Allow me to get things started by saying wearing a crown in this day and age seems even stranger to me.

Allow me to respond, - at least we do not require visitors to wear one when visiting...and, just in case you didn't realise it. the crown is merely a symbol of office, or if you prefer, a part of her uniform.

Contrary to the belief of you colonials she only wears it on ceremonial occasions, and not as regular daily wear...:-)

Ernest - former colonials? We sent George III packing. But I was really just being cheeky as you might say.

David -

The Queen is the Supreme Governor of the Church of England. By wearing the headscarf she's committed an act of submission to an alien culture and not just for herself but for all Anglicans.

It's no surprise, however. Twice before she has knelt before a Pope and kissed the Fisherman's Ring in submission. She has signed away her Subjects' birthright and continues to do so. But the Crown is above politics! Ha.

In that case, why is she allowing herself to be used for an explicitly anti-British political agenda, and why was Prince Charles all over BBC radio this morning talking about global warming?

Mahons,

Come on now! - I know you as a 'cheeky lad', but admit it, you thought she did the washing up wearing her crown, didn't you!....

The royals have always donned headscarves inside mosques. The very first mosque established in this country was c/o HM Queen Victoria btw.

In America the Heads of State not above sashaying with religious heads of State when it suits them - specifically to pander for a vote. Which seems strange in this day and age.

If the Queen visits a mosque in a muslim country, she should dress accordingly. The question is why is the Queen visiting a mosque? Was this Miliband's idea?

Pete Moore,

The Queen is on record as saying she is most proud of her position as 'Head of the Commonwealth'. I think she forgets she only holds that position as Queen of England.

Could it be that she has international aspirations, a la Blair, retaining 'a presence' on the world stage, despite the impending demise of England as an independent and valid entity?

Ernest: I presumed she wore it even on the five or so occasions when Prince Philip demonstrated that a ruler does not have 12 inches.

Whenever i see those Commonwealth visits and the crowd pleaser that she is there I suspect HM feels more at home there than here. She represents us with diginity as always. Which is more than could be said of some heads of state. And she can pronounce words and find her way out of press interviews afterwards, even with jetlag.

I rather thought that was Clinton's claim to fame Mahons. He certainly attempted to reassure himself it wasn't.

Sorry Alison, we're making fun of the Queen now, CLinton later.

The Queen also sometimes wears a headscarf on normal occasions, doesn't she?

I think it was a sad day for fashion when women stopped wearing this garment. I remember all those bubbly factory girls used to look quite fetching in their scarves when I was a boy - and when you sat behind them in church around this time of year and got wafts of their cheap perfume - heaven!

Oh no I'll try and keep this up all day. I'm sure Clinton would appreciate the sentiment behind that statement.

Pete Moore posted:

The Queen is the Supreme Governor of the Church of England. By wearing the headscarf she's committed an act of submission to an alien culture and not just for herself but for all Anglicans.

Rubbish - she politely followed the custom of a rival superstition. When in Rome...

David Vance's point is the only valid one.

If the Queen visits a mosque in Saudi or Singapore, everyone would accept that her wearing a headscarf and taking off her shoes would be normal protocol.

Those countries aren't trying to join the EU.

(Similarly, when she kisses the hand of the Pope it does not imply she wants to facilitate the Vatican into our constitution).
It is just respect. Nothing more.

But this Turkish malarkey IS something else. She wants Turkey to join, while most of Western European peoples most decidedly DO NOT.

That is what sticks in most people's, and my, craw.

Bernard -

Catholics kneel and kiss the Fisherman's Ring in supplication. You may know that each Pope has their own Fisherman's Ring. You may know also that the Ring is the symbol of the Pope's power. For this reason each Ring is destroyed after each Pope's death - to symbolically end the power vested in that Pope.

Why Catholics kneel and kiss is clear, but they aren't the Supreme Governor of the Church of England, nor the political Governor of the Nation, nor the cornerstone of our Protestant constitutional monarchy.

If Elizabeth Windsor wants to go cooing her way through Turkey then fine, let her make her abdication official (it's already de facto) and off she goes. But while she claims the Crown, she has no business shrouding her head in recognition of islam. When she does this she recognises islam's tenets and places it at least on her own level.

By the way George Bush is a firm advocate of Turkey's accession to the EU and at the end of the day this (unwanted by us) moron's say is final over all of us. In so many more ways than this aswell.

Just as well the French have managed to stall Turkeys accession this long.

Turkey was a tremendous ally throughout the long cold war, and is an incredibly important country.

But if I lived in an EU country, I'd want no part of Turkey as a member state. Its too big and too different.

There is no reason why every country that is in, or as is mostly the case with Turkey, near Europe, has to be a member state inside the EU.

When Bush spoke out publicly in favor of Turkish accession, it was a big diplomatic error. Its none of his business.

Phantom: it was much much more than a diplomatic error. Its in his 'strategic interests' as he sees it. So whatever he says is entirely relevant.

Alison

Germany is also opposed. There is no chance of Turkey joining the EU any time soon, especially since the (mild) islamists now in power there are also against joining.

Alison

I know but it was beyond clumsy, and it provided for irritation on all sides.

He didn't exactly help the cause. There are some things that don't need to be said in a public setting.

The EU should have given a polite and firm "no" to Turkey years ago.

I think it's the behind the scenes that should concern us all. That is what i mean. Of course Bush's views hold important sway and will influence. Especially with the UK. But for the power of France and Germany i think Bush would have had his way ages ago. Sorry Phantom but i think just as the US is capable of meddling in other countries it is up to its neck with its allies also.

>>Bush's views hold important sway and will influence.<<

I don't know where you see this sway or influence, Alison,
Whatever influence he may once have had with Britain, Bush is now not taken seriously anywhere in Europe when speaking on world affairs, and certainly not when speaking on European matters!

Besides, Peter is right, there is no chance of Turkey joining the EU in the foreseeable future. At the moment, Turkey is just the food of choice for sensationalists.

IF the EU were to be so stupid as to propose that Turkey become a member, would the populations/parliaments of EU countries get to vote on it?

Or could the EU bureaucrats and / or European Parliament enact it over the heads of the member countries?

If Islamic law says she should have her head covered, could she not have worn some other form of headdress, perhaps something that had not come to symbolise the Islamic law of subjugation of the female. Perhaps a fashionable beret, or one of those strange toppers she has been wearing of late? At a push, even a symbolic replica crown, if only to show that it was at least a meeting of equals...:-)

Noel,

Of course Bush holds sway in Europe, he controls NATO, and only has to suggest leaving to put the likes of France and Germany into a fit.

I mean at the time it was relevant Noel and Turkey was being discussed back when Bush was not a lame duck - of course not now. The only pro Turkey EU member was Blair. I wonder why.

Pete Moore. True. Point taken.

Phantom

To answer your 5.16 there would be nothing resembling consultation if the EU governments decided to go ahead with Turkish membership. But it's a non-starter because of the huge level of opposition in France and Germany, who do not regard Turkey as European. There's also the little matter of the Armenian genocide which they still refuse to own up to, and which inspired Hitler a few decades later.

Phantom,

Peter is right (again!). I think maybe you - like most non-Europeans - overestimate the power of the EU institutions. Generally all such large issues are decided between the sovereign goverments of certain EU states, meeting formally or informally,
There is no way the govts Peter mentions would surrender this decision-making power, and it's not only France and Germany who are against Turkey joining.

Peter

If the next US President think it's a good idea Sarkozy will dance to his tune and Turkey will be a shoo-in. He has already made noises reconsidering their accession where up til now he has been adamant. He is happy with his new found love affair with America and they same will true vice versa soon enough.

David,

"The Queen has to have a mind of her own"

Which she has. Though mind you it's debatable whether her mind could summon up enough energy to recharge my iPod.

She is, after all, a Windsor, a family not notable for their intellect.

Nice one Dawkins. And I might add, for your delectation, the real Windsors were Plantagenets from Edward the 3rds reign, 14th century. Not this German progeny, who cooked-up the name just before the first world war. Usurpers.

Bernard,

Thanks for the heads-up.

Edward III. Isn't he the chap the Irish refer to as Edward de Turd? :0)

That's interesting Bernard, I was wondering why there were a number of high-profile places known as Windsor which dated before the present dynasty rocked up on these shores (I was preumsing the small village of Windsor didnt itself wield such influence).

Turkey aint gonna be joining any time soon. Which is a good thing immigration wise. However as a relatively pro-western Islamic state (at least demographically) I do wonder if we could gain something from some type of informal social alliance. We're already in NATO together of course, but I was thinking of something more economic and cultural, but stopping short of full membership.
Just a thought, anyway.

Peter raises a good point with the Armenian genoicde - ethically I cant see how we could get too close to a country which couldnt face up to that in its past. I'm not sure whay the Turks have such a problem with it. Even Attaturk acknowleged that large-scale massacres had happened, and the regime in charge of Turkey at the time bears no resemblence to the present system of government.

Andy,

The principal reason the Turks have difficulty in fessing up to the Armenian genocides (there were several) is that they'd have to pay reparations to the survivors and the descendants if they did.

Personally speaking, I have no wish to see Turkey joining the EU until they begin behaving like democrats. Let's not hold our collective breath.