Added: 3 years ago
From: dearteacher
Views: 86,069
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (267)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • 2:50 - Great tradition they have in the UK slamming the door on the nobility.

    3:19 - "Have you got Helen Mirren on standby?", in reference to the portrayal by Helen Mirren of Elizabeth II in the 2006 film, The Queen.

  • the queen presides over the cerremonial opening of my ass

  • Hahahaha,"Helen Mirren on stand-by",lol.Well said,Mr. Speaker. But,on a serious note,3 years after this just what has changed in terms of 'tightening legislation' on immigration and violent offences? Pretty much diddlysquat.We have cases where foreign nationals who commit serious offences,such as rape,who,once their sentence is complete are rarely deported.Those who are found to be carrying weapons are meant to serve 5 years in prison.When was the last time that happened? Yup,nothing's changed.

  • the fur has to go! Ma'am please don't wear fur.

  • Such a lovely lady. Never a false step.

  • 2.17 - quickstep boys!!! Hide one's bum!!

  • I'm American and I love the Queen!!

  • Mass Hypnosis alarm !!! all are slaves of De Rothschilds

  • grand!

  • for the curious: background music is Handel's "Zadok the Priest", coronation anthem for the anointment part

  • 2:37 lol

  • 3:18 what did he say that made everyone laugh? Can't make it out.

  • @MatiasVivas one of them said "do we have Hellen Mirren on standby?" She's famous actress who played Queen Elizabeth in a tv series, and also in the movie "The Queen" in 2006. She's played a few royal period pieces. So it was a joke to have actress Hellen Mirren on standby for all the pomp and circumstance as in her movies where she played the queen.

  • @qoaa Oh, I see. I get it now. Thank you for taking the time to answer. I really appreciate it.

  • what is the point of all this pomp? why do these people dress up like that? what do all these medals represent?

    i deeply appreciate the hard work, persistence, trading tradition, language and nature of britain, but i cannot understand why such a capable people is fascinated by white furs, diamonds, red robes and trumpets....

  • @seetheredradiator - the same reason why people have always been fascinated by white furs, diamonds, red robes and trumpets - because its splendid. Are people really becoming this cynical, daft & boring?

  • @mrlopez2681 Your comment makes personal remarks that I am not interested in addressing. But I will repeat my point in a simpler way to make it easier for you to understand it: For me this circus show makes no difference, as I am not a British citizen. But if I had to pay taxes to sustain a lazy and arrogant family, I would be seriously pissed off.

  • @seetheredradiator - just about every tax payer on earth sustains "lazy and arrogant" families, be it political persons or women who can't stop having illegitimate children. But no, the Royals are not lazy. I'm no monarchist, but they are VERY busy & there are British newspapers who track their every move (with regard to their work) & report it in case you don't believe me. The problem is that, once it goes, it will change EVERYTHING, & not necessarily for the better.

  • @seetheredradiator - BTW, the comments were not directed at you personally, but rather to most people who ask the questions you did in you initial comment, so if you felt that they were, I apologize for not being more specific! :)

  • "Have you got Helen Mirren on standby", in reference to the portrayal by Helen Mirren of Elizabeth II in the 2006 film The Queen. The BBC political commentator Huw Edwards called the quip "cheap but funny"

  • Im from the USA and THANK YOU UK !! for being there for the USA when we need help when no counties would but the GREAT UK IS and thank you again !! THANK YOU UK BEING OUR FAMILY!!

  • O my God, how much I hate "multiculturalism". Is that a Black guy at 2:30? O my goodness, Britain surely has changed... Good old Britain, those times are over.

  • @HerrWagnerfreund what? fuck off!

  • O come on. That's not Britain anymore. That's Multicultistan.

  • @HerrWagnerfreund She's British get over it

  • No, she isn't. Get over it. A cat that is born in a cowhouse, doesn't become a cow.

  • @HerrWagnerfreund That's because they are both two completely different species.But there only one human species retard

  • But two differen ethnicites/nations. And you cannot change ethnicity. A nation, however, used to be defined by ethnicity until those retarded One World and multicultural idiots gained more and more power. Would you accept a white man with blond hair and blue eyes accept as a "Chinese"? Surely not. A white man cannot become Chinese, a Latino cannot become a Herero and a black man cannot become French, British, or German.

  • @HerrWagnerfreund Well there are so deal with it no matter what you say is going to change that your view is void/null so shut up or put up :)......P.S what do you call a white south African????

  • A European colonialist.

  • @HerrWagnerfreund That could mean someone from any part of the globe.You know and i know he would get introduced as a SOUTH AFRICAN 

  • Would you accept a guy with blond hair and blue eyes as a Chinese?

  • @HerrWagnerfreund yeah if he was born there

  • Comment removed

  • @HerrWagnerfreund

    No a woman actually, it's Baroness Amos, former leader of the house of Lords!

  • @HerrWagnerfreund You are being foolish. Where do you think people in US came from? Or in South America? Or in Australia? They came from everywhere, Italians, German, British, Africans, and they all are AMERICANS now or Australians. What's to be British? Being white, blonde and blue-eyed? Your are so naive. Hittler thought the same about the Jews, that's why Albert Einstein had to flee from Germany.

  • I just love reading all these negative comments and they seem to be from other countries...ENVY ENVY ENVY !!

    BRITS are the ONLY Country in the World who can and do this kind of awesome pomp.

  • I wonder what the world would be like without the influence of the British Empire over all these hundreds of years. All their colonies, from the eastern US to India, would probably not have prospered, let alone be established.

  • All hail President Miliband and the Trade Unions!

  • Why should we keep monarchy and this kind of ceremony? Let's remove it an put a republic in it's place, a republic that would spend the same amount of money, (if not more) but with things we don't even get to see!

    Smart, isn't it?

  • @talesdauphin You are clearly NOT British, thus don't understand the importance of the monarchy.

  • @keeg021985

    You're right, I'm not british, I'm brazilian.

    And yes, I understand the importance of monarchy, my country began as a monarchy, and was respected when it was a monarchy, that's why I was supporting monarchy in my first post, even with my lousy english ^^.

  • @talesdauphin You speak as if you're and Englishman, yet you are from Brazil.. This has nothing to do with you and mind you're own business!

  • @bunnymc25 His comment was intelligent. And although we are not British (me and talesdauphin) we support the Monarchy in both of our countries - Portugal and Brazil - as well as the British Monarchy.

    Indeed, the Monarchy gave much more to Portugal... in 100 years of Republic, they destroyed almost everything the Monarchy built over 800 years of history.

    Anyways, long live the Queen! Long live the UK! Long live Portugal! Oldest alliance in history!

  • the english are indeed extravagant, I mean check out those red socks!!! 3:10

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • check out the real queens speech - PUBLIC SPEECH QUEENS SPEECH ON YOUTUBE NOW!

  • what kind of executive powers can she practice if she chose ot do so?

  • 1:54 Margaret!

  • amazing man.

  • Looking back on history, we should have made the Washington's the royal family of America. We could have avoided all of the embarrassing presidents we've had to endure since then. The US definitely lacks the grandeur of the UK.

  • The doors of the House of Commons are shut when Black Rod arrives because the Commons have the absolute right to be free of the Sovereign's influence in its business (this right is re-affirmed on the appointment of the Speaker at the beginning of a new Parliament), and Black Rod must wait outside until the House business is suspended and the doors opened on the order of the Speaker.

  • Great nation, destroyed peoples n nations with imperialism but also gave them modernisation n structure, without this, non-western cultures would not be able to fit in with modernisation (which is primarily western).. ha ha

  • Comment removed

  • @DifangDuana I think you are misinformed. British colonies like my country took Westernization from Britain, even America did. The McDonald's/Jeans?Cheeseburger/­Rock culture that you are mentioning is Marketing by US firms to make money abroad. This is the Marketing influence, not culture of people outside of the US. No-one behaves like US, especially not the British colonies. Only US behaves like US. Only some systems like tertiary education and self-application r followed in some nations.

  • @nikeswool

    Uh, no. Most non-western countries try to emulate America, not Britain. You are about 100 years behind the curve.

    Also, one should strive to celebrate his own achievements, not to dwell on the achievements of others.

  • @DifangDuana Again, you are dead wrong. It's marketing that US money-making marketing that spilled over. There is no own achievements because the Brits colonized us and forced us to conform to their regime. Thats what colonizing and imperialism means. This brought in Western culture to our culture. Understand??

  • I love our countries traditions and respect for our Queen, and i hope it never changes.

  • @GoFuckYourselfBiatch - LOL!! I just love your YouTube handle!! Go Fuck yourself Bitach is GREAT!! :)

  • why does the man at 2:48 knock on the door? and who is he?

  • @elena9110 This is the "Gentleman Usher of the Black Rod" -- on ceremonial occasions such as this, it is his job to summons the Commons. They slam the door because he represents the unelected house, and must knock to gain admission.

  • @elena9110 He is the Gentleman Usher of the Black Rod. The reason for this is that the House of Commons likes to assert its independence from the monarch so it shuts the door in the face of her representative. This symbolism goes back to the English Civil War - google that to understand why. Ever since then, the British monarch has kept out of the Commons. That's also why the MPs don't hurry to obey Her Majesty's command to join her.

  • could somebody tell me why the man at 2:48 knocks on the door? and who he is?

  • DAMN BORING SHIT 2.A FTW

  • @valu777

    She only promised to up hold the protestant reformed religon as the established Church, which, so far, she has done.

  • @IDontLiveTodayJH what is she going t say to God about all the abortions that she signed into law?

  • I wish the Queen would actually give a meaningful speech that she wrote, instead of pretending that she is giving the speech and the government wrote it for her. There's nothing wrong with having division of power and admitting that different branches have different powers. I really don't see the need for all this show just to try to up hold the notion that the Monarch is still the "sole ruler" of the country, while everyone knows it isn't true.

  • @skip8619

    How is she "pretending that she is giving the speech"? She is reading out what the government is going to do. Everyone knows that the PM wrote it. Where is the pretention there? You would rather the queen writes her own speech and dictates what Parliament will do? THAT would be pretentious.

  • Usually when someone "gives a speech" it means that they wrote it themselves, and I know that is hypocrytical because most US Presidents suck to bad at writting speeches and have to have teams do it for them. But I would ask you, why is she there? I feel the same way about the State of the Union speeches in American, I think "Why are yo wasting my time?" I think people nowadays are too informed and educated to need a bunch of pagentry just so they can say "Look! Its the head of state!"

  • Doesn't the Queen have the right as a human being to give remarks that she wrote? My main point was why do give the pretence of one thing, like calling it "Her Majesty's Government" and have it be a reqirement that she open parliment, and then in reality the parliment has all the power and the monarch is a puppet. (Rage, rage, rage, shut up American!) but its true. You should can the act, because it insults people's intelligence. THAT is pretentious.

  • I just want the TRUTH, do you think it sends a good message to your children or any other person that its ok to lie as long as the lie isn't hurting any one or its for the good of all? The laws of the UK say that the Queen is entitled to certain powers, yet she is denied those powers. Yet all the trappings, such as the ceremonies and names still exist, however everyone knows who is pulling the ropes. You should either change the law, taking away the powers you don't want the monarch to have...

  • ...or give her the powers she is entitled to under law. That is how statutory law is supposed to work. But you should give up the national illusion and delusion, because it always comes around to get you in the end. I want the same thing along the same lines in my country, we should seek the truth above all else and codify those truths in law. Its not much more complicated than that.

  • @skip8619

    Because it's not a pretence to call it "Her Majesty's Government." It IS her government. She has the sole authority to appoint Ministers, from the elected MP's, to form a government. The Constitution revolves around the Queen. And all officials swear an oath to her. It creates unity.

    And what powers is she denied? It IS clearly written in law. The Bill Of Rights states how her powers are restricted. Maybe you should look it up on wikipedia as there is too much of it to write here.

  • Some of the powers that Queen has under law that are denied to her under convention:

    1. Choosing any member of Parliment to be her Prime Minister i.e. First Lord of the Treasury, instead of just the leader of the party that won the most seats in the last election.

    2. Giving a speech that she wrote, instead of the one written by the majority government for the opening of Parliment and the Speech from the Throne.

    3. Refusing to give royal assent to bills that she disagrees with...

  • ...or she thinks will harm the country.

    I'm sure there are more that I either forgot or am not familiar with. None of those actions that I listed in any way conflict with the Bill of Rights of 1689.

  • @skip8619

    She chooses the party with the most seats because that creates the most stable, efficient government. There's not much point appointing a Prime Minister who doesn't have Parliament's support. No bills would get passed. It's convention because it's the most sensible thing to do. Not because the Queen is forced to do it.

    And there's no law that says the Queen gets to write a speech dictating what Parliament should do. She has the right to be informed and to advise. Not to govern.....

  • @skip8619

    .....And refusing to give Royal Assent is a check against a party lying their way into power and then doing something extreme. It's never used because it never has to be.

    If for example a party gets voted in and then decides to gas 6 million jews... The Head Of State would refuse Royal Assent and call a new election. Unfortunately, in Germany, Hitler himself became Head Of State aswell as being leader of Parliament. That can't happen in a Constitutional Monarchy like Britain.

  • You make some good points, but I still think that if the Queen excersizes her powers only in the way you described, that means that the UK has no chief executive, its a country run by legislators. Because even with the considerable executive powers the Prime Minister has, he/she is still a legislator and performs many legislative functions. That was my original point, under law, the Monarch is the chief executive, yet in reality they are not. And I disagree with you that it really is...

  • ..."Her Majesty's Government", it should be called "Mr. Cameron's Government", because he holds all the executive powers that actually matter, like conducting diplomacy with other nations, asking Parliment to authorize military action against another nation,setting the legislative agenda for the session, etc. Don't take this as me insulting the UK goverment system, I think it is the best ever devised, and the US goverment is based completly off it, but the authors of the US Constitution...

  • ... realized, I think correctly, that in order for government to work effectivly, you need an executive, legislative, and judicial branch, each with seperate and defined powers. They tried a goverment with no seperate chief executive under The Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union, and it didn't work. They could excersize almost no control or rule of law over the states, and there was essentially no federal government.

  • @skip8619

    I don't know much about the US government, but Britain has been an effective, stable democracy for the past 350 years.

    I think doing everything in the name of the Queen (I.E. calling it HM Government, and all the armed forces and police wearing a Royal Insignia and swearing allegiance to the Monarch, and having public businesses like Royal Mail, and having the Queen do all the ceremonial stuff like military parades etc), does a good job of seperating the power from the glory.

  • @skip8619 Your getting confused. Britain has a uncodified constitution. Or more precisely the constitution is made up of statues, common law, court judgements, treaties and unwritten conventions.

    The wonder of the British constitution is that big chunks of it don't need to be written down and it still works and is more adaptable than any other constitution.

  • The State Opening of parliament needs to be scrapped. The speech can be read by the Lord Chancellor.

  • @JuanMacready That has no sense at all. This is the reason why the UK is one of my favorite countries. And that's why the Monarchy is a major factor for your tourism. You ask me about the UK? I automatically think about the Queen.

  • @AvatarMarxon90 No British monarch has had any power at all since William IV in the 1830s. The monarchy serves no purpose and should be scrapped. It was the Lord Chancellor who read the speech in 1951 when her father was dying of lung cancer.

  • @JuanMacready And why take it away? At least let the Queen do it. And I can't understand you people at all. You want a Constitutional Monarchy with more powers or with those they currently have? I think the answer is quite obvious (I help you: second option). The Monarch should only function as a balance between all powers. She doesn't need more powers then. The same thing happens here in Portugal with our President. God...

  • @AvatarMarxon90 The Queen is a worthless powerless cunt, just like every monarch since William IV. We were much better off as a republic with Oliver Cromwell as our leader.

  • @JuanMacready Let me laugh at that one. I don't know much about your country's history, but that mister... well, that man, Oliver Cromwell, was an absolute Monarch but with no crown - or if you prefer, a bloody dictator. Don't come to me saying that you'd prefer him or a person like him as your leader. That's stupid and irrational of you to say. Forgive me for being blunt, but are you German (or German descendant)? As it seems you are. Germans are the people that love to be ruled by iron.

  • @JuanMacready And good Lord! Why the hell do you want a head-of-state with power? That's madness! A Constitutional Monarchy or a Semi-Parliamentary Republic are the best representative governments on Earth! Nothing that tips the scale too much to one side is likely to end well. You need balance, sir! Balance! If you'd like to live in a place where the heads-of-state have power, go to Middle East. You'd rot in contempt over there with their power. And their corruption as well.

  • @JuanMacready I for one can tell you personally: I live in a fucking Republic. And it has done NOTHING more than corrupt my country's culture and history since 1910. It all began when they expelled King Manoel II from here. Did you know that in our State Budget, we have to "feed" our current President and 4 ex-presidents plus their families (yes, because some of their children have jobs in our Parliament). We also have to keep their institutions. Sorry sir, I prefer a Monarchy.

  • @JuanMacready And yes - you can compare both Portugal and Spain. Our revolutions were in the same time (1 year of difference). By revolutions, I meant the Revolutions that delivered us to democracy. Portugal - 1974 (4 years after the death of Salazar); Spain - 1975 (with Franco's death). What can you see? The ex-colonies of Portugal are a bloody mess because of the stupid speedy de-colonization they had. And what's left of Portugal but this single rectangule in the Atlantic? Do tell me.

  • @JuanMacready The King of Spain brought in democracy in a gradual way. If Portugal had a King, Angola and Mozambique would be surely in a far better way nowadays. They wouldn't be Africa's AIDS pits. Portugal wouldn't for sure be one of the most corrupted and poor countries in Western Europe. The problem is sir, that people with good-hearts are never found amongst the Republicans. They only care about themselves, and they only want to get elected, and then "fuck off" to those who elected him.

  • @AvatarMarxon90 Oliver Cromwell was the greatest leader Britain ever had. He conquered England, Ireland and Scotland and made Britain a leading world power. The monarchy has served no purpose at all since William IV's time.

  • @JuanMacready I can't still understand why do you want the head-of-state with power. I don't agree with that. I simply don't. You need three plates in your balance. The head-of-state in the middle, and the Parliament and the Government on both sides. That's true democracy. About Cromwell being the greatest leader the British ever had... that's questionable. You certain you're not biased because he was the head of a so-called British Republic?

  • @AvatarMarxon90 The last great monarch was George III because he was the last to have considerable political power.

  • c'est magnifique

  • it sounds better with the soccer knob on

  • the man who knock the door is a francmason?

  • @kriahambul Uhh... I don't think so... his title is the Black Rod if I'm not mistaken. I think his role is somewhat related to Charles I (when he tried to enter the House of Commons, and the door was shut on him, the guards then brought the door down, so the King could enter and imprison some people). I don't know much about the British history - so I'm sorry, but I think that's it. If not, please do correct me when you learn the correct version. Or tell me if I'm right :P

  • Tony Blair said EVERYTHING! British people love ceremonies, it's a part of our culture, we're a traditional nation, and monarchy has a binding power over englishmen minds. Therefore, yes, we like it. What's wrong with it? And why's everyone always trying to mock on us because of it? Sounds to me like a bit of jealousy!

  • Good men of the world, get in shape like British Royal Guards, And say Thank you Jesus,!!!

  • GOD SAVE THE GLORIOUS QUEEN OF THE UK

  • @MegaBeaumont what is even her job? what does she do?

  • I am a 16 year old british boy and I for one think the monarchy is one thing that makes this country British. Yes she may not have any real power as head of state. But she provides a head of state that is above politics. She is not a total waste of time! The monarchy is one of the things at the center of british culture. I would rather have a monarch insted of a president.

  • Nice to see old traditions although it is a pomp

  • @gringodeltoro1 How dare you! Have some respect. You are 100% useless too.

  • @gringodeltoro1 She's also one of the most important parts of our constitution and holder of a position that goes back over 1000 years which is a huge part of our culture.

    So kindly fuck off.

  • @theredraven She's an old lady with a £10000 piece of clothing on her. Ever remember her doing a speech that moved you? Ever remember her fighting injusctice? (Apart from giving back scraps from the money we give her) Ever remember her fighting for a cause? She's a poster for elitism, snobism, eccentrism, arrogance, nationalist brainwash, fake authority, fake morals, out of dated monarchy, senseless hierarchy, false sense of prestige, and total waste of time... she's a tramp...

  • @gringodeltoro1 how erudite. you can always tell a man by his quotes. lol

  • A question: Between the time when the old PM travels to Buckingham Palace and tenders his/her resignation and the time when the new PM does the same journey and is appointed by the Queen, who is in charge of the government?

    What happens if the New PM's car breaks down or is stuck in traffic? ...I noticed David Cameron's car was travelling in normal traffic yesterday.

  • Man, sometimes I stop and think:

    "Human beings are soooooooooooo weird."

    And I realise everybody's crazy, including me.. .

  • Comment removed

  • Vicki Pollard got a pretty sweet gig here! ;)

  • Does any other nation do Pomp aswell as us British, I don't think so! just look at this... its magnificent!

  • Does anyone know the music playing in the background?

  • @nelsonkee123 Zadok the Priest.

  • Nicolas Sarkozy is a good man.

  • Prince Phillip is a Don :)

  • There IT is!

  • shes a fail :P

  • you know, God will forbid Elizabeth to be next in line to the throne, if she is not worthy to be an English Queen. But God did not do anything so that means she can raise her country .... and no one, can break her law.. she is who she is right now ... The Queen ...

  • @Sidneius im athiest :P

  • well, that is a BIG QUESTION for u

  • que hacen las Reinas , a favor de la humanidad ?

  • que los hace reyes, sobre la humanidad?

  • She is a Queen, not a King.

    The Queen is human, but she is also one of the most respected people in the world. In the UK she has an approval rating of over 70%.

  • Why answer me that the queen is human????. I didn't asked that. What soupouse to be she, what you defend from ?

  • I thought you were saying the Queen was only human. I think I need to improve my Spainish.

  • ok thanks.

    But again I ask, what does she make in favour of the humanity, or she as queen is only request to dress elegant, and make speaches? also I'm confused, about the crown she wears, It look like a King Crown.

  • She wears the Imperial State Crown which is the crown of the monarch. It has been worn by Queen Victoria, King Edward VII, King George V and King George VI.

    The Queen is the head of state, and so has all the work and duties of that office.

  • @Medeasbiggestfan shes a whore and a parasite and the british government are her clowns .She owns the british people and she shits on them.

  • The Queen has no executive or legislative power whatsoever. In the UK she has an approval rating of over 70%.

  • @Medeasbiggestfan they all work for her in the interests of her family relatives associates and friends,their properties and wealth and for nothing else.

    Believe me they dont step out of line.If you want to believe otherwise then you are entitled to your opinion I dont wish to argue the point or persuade you otherwise .I just felt like venting some spleen.

  • Why would the elected policitians feel obliged to do what the Queen says? It's not as if she can do anything if the elected policitians do something she doesn't likes.

    Look at the policies of the UK governrnent over the last 60 years. I think you can clearly see how they change with each Prime Minister.

  • @Medeasbiggestfan Her family friends ans associates own ninety 80 percent of the united kingdom ,the rest being allocated to the working ,middle and under classes . Nothing can be done without her approval,Im not asking to debate this please.

  • Of course you don't want to debate this, what you are saying is unfounded and doesn't stand up to any sort of scrutiny or basic logic.

    Do you have any evidence whatsoever to back up what you're saying?

  • I'll take that as a 'no'.

  • you want me to spoon feed you research in to something thats staring you in the face unless youre deaf and blind and live in somewhere like tobago or trinidad

  • What's staring me in the face is a constitutional monarchy where all the laws and decisions about the country are made by the elected Parliament and Prime Minister.

    If you look at the UK government under the Labour party of the late 1970s and then look at the UK government under the Conservative party in the 1980s you'll see fundamental differences in economic, social and foreign policy. We had the same monarch but a different Prime Minister.

  • @Medeasbiggestfan and you elect them yes yes yes .And nobody owns them Yes yes.. ok..

  • I wish you were right and the Queen really did run the country, I think she'd do a better job than expense cheats in the House of Commons!

    I think, if the Conservatives win the election next year, things will change - I just hope it's for the better!

  • Its her country and her chessboard and as long as you stay out of her way shes not bothered.

  • I think these conspiracy theories about the Queen running the world are very amusing and quite interesting to think about, but they have no basis in fact.

  • In the end, I think most - I do - have more faith in the Queen as a person and as a part of the system we have in place... than the elected self serving basta$#@ in the commons. I love that she keeps them all in their places - bunch of wankers! God save the Queen!

  • Blair: 'the monarchy has a unifying role to play...a wonderful ceremony.." Frankly, I'm embarrassed by this kind of anachronistic, imperialist nonsense. Have a Royal family (if we must), but on the scale of Spain or the Netherlands.

  • 3:18

    "Have you got Helen Mirren on standby?" Lol.

  • Fuck The EU!

    God Save The Queen!!

  • ...She ain't no human being

    There is no future

    In England's dreaming

    Don't be told what you want

    Don't be told what you need

    There's no future

    No future no future for you

  • and there is no logic in your comment you dropkick, i would rather watch fucking paint dry than listen to a brainless 7 year old child running around youtube and spreading bullshit, why don't you go and blabber your bullshit to someone else who actually gives a fuck what you're saying

  • That's badwords, people like you cannot use this vocabulary,respect the queen! lol

  • and that was a completely redundant comment coming from a cretin or possibly even a 7 year old who could give a shit about global issues, i would rather sit in my room and wait out the winter looking a white ceiling than to continue with this conversation

  • what is really a global issue? what does the queen really do? bullshit is your backward way of thinking. but seriously lets debate. you can add me in facebook and debate your point of view with me, it would be pleasant.

  • why would i even bother adding you on facebook? I really do not want seeing a really very angry man on the internet getting all really upset in my comment box, the Queen is who she is and does have more power than you can generate in that thick skull of yours

  • @QymLym i really dont know where you get all the about slave importing, thats never happened, The Queen does actually have executive power she can practice, I am very glad i am under a constitutional monarchy, it stops Government lunacy, it is no way dark or awful, the Queen also exercises her power (she rarely does) maturely and justly, you can believe what you want but it sounds you are way out in left field when it comes to this subject

  • @CanadianMonarchist1 the point I'm trying to make is that the history of the monarchy is absolutely disgusting, hardcore authoritarian tyranny. I know the queen has executive power she can practice but the point is she shouldn't even have that power. she earned it through her bloodline, claiming that they were chosen by God to rule, the perfect pretext for authority. monarchy is a primitive outdated concept that needs to be phased out.