Prince Charles: Islam’s New Ambassador

Prince Charles of Wales and his new bride, Camilla Parker Bowles, the Duchess of Cornwall, have been 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” towards Islam.  In Prince Charles’ 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 increasing 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 paying lip service to condemning violence against civilians (a word with multiple connotations among Muslims), Sacranie has also said of the July 7th 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 upon 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 will Islamists.

To cap all this off, British banks are now fazing 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 is appears to be going down without a fight.  Prince Charles certainly seems to be on board for the change over.  His recent 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, Prince Charles 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 to spread “peace and harmony through education.”  The fact that Stevens is an active sympathizer of terrorist groups 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 towards 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? Amidst this backdrop, anti-Semitism in the UK is at an all-time high.  Whether it be the brainwashed 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 and in some cases moving to Israel.  According to writer Barry Shaw who sells real estate in Israel, sales have been booming as British Jews choose to settle in Israel instead of waiting around for things to get worse.  In truth, 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 two 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.  Meanwhile, France’s “leaders” dither on ineffectually.

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 like England, multiculturalism has created an unassimilated population in which radicalism has been allowed to flourish.  Whether or not 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 have been occurring in Denmark.  They were spurred on by anger at the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten for running a series of cartoons based on the prophet Mohammed.  It appears the newspaper miscalculated in thinking that the Muslim community would welcome such freedom of speech.  As Imam Raed Hlayehel put it in a statement, “This type of democracy is worthless for Muslims.” 

With both Denmark and France burning, a civil war seems to be brewing in Europe and it’s unlikely to end anytime soon.  All of this so far is a far cry from the relatively integrated and prosperous Muslim population in the United States.  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. Statistics on Arab-Americans bear out similar results. According to the 2000 U.S. Census Bureau, people of Arab descent in the U.S. are actually “better educated and wealthier than average Americans.”  This population includes Christians along with Muslims, but the economic opportunities and institutions that benefit all Americans is the real key to Arab-American success.  Despite Prince Charles’ 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.  In addition, the Bush administration has gone out of its way to emphasize that the war on terrorism is not a war against Islam itself.  Some would say they’ve gone overboard in such pursuits, but the administration certainly can’t be faulted for lack of effort. 

And if helping to rid Muslims of their despotic leaders is considered too “confrontational,” then so be it.  Perhaps Prince Charles needs reminding that his own Prime Minister Tony Blair has been along for the ride since day one. It’s obvious that the problems of Great Britain and Europe with their Muslim population are far greater than that of the United States.  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 are foregoing their Christian heritage in favor of an Islamic future.  Whether or not everyone goes willingly, sheer population numbers will eventually engulf them.  Islamists are nothing if not patient, assigning centuries to these ongoing civilizational battles.  And when it comes to Europe, they are definitely winning.  Just ask Prince Charles.