greater opportunities to influence, there will be increasing pressure applied to all Muslims to practice their faith fully and become organized to take up the call to physical jihad. The sword of Islam is to be felt eventually by all nonbelievers, and for Muslims, to die in jihad is to be received immediately into Paradise with it’s promised eternal carnal rewards.

Islam is a very real threat. Iran's President Mahmud Ahmadinejad has just cited comments by Ayatollah Khomeini, the founder of the Islamic revolution, when he declared to an audience of 3,000 students, “As the imam said, Israel must be wiped off the map” and that there was “no doubt the new wave [of attacks] in Palestine will soon wipe off this disgraceful blot from the face of the Islamic world.” The U.S. State Department spokesman Sean McCormack has said in Washington: “I think you are starting to see, through some of these remarks, some of the true views and intentions of this [Iranian] regime, and I think that it only serves to underscore our concern, as well as the international communities concern, about Iran’s pursuit of nuclear weapons.”

So just how relevant is Prince Charles trying to be?
He leaves me shaking my head in dismay. And as for any role in leadership of the Church of England…
Matthew 8:25

Essential further reading on this subject:

Prince Charles: The Constantine of Islam?
by Ali Sina of the FaithFreedom website.

Added 22 November:

Prince Charles, Islam`s New Ambassador

Prince Charles of Wales and his new bride, Camilla Parker Bowles, the Duchess of Cornwall, were just in the United States, hobnobbing at the White House and imparting royal pearls of wisdom. According to statements made prior to this visit, Prince Charles thinks the U.S. is “intolerant” toward Islam. In Charles's view, it's all gone downhill since 9/11 because of the Bush administration's “confrontational” approach to Muslim countries. In fact, he made these comments during a meeting with Muslim leaders soon after 9/11.

Of course, Great Britain's tolerance for Islam is hardly the model to follow. After allowing Islamic extremism to fester openly in Muslim mosques and neighborhoods (to the point where the nickname “Londonistan” became commonplace), the UK was attacked by homegrown terrorists on July 7, 2005. The London bombings were the culmination of years of turning a blind eye to the cancer within.

Initially, there was much talk about retaining a sense of “British identity” in lieu of the self-destructive multiculturalism that had engulfed English society, but that has since faded into obscurity. The “stoic” British spirit in the face of terrorism and the country's historical legacy of wartime endurance were also popular topics. But instead of defiance, the British reacted more with resignation. “We can take it,” was the mantra uttered by many an Englishman in the wake of the bombings, as if bearing terrorism rather than fighting it was their unavoidable fate.

But even after these brutal attacks, the British descent into dhimmitude continued. Radical groups such as Al Mahajiroun are still calling publicly for jihad against the West and the creation of an Islamic Caliphate to rule Britain. Members of the British government, such as Respect Party MP George Galloway, openly side with Islamists against their own country, going so far as to aid in the propaganda battle with regular appearances on al-Jazeera and other Arab media outlets.

Muslim voters and politicians are having an ever greater influence on the British political landscape. When Queen Elizabeth knighted the secretary general of the Muslim Council of Britain, Iqbal Sacranie (now Sir Iqbal Sacranie), it was the epitome of this trend. Although he paid lip service to condemning violence against civilians (a word with multiple connotations among Muslims), Sacranie also said of the July 7 terrorists: “Nothing is clear about what motivated them.”

In a country where knighthood is conferred upon such luminaries as Sir Mick Jagger and Sir Elton John, the honor bestowed on Sacranie is hardly shocking. But something tells me rock stars will have less of an impact on British politics in the years to come than Islamists.

To cap all this off, British banks are now phasing out piggy banks because they “offend Muslims.” It's apparently not enough that Muslims abstain from eating pork, as do devout Jews. The mere sight of a pig-like figurine is an affront to their purity. At this rate, it's just a matter of time before the sight of women's uncovered heads will also be deemed offensive to Muslims and such freedoms will go the way of piggy banks. The Islamic Caliphate is encroaching and England appears to be going down without a fight.

Prince Charles certainly seems to be on board for the changeover. His visit to Georgetown University's Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding was simply the icing on the cake. It turns out his fascination with Islam, along with various New Age pursuits, has a long history.

In 2000, the prince made a point of visiting former singer Cat Stevens (turned Muslim convert Yusuf Islam) at his Islamia School in Britain, where he congratulated Cat, a.k.a. Yusuf, for his efforts at spreading “peace and harmony through education.” The fact that Stevens is a sympathizer of groups linked to terror and was deported back to Britain after appearing on a no-fly list in the U.S. would seem to belie such claims. The prince has also become a patron of the UK's Center for Islamic Studies, along with the late King Fahd of Saudi Arabia, who once donated 33 million dollars to the school.

When Prince Charles became Supreme Governor of the Church of England in 1994 he opted to call himself not the traditional “defender of the faith” but rather “defender of faiths” so as not to offend non-Christians. A year earlier, he gave a speech in which he urged the West to overcome its “unthinkable prejudices” about Islam. Of Islam's unthinkable prejudices toward every other religion in the world, he had little to say. Prince Charles tends instead to employ the logic of moral relativism by equating Christian “extremism” with Islamic extremism, as if the two are comparable.

With all of this mind, one has to wonder whether Prince Charles' own conversion to Islam is eminent or if the royal family has simply made the change from symbolic rulers to proselytizers for Islam?

Against this backdrop, anti-Semitism in the UK is at an all-time high. Whether it be leftists in academia calling for boycotts and divestment from Israel or the Muslim Council of Britain (of Sir Ian Sacranie fame) insisting that commemorating Holocaust Day is somehow offensive to Muslims, things aren't looking too good for Jews in England these days. This may explain why British Jews are streaming out of the country, in some cases moving to Israel. British society has always had an anti-Semitic streak along with a propensity for Arabism, and both are now reaching their logical conclusion.

Meanwhile, over in France, Muslim mobs have been rioting for the past three weeks. It began when two Muslim men (or “youths” as the media likes to call them) hiding from police in a power substation accidentally electrocuted themselves. Riots ensued and quickly spread, resulting in roaming gangs attacking police, setting hundreds of vehicles on fire, firing guns into the street, hurling Molotov cocktails and stones at firehouses, and burning down stores.

The violence ratcheted up a notch when rioters doused a disabled woman in gasoline and tossed a Molotov cocktail at the bus she was in, almost burning her to death. Another man fared even worse, dying after being in a coma for a week thanks to the group of thugs that attacked him.

After dithering ineffectually for the first two weeks, French “leaders” instituted measures to try to control the chaos. But the nightly rioting in Muslim neighborhoods, while diminishing somewhat, continued on. Perhaps this will be the new norm for France.

France's high unemployment rate and segregated ghettos have long been fertile ground for crime and extremism, but what we're witnessing now is nothing less than societal collapse. Much as it has in England, multiculturalism in France has created an unassimilated population in which radicalism is allowed to flourish. Whether the latest generation of Muslims actually wishes to integrate into French society is another matter.

This last question is also integral to the Muslim riots that recently occurred in Denmark. They were spurred by anger at the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten for running a series of cartoons deemed insulting to Islam. It appears the newspaper miscalculated in thinking the Muslim community would welcome such freedom of speech. As Imam Raed Hlayehel put it, “This type of democracy is worthless for Muslims.” With both Denmark and France under attack from within, a civil war certainly seems to be brewing in Europe.

All of this is a far cry from what one finds in the U.S., with its relatively integrated and prosperous Muslim population. A drive through the largely Arab-American enclave of Dearborn, Michigan, demonstrates not ghettoes or alienation but well-maintained streets and a thriving business community. According to the 2000 U.S. Census Bureau, individuals of Arab descent in the U.S. are actually “better educated and wealthier than average Americans.”

Despite Prince Charles's claims of American intolerance, incidents of anti-Islamic hate crimes in the U.S. numbered only 154 in 2004. This is far below that of racially motivated hate crimes, not to mention those involving other religions. Anti-Jewish hate crimes for instance, were the highest of the bunch, numbering 954. Yet for some mysterious reason, Prince Charles hasn't commented on the “intolerance” of anti-Semitism in America.

If helping Muslims rid themselves of their despotic leaders is considered too “confrontational,” so be it. Perhaps Prince Charles needs reminding that his own prime minister has been along for the ride since day one.

While the U.S. has its own extremist elements to contend with, the long-term prospects are fairly hopeful. Commitment to religious freedom is still high among Americans and this may prove to be the ultimate savior.

In contrast, Great Britain and Europe as a whole are forgoing their Christian heritage in favor of an Islamic future. Whether the masses go willingly or not, the sheer demographics will eventually engulf them. Islamists are nothing if not patient, assigning centuries to these ongoing civilizational battles. When it comes to Europe, they are definitely winning. Just ask Prince Charles.

(written by Cinnamon Stillwell)