Times Subs? Tut, tut

The Queen may be a child of the Prophet Muhammad
Family tree suggests the monarch is directly descended from the founder of Islam

Well, no. A descendant of, perhaps, but a child of?

8 thoughts on “Times Subs? Tut, tut”

  1. I don’t see where Richard of Conisburgh features in her Nibs’ ancestry. She is descended from the Duke of York, who was a grandson of Edward III, and a bastard of the Duke of Lancaster, who was a son of Edward III, but where does the Earl of Cambridge feature?

  2. And the assumption is that King whatsit of Spainistan really was a descendant, and not simply saying he was and removing the heads and limbs of anyone who disagreed.

  3. And I’m descended from Charlemagne. So what?

    It’s the clearest proof yet that mass immigration is required.

  4. As far as I can tell, the idea is that if they can claim the Queen as a descendant, then they can say she is actually Muslim.

    And therefore Britain (and I guess the Commonwealth) is actually part of the Dar al-Islam (since it’s ruled by a Muslim).

    And therefore anyone who isn’t Muslim must either convert or pay the jizya.

    Crazy, I know, But it fits with how these people think.

  5. Nat Geo says we were all together in Africa 200,000 years ago. So we are all black.

    But I think it like Animal Farm, where some are more black than others.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *