Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Prince Charles speech

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Prince Charles speech

    Last week, Britain’s Prince Charles gave yet another one of his tedious speeches about environmentalism at
    Oxford University. The man who owns six cars while urging others to walk when running their errands and who travels by private jet when promoting “enviromnental issues” throughout Europe is still yammering on about “carbon footprints” and “global warming.” Yawn.
    Normally, we’d just give the old two fingered salute to this privileged man who insists on telling the rest of us how to live while he lives it up. But as he decided to bring Islam into the mix, well, we sat up and took more notice than usual.
    Good old Charlie told the Islamic Studies students to whom he was speaking that if Westerners want to save the environment, we should follow Islamic “spiritual principles.” He went on to say, “The inconvenient truth is that we share this planet with the rest of creation for a very good reason – and that is, we cannot exist on our own without the intricately balanced web of life around us. Islam has always taught this and to ignore that lesson is to default on our contract with creation.”
    Islam teaches that if we ignore the intricately balanced web of life we will default on our contract with creation?
    Perhaps Charles would have been better off speaking about some of the outrages perpetrated in the name of Islam, such as the 7-year-old boy who was hanged by the Taliban last week for being a spy. Nothing says “intricately balanced web of life” than putting a noose around the neck of a little boy. According to the spokesman for the governor of Helmand province, where the hanging is thought to have happened, “The innocent boy was not a spy, but he may have informed the police or soldiers about planted explosives.” In Western countries like Britain and America, children are encouraged to talk to police if they think there is danger. In Afghanistan, such behavior is apparently a call for the death sentence.
    Just three years ago, the Taliban also hanged a 70-year-old woman and a child on trumped up spying charges. The religion of peace sure has been busy.
    Then there was the suicide bomb that went off in the middle of a wedding party, killing 40 and injuring 74, including children. Bored with the usual bouquet toss and garter throw? Strap on an explosive vest the next time you’re invited to a wedding and see how exciting things can get.
    This is not the first time Charles has given Islam two thumbs up in public. In 1997, he explained how the Muslim critique of materialism helped him to rediscover the sacred spirituality of Islam and explain the decline of the West:
    "I start from the belief that Islamic civilization at its best... has an important message for the West in the way it has retained an integrated and integral view of the sanctity of the world around us. I feel that we in the West could be helped to rediscover the roots of our own understanding by an appreciation of the Islamic tradition's deep respect for the timeless traditions of the natural order.”
    Daniel Pipes speculates that Charles is a secret convert to Islam – which is a sticky wicket, considering he is next in line to the throne and would thus succeed his mother, Queen Elizabeth, as the head of the Church of England. While Pipes says there is no definitive proof there are worriesome signs, such as his being chosen to receive a $50,000 prize in 2004 from the Sultan Hassanal Bolkiah of Brunei for his contributions to understanding Islam in the West. In 2005, the Archbishop of Canterbury (at that time George Carey, not Islam apologist Dr. Rowan Williams, who believes Sharia law in Britain is “inevitable”), was concerned that upon succeeding his mother as head of the Church of England, Charles intended to change the title “defender of the faith” to “defender of faith” and “defender of the Divine.” Charles also apparently thought the U.S., under the leadership of George W. Bush, was too intolerant of Islam, and planned to lecture the president on his folly.
    The list can go on and on. See the Pipes link above for many other examples.
    Prince Charles has led a life of luxury and privilege. In an effort to keep busy, aside from the usual involvement with charities, he’s latched on to various fads such as the environment and organic food. Ironically, while suggesting that McDonalds be banned from the UK, it was discovered that a Cornish pasty churned out by his organic food company, Duchy Originals, had more calories, fat and salt than a Big Mac. Good thing he has such a big mouth – he needs it for that large foot he keeps putting into it.
    It seems that Charles’ attempt to keep busy and leading a useful life may have also led him into becoming a dangerous shill for Islam, if not an actual convert. With Islamic radicals continuing their takeover of the UK, the last thing that nation needs is its spoiled brat Crown Prince giving said radicals more encouragement. What a prat.
    If the Queen can’t actually put a muzzle on her eldest son, perhaps the next best thing would be for her to arrange for grandson William to bypass Charles in the line of succession – before it’s too late.

  • #2
    Prince Charles has been giving private speech about Islam since last year , hes given thousands like this one but its really bothering the bishop.

    Comment


    • #3
      Nobody is perfect but Royal indulgences aside, there is something about Prince Charles's willingness to speak up that really makes sense. He's covered a wide range of subjects with a thoughtful openess. That is a rare quality and it doesn't endear him to media sensationalisers.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by tor_khan View Post
        Nobody is perfect but Royal indulgences aside, there is something about Prince Charles's willingness to speak up that really makes sense. He's covered a wide range of subjects with a thoughtful openess. That is a rare quality and it doesn't endear him to media sensationalisers.
        Salam tor khan lala ,i agree with you he is a very open speaker, which is becoming a problem for the western world,the propaganda against him in the media are highlighted,in every propaganda hes called all sorts,his nick name now is Defender of Islam, or the traitor , the bishops want him out of the way.

        Comment


        • #5
          Charles actual islamic speech

          In the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful
          Prince Charles' speech on Islam
          The Times, Saturday December 14th. Prince Charles' Speech at WiltonPark.
          The Prince of Wales explains how the Muslim critique of materialism helped him to rediscover the sacred Islamic spiritualityand the decline of the West.
          I start from the belief that Islamic civilisation at its best, like many of the religions of the East Judaism, Hinduism, Jainism and Buddhism has and important message for the West in the way it has retained an integrated and integral view of the sanctity of the world around us. I feel that we in the West could be helped to rediscover the roots of our own understanding by an appreciation of the Islamic tradition's deep respect for the timeless traditions of the natural order.
          I believe that process could help in the task of bringing our two faiths closer together. It could also help us in the West to rethink, and for the better, our practical stewardship of man and his environment in fields such as health-care, the natural environment and agriculture, as well as in architecture and urban planning.
          Modern materialism is unbalanced and increasingly damaging in its long-term consequences. Yet nearly all the great religions of the world have held an integral view of the sanctity of the world.
          The Christian message with, for example, its deeply mystical and symbolic doctrine of the Incarnation, has been traditionally a message of the unity of the worlds of spirit and matter, and of God's manifestation in this world and in mankind.
          But during the past three centuries, in the Western world at least, a dangerous division has occurred in the way we perceive the world around us. Science has tried to assume a monopoly even a tyranny over our under standing. Religion and science have become separated, so that now, as Wordsworth said, "Little we see in nature that is ours". Science has attempted to take over the natural world from God; it has fragmented the cosmos and relegated the sacred to a separate and secondary compartment of our understanding, divorced from practical, day to day existence.
          We are only now beginning to gauge the disastrous results. We in the Western world seem to have lost a sense of the wholeness of our environment, and of our immense and inalienable responsibility to the whole of creation. This has led to an increasing failure to appreciate or understand tradition and the wisdom of our forebears, accumulated over the centuries. Indeed, tradition is positively discriminated against as if it were some socially unacceptable disease.
          In my view, a more holistic approach is needed now. Science has done the inestimable service of showing us a world much more complex than we ever imagined. But in its modern, materialist, one-dimensional form, it cannot explain everything. God is not merely the ultimate Newtonian mathematician or the mechanistic clockmaker. As science and technology have become increasingly separated from ethical, moral and sacred considerations, so the implications of such a separation have become more sombre and horrifying as we see in genetic manipulation or in the consequences of the kind of scientific arrogance so blatant in the scandal of BSE.
          I have always felt that tradition is not a man-made element in our lives, but a God-given intuition of natural rhythms, of the fundamental harmony that emerges from the union of the paradoxical opposites that exist in every aspect of nature. Tradition reflects the timeless order of the cosmos, and anchors us into an awareness of the great mysteries of the universe, so that, as Blake put it, we can see the whole universe in an atom and eternity in a moment. That is why I believe Man is so much more than just a biological phenomenon resting on what we now seem to define as "the bottom line" of the great balance sheet of life, according to which art and culture are seen increasingly as optional extras in life.
          This view is quite contrary, for example, to the outlook of the Muslim craftsman or artist, who is never concerned with display for its own sake, nor with progressing ever forward in his own ingenuity, but is content to submit a man's craft to God. That outlook reflects, I believe, the memorable passage in the Koran, "whithersoever you turn there is the face of God and God is all-embracing, all knowing". While appreciating that this essential innocence has been destroyed, and destroyed everywhere, I nevertheless believe that the survival of civilised values, as we have inherited them from our ancestors, depends on the corresponding survival in our hearts of that profound sense of the sacred and the spiritual.
          Traditional religions, with their integral view of the universe, can help us to rediscover the importance of the integration of the secular and the sacred. The danger of ignoring this essential aspect of our existence is not just spiritual or intellectual. It also lies at the heart of that great divide between the Islamic and Western worlds over the place of materialism in our lives. In those instances where Islam chooses to reject Western materialism, this is not, in my view, a political affectation or the result of envy or a sense of inferiority. Quite the opposite. And the danger that the gulf between the worlds of Islam and the other Eastern religions on the one hand and the West on the other will grow ever wider and more unbridgeable is real, unless we can explore together practical ways of integrating the sacred and the secular in both our cultures in order to provide a true inspiration for the next century.
          Islamic culture in its traditional form has striven to preserve this integrated, spiritual view of the world in a way we have not seen fit to do in recent generations in the West. There is much we can learn from that Islamic world view in this respect.
          There are many ways in which mutual understanding and appreciation can be built. Perhaps, for instance, we could begin by having more Muslim teachers in British schools, or by encouraging exchanges of teachers. Everywhere in the world people want to learn English. But in the West, in turn, we need to be taught by Islamic teachers how to learn with our hearts, as well as our heads. The approaching millennium may be the ideal catalyst for helping to explore and stimulate these links, and I hope we shall not ignore the opportunity this gives us to rediscover the spiritual underpinning of our entire existence.

          Comment


          • #6
            I still cant believe he dumped Diana for a horse.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by KhyberKhan View Post
              I still cant believe he dumped Diana for a horse.
              yeah me too, that i will never understand .

              Comment


              • #8
                let's see.. She was insecure paranoid and weak as well as a bimbo. She met a rich man in his late 30s when she herself was only 19 or 20 and then she had kids. Two of them before she was even 22. She got what every pretty girl her age marryig a rich old man for his wealth and status deserves.

                I am no bird, and no nest ensnares me.

                non commercial would cost less if he was in charge himself which he plans on doing. right now it's n herat but soon it will be in qanadahar.

                Comment


                • #9
                  she got her some "dodai" al fayed afterwards.

                  though what the prince says sounds nice n all, its action that i care about. the brits have been nothing but hostile to muslims for centuries now. if its just words we cared about and not action, we might as well praise bush because of his nice words about islam and that jazz.
                  There are people today who think that admitting God’s absolute greatness decreases the value and importance of humans in the creation, as if God and mankind are rivals competing in greatness and power. Meanwhile I feel that whenever our perception of God’s greatness increases, with it we become greater, because we are the creation of a great God.

                  Sayyid Qutb

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Princes charles campaigned against war

                    Our glorious leader: Prince Charles's sarcasm-laced jibe at Tony Blair as he fought to avert invasion of Iraq

                    By Daniel Martin

                    Last updated at 8:16 AM on 4th January 2010





                    Prince Charles campaigned actively against the Iraq war and sarcastically referred to Tony Blair as 'our glorious leader', it has emerged.
                    The heir to the throne, who was privy to secret intelligence, was convinced the war was wrong and broke royal tradition by opposing it behind closed doors.
                    And he was 'scathing' about Mr Blair, a senior royal source revealed.




                    Prince Charles was convinced the war was wrong and was 'scathing' about Tony Blair behind closed doors, according to a senior royal source


                    The prince warned that the 2003 war would only stir up more conflict in the region and accused Western leaders of failing to deal with the real cause of trouble there: the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
                    He questioned whether secret intelligence provided enough evidence for the war.


                    More...



                    The revelations will add to accusations that Charles is guilty of 'unconstitutional meddling' in the affairs of democratically elected governments.
                    It emerged last month that he had written to eight Whitehall departments in three years.
                    Revealing how Charles did his utmost to oppose the Iraq war, the royal source told a Sunday newspaper: 'The prince thought Blair was making a big mistake and he made his stance clear to influential people and politicians.
                    'He believed it would be a disaster to send in our troops and he was proved right. Of course, HRH totally supports our boys on the frontline. He has two sons in the military and the Royal Family is intrinsically linked to the armed services.
                    'This is about the decision to go to war given what was known at the time. He thinks it was wrong and made his position clear, then and now.
                    'He was scathing about Mr Blair and sarcastically called him "our glorious leader". It was a running joke.'
                    At the weekend, former Prime Minister Sir John Major also attacked Mr Blair over Iraq, saying Britain's decision to join the U.S.-led invasion had damaged trust in the political process more than the MPs' expenses scandal.
                    'The suspicion arises that this was more about regime change than about weapons of mass destruction,' he said.
                    Mr Blair is due to appear soon before the Chilcot inquiry into the Iraq war. There may be calls for exchanges between him and Prince Charles to be presented to the inquiry.
                    In his position as a privy councillor, Charles saw a range of secret documents before the war.
                    Opponents of the war will point out that he and Mr Blair came to opposing views on the rightness of the war after reviewing the same evidence.
                    During 2002 and 2003, Charles pressed repeatedly against Britain's involvement. He even visited Arab countries and voiced his opposition to world leaders.
                    Another senior figure said: 'The prince thought it was madness to go to war and said so - especially knowing what he and the prime minister knew.'
                    A further source said: 'The prince certainly made his views clear before the invasion and since. Perhaps if the government of the day had listened it may have turned out differently and for the better. 'The prince fundamentally disagreed with Bush and his administration. He thought the approach was all wrong and was baffled by the man and his policies. Frankly, Bush scared him to death.'

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Diana Spencer was born in the late afternoon on july 1961 to John Earl Spencer Viscount Althorp and Frances Ruth Burke Roche.
                      The Spencer family is one of Britain's Aristrocratic dynasties.
                      The Spencer Earls enjoyed Diana Spencer was born in the late afternoon on July 1961 to John Earl Spencer Viscount Althorp and Frances Ruth Burke Roche.
                      The Spencer family is one of Britain's Aristrocratic dynasties.
                      The Spencer Earls enjoyed wealth and political power,they were collectors
                      and patrons of arts.
                      The Spencer closely allied with the royal family for several generations family is one of Great Britain's oldest and most important families.
                      wealth and political power,they were collectors
                      and patrons of arts.
                      As far as money goes she was a Viscount billionaires daughter.



                      earl spencer viscount and Burke spencer countess.jpg

                      Diana-Spencer-and-Prince-Charles-3.jpg
                      Last edited by Guest; 09-29-2011, 10:05 PM.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X