Prince Charles and the Lizard Queen

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Re: Real Connections

Postby proldic » Fri Nov 04, 2005 8:22 pm

www.sfgate.com Friday, November 4, 2005 <br><br>A down-to-earth visit by a royal highness <br>Tour by Charles and wife to focus on organic farming <br><br>- Julian Guthrie, Chronicle Staff Writer<br> <br>England's Prince Charles and his new wife, Camilla, the Duchess of Cornwall, are to arrive in San Francisco tonight for a meticulously choreographed four-day visit that combines the earthy with the glitzy -- organic farmers with power brokers... <br><br>The trip to the United States is the first visit overseas by Charles and Camilla as a married couple. It is being billed as a testament to the ties that bind the two countries: political, cultural, economic and environmental. <br><br>It is also an effort to showcase the substantive side of Charles, whose environmentalism, organic farming and philanthropy get obscured by snippy reports on his handsome sons, Harry and William; his glamorous first wife, the late Princess Diana; and his less glamorous second wife, his longtime friend and former mistress. <br><br>...the British consul general in San Francisco, understands the curiosity but believes Charles is misunderstood. <br><br>"He is a businessman farmer and does an enormous amount of charitable work," "He is not just lending his name, either. He really gets in there." <br><br>The Prince of Wales...runs a nonprofit organization called the Prince's Charities that raises more than $200 million a year for 16 programs ranging from education to holistic health. He created an organic farm on his estate at Highgrove in 1985, when the movement was in its infancy. And he launched a high-end line of organic products called Duchy Originals that now brings in $71 million a year. <br><br>Uden does not agree with the contention by some royal watchers that the hop across the pond is part of a royal plan to boost the couple's popularity and gain acceptance for Camilla as the future queen. <br><br>"That certainly wasn't in my planning," Uden said. "My job is to make sure the visit goes well and the objectives are met. If it helps create a good positive image, that's great."...<br><br>For the last leg of the royal highnesses' visit, Uden looked at "what is important to the prince. What matters to him are issues of sustainability and the environment. So we naturally wanted him to see local organic farming." ...<br><br>The largest part of the visit will be devoted to Charles' passion: organic farming. He and Camilla will spend Saturday morning at the farmers' market in Point Reyes Station in Marin County and then have lunch in the coastal hamlet of Bolinas with local farmers and producers. <br><br>Helge Hellberg, executive director of Marin Organic, an association of organic producers, will lead the prince on the Saturday tour. Hellberg said he wants to share with Charles the "efforts going back 30-plus years of people who have poured their hearts into forging a new relationship with the land." <br><br>Hellberg attended an environmental conference called Terre Madre in Turin, Italy, in October 2004. Charles was the keynote speaker. <br><br>In the speech, Charles told the gathering, "I have always believed that agriculture is not only the oldest, but also the most important of humanity's productive activities." <br><br>Hellberg said that people at the conference immediately began to say, "Gee, wouldn't it be great if he came to our area?" <br><br>The royal couple will travel from the farmers' market to a small luncheon with Warren Weber, a leader in the Bay Area organic movement. Weber's Star Route Farms is the oldest certified organic farm in California. <br><br>Weber said that much of what he learned about organic farming came from soil experts in England. <br><br>"Most organic farmers here followed organic farming ideas developed in Britain by the Soil Association," Weber said of the United Kingdom's largest organic certification body. "Certainly in the '70s, when we were starting, we looked to the Soil Association for literature and ideas. We were students. Now they're coming here. It's full circle." <br><br>Patrick Holden, the Soil Association's director, has been traveling with Charles and Camilla and will be in the Bay Area over the weekend. A private concert given by Sting on Wednesday night was attended by Charles and Camilla and benefited the Soil Association, which was founded nearly 60 years ago. Charles is the patron of the association and has pledged to raise about $35 million to expand the program. <br><br>"He is actually an approachable man," Holden said of Charles. "Of course, it's quite difficult to make his close acquaintance because there are layers of protection around him." ...<br><br>On Monday morning, Charles and Camilla will head to the East Bay to visit the Edible Schoolyard, an educational program founded in 1994 by renowned chef Alice Waters. They will then head back to the city, where the prince will give a speech to environmentalists at the Ferry Building...<br><br>On Monday night, Charles and Camilla will attend a black-tie dinner at the new M.H. de Young Memorial Museum in Golden Gate Park. The dinner will be hosted by the mayor's office and the British consulate. <br><br>The event will be held in the Piazzoni murals room and will be attended by about 60 people. The guests include a mix of high society and high technology, from Ann and Gordon Getty to Steve Jobs. <br><br>Alice Waters, who will have spent the morning with the royals at the Edible Schoolyard at Martin Luther King Middle School in Berkeley, also will oversee the dinner at the de Young. <br><br>Waters said she has been closely connected to the organic food movement in England for several years. She dined with Charles at the 2004 Terra Madre conference. <br><br>"This movement is not a small thing that's happening in Northern California," Waters said. "It's a global picture we need to clarify for people..."<br><br>For the dinner, she plans to do what she has always done: emphasize local, organically produced food... <br><br><br>URL: <!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2005/11/04/MNGIOFJ3PB1.DTL">sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...FJ3PB1.DTL</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--> <p></p><i></i>
proldic
 
Posts: 989
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 7:01 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

These peoples' idea of 'fun'...

Postby banned » Fri Nov 04, 2005 8:37 pm

....is blowing up frogs with M80s.<br><br>Or going out to a Satanic party and abusing children.<br><br>Or thinking up new ways to justify torture.<br><br>I don't put Prince Chuck in that classification. He's always been more interested in art, organic farming, and hanging out in Scotland in a kilt than strutting around making warlike pronunciamentos. He's a cultured, intelligent man who wasn't all that keen on being king but if he were he wouldn't let someone put a hand up his butt and 'run' him the way Bush is run.<br><br>That's why his mother's hanging on for dear life until Will can take over. Only Will didn't turn out to be what they needed either, being Diana's son; he'd rather be a film star than a king. Harry on the other hand is a troubled boy--remember the Nazi costume thing?--who might be inclined to direct his aggressions politically. In which case, Will will abdicate, or 'have an accident' and Harry will be the puppet on the throne. <p></p><i></i>
banned
 
Posts: 912
Joined: Sun Oct 02, 2005 5:18 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Camilla

Postby antiaristo » Fri Nov 04, 2005 8:54 pm

banned,<br>It doesn't matter a tittle or a damn who is king. The only thing that matters is that there is a queen on the Throne.<br>Please read the Treason Felony Act carefully.<br>If there is no queen this law has no meaning.<br>If there is a queen then she can do ANYTHING and it is illegal to oppose her ("put any force or constraint upon her").<br><br>She can lend her power to her husband, if she so wishes.<br>By convention she lends her power to the prime minister of the day (royal prerogative), but the prime minister in turn swears allegiance to her.<br><br>WITHOUT A QUEEN KING CHARLES HAS NO POWER<br><br>Once you understand that then everything falls into place.<br><br>It explains why Diana could not be allowed to live.<br>It explains why they went through with a clearly fraudulent and illegal "marriage". <p></p><i></i>
antiaristo
 
Posts: 2555
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 9:50 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Camilla

Postby rapt » Fri Nov 04, 2005 10:20 pm

Anti, I get the feeling that the reason you have to repeat this Treason Felony Act stuff so often is that the Yanks can't deal with it. And I would assume neither can the Brits. Surely you have this same feeling.<br><br>We can't accept it because no-one else, here or there in the UK is willing to bring up the point. Even though it is WRITTEN AS PART OF THE LAW. (I assume)<br><br>I agree that the Treason Felony Act is a big issue, so how about lets think up a better way to get it into the public mind. A better means than antiaristo repeating it many times. So far your method has not worked, at least not well enough to shake em up sufficiently. (I've been following this)<br><br>What I haven't seen yet is a believable connection between British law and what happens here in USA. I'm sure your point is a valid one, but a powerful argument must be made connecting the two. So far I haven't seen it. You have assumed that others (blog readers) will make the connection - for me it is too easy to ignore unless the point is driven home.<br><br>OK enough of that rationale - lets do it. <p></p><i></i>
rapt
 
Posts: 132
Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 2:31 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

To me...

Postby Trap » Fri Nov 04, 2005 10:46 pm

and I haven't seen this commented on before...<br><br>it looks like Charles is giving Laura 'the goose'...<br><br>I mean, where's his hand??? <!--EZCODE EMOTICON START :lol --><img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/laugh.gif ALT=":lol"><!--EZCODE EMOTICON END--> <p></p><i></i>
Trap
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2005 10:46 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: To me...

Postby Col Quisp » Fri Nov 04, 2005 11:41 pm

Why couldn't Diana be allowed to be queen? (excuse me for being ignorant) <p></p><i></i>
User avatar
Col Quisp
 
Posts: 734
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 2:52 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Isn't the reason the Treason Felony Act...

Postby banned » Sat Nov 05, 2005 12:05 am

refers to "the queen" because it was passed in 1848 when Victoria was the reigning monarch? If there's a king on the throne then it applies to the king.<br><br>Semantics, no? <p></p><i></i>
banned
 
Posts: 912
Joined: Sun Oct 02, 2005 5:18 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Quisp

Postby Homeless Halo » Sat Nov 05, 2005 12:20 am

Could've been, but it would've been a departure from tradition.<br><br>Normally one must be VERY inbred to be queen. <p></p><i></i>
Homeless Halo
 
Posts: 564
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2005 1:51 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Kings and Queens

Postby antiaristo » Sat Nov 05, 2005 7:32 am

banned,<br>You are correct that it was passed for Victoria.<br>But it says what it says. If there is no queen, the law has no meaning.<br>It does NOT apply to a king.<br><br>Once this is understood it completely changes one's understanding of British, European and world history (herstory?) <p></p><i></i>
antiaristo
 
Posts: 2555
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 9:50 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

rapt

Postby antiaristo » Sat Nov 05, 2005 8:21 am

I owe you a considered response. <p></p><i></i>
antiaristo
 
Posts: 2555
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 9:50 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

What they do for fun...

Postby marykmusic » Sat Nov 05, 2005 12:19 pm

...has to do with Bohemian Grove and THAT kind of party.<br><br>And yes, that's a goose-the-woman kind of lopsided smile on Charles' face in that photo. --MaryK <p></p><i></i>
marykmusic
 
Posts: 1502
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 12:23 am
Location: Central Arizona
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: royal inbred monsters

Postby AnnaLivia » Sat Nov 05, 2005 1:08 pm

I write some posts that I never post (helps me sort some things in my own mind to write it out), and this was one I started two days ago that I’m putting here now:<br><br><br>For just one reason why I said this Heinberg thread (exposing the eco-concerned and peak-oil concerned being taken unawares (attempted, anyways) right down the old nazi path of people-in-ovens) is so important: minutes ago, whilst putting a brisket in the oven for tonight’s supper, I catch a glimpse of prance charles on the TV news…getting some award at the UN for environmentalism (?), hear him saying something about how “we have over-industrialized”…and my ears perk up in whole new way! …and my brain adds in the treason felony act…and…and…<br><br><br>Adding today: I’d say camilla is a pretty dangerous creature. If I was that supremely ugly, I’d be mad at the universe and prolly want to get even with everyone and everything. She’s so hideous!<br><br>And whoa those photos of laura shrub! Scary doesn’t really even begin to touch it, eh? Personally, I don’t really even think about the reptile shapeshifting thang, but with these people around, and considering there is both the unknown and the unknowable, I feel safe to never say never.<br><br>Poor Di was lovely. They couldn’t corrupt her soul, so they had to murder her body.<br><br>As for fitting the treason felony act into the consciousness of yr average American voter, yeah, that’s a REALLY hard sell, because it’s so far off their radar it might as well be on Planet Pluto.<br><br>we're sure lucky to have antiaristo around!<br> <p></p><i></i>
AnnaLivia
 
Posts: 747
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2005 3:44 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Quisp

Postby Col Quisp » Sat Nov 05, 2005 6:53 pm

<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr> Could've been, but it would've been a departure from tradition.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>Then it makes no sense that he was permitted to marry Diana in the first place. Unless it was just to procreate. It's all so confusing. <p></p><i></i>
User avatar
Col Quisp
 
Posts: 734
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 2:52 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Diana

Postby antiaristo » Sat Nov 05, 2005 7:13 pm

She was given a choice: lose your soul or lose your life.<br><br>A couple of days before it happened she gave an interview to a French magazine (I think it was Match).<br>In the course of that interview she said<br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>I would rather be with those down below than with those up above<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>A few days later she was dead.<br><br>I was never one for adulation of these people. But what I have learned since she died leads me to believe she was a saint. She knew what she was up against, but she carried on fighting nonetheless.<br><br>And, for me, that is confirmed by the sustained effort to denigrate her memory, paint her as an unbalanced hysteric and airbrush her from the Windsor story.<br><br>Don't be taken in by all that organic farming crap that proldic posted. That's his cover story, and it's full of lies for American consumption. The man has never done anything worthwhile in his life. <p></p><i></i>
antiaristo
 
Posts: 2555
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 9:50 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Please quote me the exact part of the law...

Postby banned » Sat Nov 05, 2005 7:57 pm

...which states that if there is no queen the law is invalid.<br><br>Thanks. <p></p><i></i>
banned
 
Posts: 912
Joined: Sun Oct 02, 2005 5:18 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

PreviousNext

Return to Other

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests