The Royal Forums Coat of Arms

Go Back   The Royal Forums > Royal Highlights > Royal Library > The Electronic Domain

Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #201  
Old 02-10-2007, 07:59 AM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,943
Quote:
Originally Posted by fandesacs2003
Of course I have not bee there. But the whole way thinks happened confirms the film. The Royal family was fully absent for the first days, and people's rection was growing and growing.
And finakl the family changed her behavior.
These ARE THE FACTS.
Of course we do not know the discussions, be the events are known. And do not forget that among Tony Blair's environment, things should have been discused.
All we do know for certain about these events is that Diana died in a car crash, that the Queen and the rest of the close family chose to try to protect the boys and allow all of them some time to grieve, in private.
We know about the mob that was waiting for them in London, that in their grief they had to 'parade' in front of and they (including the children) had to read some rather nasty messages left by some people.

We know nothing about what the Queen or any of the family did at Balmoral, before or after the death. We know nothing about what was said by the Queen, the rest of the family or Blair at this time, except the statements made on tv by HM or Blair.

That HM and 2 grieving children were forced by a mob, stirred up by the media, to return to London, is to this day something anyone who took part, should be ashamed of!
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #202  
Old 02-10-2007, 06:19 PM
MARG's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand
Posts: 4,253
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skydragon
All we do know for certain about these events is that Diana died in a car crash, that the Queen and the rest of the close family chose to try to protect the boys and allow all of them some time to grieve, in private.
That HM and 2 grieving children were forced by a mob, stirred up by the media, to return to London, is to this day something anyone who took part, should be ashamed of!
Well said Skydragon. I have to admit that I watched that on TV with a morbid sense of fascination.

My common sense told me that none of them should be there, especially the children, but if we're honest we will admit that it was the very first piece of 'Realty Television', as compulsive as watching a train wreck. Perhaps that's why I loathe and never watch reality shows.

As to the movie? In some ways it's like the film community looked back on the whole episode with the benefit of 20/20 hindsight and tried to say to say a collective I'm sorry! Gee, Helen Mirren has said she now admires the Queen! As for the public? Many will watch the movie as some sort of guilty penance, and find through through the power of the screen, that the Queen is worthy!

Shame indeed Skydragon.
__________________

__________________
MARG
"Words ought to be a little wild, for they are assaults of thoughts on the unthinking." - JM Keynes
Reply With Quote
  #203  
Old 02-10-2007, 08:40 PM
ysbel's Avatar
Heir Apparent
TRF Author
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 5,390
I admit I didn't like to watch William and Harry forced out to greet the crowds so soon after the death of their mother, especially with William so shy and private. I would have preferred they be given private space to grieve.

I don't know if Her Majesty ever really read any notes on the flowers left in front of Buckingham Palace after Diana's death that said "They have your blood on their hands" (as was shown in the movie) but I can well imagine that some misguided fan wrote words like that and left them with flowers at the gates.

Even if Her Majesty didn't read such notes herself, I'm sure that she was informed of what was going on including some of the contents of the notes.

I thought it was an unpleasant scene. Others may feel differently.
__________________
"One thing we can do is make the choice to view the world in a healthy way. We can choose to see the world as safe with only moments of danger rather than seeing the world as dangerous with only moments of safety."
-- Deepak Chopra
Reply With Quote
  #204  
Old 02-11-2007, 07:58 AM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,943
I think I said right at the beginning , that my cause for concern with this film, is that people will believe it is a factual account, of what happened and who said or did what.

What was said or done at this time will never be known.

As a work of fiction, it is worthy of merit, being seen as a docu drama is misguided.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #205  
Old 02-11-2007, 08:05 AM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,943
Quote:
Originally Posted by ysbel
I don't know if Her Majesty ever really read any notes on the flowers left in front of Buckingham Palace after Diana's death that said "They have your blood on their hands" (as was shown in the movie) but I can well imagine that some misguided fan wrote words like that and left them with flowers at the gates.
I am certain that HM saw some of the television coverage of the scenes at BP. "They have your blood on their hands", was only one of many nasty messages left.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #206  
Old 02-11-2007, 10:07 AM
fandesacs2003's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Athens, Greece
Posts: 3,260
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skydragon
We know about the mob that was waiting for them in London, that in their grief they had to 'parade' in front of and they (including the children) had to read some rather nasty messages left by some people.

That HM and 2 grieving children were forced by a mob, stirred up by the media, to return to London, is to this day something anyone who took part, should be ashamed of!
I'm sorry but you can not be private when it is suitable and public when it also suitable. Any royal family lives from their people and for their people, and they have to hear their people's wishes, even it sometimes is very difficult.
And do not mix the boys in this story. Nobody claimed the boy's presence, and no one of the british people would have reacted if a 11 years and a 15 years boy would have been crying alone.
People reacted to claim The Queen and Prince Philip, and also Charles, but not in any case the boys.
Look the difference with the Spanish family. Letizia lost her sister, and Queen Sofia immediately interrupted her trip to be back. Erica is not directly involved with the RF, but ALL the SRF is there.
IN UK the mother of the future King died, and the family stays on their holiday's place. I do not say that they were dancing in Balmoral, of course they were sad, but they were absent, and this is not a Monarch's place.
In another register, remember when the submarin KURSK disappeared under the sea. Vladimir Putin did not interrupt his holidays. Of course he was following the events, BUT HE WAS ABSENT, and this was extremely badly taken by the Russian people.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #207  
Old 02-11-2007, 10:43 AM
Warren's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 15,425
Quote:
Originally Posted by fandesacs2003
And do not mix the boys in this story. Nobody claimed the boy's presence, and no one of the british people would have reacted if a 11 years and a 15 years boy would have been crying alone.
People reacted to claim The Queen and Prince Philip, and also Charles, but not in any case the boys.
That's an interesting scenario. Imagine the headlines: "Heartless Royals return to London; grieving boys abandoned and alone at Balmoral."
__________________
Seeking information? Check out the extensive Royal A-Z
Reply With Quote
  #208  
Old 02-11-2007, 10:55 AM
fandesacs2003's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Athens, Greece
Posts: 3,260
Quote:
Originally Posted by Warren
That's an interesting scenario. Imagine the headlines: "Heartless Royals return to London; grieving boys abandoned and alone at Balmoral."
Good point That's true that press can say all the versions for the same event.

By they could have been back WITH the boys.

But I think this is an endless discussion. They are people considering that Queen Elisabet II, WHATEVER she is doing, she is doing well.
And other people thinking that sometimes she might be wrong.

Someone has his opinion, thst is the good point.

Ciao
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #209  
Old 02-11-2007, 11:23 AM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,943
Quote:
Originally Posted by fandesacs2003
But I think this is an endless discussion. They are people considering that Queen Elisabet II, WHATEVER she is doing, she is doing well.
And other people thinking that sometimes she might be wrong.
Love the film or hate it, agree or disagree with the writers interpretation of the few facts known, that's fine as long as viewers remember that it is apocryphal.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #210  
Old 02-11-2007, 12:21 PM
ysbel's Avatar
Heir Apparent
TRF Author
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 5,390
Quote:
Originally Posted by fandesacs2003
Good point That's true that press can say all the versions for the same event.

By they could have been back WITH the boys.

But I think this is an endless discussion. They are people considering that Queen Elisabet II, WHATEVER she is doing, she is doing well.
And other people thinking that sometimes she might be wrong.

Someone has his opinion, thst is the good point.

Ciao
I think you're oversimplifying. Not every one in this discussion actually admires everything the Queen does.

I also think we have a different idea of what being human means. I remember some people in the press reflecting with pride that the Royal Family were like puppets on a string and the people could make them do what they wanted when they wanted. I thought that attitude was inhuman and did not want to see a Queen be just a marionette on a string that public opinion can pull whenever it wants. I prefer a monarch to be as true as they can to their feelings in a public situation. It makes them more real.

For Queen Sofia, it was easy to express affection for the dead sister of Letizia because the Queen Sofia adores Letizia, they have a good relationship and Queen Sofia knows that Letizia and her sister were close. I'm not sure if Sofia wanted to prove anything to her people by showing up at the funeral of Erika but she definitely wanted to show support for Letizia, a young girl she loved very much and she had had no unpleasant dealings with Erika herself to turn her off the girl.

In contrast Queen Elizabeth had liked Diana as a young girl but Diana had declared a public war in the press against the Royal Family and the Queen herself. Also the Queen was very concerned for her grandsons growing up in this environment, especially William, who was very shy and scared of the press. The Queen showed her humanness by paying attention to her grandson's needs first. I believe that anything else would have been inhuman.

Could she have made a public statement and tried to approach the public before? Yes, and I think she would have if Diana hadn't done that last Panorama interview where she criticized the monarchy and Charles' ability to inherit the throne. That one interview put the monarchy in a precarious position and so I find it perfectly understandable that the Queen was at a loss of words to express her thoughts at Diana's passing.

Queen Sofia and King Juan Carlos have never been put in this position by their own immediate family and so you cannot compare the reactions of the two families. If Letizia had died after giving Jaime Penafiel a critical interview against Felipe, Juan Carlos, and Sofia, do you think Sofia would have rushed out to greet the public in mourning for Letizia's death?
__________________
"One thing we can do is make the choice to view the world in a healthy way. We can choose to see the world as safe with only moments of danger rather than seeing the world as dangerous with only moments of safety."
-- Deepak Chopra
Reply With Quote
  #211  
Old 02-11-2007, 01:05 PM
fandesacs2003's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Athens, Greece
Posts: 3,260
Quote:
Originally Posted by ysbel
I also think we have a different idea of what being human means.
I think you are fully right. Cultures are very different and regarding where you are coming from, showing your feelings could be considered normal, or not accepted.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ysbel
I prefer a monarch to be as true as they can to their feelings in a public situation.
The problem is exactly that. After Diana's death, people suspected the Queen being completely cold to Diana's death, because she did not like her. Some thought that she did not hide her emotion, just she had no emotion....

Quote:
Originally Posted by ysbel
In contrast Queen Elizabeth had liked Diana as a young girl but Diana had declared a public war in the press against the Royal Family and the Queen herself. Also the Queen was very concerned for her grandsons growing up in this environment, especially William, who was very shy and scared of the press. The Queen showed her humanness by paying attention to her grandson's needs first. I believe that anything else would have been inhuman.

Could she have made a public statement and tried to approach the public before? Yes, and I think she would have if Diana hadn't done that last Panorama interview where she criticized the monarchy and Charles' ability to inherit the throne. That one interview put the monarchy in a precarious position and so I find it perfectly understandable that the Queen was at a loss of words to express her thoughts at Diana's passing.
Yes, but the Queen sould not resume Diana's personnality just to one interview, even if she considered that it was a mistakefrom her. Diana was a complex and touching personnality, and despite her weakness to many points, she touched people's hard. And it is extremely egoist from the Queen to reject her, just because she did this interview. And do not forget that she did not lie to this interview. It was a highly manipulation moment, but we should not forget that at the very beginning, this young girl married a guy who was unfaithfull since the beginning, and his family ALL new it. Diana explosed like a uncontrolled bomb, that is true, but SHE was cheated.
out of this interview, Diana did many many good thinks for the people, and I think the people become angry because they just realised that the Queen was indifferent to ALL this.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ysbel
Queen Sofia and King Juan Carlos have never been put in this position by their own immediate family and so you cannot compare the reactions of the two families. If Letizia had died after giving Jaime Penafiel a critical interview against Felipe, Juan Carlos, and Sofia, do you think Sofia would have rushed out to greet the public in mourning for Letizia's death?
For this I would agree with you, but Queen Sofia would have managed a "middle" behavior, in order not to offense people's feelings.
The Queen behaviored completely ABSENT and this hurt her people. IMO if she had issued a statement the first day after, people would have been satisfied, and they have never asked anything else.
You would never expect from your Monarch to walk around the whole day and to check the flowers in the Palace gate.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #212  
Old 02-11-2007, 04:05 PM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,943
Quote:
Originally Posted by fandesacs2003
but SHE was cheated.
And in turn did her own cheating! This film and this thread are not about who cheated on who and at what point in the marriage.
Quote:
out of this interview, Diana did many many good thinks for the people, and I think the people become angry because they just realised that the Queen was indifferent to ALL this.
The only person who benefited from the interview was Diana. Her son's didn't benefit, ordinary people didn't benefit!

Has it never occured to anyone, that HM and the rest of the family were so shocked by Diana's death, that they needed time to come to terms with it, let alone allow two young boys a little time to grieve. Most people who have lost someone in these circumstances are so shocked, that their only grip on sanity is to carry on, in as normal a routine as possible, that crying on demand and in public is not something that was in the British mentality. How terrible that anyone would say, it would have been OK to see them cry, that is not the way everyone wants to behave, in public, after the death of someone close to them!
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #213  
Old 02-11-2007, 04:39 PM
fandesacs2003's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Athens, Greece
Posts: 3,260
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skydragon
And in turn did her own cheating!
Of course she did.
But when she married she was sincere. Charles and his family NOT. She wed with her illusions, he WED to be more free to cheat.
This is not the point of the thread. I just mentioned it to show that the Queen might have griefs against Diana, but being an intelligent woman, she for sure had think about reasons of Diana's behavior. And this sould have made her being "mild" after her death.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skydragon
The only person who benefited from the interview was Diana. Her son's didn't benefit, ordinary people didn't benefit!
I did not say that people benefit from the interview.
I said that people benefit from acts she did during her 15 years of Princess of Wales.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #214  
Old 02-11-2007, 05:16 PM
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: ***, United States
Posts: 16,897
Quote:
Originally Posted by fandesacs2003
The problem is exactly that. After Diana's death, people suspected the Queen being completely cold to Diana's death, because she did not like her. Some thought that she did not hide her emotion, just she had no emotion....
Initially the public blamed the press for the accident because of the paparazzi involvement. How easy for the press to deflect blame from themselves onto the royal family because the royal family behaved with their customary control and coolness. There's no reason why the Queen should be showing a public display of emotion about Diana after the "I want to be Queen in people's hearts" and "I don't think Charles is up to the top job" speech. If the Queen felt that staying at Balmoral with the young princes was the correct thing to do, it may have been the first time in her reign that she put personal considerations above cold duty, and it didn't matter to the public, which criticised her anyway. The press was determined that the blame would stick to the royal family, because the alternative was that the press would be the ones to get the blame, and they weren't going to let that happen. So if the Queen and Prince Philip had gone straight to London and left the boys at Blamoral, they'd have been abandoning their grandsons in an attempt to curry favour with the public; if they'd gone to London and taken the boys, they'd have been cynically using the princes to shore up their public image; if they stayed at Balmoral, they'd have been showing indifference toward Diana and the public. There are ways to put a negative spin on anything they did, and the press had a great deal of interest in making sure that's what happened.

Quote:
Yes, but the Queen sould not resume Diana's personnality just to one interview, even if she considered that it was a mistakefrom her. Diana was a complex and touching personnality, and despite her weakness to many points, she touched people's hard. And it is extremely egoist from the Queen to reject her, just because she did this interview.
With the "I want to be Queen in people's hearts" speech, Diana rejected the Queen. In a constitutional monarchy, if the Queen isn't Queen in people's hearts, she's in deep trouble. Diana would have known that. I don't see any other interpretation of that comment other than that Diana had decided that she thought the Queen was as out of date as Charles and that Diana was the one who was really the royal who mattered. That was possibly the most stupid thing she ever did.

Quote:
And do not forget that she did not lie to this interview. It was a highly manipulation moment, but we should not forget that at the very beginning, this young girl married a guy who was unfaithfull since the beginning, and his family ALL new it.
We only have Diana's word for that. Charles said he was faithful to her for the first few years of the marriage, so it's a case of his word against hers. Not at all the same as "his family all knew it." Diana believed he was unfaithful even though he assured her that his past relationships had ended. She didn't trust what he was telling her, and that sort of distrust is very unhealthy for a relationship.

Quote:
Diana explosed like a uncontrolled bomb, that is true, but SHE was cheated.
out of this interview, Diana did many many good thinks for the people, and I think the people become angry because they just realised that the Queen was indifferent to ALL this.
I don't think people thought anything of the sort; they were being manipulated by the press, which had its own good reasons for deflecting blame onto the royal family, and the press were playing on people's emotions, not appealing to their reason. After the short-term emotional reaction, a lot of people realised they'd been played by the press, and most people these days realise that the Queen's public face isn't the same as her private one. Once the royal family caves in to a self-serving press, they're in trouble.


Quote:
For this I would agree with you, but Queen Sofia would have managed a "middle" behavior, in order not to offense people's feelings.
The Queen behaviored completely ABSENT and this hurt her people. IMO if she had issued a statement the first day after, people would have been satisfied, and they have never asked anything else.
You would never expect from your Monarch to walk around the whole day and to check the flowers in the Palace gate.
As ysbel has pointed out, the circumstances are very different. Many British people would be terribly embarrassed by seeing the Queen in tears over something like that. You don't have to be overtly emotional; there's a difference between having emotions and showing them. But maybe that's the difference between Northern and Southern Europeans.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #215  
Old 02-11-2007, 05:35 PM
fandesacs2003's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Athens, Greece
Posts: 3,260
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elspeth
As ysbel has pointed out, the circumstances are very different. Many British people would be terribly embarrassed by seeing the Queen in tears over something like that. You don't have to be overtly emotional; there's a difference between having emotions and showing them. But maybe that's the difference between Northern and Southern Europeans.
I think you resumed perfectly the discussion. It's THE difference between Northern and Southern Europeans. What is touching for some is embarrassing for the other.
As for Queen/Diana story, it is an endless story, it is like the death sentence discussion, you have strong for and strong against. And it will never stop.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #216  
Old 02-11-2007, 07:12 PM
PrincessofEurope's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Belfast, United Kingdom
Posts: 2,824
Helen Mirren wins best actress BAFTA for her role as the Queen and the film wins Best film as well
__________________
This is the stuff of fairytales

Reply With Quote
  #217  
Old 02-11-2007, 07:46 PM
ysbel's Avatar
Heir Apparent
TRF Author
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 5,390
Quote:
Originally Posted by fandesacs2003
I just mentioned it to show that the Queen might have griefs against Diana, but being an intelligent woman, she for sure had think about reasons of Diana's behavior. And this sould have made her being "mild" after her death.
I think the Queen was pretty mild towards Diana after the divorce. She kept Diana's pre-divorce status in the Order of Precedence and placed her only second to the Queen which was highly unusual privilege to grant a divorced former royal. I keep on imagining how Queen Sofia would react if Letizia gave Penafiel an exclusive interview criticizing Felipe and the Spanish Royal Family and given all that Sofia and Juan Carlos have done to secure the Spanish throne for themselves and their children, I cannot imagine Sofia being any milder than the Queen Elizabeth was in this instance. On the contrary, I think Sofia would ruthlessly strike anybody down who endangers the monarchy no matter how close to the throne they are. She and Juan Carlos have worked too hard to let the monarchy be threatened and Queen Elizabeth has worked too hard for this also.

But since you say that the Queen should have been intelligent and think about the reasons behind Diana's behavior, surely we, the people, can be just as intelligent as you ask the Queen to be and we too can think about the reasons behind the Queen's behavior. We can choose to see that there are some very human and normal reasons and emotions behind why the Queen acted as she did in the same way you expect the Queen to see that there were very human and normal emotions to cause Diana to act like she did.

In response, we the people can choose to be as mild toward the Queen in her mistakes as you think the Queen should have been mild and forgiving towards Diana for her mistakes.

They all are human, they all made mistakes, they all hurt each other in one way or another. But if forgiveness is to be granted to Diana for her mistakes, surely the Queen deserves the same understanding and forgiveness. I don't believe the Queen's mistakes were any greater than Diana's.
__________________
"One thing we can do is make the choice to view the world in a healthy way. We can choose to see the world as safe with only moments of danger rather than seeing the world as dangerous with only moments of safety."
-- Deepak Chopra
Reply With Quote
  #218  
Old 02-11-2007, 09:59 PM
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: ***, United States
Posts: 16,897
BBC article about the BAFTA win:

BBC NEWS | Entertainment | Mirren adds Bafta to awards haul
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #219  
Old 02-12-2007, 04:33 PM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,943
Quote:
Originally Posted by fandesacs2003
But when she married she was sincere. Charles and his family NOT.
As others have already said, that was only Diana's version.

I think that HM did entirely the right thing by trying to give her grandchildren the privacy to get over their initial shock and tears, before being put on public display!

Most parents and grandparents would also do their best to allow a child breathing space, before facing a mob.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #220  
Old 02-13-2007, 12:30 PM
fandesacs2003's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Athens, Greece
Posts: 3,260
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skydragon
As others have already said, that was only Diana's version.

I think that HM did entirely the right thing by trying to give her grandchildren the privacy to get over their initial shock and tears, before being put on public display!

Most parents and grandparents would also do their best to allow a child breathing space, before facing a mob.
As I said before this is and endless discussion, because each one if us decides to believe what he prefers. According to this, we can have our opinion.

Take care
Ciao
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off





Popular Tags
abdication belgium birth brussels carl philip charlene chris o'neill crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit crown princess victoria current events engagement fashion genealogy grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri hohenzollern infanta leonor infanta sofia jewellery jordan king carl xvi gustav king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander luxembourg nobility official visit olympics ottoman pieter van vollenhoven president komorowski prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince constantijn prince floris prince pieter-christiaan princess aimee princess anita princess beatrix princess charlene princess claire princess laurentien princess mabel princess margriet princess mary princess mary fashion queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen rania queen silvia queen sofia royal royal fashion russia sofia hellqvist spain state visit sweden the hague visit wedding winter olympics 2014



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:35 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014
Jelsoft Enterprises

Royal News Delivered to your Email!

You can get the latest Royal News right in your inbox.

unsusbcribe at anytime with one click

Close [X]