Al Mayadeen English – Donald ‘Jesus’ Trump, as in his deranged state he now appears to see himself, has proven once again that the undisputed King of Bling is also the King of Lies.
One doesn’t have to be a royalist or a fan of the current administration in the United States to have looked with interest upon the recent visit of the King of England to Washington.
The British monarch is not supposed ever to be overtly political or politically controversial, but his public remarks would no doubt have been approved (and tailored) at the highest level by the UK government.
Since his days as a prince campaigning on environmental concerns and on the prospects of disadvantaged youth, Charles III has been unafraid to address issues that verge on the political, and in some ways, a number of his comments whilst Stateside may be seen, in their quiet diplomatic way, as rather harder-hitting than his own Prime Minister’s denunciations of the American President’s unlawful war against Iran.
Indeed, several commentators have gone so far as to suggest that – just as the majority of British people have applauded Keir Starmer’s refusal to join Trump’s crazed crusade – the king’s address to Congress to mark the 250th anniversary of the year in which his country reluctantly relinquished its possession of theirs may represent another Love Actually moment… reminding us all of that scene in Richard Curtis’ 2003 movie in which the British premier takes a public stand against a dishonest, narcissistic, bullying President of the United States (which at the time expressed the outrage of many ordinary British people at their nation’s involvement in the Iraq War).
Having pointed to the “immense challenges for the international community” provoked by the conflict in the Middle East, Charles reminded Congress that the United Kingdom and the United States “do not always agree.” It wasn’t quite as strong as Hugh Grant’s declaration that “a friend who bullies us is no longer a friend” but it established a clear challenge.
He emphasised the vital importance of a “commitment to uphold democracy”, “the rule of law” and “impartial justice”. He earned cheers from Trump’s opponents – and then from across the chamber – when he observed that these values are crucially underpinned by “the principle that executive power is subject to checks and balances”.
And when he referred to the latest attempt upon the life of Mr. Trump, he spoke so vaguely of an “incident” that “sought to harm the leadership of your nation and to foment wider fear and discord” that one might wonder whether the thoughts of some of those in the chamber may have turned to the violent attack upon American democracy which took place in that very place in the first week of January 2021 as Congress met to ratify the election of Trump’s rival to the Oval Office.
Then, in direct contrast to Mr. Trump’s views on these subjects, he went on to pledge his support for the fight against climate change and to observe that the only time that NATO has ever invoked its Article 5 was in defence of the United States… gently reminding his local and global audience that the White House has recently threatened the territorial sovereignty and security of European allies which have refused to support his war, suggesting he might invade the Falkland Islands and throw Spain out of the military alliance.
