October 28, 2013, - 2:25 pm

Royal Christening Irony: Prince George Dunked in Water from Israel, the Country Shunned by UK Royals

By Debbie Schlussel

I’m tired of hearing about the world’s richest welfare queens, the British Royal Family, and the Christening of Prince George, the heir to the British throne. But I noted one ironic detail over and over and over in the many gushing news reports of this “important!” event: that Prince George, son of William and Kate, was dunked in water from the River Jordan.


Hmmm . . . guess where the River Jordan is? And guess where the water came from? Yup, Israel. Yes, the same Israel to which the British Royal Family has NEVER made an official state visit. And probably never will.

Uh-huh, the same country that Queen Elizabeth has deliberately NEVER visited. The same country William and Kate–who seem to have been to every G-d-forsaken Pago Pago and Walla Walla–haven’t been to, and probably never will for the same reasons as those of Wiliam’s grandmother. Yes, the same Israel that was “visited” only once by Prince Charles, and that was for a funeral of a head of state (former Israeli Prime Minister Yitzchak Rabin). Charles made sure that the world knew that he was not there–in the JOOOWISH state –in any official capacity as a Royal from the UK (in what capacity, then, pray tell, was he there?). Yes, the same Prince Charles who instructed America that he would be the “ambassador of Islam” to us because, in his words, we Americans and Westerners don’t understand what a peaceful and beautiful religion it is (which is why he’s Anglican). That was after he said he wished he was a tampon (yup, he really said that!).

Charles’ two senior aides also trashed Israel in e-mails on which they accidentally copied the Israeli Ambassador. Morons. They teased Israeli officials, saying they were entertaining a trip to the country, when they actually said in their e-mails that they had no such intentions, and so on.

Apparently, the water was used by the Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, who has a Jewish father and visited Israel in June to kiss Palestinian Muslim ass, bless the Obama-John Kerry BS “peace” process, and preach that Christianity says to “love our enemies,” the Muslims. At least, he recognized Israel’s right to exist. Thank Heaven for small favors. That’s more than the British Royals have done.

If Israel had any self-respect, it would refuse to allow water from the Jordan River to be used in this ceremony. Proud Jews don’t beg for scraps from Jew-haters. They tell them where to go. Israel doesn’t need this kind of “marketing” from British Royals who are bought and paid for by Saudi and other Muslim petro-chemical dollars.

If there is any justice here, it will be that the water was taken from the many portions of the River that the Palestinians have polluted by dumping their sewage.

But this is the wimpitude of Israel 2013.

Israel doesn’t need the celebrity graces of the British Royal Welfare Queens. It should act like it.

Get your water from the Thames, you inbred frauds.


Some Jewish friends of mine are taking pride in the allegation that Prince George was circumcised by a rabbi (I’ve seen no confirmation of this, just speculation that he might be circumcised by a rabbi), and that Prince Charles was circumcised by a mohel [man who performs a Jewish circumcision].

To me, it makes no difference what these over-rated Israel-haters do with their penises, when they don’t have the balls to recognize Israel.

One of my friends says the mohel for Prince George was Lord Jonathan Sacks, the recently-retired Chief Rabbi of Great Britain and a close friends of the Windsors. If so, that would be fitting because Rabbi Sacks was proud to use his bully pulpit to bully Israel.

From Masada2000’s Jewish “S-IT (Self-Haters and/or Israel-Threatening) LIST” entry on the “Royal Rabbi”:

Backed the ill-fated Oslo Accords from day one. . . . He also went out of his way recently to praise the B.B.C. — the same B.B.C. which is world-renowned for unrelenting Israel-bashing. He also told the B.B.C. that Israel’s self-defense against a two-year war of Palestinian terror makes him “feel very uncomfortable as a Jew.” He has also quoted the 12th century Jewish sage Maimonides: “Israel did not long for the Messiah so it could lord it over other nations.” Rabbi Sacks, stop trimming your beard for those photo shoots and grow a freakin’ backbone!

Amen to that (Maimonides is turning over in his grave). Maybe if Jewish “leaders” in the UK would get some testicles, their Royals would be forced to do the right thing.

For now, a Christening with water from the Detroit River (or some polluted swamp behind Brett Favre’s house in Kiln, Mississippi) would be appropriate.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

28 Responses

They aren’t welfare queens. Their lifestyle is paid for in exchange for all the profits that come from the land they own which are given to the British people. If the British abolished the Monarchy then the family would ask for that land back which is some of the most valuable in Great Britain. The Brits would lose money without the Monarchy.

V: The Brits recently had to end the Queen’s private train because they could not afford it. Yes, they are welfare queens. DS

Vivian on October 28, 2013 at 3:00 pm

    Most of those “royal lands” were stolen by King Henry VIII from the Catholic Church or lands stolen from the commoners by the royals.

    Just remember, the royals got their jobs through nepotism, not merit. Heck, they are not even English, they are Germans, and like most royalty they come from a long line of inbreeding.

    Unfortunately, nepotism is how the Bushes got to where they are, it is why Hillary will probably be the Democratic nominee and Cousin It (Chelsea) will be a congressman, it is why we have the Kennedys always in office, and it is why countless other politicians and judges and civil service workers have their positions.

    Jonathan E. Grant on October 28, 2013 at 4:02 pm

I’d completely agree with Debbie on everything in here. and even like to add to the commonly quoted, “Love our enemies” spewed by most Christians in the wrong way. When Christ said that, It was meant for enemies which have personal vendetta’s, agenda’s with you on a personal level. Definitely not G-d’s enemies, and especially not the Muslims who blatantly make it clear with their Neo-Nazi sign’s and obvious clear hatred of Israel. Really sad though where the U.K. is going down too….and a sad portion of Europe…..

John B. Martyn on October 28, 2013 at 3:15 pm

Dunk him in used muslim foot-bath water to show that royals really do love the religion-of-peacers.

DS_ROCKS! on October 28, 2013 at 3:58 pm

Wow. This hypocrisy is over the top.

Queen Victoria claimed ancestorship with the King David of Judah and thus a blood lineage all the way back to Adam. http://www.originofnations.org/Royals/queens%20descent/The%20Queen's%20Royal%20Descent%20from%20King%20David%20of%20Judah.htm

Their hypocrisy to ride on the shoulders of giants while they trample the substance of the people knows no bounds. I;m with DS-Rocks. Dunk the bastird in Muslim foot-bath water.

Jack on October 28, 2013 at 5:12 pm

Well, gee, pardon my political incorrectness, but isn’t this diatribe against the royals over the water a kid was baptized in–isn’t this a bit “Disproportional?”
Yeah, Chas has a lot of goofy opinions, but so what? You’d think the dear old Queen Mum was some kind of virulent anti-Semite.

Let’s all try and remember that being a royal is an accident of birth–they don’t deserve the credit, so why should they really deserve so much blame? What’s more, the Queen herself seems like a rather admiral individual, to me anyway.

Can’t we once in awhile take the old Dalai Lama’s advice from “Lost Horizon?” Be Kind.

Joe Guiney on October 28, 2013 at 5:20 pm

    Joe, the royals have studiously avoided going to Israel, excep for the funeral of Rabin. Yet, they have traveled extensively in the Arab countries, and have received many jewels and pounds for their efforts.

    Jonathan E. Grant on October 28, 2013 at 5:30 pm

I recall the Charles’ comment about wanting to be Camilla’s Tampon.


Ya’ may want to consider celibacy.

Peter on October 28, 2013 at 6:54 pm

Well, there is a report claiming that Diana, Princess of Wales put a stop on circumcising male members of the British Royal Family , so unless there is an official statement by either the Royal Family or Rabbi Jonathan Sacks, all we have is just speculation.

About the lack of state visits to Israel by the British Royal Family, there are lots of evidence of Prince Charles’ fondness to Islam. One interesting piece is a speech in Oxford, where Charles Windsor mixes Islam with Environmentalism. Quoting Charlie Windsor:

“This, then, is why the wisdom and learning offered by a sacred tradition like Islam matters – and, if I may say so, why those who hold and strive to preserve their sacred traditions in different parts of the world have every reason to become more confident of their ground. The Islamic world is the custodian of one of the greatest treasuries of accumulated wisdom and spiritual knowledge available to humanity. It is both Islam’s noble heritage and a priceless gift to the rest of the world. And yet, so often, that wisdom is now obscured by the dominant drive towards Western materialism – the feeling that to be truly “modern” you have to ape the West.”

There is more at . Last, but not least, there are rumors out there claiming Charlie Windsor is a member of a tariqa, which is worth investigating before saying anything definitive about Charlie Windsor and his relationship with Islam.

Rodrigo Veleda on October 28, 2013 at 7:06 pm

He wishes he were Camilla’s tampon because it would be a promotion for him. For now he is Camilla’s hemorrhoidal suppository.

CornCoLeo on October 28, 2013 at 8:22 pm

    Corny, you are more correct on it than you realize.

    William on October 29, 2013 at 5:03 pm

The evidence is clear about his “relationship” with Islam: Prince Charles is a mawlah.

It still tickles my funny bone that all those years ago Mad Magazine modeled the original Alfred E. Neuman after the infant Prince Charles, and was threatened by both the royal family and their proxies in the U.S. State Department for doing so. Mad Magazine capitulated, of course, but Charles certainly knows who he is …

Archie on October 28, 2013 at 8:55 pm


    Alfred E. Neuman was based on a comic strip character from the late 1800’s. Although I like the Prince Charles story, I’m afraid its origin is of urban legend.

    Kimosabbe on October 29, 2013 at 1:28 pm

To paraphrase Rush, didn’t we fight a war so we wouldn’t have to give a sh*t about these people?

Matt on October 28, 2013 at 9:48 pm

Bow to your betters, varlets, and touch your forelocks, not your foreskins.

The Court of King Bama

Nir Leui on October 29, 2013 at 2:29 am

Our Church has refused requests by families to Baptize with water from the Jordan. The reason for the refusal was that these families thought that the water from the Jordan was somehow extra special. The point being, the source of the water doesn’t matter it’s the Word that matters. I find this story interesting because this last Sunday was Reformation Sunday and our Church had a number of Baptisms.

Karen on October 29, 2013 at 9:22 am

Any nation that pays taxes for unelected royalty (police protection, etc) is a nation of fools.

Truth on October 29, 2013 at 9:46 am

Jesus Jonathan you are a hypocrite attacking everyone who disagrees with Debbie. First of all king Henry “stole” the land from the same family that “stole” it from his decendents and then married the heir to that family anyways so there was no question over who owned the land. Back in the old days, people bought land by paying for an army to conquer the land. Every single piece of property owned was once obtained this way. Tell me jonathan are you going to give your house and possessions up to a Native American? Because our ancestors stole all of America from the Indians so I guess we don’t own our land either.

Once again Debbie, you discredit yourself by making a post when you don’t know what the hell you are talking about and your band of five fanatic stalker a only make you look worse.

Vicky on October 29, 2013 at 9:59 am

Maybe things will change now that it’s been revealed that Kate is actually Jewish due to her family heritage on her Mothers’ side.

carl levin on October 29, 2013 at 10:24 am

Bret Favre’s doesn’t live in Kiln ,Ms .He lives in Oak Grove ,Ms .ten miles west of Hattiesburg ,Ms .And why are you making nasty comments about Ms .Debbie ? I read you news stories all the time and I’m from South ,Ms and very ,very Pro-Israel and also very Conservative .Also I get your news in my e-mail .If your going to make comments then make them about Washington DC and Michael Vick and Obama and his Muslim hoard .

Jo Ann on October 29, 2013 at 2:19 pm

The “Royal” family are no better than the people they walk on. The Royals, not KC either are in lock step with obama, soros, kissinger and the illuminated ones. You could put “horns” on them all and the only difference would be is you could see the horns. The inside beliefs are the same no matter what. Every one of the Crown’s members would slit the throat of every Brit and American to obtain there globalist goals. That is a Family of sacrifice, and how many of their own family members have the literally sacrificed ? They Hate the Hebrew people. My comments for what they are worth.

William on October 29, 2013 at 5:16 pm

Much ado about nothing. The U.K. recognized Israel in 1949. Whether the Royals make an official visit to Israel or not is of profound unimportance. Not allowing them to use water out of the Jordan River would be beneath the State of Israel. Israel exists because it exists, not whether a constitutional monarch visits or not. From what I understand Queen Elizabeth II is a nice woman and if her eldest son is a bit of a jug eared dolt, that’s their problem. Get some perspective.

Repeat on October 29, 2013 at 8:14 pm

If the Royals do not make official visits to Israel (Prince Edward made a private visit to Israel on September 6, 2007) it is the fault of the Foreign Office (a notorious Arab centric Foreign Office).

Repeat on October 29, 2013 at 8:18 pm

If Mister Ed (Prince Charles) ever visits again, will he bring his lovely Seabiscuit along for a prance around the Negev?

Not Ovenready on October 29, 2013 at 9:16 pm

Over time with the erosion of even the symbolic artifices of power the royal family has become silly. When the present queen is gone they will be nothing but prince Andrew silly.
There’s a reason the queen has never stepped aside.
A silly dhimmi monarchy for a silly dhimmi nation. That is the other face of senility.

Frankz on October 29, 2013 at 10:53 pm

Methinks the circumcisions were part of a disguised conversion to Islam, w/o admitting as much, since that could cost them the right to the throne (the king/queen have to be Anglican)

Infidel on October 29, 2013 at 11:48 pm

Don’t blame the kid. And don’t discount the symbolism – an heir to the British throne was baptized with Israeli water. That is no accident. The Muslims most certainly took notice of this. And if Charles is an anti-semite, so what? Maybe Prince William is not. Our current President and many Democrats and some Republicans are anti-semites and anti-Israel. Let’s worry about Obama the quasi-Muslim and his obvious hatred of Israel and the Jews. The British Royal Family will not facilitate Iran getting nukes – it will be America through Obama and the Russians.

The British are still smarting from being pushed out by Begin and the Irgun after WWII (as they should have been).

And I’m no Anglophile – my great grandfather was Irish and hated the English.

Concerned Citizen on October 30, 2013 at 11:00 am

George is far from being the first British Royal to be baptised with River Jordan water. It’s actually a common thing with the Royal Family. It’s also long been common practice for royal males to be circumcised although I’m obviously not privy as to the situation today.

To be honest, Debbie, I don’t see why you get so het up and vitriolic about it all. They’re OUR Royal Family, not yours. And, while there is a voice for republicanism over here, far more of us, including me, would never vote for their abolition. If that makes me a fool, as suggested by other of your respondents, then so be it.

Alison on November 1, 2013 at 1:04 pm

Leave a Reply

* denotes required field