David Cameron reveals Islamic State plot to kill the Queen, royals

news.com.au ^ | 8th September 2015

[naturalman1975]

I'll take your word for it. However Great Britain ceased to be a Christian nation at least a couple of decades ago. For the most part British citizens are ambivalent about Christianity and probably could care less if their king was an Anglican or a Muslim. They's probably prefer he was an atheist like them.

On that I agree with you - Christianity is still the most common religion in the UK, but lack of religion is even more common. And even a lot of those who still profess to be Christians, don't take it at all seriously. I actually thought the Prince was probably one of those until I came to know him better but I've found out he actually takes his faith seriously.

[Churchillspirit]

My friend's daughter worked for the Prince's Trust.

She had nothing but good things to say about Prince Charles - and Camilla.

Knee jerk reaction is rather tiresome.

[Churchillspirit]

Do you think they have given up?

No. We must always be on guard.

See my tagline.

[naturalman1975]

He won’t be the first Christian caricatured by the media. I read someplace today that the Queen is worth about 30 billion dollars. I assume he’ll get that if he doesn’t die before his mom, who seems to be doing great at eighty-eight.

The Queen's wealth is complicated. If you take everything she technically owns, thirty billion dollars probably isn't far wrong (I'd say closer to twenty but it's in the ball park) but the vast majority of it is out of her control and really is more the property of the nation than herself. Having said that, even if you only count her personal wealth, she's still worth at least in the hundreds of millions and probably in the low billions. She's an extremely rich lady by any measure.

The Prince of Wales himself is worth at least in the high tens of millions, and both his sons are worth at least ten million or twenty million themselves (Harry is actually richer than his older brother at the moment, because the Princess of Wales left most of her estate to him on the basis that William would one day inherit the bulk of his father and grandmother's estates).

The family is ridiculously privileged in a lot of ways - and they know it. I think that is part of why most of them do have the sense of duty they have - because they know that if they didn't, eventually there'd be a huge backlash. But even if part of the duty comes from that, it's genuine.

[P-Marlowe]

I actually thought the Prince was probably one of those until I came to know him better but I've found out he actually takes his faith seriously.

Then perhaps when he becomes King he can fire the current Archbishop of Canterbury and replace him with a real Christian.

Where are today's CS Lewis's in the Anglican Faith?

[pbear8]

I thank you for your posts. I had heard mention of this plot a bit ago but then nothing. I am glad the DC had the fortitude to go after the terrorists. I trust your word on PC and his beliefs, after all, you know the man, I only know the press reports.

[Lurker]

“As heir to the throne, he has to be aware that he could become King at anytime. As King, he constitutionally cannot be opposed to the policies of ‘His Majesty’s Government’. Nor can he advocate policies that the Government is not in favour of. He can support a war that Britain is fighting - and he does support such things - but he is very limited constitutionally in what he can publically do. That’s the nature of the Constitutional Monarchy that applies.”

Gibberish.

The rest of your post makes sense to me. And I thank you for the analysis.

L

[naturalman1975]

Then perhaps when he becomes King he can fire the current Archbishop of Canterbury and replace him with a real Christian.

He can't even do that - nor can his mother. The Monarch does technically choose the Archbishop of Canterbury, but in practice, the Prime Minister gives her a shortlist of two, or at most, three to choose from. And the oath that is sworn at the Coronation actually requires the Monarch to support the Bishop's:

Will you to the utmost of your power maintain the Laws of God and the true profession of the Gospel? Will you to the utmost of your power maintain in the United Kingdom the Protestant Reformed Religion established by law? Will you maintain and preserve inviolably the settlement of the Church of England, and the doctrine, worship, discipline, and government thereof, as by law established in England? And will you preserve unto the Bishops and Clergy of England, and to the Churches there committed to their charge, all such rights and privileges, as by law do or shall appertain to them or any of them?

[naturalman1975]

Gibberish.

Nonetheless, it's a succinct and simple analysis of the Constitutional position. The King (or Queen) cannot publically disagree with Parliament and His/Her Majesty's Government. And for that reason, nor can the heir because they might become King at any time. Doing so would create a constitutional crisis.

[Lurker]

As I said...gibberish. Also perfect evidence of the inherent flaw of the so called “constitutional monarchy”.

A government can be Constitutional or it can be a Monarchy.

It can’t be both.

L

[Olog-hai]

Of course. The left always wants to increase the hate.

[Olog-hai]

It’s not the liberal media that’s been giving us that impression. Its HRH himself.

[Olog-hai]

Not true. Kings don’t have any authority to subvert a constitution of law. What if George Washington had become the king of the USA? which was not out of the realm of possibility.

And even the US republic is a constitutional monarchy of sorts, with most of the Founding Fathers recognizing Jesus as the sovereign monarch.

[july4thfreedomfoundation]

“...VJ Day is August 15th, and the ceremony in question was held then.”
___________________________________________________________

OK, August 15th, that makes more sense.

I’m glad that attack was foiled....it would have been a catastrophe if the terrorists had succeeded.

Thank-you for posting.

[Lurker]

“What if George Washington had become the king of the USA?”

He didn’t. The question is irrelevant and silly.

The U.S. is, or used to be anyway, a Constitutional Republic. It’s the difference between a citizen and a subject. One is sovereign, free to speak their mind no matter what the Givernment thinks, and the other is a slave.

L

[caww]

Two "British" Nationals killed in Syria by Drone operating from Britain...Amazing!

And here with the third terroist also killed

British Nationals Reyaad Khan, 21, from Cardiff and Ruhul Amin, 26, from Aberdeen,.... killed in attack on August 21 They were... blitzed in Syria ....by a drone controlled by RAF pilots sitting 3,000 miles away in Lincolnshire

Airmen were operating the controversial £10m Reaper unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) from hub at RAF Waddington

The experienced airmen were operating the controversial £10million Reaper unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) from a hi-tech control hub at RAF Waddington.

As the unsuspecting jihadists travelled in a vehicle in Raqqa, capital of the so-called Islamic State, they were wiped out by a laser-guided Hellfire missile.

Pilots from 13 Squadron ordered the craft – about the size of a small executive jet – to carry out airstrikes from a height of up to 50,000ft using its fearsome arsenal.

[caww]

here’s the link...sorry i forgot...

http://www.usaukonline.com/news/110999-the-technology-behind-the-raf-drone-attack.html

[P-Marlowe]

He can't even do that - nor can his mother. The Monarch does technically choose the Archbishop of Canterbury, but in practice, the Prime Minister gives her a shortlist of two, or at most, three to choose from.

What good is being the Titular head of the Church of England if you can't fire some out of control underling like the BofC?

Henry VIII would just lop off the heads of the BofC until he got it right.

[MUDDOG]

wiped out by a laser-guided Hellfire missile

Look at the sky turn a hellfire red, Lord.

[caww]

A thing of Beauty! I’m going to see if I can find the actual hit.....