Comments by "Brad Miller" (@bradmiller2329) on "The Secret Feud Between Prince Philip and The Queen Mother | Behind Closed Doors | Timeline" video.

  1. The King is dead, Long live the Queen. It's been the law for centuries now.
    53
  2.  @heytherejay04  Since way, way back (Henry I?), English (later British) law has been that the crown passes automatically down a specified line of succession. Usually father to son, or father to daughter (if no sons) (yeah, yeah, new law, but that doesn't kick in until William of Cambridge's kids anyway). The coronation is "just" the public recognition of the 'de jure' status of the new monarch, as well as that monarch's public oath to uphold the "laws and customs", etc. In some countries, the succession is NOT automatic, and then you get all sorts of fun things -- civil war, etc.
    40
  3.  @Brandon-mn1cx  Because unless the King/Prince married his sister, or a VERY close cousin, with no other relatives between them, his wife is not HIS heir to the throne. It can happen, but the odds are very strongly against it, because so many first cousins would have to marry, and then have only one child, that it is extremely unlikely.
    24
  4. (1) He's a man, not a soy-boy. (2) He's a war-proven commissioned naval officer -- he's used to being in charge. (3) He comes from a generation where the husband was EXPECTED to be head of the household.
    14
  5.  @cherylann9781  Why skip him? Not even willing to give him a CHANCE?
    13
  6.  @dopechick4955  Go back far enough, EVERYONE is cousins.
    7
  7. You have a desperately sick imagination -- should really get that looked at by a professional -- maybe an exorcist?
    6
  8. Philip was always blonde.
    5
  9.  @chaoswitch1974  Albert? No, he wasn't. He was the consort to a ruling queen. England/UK has had so few ruling queens, as opposed to queen-consorts, that until modern times (20th century) law wasn't established on exactly what a ruling queen's husband was. Mary I = Philip, already King of Spain. Matilda the Empress = never crowned. Elizabeth I = never married. Jane = never crowned. Mary II = William of Orange, who was made king by special dispensation of parliament. Anne = George (?) Of Denmark who was specifically NOT made king, by dispensation of parliament. Victoria -- same thing again and she was very angry Elizabeth Ii -- the question of making him king never came up, and he was not officially even Prince Consort. Comes down to what the law is at the time.
    5
  10. Yes. The dukes who are nominally "cousins" of the monarch are supposed to greet the new king/queen with the "kiss of peace". You know, just before they start an armed rebellion aimed at seizing the throne?
    4
  11. I would go absolutely mad, living in a fish bowl like that.
    4
  12. So why don't THEIR rulers look out for them?
    3
  13. And Scots. And Norman. And French, Spanish, Danish ....
    3
  14. Continuity, stability, some to put roots down into.
    3
  15.  Crazy Canuck  "Nonsense" to LOWE sonia, that "Jannloch it was bound to be a reality .sooner or later .she was the heir to the throne after all". She was the Heiress Presumptive from the moment Edward VIII/Duke of Windsor signed the abdication papers. Either you know absolutely nothing (appearing more and more likely), or you're just speaking out your @$$
    3
  16.  @didntknoicouldchangethis  Actually, the Royals live off of the money generated by the Crown Estates. They only own two houses of their own (Sandringham and Balmoral) -- all the others are government property that they are permitted to USE. They also donate to charity each year the equivalent amount they would pay on their "income" if they were liable to income tax. They don't COST "the people" a penny, any more than any head of state costs "the people".
    3
  17.  @didntknoicouldchangethis  Too many people just assume that anything that is going on "is a burden on the people", without bothering to find out WHO is actually footing the bill. As a current example in the US -- private citizens are raising money, close to a million dollars already, to build the wall that Congress refused to. Most of what is being built is being paid for by the Defense Department, out of discretionary funds, because when you have illegal entry into your country in huge numbers, and when a significant portion of those entries are known terrorists, it does fall under the jurisdiction of National Defense. I saw a breakdown a few years ago of the number of charities the Royals support, and how much they personally gave, and how much just being associated with the charity got other people to donate, and I thought -- all the good that WOULDN'T be done, if they hadn't "fronted" for this or that charity!
    3
  18. If you did 1/10 what he does, at 1/4 his age, you'd be doing 3 times what you do now.
    3
  19. So did Anne, Andrew, and Edward.
    3
  20. No, she wasn't. In Britain only a titled non-stop royal is technically a noble. The daughter of an early is not, herself, s countess.
    3
  21. Queen Mary, actually. Vicky never bothered to even acknowledge the crowds.
    2
  22. If you try and pull an illegal coup like that -- you destroy completely the validity of the whole system.
    2
  23. Here, stand in this spotlight, and remember that for the rest of your life, you will have papperazi coming out of the wall-sockets wherever you go!
    2
  24.  @IR-yd5bp  True life? What, she's a fairy tale? Her REAL life is well (over well) documented by the paperazi . Oh, and she was an Olympic dressage rider, too!
    2
  25. WAS greek by nationality, mostly danish by ancestry, nationalized brit by choice.
    2
  26.  @linanae1  Also a (distant) cousin through the European Royal Family Network a few generations back.
    2
  27. You have a sick mind.
    2
  28.  Crazy Canuck  What "baloney"? 91) He IS a soy-boy and not a man? (2) He's not a war-proven commissioned naval officer, used to being in charge? (3) He doesn't come froma generation where the husband is expected to be head of the household? Come on, "man up" and tell me which of my facts are wrong!
    2
  29.  @michaelgodfrey336  He was grateful for a loving and supportive wife
    2
  30.  @friedman01  The reality of dynastic politics. There were very few women that it would have been "acceptable" for him to marry. To all of you who go off on what a wonderful life the royals have -- even then they were trapped in a fish bowl, weighted down with cultural expectations.
    2
  31.  @friedman01  Not deposed by any recognized authority. He was STILL related to the Danish and British royal houses. Get born into that yarn snarl, you NEVER got out.
    2
  32.  @didntknoicouldchangethis  Tourism
    2
  33. Lord Mountbatten did not "adopt" Edinburgh. He took a young relative under his wing.
    2
  34. Your tinfoil hat is too tight? It is well known -- it was the annointing with the sacred oil -- that point at which the monarch goes from just being legally, to also being divinely, recognized as the head of state.
    2
  35. Queen Elizabeth I died in 1603, and was never a queen mother. Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother, nee Bowes-Lyon never had a "number", because she never reigned in her own right.
    2
  36. Nasty, much?
    1
  37. Why not? She married one!
    1
  38. You've never done what you were sure was best, and had it turn out wrong? Hail, Divinity!
    1
  39. Ever heard of scholarships?
    1
  40. Oh good -- thank you for volunteering to both generate a huge chunk of the budge due to tourists, AND provide a continuing piece of stability for the government.
    1
  41.  @manLoLothegoddesslover  Condemned out of your own mouths. Repent your hatred while you can.
    1
  42. There is a very practical reason for HM's hat, and the Queen Mum's hats -- it is an instant visual locator for their security teams, if anything goes down. Their "primary" is right -- there!
    1
  43. Only the royals YOU know.
    1
  44.  @dulciemidwinter5990  Prince of Wales is NOT a hereditary title. Each one is a "special creation"
    1
  45.  @dulciemidwinter5990  He started by learning Welsh, becoming interested in Wales and its people, and by becoming heavily involved in Welsh charities and such .
    1
  46. Fools generally aren't popular.
    1
  47. Suuuuurrrree you can.
    1
  48. Don't check the mirror, luv.
    1
  49. Hey sense of duty drives her. Try it some time.
    1
  50.  @MrGunboy2  You should really shut up before you show the absolute bottom of your knowledge.
    1
  51. For one thing, Charles is 40 years older, now, that Edinburgh was, then.
    1
  52.  Crazy Canuck  Translation -- you HAVE no answer!
    1
  53.  @zachj61  Times change.
    1
  54.  @patowilly5809  More than 3500 (three thousand, five hundred!) independent realms -- kingdoms, electorates, prince-bishops, dukes, landgraves, cities ....
    1
  55.  @Consrignrant  And Saxon and Scandinavian, and Celtic and ...
    1
  56.  @robincombs3449  Not true.
    1
  57. Not since George Ill. Geo III Duke of Kent Victoria Edward VII Geo V Geo VI Elizabeth II 7 generations is more than enough to make them "native Britons"
    1
  58. Stick your racism in next to your head.
    1
  59. Are you really that dumb,not is it normal in your 'hood?
    1
  60. E dai?
    1
  61. Jealousy, envy, spite.
    1
  62.  @Freespeech141  He's a nutter.
    1
  63. Not even that -- the Sonderburg etc were a house older than surnames.
    1
  64.  @tanishaclairesequeira9115  ... Says the cannibal, picking his teeth.
    1
  65. Saxe-Coburg-Gotha-Sonderburg-Glucksburg
    1
  66. Bite off your own nose to spite your face ...
    1
  67.  @brendaparent852  Anh-hunh. Riiiiiight.
    1
  68. Learn some science.
    1
  69.  @daveslawinski9522  Exactly what it says.
    1
  70.  @daveslawinski9522  You have a right to your own opinions, not your own facts.
    1
  71. The coronation ceremony IS more than a thousand years old. And it's the House of Windsor
    1
  72. She was.
    1
  73. The paperazi killed Diana AND the others that night.
    1
  74.  @navasjulio04  And I should take his word that water is wet because ....?
    1