To think that Prince Charles is slow on the uptake

I'm irritated by the fact that PC must know that the press are swarming wherever he is and whatever he does. It was a private conversation and we don't know exactly what he said but for someone who generally regards the press as the enemy, he should have been more guarded.

What piddles me off is the fact that a personal conversation is mentioned and takes percedence over the fact TODAY in the United Nations over 60 countries voted to take the Syrian government and opposition to task over war crimes and Russia and China vetoed all of them.

Charles was a fool if he doesn't know he has to be careful who, where and when he opens his gob. Having said that did he not say what the likes of Hilary Clinton has said and the rest of us think?

I heard that Putin is insisting on an apology - it will be interesting to see how that pans out!

I was begining to wonder why the news media hadn't said much about the things that Russia were up to at the moment; but then again we have to be careful as we depend on them for our gas etc . I guess Prince Charles had an Emperors New Clothes moment. The person at fault is the one that repeated it, given that it seems to have been a private conversation.

As I said before, does anyone know exactly what he said? The BBC radio news report I heard this morning indicated it was a throwaway remark, not accusing Putin of 'being like Hitler'.

(to get back to the subject of the OP)

Big difference between

defender of the faith

and

defender of the faiths - hope it includes humanism and even atheism too.

Did anyone know that he was even in Canada until this erupted?

I'm no fan of Putin but it's very insensitive to liken any Russian leader to Hitler, in light of their losses in WW2.

Henry Vlll was given the title 'Defender of the Faith' by the then Pope because of his defence of Catholicism against the wave of Protestantism sweeping Europe. That was before he refused to pay any more taxes to Rome and divorced himself in direct disobedience to Papal instructions. Then every other sovereign kept it. Funny old world! I think the Queen won't abdicate because she has a very strong sense of duty and because of her uncle, whose refusal to accept his responsibilities resulted in her father being lumbered with them.

X post!

The move would mean the monarch, as Supreme Governor of the Church of England, would no longer be known as Defender of the Faith for the first time since the reign of Henry VIII.

The Prince caused controversy within the Anglican church when he floated the idea several years ago of becoming Defender of the Faiths in an attempt to embrace the other religions in Britain.

In a compromise he has now opted for Defender of Faith which he hopes will unite the different strands of society, and their beliefs, at his Coronation.

However, there would be huge obstacles to overcome before the Prince can fulfil his wish which he has discussed with some of his closest advisers. It would require Parliament to agree to amend the 1953 Royal Titles Act which came into law after changes were made for the Queen's Coronation in the same year. A senior source told The Daily Telegraph: "There have been lots of discussions. He would like to be known as the Defender of Faith which is a subtle but hugely symbolic shift."

The Monarch has been known by the title Defender of the Faith ever since the title was bestowed on Henry VIII by the Pope in 1521 for his early support for Roman Catholicism

As you said, already in 2008- and I believe the reason his mother is concerned about abdication.

He said years ago that he would like to be known as 'Defender of Faiths' I believe.

Just looked it up and he made the suggestion in 2008 that he would wish to be Defender of Faith, rather than defender of THE Faith. Interesting. All faiths? - even those with barbaric practices?

But I do see where he is coming from and good for him to be trying to move things on.

Has Charles made it clear that he would not be head of Anglican church? - I did not know that. Good for him from me too.

Agree about the need for diplomacy- but he was not far wrong, was he? And in a private conversation- not a public speech or tv interview. If anyone is to blame, it is the reporter and editors, and the paper that decided to go to print

He is not at all like his father actually. The reason his mother does not want to abdicate is because he has made it clear he would refuse to be the Head of the Anglican Church- which would force the country to do some much needed re-thinking of the power of the Anglican Church on the country- and move towards separation of Church and State in a modern and multicultural society. I am not Royal fan, but good for him I say.

It is a pity he can't make any comment without someone eavesdropping and it being reported in the press. Even phone calls have been hacked. I would not like their lives even with all the privileges.

I will say that HM has been the soul of discretion, but I think people near to her would not 'sneak' and if they did, I wonder which newspapers would report it?

And of course we have to believe the Daily Mail reporter who was eavesdropping behind a pillar.

I believe it was a private conversation. Did the woman he was speaking to comment?

There does seem to be some confusion about what he actually said. As for some calling for him to 'abdicate'...

Like father, like son!