BROADSIDES

February 09, 2003

The Dupe of Windsor
If this News of the World report is accurate, then there can be only one conclusion: Queen Elizabeth II and her boorish husband are too closely related.

Their elder child and heir to the British throne, Prince Charles, has taken a break from his only job—waiting for his mother to die—to undermine American and British efforts to liberate the world from the threat of Saddam Hussein. Charles, according to the report, is whining that "American imperialism" is a greater threat than Saddam. (There's something amusing about the future pretend-ruler of the British Empire accusing another country of having imperial designs.)

He also accuses President Bush of being motivated by—you guessed it—oil. As with his fellow celebrity-simpletons, Charles is apparently oblivious to the events of September 11, 2001, the Bali bombing, the Foley assassination and al-Qaeda's Ricin poison operation in London.

The News reports that Prime Minister Tony Blair's government is, understandably, pissed:

There are also worries that he makes no secret of his anti-American views in conversations with members of Arab royal families and their leading officials . . . A Whitehall source said: "Downing Street tries not to involve the prince in anything—because they have concerns over how he will react. "He has this lunatic view he is the voice of the people."

The News also reveals that the prince patters around at home in "Islamic dress", reads the Koran daily and cozies up with nefarious members of the Saudi royal family:

One of his closest friends is the former Saudi ambassador Ghazi Algosaibi who wrote a poem in praise of the first woman suicide bomber. Algosaibi said that the "doors of heaven are opened for her". He once described the Israelis as worse than Nazis and he was a regular guest at Highgrove—Prince Charles's country home—before he was recalled by his government last year.

As a result, Blair has cut Charles out of the loop and President Bush personally canceled plans for Charles to make an official visit to the United States. In other words, the Prince of Wales is a security risk. Given that the two-faced Saudi regime plays footsies with al-Qaeda and some members of the Saudi royal family are al-Qaeda's major funding conduits, keeping Charles in the dark is a matter of national security.

This is not to say that Charles Windsor supports terrorism. This is to say, however, that Charles has too much spare time. His lifelong job as heir to the throne is not much different than that of the casino greeter-in-centurion-garb at Caesar's Palace. He smiles and he waves and dresses in nifty costumes. And there his responsibilities and experience end. Combine that with the fact that Charles feels insecure about possessing the appearance rather than the essence of power and you have the precise makings for a dupe.

Dupes are nothing new in the House of Windsor. Charles' great uncle, the Duke of Windsor (the former King Edward VIII who abdicated in 1936 so he could get laid by a golddigging American divorcee), was so desperate to recover some of the influence and power he had as a monarch, he struck-up a friendship with Adolf Hitler. (Here's an infamous photo of the duke and duchess being warmly greeted by their Nazi pal.) Hitler, of course, cheerfully duped the duke into spewing pro-Nazi propaganda to the rest of the world. Edward vigorously defended the Nazi dictator even as late as 1941 in a letter to the American magazine Liberty. In that letter to the editor Edward wrote "it would be a tragic thing if Hitler was overthrown." Rumors that Edward actively sought to overthrow Churchill's wartime government by force are probably exaggerations, but there can be no doubt that, at the very least, the duke sought to undermine British efforts to stop Hitler. And the Nazis were counting on him. "There is no need to lose a single German life in invading Britain," Deputy Fuhrer Rudolf Hess wrote to Hitler, "The Duke and his clever wife will deliver the goods."

Is Edward's grandnephew trying to deliver the goods for Islamofascists by sabotaging the liberation of Iraq? If so, Downing Street would do well to discreetly remind Prince Charles that if the 1701 Act of Settlement establishing succession can be altered to remove a reigning king from the succession, as it was in 1936, it sure as hell can be altered again to nix a prince of Wales from the line-up.

It's doubtful matters will reach that critical point. But if they do, so what? Charles is damaged goods, his lack of good judgment is apparent and his sense of priorities is twisted. He is not fit to be king.

The Duke of Edinburgh agrees. Charles, he said, "is precious, extravagant and lacking in the dedication and discipline to make a good king." And the Duke of Edinburgh should know; he's the father of Prince Charles.

B. Sides @ 4:15 PM