Shame on Prince Charles!

[David Ben-Ariel]

Prince Charles and his new/old wife are an ACCURSED COUPLE. Their adultery led to Princess Diana's adultery and ultimately to her death. Charles bears the chief responsibility for the entire tragedy and is unfit to be king.

May Prince William remember his Hebrew roots (http://www.britam.org) and biblical responsibilities and act accordingly, as the scion of King David, continuing King David's dynasty (http://www.thetrumpet.com/index.php?page=book&id=1265&section=1365) with honor and great dignity, with the grace of his beloved mother before her fall.

[Piebald]

Oh, you're one of those with European ancestry that likes to pretend that they're really the lost tribes of Israel?

[Gilgaron]

Oh, you're one of those with European ancestry that likes to pretend that they're really the lost tribes of Israel?

They generally clam up when you mention the lack of genetic evidence for such an idea.

[Piebald]

They generally clam up when you mention the lack of genetic evidence for such an idea.
Or the sham etymology. Get a load of this:


The nickname "Yank" applied to someone from the U.S.A. is derivable from a possible pronunciation of the Hebrew name Yaacov or Jacob rendered as "Yankel" in Yiddish.


But on our planet:

ETYMONLINE.com:

YANKEE
1683, a name applied disparagingly by Du. settlers in New Amsterdam (New York) to English colonists in neighboring Connecticut. It may be from Du. Janke, lit. "Little John," dim. of common personal name Jan; or it may be from Jan Kes familiar form of "John Cornelius," or perhaps an alt. of Jan Kees, dial. variant of Jan Kaas, lit. "John Cheese," the generic nickname the Flemings used for Dutchmen. It originally seems to have been applied insultingly to Dutch, especially freebooters, before they turned around and slapped it on the English. In Eng. a term of contempt (1750s) before its use as a general term for "native of New England" (1765); during the American Revolution it became a disparaging British word for all American native or inhabitants. Shortened form Yank in reference to "an American" first recorded 1778.

[kiwimac]

Yup.

Just another dollop of heiferdust!

Kiwimac

[yoki]

Prince Charles and his new/old wife are an ACCURSED COUPLE. Their adultery led to Princess Diana's adultery and ultimately to her death. Charles bears the chief responsibility for the entire tragedy and is unfit to be king.

May Prince William remember his Hebrew roots (http://www.britam.org) and biblical responsibilities and act accordingly, as the scion of King David, continuing King David's dynasty (http://www.thetrumpet.com/index.php?page=book&id=1265&section=1365) with honor and great dignity, with the grace of his beloved mother before her fall.

Did not King David practice polygamy as well as falling into adultery? I'm sure that Prince Charles has a time for repentence before his skin turns any darker. :eek:

[David Ben-Ariel]

Oh, you're one of those with European ancestry that likes to pretend that they're really the lost tribes of Israel?

No, I'm one of those who recognize our Hebrew roots and am not in denial or opposed to this plain truth, this fulfillment of many biblical prophecies, that some self-hating Israelites or insecure Gentiles oppose.

Some remain willfully blind to JOSEPH who stands before them. How revealing and shameful.

[Meh_Gerbil]

AT any rate, the larger point is obviously that Prince Charles lost the capacity for shame some time ago....

[Krusader]

Prince Charles and his new/old wife are an ACCURSED COUPLE. Their adultery led to Princess Diana's adultery and ultimately to her death. Charles bears the chief responsibility for the entire tragedy and is unfit to be king.

May Prince William remember his Hebrew roots (http://www.britam.org/) and biblical responsibilities and act accordingly, as the scion of King David, continuing King David's dynasty (http://www.thetrumpet.com/index.php?page=book&id=1265&section=1365) with honor and great dignity, with the grace of his beloved mother before her fall.


Are you nuts? What "Hebrew roots?" I would assume that our dear William is Anglo-Saxon, with some Danish, Greek and German genes thrown in, if I'm not mistaken. But, can't say as I recall any Jews getting in the mix. This is just plain false doctrine and laughable.

If you want to blame Charles for anything, then why not censor him for telling us we should be more open to Islam, the "religion of peace" not!

As for Diana, nobody forced her to get in bed with a rich Muslim - we each are accountable for our own actions. Charles was an adulterer, I agree, but this fact never gave Diana an excuse to follow in his path.

[Shadow Phoenix]

Now who was it that years ago refuted the idea that all personal suffering is the result of a personal sin? Oh yeah. It was God! And when did he do that? Oh yeah! The book of Job! By the way, that's also supposed to be the oldest book in the OT.....

And 3,500+ years later some people STILL haven't learned the lesson.

[wfaber]

Are you nuts? What "Hebrew roots?" I would assume that our dear William is Anglo-Saxon, with some Danish, Greek and German genes thrown in, if I'm not mistaken. But, can't say as I recall any Jews getting in the mix. This is just plain false doctrine and laughable.
Didn't you know that the name "saxon" is derived from "Isaac's sons"?
(Just think! Shakespeare as Hebrew poetry!)

[kuboes1831]

Did not King David practice polygamy as well as falling into adultery? I'm sure that Prince Charles has a time for repentence before his skin turns any darker. :eek:


At least Mr Parker Bowles is still alive and was not sent to Iraq

[technomage]

Are you nuts? What "Hebrew roots?" I would assume that our dear William is Anglo-Saxon....

Actually Norman would probably be the "biggest" root influence there. :wink:

Hey, David ... has anyone reminded you lately that the Celts and the Anglo-Saxons not only ate pigs, but revered them?

[Guerdis]

They generally clam up when you mention the lack of genetic evidence for such an idea.

I prefer the lack of post-resurrection theological relevance myself.

[David Hayward]

As for Diana, nobody forced her to get in bed with a rich Muslim - we each are accountable for our own actions. Charles was an adulterer, I agree, but this fact never gave Diana an excuse to follow in his path.Hear hear!

[jason]

Prince Charles and his new/old wife are an ACCURSED COUPLE. Their adultery led to Princess Diana's adultery and ultimately to her death. Charles bears the chief responsibility for the entire tragedy and is unfit to be king.
Well as someone else mentioned Diana's death came from her own adultery and evil doing. She was as big an adulterer as him.

But I certianly agree, he is not fit to be king. I suspect neither are his boys.

Jason

[TheOneAndOnly]

But I certianly agree, he is not fit to be king. I suspect neither are his boys.

Considering the past kings of England I think Charles is more fit than anyone. He hasn't executed his wives yet, for instance.

Anyway, everyone knows the current ruling family haven't a drop of royal blood in them. The last true dynasty was the Stuarts, directly related to the Merovingians, who as everyone intelligent knows are the descendents of Jesus. There's no point arguing this. It's fact.

[Meh_Gerbil]

The idiocy of expressing concern over succession in a monarchy whose only role is symbolic is what puzzles me.