The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #241  
Old 08-10-2011, 07:52 AM
figtreecrossing's Avatar
Gentry
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Midwest, Australia
Posts: 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by Donovan View Post
Here's an article about that (it's from E! so take it with a grain of salt ): Is Kate Middleton Safe While London Burns? - E! Online

I would imagine that the palaces would have contingency plans in place in case the royals were attacked or their homes stormed by angry mobs. Wouldn't it be awesome if someone gave a tour of the secret passageways and hidey-holes they'd use? Of course that would defeat the purpose of them so we can't look forward to seeing that anytime soon.
thanks for the link to the E article Donovan
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #242  
Old 08-10-2011, 10:44 AM
sirhon11234's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 2,464
Security most definitely has been bumped up with these riots going on. Can't be too careful.
__________________

__________________
"I think the biggest disease the world suffers from in this day and age is the disease of people feeling unloved."
Diana, the Princess of Wales
Reply With Quote
  #243  
Old 08-10-2011, 11:29 AM
muriel's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: London / Guildford, United Kingdom
Posts: 4,877
Quote:
Originally Posted by sirhon11234 View Post
Security most definitely has been bumped up with these riots going on. Can't be too careful.
I suspect few senior members of the BRF are in London at the moment, so hopefully, they should be safe.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #244  
Old 08-10-2011, 11:47 AM
Daria_S's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: My own head, United States
Posts: 7,030
Quote:
Originally Posted by roseroyal View Post
I have a ?
Royals come into contact with people with disabilities often. I am thinking along the lines of those who are mentally retarded/autism, or those who are nonverbal.
These people sometimes reach out and grab hands, clothes, hair. They don't mean to be rude, or offensive, to them it is normal.
But someone grabbing a member of the BRF could be or signal a problem such as a kidnapping.. Are protection officers trained to know the difference, and deal with these people without having to use force?
That's a good question (one I was curious about as well actually). My guess would be that each situation might be treated differently (a child grabbing a tie, or a hand, versus an adult). I remember when I was a para at a summer school for children with disabilities about eight years back, one of the students (a little girl of seven, who had cerebral palsy) liked to talk about going on planes. I discussed that with her Mom (partially because I was a curious individual and wanted to know if perhaps Brianna liked the concept of flying, so that I could find some books to read with her), and her Mom told me that they went to England the summer before. She proceeded to tell me that they had a chance to shake hands with William, Harry and Prince Charles at a public appearance, and that Brianna, in her enthusiasm, grabbed William by the tie (she was verbal, but was considered intellectually disabled [she also had some issues with expressing her emotions in what was considered 'appropriate' fashion']). According to her Mom, there was really no reaction from the PPOs (I guess they were waiting for the parent to react), but William appeared to have been taken aback by the little girl's action. She said that she explained that her daughter was really excited, and due to her ID, didn't express it the way she should have.

I don't know if the same would apply if an a teen or an adult did the same thing.
__________________
"My guiding principles in life are to be honest, genuine, thoughtful and caring".
~Prince William~


I'm not obsessed with royalty...I just think intensely about it.
Reply With Quote
  #245  
Old 08-10-2011, 12:50 PM
olebabs's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Århus, Denmark
Posts: 283
I think the PPO's are trained to tell the difference. Otherwise quite a few babies would have been restrained for grapping the nose of the DoC :-). I can understand that Will was a little surpriced, but hopefully he realised it was just a little girl. But I think they have an eye on each finger in case the situation gets out of hand.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #246  
Old 08-10-2011, 02:08 PM
Daria_S's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: My own head, United States
Posts: 7,030
Quote:
Originally Posted by olebabs View Post
I think the PPO's are trained to tell the difference. Otherwise quite a few babies would have been restrained for grapping the nose of the DoC :-). I can understand that Will was a little surpriced, but hopefully he realised it was just a little girl. But I think they have an eye on each finger in case the situation gets out of hand.
I'm sure he realized that there was no intent to harm him, but I can understand feeling a little startled. From my memory, the child was not mean-spirited at all, though she had a real hard time controlling her emotions.

I don't even want to know what would occur if someone dared to harm either William or Catherine, or any royal. I would want to be as far away from that as humanly possible, because I don't feel comfortable watching someone else get restrained (even if it's for safety reasons).
__________________
"My guiding principles in life are to be honest, genuine, thoughtful and caring".
~Prince William~


I'm not obsessed with royalty...I just think intensely about it.
Reply With Quote
  #247  
Old 08-10-2011, 03:15 PM
roseroyal's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Rapid River, United States
Posts: 3,600
I was just curious, because it seems to me I read somewhere a news story about someone with autism, and who was nonverbal who in their excitement to see Prince Charles lunged forward at him. He was forcibly removed by police, which caused him great trauma.
I know that in some cases, it would be appropriate for the police to take action. But in this case, I think it could and should have been handled differently. Although I was not present, so I am not the best judge.
What also comes to mind is a video of the Countess of Wessex visiting a music class, at a school for mentally challenged children. A little girl reached out, and tapped her on the head with a drumstick. The teacher corrected her, and everybody carried on. Sophie wasn't bothered in the least.
And Diana came into contact with disabled people every day. I have seen videos of her with them- several times people in wheelchairs lunged forward and grabbed her hand. She smiled and carried on. In his book, her PPO, Ken Wharfe said he never had a situation with mentally challenged people that came into contact with Diana in which he had to intervene.
In fact, I only remember him telling in his book of 4 occasions in his book, where he had to remove people. Only 1 time did he have to physically restrain someone. He never had to use his weapon, although he always had a concealed weapon, if ever one had been nessary to protect Diana. He said that PPO's only use their weapons in extreme, life- threatning situtions. They were not in any way mentally challenged, they were just in 1 way or another a threat to Diana's saftey, or made her feel unsafe.
__________________
The greatest glory in living lies not in never falling, but in rising every time we fall- Nelson Mandela
Reply With Quote
  #248  
Old 08-10-2011, 04:31 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Berkshire, United Kingdom
Posts: 643
Please could I help with a little background information?

The most recent breaches of security i.e. over the past few years that I can remember have been

1. Michael Fagan breaking into BP and the Queen's bedroom. [no joking matter but even he didn't try to hurt her; he did try to cadge a cigarette from her, which was fortuitous in the event because it enabled HM to say that she had not got one and therefore had to ring for 'assistance'. Fagan was mad rather than dangerous. He also revealed later that he came across a collection of 'Queen-Shaped' royal wigs(!) [If you believe him!]

2. An idiot firing a gun loaded with blanks at The Queen when she was riding Burmese along the Mall on her way to Trooping the Colour

3. A so-called 'comedy terrorist' Aaron Barschak gatecrashed William's private 21st birthday at Windsor Castle.

4. A car containing Charles and Camilla was attacked during the riots following student protests. It was a classic Rolls Royce and not one with additional security measures [bullet proof glass, toughened panels etc] and now each and every journey made by Royals is more thoroughly scrutinised by Security to see that the vehicle chosen is suitable. If Charles was to venture out anywhere at the moment, there would presumably be consideration given to using a helicopter, closing roads, using bullet proof vehicles.


There have also been minor breaches, as for example the Handbag of the Duchess of Kent being stolen on a private shopping trip to a Bond Street shoe-shop.

After the debacle of 1,2,3 and 4 above, security measures have been tightened considerably.

I have been a guest at Buckingham Palace, Kensington Palace and Windsor Castle. On each occasion, some weeks in advance you have to provide full personal details which I presume are checked. You are issued with Admission cards, which, on the day itself are checked against your passport by a police officer OUTSIDE the gates.

There are police stations in the grounds of BP, Windsor Castle and KP. I know that they are all state-of-the art. You can actually spot the Police Station at BP round by the Royal Mews if you know where to look.

At the risk of stating the obvious, there are soldiers 'on guard' too at BP and Windsor. They are not of course just a tourist attraction! The walls at Winsdor Castle are up to 3m thick in places as well, which is pretty secure. KP is of course in a very well guarded area anyway, because that area of Kensington is full of very important Embassies, and so there is a lot of protection for the Diplomats.

There are 'safe rooms' in all palaces and castles. Those in the know also point to the fact that some of the 'gardeners' and 'workmen' visible in the grounds of Royal residences are apparently NOT just concentrating on the flowers or on the building works...


I drove to Windsor Castle [very close to where I live] for a partyand you have to provide - in advance - details of your car, its make, licence plate and colour. A guard checks your ID whilst a Policeman with a long list appears and checks you car against the details you have provided. And that is just to get into the car park, which in itself is through the well-guarded castle gate. Once I had parked my car, I changed from my driving shoes into my evening shoes, all under the watchful eye of a policeman. The police also look quite closely at your car to make sure that you are not trying to 'smuggle in a friend'. The policeman then checks to make sure that only the correct number of people get out of the car. And of course, there are massive security cameras everywhere. And, I daresay, concealed security cameras as well.........

You then have to make your way to the entrance of the castle, where they check your details again.


Incidentally, one lady in front of me was wearing glasses (spectacles). She was not wearing then in her passport photograph and so the Police Officer made her remove them so that he could check her photo against her 'plain' face.

Once you get to the party / reception etc, even though you do get very close to the Royal hosting the event, some of the accompanying 'courtiers' are in fact not Royal Household Members at all but rather charming Police Officers. Don't be fooled by the fact that they may be in black tie or Morning Dress. Sometimes you can spot wires from their earpieces 'snaking' into their radios concealed pockets in their jackets!

At Royal Ascot, you have to submit to security searches of your handbag etc.

Finally, members of the BRF sometimes stay overnight in the Royal Train, which 'parks' in a secluded siding, which is hard for the public to access. It is then surrounded by guards.

Hope some of this helps

Alex
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #249  
Old 08-10-2011, 05:25 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 514
Quote:
Originally Posted by roseroyal View Post
I was just curious, because it seems to me I read somewhere a news story about someone with autism, and who was nonverbal who in their excitement to see Prince Charles lunged forward at him. He was forcibly removed by police, which caused him great trauma.
I know that in some cases, it would be appropriate for the police to take action. But in this case, I think it could and should have been handled differently. Although I was not present, so I am not the best judge.
What also comes to mind is a video of the Countess of Wessex visiting a music class, at a school for mentally challenged children. A little girl reached out, and tapped her on the head with a drumstick. The teacher corrected her, and everybody carried on. Sophie wasn't bothered in the least.
And Diana came into contact with disabled people every day. I have seen videos of her with them- several times people in wheelchairs lunged forward and grabbed her hand. She smiled and carried on. In his book, her PPO, Ken Wharfe said he never had a situation with mentally challenged people that came into contact with Diana in which he had to intervene.
In fact, I only remember him telling in his book of 4 occasions in his book, where he had to remove people. Only 1 time did he have to physically restrain someone. He never had to use his weapon, although he always had a concealed weapon, if ever one had been nessary to protect Diana. He said that PPO's only use their weapons in extreme, life- threatning situtions. They were not in any way mentally challenged, they were just in 1 way or another a threat to Diana's saftey, or made her feel unsafe.

I think the problem for the security officers is that they only have a second or two to assess the situation and decide what action to take. In some situations that's enough time - it only takes a second to realize that a small girl wielding a drum stick doesn't pose much of a threat. Other situations are trickier - a fully grown male is lunging toward your protectee, that's all the information you have and you've got to decide what to do right now. IMO the protection officers in cases like that can't be expected to think every potential outcome of their actions, (what if this guy is autistic and is just really happy to see Charles and we traumatize him by hustling him out? On the other hand, what if he's a schizophrenic who's got it in his head that Charles needs to die right now and is lunging towards him with a knife in the hand we can't see at the moment?) All the protection officers can reasonably be expected to do, IMO, is use their best judgement and stick with the protocols and training they've been given.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #250  
Old 08-10-2011, 05:34 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,495
Man who shot at Prince Charles becomes barrister - National - www.theage.com.au.

This is a link to the story of the attack on Prince Charles in 1994 - when the attacker was forcibly retained on the stage.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #251  
Old 08-10-2011, 06:12 PM
figtreecrossing's Avatar
Gentry
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Midwest, Australia
Posts: 89
In your opinion, do you expect the current riots in London will sway the opinion of Parliament to re-consier reinstating government paid protection for the close members of the Royal Family like the Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #252  
Old 08-10-2011, 07:40 PM
nascarlucy's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Central Florida Area, United States
Posts: 1,342
A child or an adult who has mental or physically challenges is generally not a threat to anyone, including royals. With a teen or adult unless they show evidence of being physically or mentally challenged, you don't always know.

Perhaps they don't mean to be, but some children, teens and adults who are mentally challenged sometimes come across as aggrestive. I worked part-time at a retail store years ago and a child who had autism greeted me by almost charging me and slamming his head into my shoulder. I almost fell backwards. My shoulder was sore for about an hour. I realized that this child was not behaving normally and this wasn't a case of a normal child out of control. The mother of this child apologized to me and told me that her child had autism and he was greeting me. He didn't intend to hurt me but he could have if I had fallen flat on my back.

I wonder how a security detail would have handled this type of situation which would have been tricky due to the child's mental challenges.

It's a tough call in some cases. If you physically restrain the teen or adult and it wasn't necessary, then security is criticized for overreacting to the situation. If you don't take action and as the result the royal is injured or harmed by the person, they security would be accused of being lax and not taking proper action to protect the royal
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #253  
Old 08-10-2011, 08:22 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Berkshire, United Kingdom
Posts: 643
Quote:
Originally Posted by figtreecrossing View Post
In your opinion, do you expect the current riots in London will sway the opinion of Parliament to re-consier reinstating government paid protection for the close members of the Royal Family like the Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie

In my opinion, no, because Beatrice and Eugenie are not performing Royal Duties and so it would be a PR nightmare for the BRF when the two young ladies are photographed coming out of nightclubs and holidaying in foreign parts, with a taxpayer-funded couple of royal detectives in tow.

There is a recession on and I think people are becoming unwilling to finance protection for people such as B & E when they are enjoying themselves. That might strike some of us as unfair, but, as they say, perception is reality!! A good few taxpayers would start the familiar refrain of 'why should we pay for the princesses having fun when we have all lost our jobs / had our pay increases capped etc'. This would be accompanied by others suggesting that if B + E need protection, then the BRF should pay for it themselves etc

IMHO the Riots here in the UK are mindless thuggery and nothing else; however there are suggestions from some people that the riots have occurred because of the 'widening gulf between rich and poor' regardless of how accurate or not this may be. Again, I think that the current troubles would make it hard to justify the taxpayer picking up the security tag for the 2 young ladies. Sarah's unpopularity also -unfairly IMHO - also has a slight impact on how her daughters are received, which has a knock-on effect of making it unlikely that the taxpayer would be prepared to finance protection.

Don't forget that any time the two young ladies are with the Queen [Sandringham, Balmoral etc] they will be receiving a certain amount of protection due to their physical proximity to HM

Hope this helps

Alex
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #254  
Old 08-10-2011, 08:55 PM
roseroyal's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Rapid River, United States
Posts: 3,600
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
Man who shot at Prince Charles becomes barrister - National - www.theage.com.au.

This is a link to the story of the attack on Prince Charles in 1994 - when the attacker was forcibly retained on the stage.
This was a different story than the one I am referring to. But thanks for the interesting article!
__________________
The greatest glory in living lies not in never falling, but in rising every time we fall- Nelson Mandela
Reply With Quote
  #255  
Old 08-10-2011, 08:59 PM
roseroyal's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Rapid River, United States
Posts: 3,600
Quote:
Originally Posted by camelot23ca View Post
I think the problem for the security officers is that they only have a second or two to assess the situation and decide what action to take. In some situations that's enough time - it only takes a second to realize that a small girl wielding a drum stick doesn't pose much of a threat. Other situations are trickier - a fully grown male is lunging toward your protectee, that's all the information you have and you've got to decide what to do right now. IMO the protection officers in cases like that can't be expected to think every potential outcome of their actions, (what if this guy is autistic and is just really happy to see Charles and we traumatize him by hustling him out? On the other hand, what if he's a schizophrenic who's got it in his head that Charles needs to die right now and is lunging towards him with a knife in the hand we can't see at the moment?) All the protection officers can reasonably be expected to do, IMO, is use their best judgement and stick with the protocols and training they've been given.
Yo make some excellent points. As I said, I was not there, it was unfair of me to judge perhaps. I admire the job PPOs do, it cannot be easy.
__________________
The greatest glory in living lies not in never falling, but in rising every time we fall- Nelson Mandela
Reply With Quote
  #256  
Old 08-10-2011, 09:07 PM
Daria_S's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: My own head, United States
Posts: 7,030
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
Man who shot at Prince Charles becomes barrister - National - www.theage.com.au.

This is a link to the story of the attack on Prince Charles in 1994 - when the attacker was forcibly retained on the stage.
Thank you for the link. Interesting story.
__________________
"My guiding principles in life are to be honest, genuine, thoughtful and caring".
~Prince William~


I'm not obsessed with royalty...I just think intensely about it.
Reply With Quote
  #257  
Old 08-10-2011, 09:16 PM
roseroyal's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Rapid River, United States
Posts: 3,600
[QUOTE=nascarlucy;1301001]A child or an adult who has mental or physically challenges is generally not a threat to anyone, including royals. With a teen or adult unless they show evidence of being physically or mentally challenged, you don't always know.

Perhaps they don't mean to be, but some children, teens and adults who are mentally challenged sometimes come across as aggrestive. I worked part-time at a retail store years ago and a child who had autism greeted me by almost charging me and slamming his head into my shoulder. I almost fell backwards. My shoulder was sore for about an hour. I realized that this child was not behaving normally and this wasn't a case of a normal child out of control. The mother of this child apologized to me and told me that her child had autism and he was greeting me. He didn't intend to hurt me but he could have if I had fallen flat on my back.

I wonder how a security detail would have handled this type of situation which would have been tricky due to the child's mental challenges.

It's a tough call in some cases. If you physically restrain the teen or adult and it wasn't necessary, then security is criticized for overreacting to the situation. If you don't take action and as the result the royal is injured or harmed by the person, they security would be accused of being lax and not taking proper action to protect the royal[*/QUOTE]
I have had autistic students give me the same " greeting" when I volunteered in a classroom for autistic students, nascarlucy. It can be frightening.
You hit the nail on the head. There lies in the difficulty with dealing with mentally challenged people. You don't always know their intentions.
Sometimes you don't have time to fully judge their intentions. It would be a 50/50 dammed if you do- damned if you don't situation for just the reasons you described. The price would be much higher though of course if a royal was harmed. Extremely tough call.
__________________
The greatest glory in living lies not in never falling, but in rising every time we fall- Nelson Mandela
Reply With Quote
  #258  
Old 08-20-2011, 11:37 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Melbourne & Sydney, Australia
Posts: 3,983
Quote:
Some truth here but not for why you think - I am reacting, I think, to people's fans more than to them. After all, I really don't know William - but I do have occasion to experience his fans, and all this talk of leap-frogging over his father to the throne, etc. Its the animosity I see expressed by fans of Diana and now by fans of William, at what seems to be the expense of Charles - that I react to - and that said: am I becoming that which I abhor? It happens - we turn into that which we judge. Ah so!
Then by your own admission, your apparent dislike of the man is considerably void and your acceptance of it, though clearly aware of it, is rather bewildering.

You're judging him through the people who have an avid interest in his life and who are in no way, a reflection of him. That's odd.

Quote:
As for William's (and Harry's) coming over to foreign countries and 'looking around' - fine - just don't have 'my' city's police department have to deal with 'you', and have 'me' (taxpayer) pay for what is in effect 'your' PR. Sorry, I am extremely jaded with these things - and I remain annoyed by what William decided to do in what is for him a foreign country. I believe he did it because he believes some of his mother's PR spin and is proceeding under that illusion, which I think is sad.
So really, from what you've said thus far, your issue with William really appears to be that he is his mothers son. Again, that's some well misplaced grudge.

You target William, but any foreign dignitary who should visit the US in an official capacity is accorded the very same protection at the expense of the taxpayer. It's largely the same the world over.

As for pointless PR visits, then look no further than Oprah's visit to Australia last December and just how much the Australian taxpayer had to fork out for Miss Winfrey's security, domestic travel expenses and catering. The economic downturn has meant that her visit here has done nothing for the tourism industry and that all we were left with was having had the "experience" of Oprah visiting Australia and a costly bill for our hospitality.

Sickening!

Quote:
Now Charles, given he is the actual heir who 'stands in' for HM, and given his life's work - his visiting the down-and-out portions of Washington D.C. as he did some years back with Camilla - when I lived there - was wholly acceptable IMO. Nothing false about it. His interest was believable and his questions and comments bona fide.
You liken William with his mother to a point that you're eager taint him with the same brush.

From all you've written, and I appreciate you taking the time do so, it's evident you have an issue with the late Diana and consequently, her children. They are Charles' children too, 'we' musn't forget, and I think perhaps some people underestimate the influence he has had on them and the way they conduct themselves in the public arena and on behalf of the royal family.
__________________

"Dressing is a way of life" - Monsieur Saint Laurent
Reply With Quote
  #259  
Old 08-30-2011, 12:01 AM
roseroyal's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Rapid River, United States
Posts: 3,600
Safety of members in the BRF in the Middle East

I have a ?How safe is it for members of the BRF to visit countries in the Middle East?Charles and Diana went on tours there in the 80's, and Diana visited Pakistan several times in the 90's. Pakistan was where Bin Laden was known to hide out, so was it a wise choice to bring Diana to Pakistan?And even today BRF members visit troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. While admirable is it wise? Not meant to be critical..... just asking!
__________________
The greatest glory in living lies not in never falling, but in rising every time we fall- Nelson Mandela
Reply With Quote
  #260  
Old 08-30-2011, 12:43 AM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,495
Quote:
Originally Posted by roseroyal View Post
I have a ?How safe is it for members of the BRF to visit countries in the Middle East?Charles and Diana went on tours there in the 80's, and Diana visited Pakistan several times in the 90's. Pakistan was where Bin Laden was known to hide out, so was it a wise choice to bring Diana to Pakistan?And even today BRF members visit troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. While admirable is it wise? Not meant to be critical..... just asking!

As safe as it is for them to travel in open topped vehicles in any major city. There are crackpots everywhere and their security is as good as it gets short of shutting them inside protective bunkers.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
british royal family, gloucester, kent, kidnapping, minor hrh, royal security, security, terrorism


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


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Security Aspects Harold Royal Life and Lifestyle 4 10-18-2007 07:36 AM
The Royal Family's Security Helen88 Royal House of Sweden 5 02-11-2005 07:59 PM




Additional Links
Popular Tags
birth charlene chris o'neill crown prince haakon crown princess letizia crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit current events duchess of cambridge dutch royal history fashion genealogy grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri hohenzollern infanta sofia jordan king abdullah ii king carl xvi gustav king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander luxembourg nobility olympic games olympics ottoman picture of the month poland pom president hollande president komorowski prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince constantijn prince felipe prince floris prince pieter-christiaan princess anita princess astrid princess beatrix princess charlene princess laurentien princess mabel princess madeleine princess margriet princess marilene princess mary princess mary fashion princess of asturias queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen rania queen silvia queen sofia royal royal fashion russia sofia hellqvist spain state visit sweden visit wedding winter olympics 2014



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:35 AM.

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]