The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #21  
Old 08-04-2008, 12:24 AM
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: ***, United States
Posts: 16,897
Which threads are they, scooter? If we've got fights breaking out, we're liable to close threads for a cooling-off period even if some of the participants are doing their best to provide factual information. Plus, if a thread is going badly off topic (especially if it's veering into CCD territory), we may end up deleting posts for that reason, however well confirmed the information in the posts is.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 10-09-2008, 09:39 PM
ghost_night554's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 3,786
Anyone know where I can find this quote? It's supposed to be from Bradford's book but I can't find it.

Quote:
It was normal for him. 'He was a loner, he liked silence,' said one of his staff. 'And when he found he had a wife to talk to and to consider, it threw him.'
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 10-17-2008, 09:23 PM
scooter's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: katonah, United States
Posts: 2,331
Elspeth, this is exactly what I was mentioning in the Mods/heavy handed topic. Why is it when several sources including a quote from the Royal in question get deleted and the thread closed? The truth is the truth, regardless if it is unpalatable to certain strong willed posters. I never got a reply on this thread either. I will forward you some of the pms.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 10-18-2008, 11:56 PM
Angl3's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Karachi, Pakistan
Posts: 106
How are you sure that all things are true?????
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 10-19-2008, 04:55 AM
TheTruth's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Between the first and second floor of the Eiffel Tower, France
Posts: 2,682
Well you never know. You can't be sure of everything. However, when you see a supposed fact reappearing again and again, no matter from what source it comes from, then you might want to consider it could be true. That's the goal of this thread; helping to find sources or quotes that have been published.
__________________

Please, help find a cure for ALS

Because it matters...
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 10-19-2008, 11:23 AM
Angl3's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Karachi, Pakistan
Posts: 106
Now that she`s dead you can say anything about her cause she wont come and say that either it is true or not
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 10-19-2008, 12:02 PM
Jo of Palatine's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Munich, Germany
Posts: 3,323
Quote:
Originally Posted by Angl3 View Post
Now that she`s dead you can say anything about her cause she wont come and say that either it is true or not
As she has been proven to be a liar at occassions when it suited her aims, I think there is no need to have her around for evaluation. Evaluating the quality of sources is something a historian learns and quite some biographes started out as/are learned historians. While journalists without that background in most cases only know the media rules of their country, so evaluate what they write in terms of: does it further my aim and do I get a problem on claiming that?

And you as the reader: should take this background into account and just use common sense.
__________________
'To dare is to lose one step for but a moment, not to dare is to lose oneself forever' - Crown Prince Frederick of Denmark in a letter to Miss Mary Donaldson as stated by them on their official engagement interview.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 10-19-2008, 12:25 PM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,943
Quote:
Originally Posted by scooter View Post
Here is my question: There is a certain member that whenever anything the slightest bit unfavorable about her Favorite Royal is discussed, no matter how widely published, the member comes back and says 'Was there a statement from XYZ Palace or from Favorite Royal's office on this sublect? If not, then it's an Urban Legend'. Like Palace XYZ or the Favorite Royal is going to issue a statement saying (for example) 'When I first met Prince Favorite Royal, I made a remark about our ancestors having a sexual relationship and then I took him home and had Prince Favorite Royal for a midnight snack'. At what point is it firmly in the public domain and accepted? Because if we're going to be waiting for Palace XYZ to make statements, its going to be a pretty slow millenium, TRF wise.
Yes the 'certain member' would question whether a certain royal had ever said such a thing, It is an urban legend if it was said in private, unless the fly on the wall was the one confirming it. In the same way that a rumour was printed in a paper and by the time it appeared on this forum, it was stated as fact, when the papers that repeated it clearly stated that it was a rumour.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 10-19-2008, 09:28 PM
scooter's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: katonah, United States
Posts: 2,331
Well Certain Member, I was in particular refering to a post I had made quoting verbatim the now Royal person mentioned. If it came from her own mouth, how can you deny the truth of it? It was not a fly on the wall, but a ham radio person who picked up the cell phone call, if I recall correctly. I had also quoted no less than three widely respected books, not the national enquirer. It is completely unreasonable for Certain Member to say unless there is an Official Statement from the Palace, this does not exist. If we are going to all have to wait for an Official Statement before we can talk about things, we're not going to have much to discuss here, royal wise.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 10-20-2008, 03:49 AM
Jo of Palatine's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Munich, Germany
Posts: 3,323
Quote:
Originally Posted by scooter View Post
Well Certain Member, I was in particular refering to a post I had made quoting verbatim the now Royal person mentioned. If it came from her own mouth, how can you deny the truth of it? It was not a fly on the wall, but a ham radio person who picked up the cell phone call, if I recall correctly. I had also quoted no less than three widely respected books, not the national enquirer. It is completely unreasonable for Certain Member to say unless there is an Official Statement from the Palace, this does not exist. If we are going to all have to wait for an Official Statement before we can talk about things, we're not going to have much to discuss here, royal wise.
If you are referring to the Camillagate-tapes, these have been quoted here in detail and these posts were not deleted. Of course it is imaginable that certain parts could be taken from them and used in contexts that might endanger these boards through juridical action. In that case I think the whole post would be deleted. Apart from that I guess I'M not alone in not being able to understand your constant harping about deleted posts as obviously they are not longer there.
__________________
'To dare is to lose one step for but a moment, not to dare is to lose oneself forever' - Crown Prince Frederick of Denmark in a letter to Miss Mary Donaldson as stated by them on their official engagement interview.
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 10-20-2008, 04:02 AM
Jo of Palatine's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Munich, Germany
Posts: 3,323
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheTruth View Post
Well you never know. You can't be sure of everything. However, when you see a supposed fact reappearing again and again, no matter from what source it comes from, then you might want to consider it could be true. That's the goal of this thread; helping to find sources or quotes that have been published.
You say one should consider if a quote could be true or not. That's a very important point when evaluating sources and quotes. For example the infamous quote allegedly by Camilla when she first met the Prince of Wales: My ancestor and yours were lovers, how about us (or something along that line. Could that be true?

I personally doubt it for two reasons: first of all - why should Miss Shand believe that HRH knows her ancestry when she first meets him? A quote like that only works if both are immediately informed. Would she have chanced that he didn't understand the innuendo? What then? She would have been forced to explain and be put in a position no lady ever wants to find herself in. just imagine the disgrace.

Secondly she must have known before how the prince reacts to talk about his ancestor's affairs. After all, Edward VII. cheated on his queen with Mrs. Keppel.It is one thing to know that, it is another to refer to such a thing on the first meeting with the prince. I doubt Camilla would have been so careless with her chance of finding introduction into the Royal circles, especially as she was on the search of a suitable husband back then. Would she have told all via the prince that she was used goods and easy to be had? How stupid do people believe Camilla has been?
__________________
'To dare is to lose one step for but a moment, not to dare is to lose oneself forever' - Crown Prince Frederick of Denmark in a letter to Miss Mary Donaldson as stated by them on their official engagement interview.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 10-20-2008, 04:54 AM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,943
Quote:
Originally Posted by scooter View Post
Well Certain Member, I was in particular refering to a post I had made quoting verbatim the now Royal person mentioned. If it came from her own mouth, how can you deny the truth of it? It was not a fly on the wall, but a ham radio person who picked up the cell phone call, if I recall correctly. I had also quoted no less than three widely respected books, not the national enquirer. It is completely unreasonable for Certain Member to say unless there is an Official Statement from the Palace, this does not exist. If we are going to all have to wait for an Official Statement before we can talk about things, we're not going to have much to discuss here, royal wise.
If I recall, the quote had been misquoted, one comma out of place and the whole sentence changes, that is what happens to make the story more exciting. That is why I try to post a link, bearing in mind, the punctuation has been inserted by someone who decided to transcribe the phone call.
Camillagate Transcript

Without discussing the gossip, this forum would probably fold, but at least acknowledge it is purely gossip, just because it is repeated and repeated, does not make it fact. The meeting by the tree is another clash point. Nobody else was there except Charles and Camilla, so how can anyone quote what they said, but repeated enough times as being overheard by Lady this or Mrs Smith-Jones and people start to believe it.

I'm disheartened that so many people are offended by someone pointing out facts or questioning the source. It would appear the truth is out there, but nobody wants to seek it.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 10-20-2008, 10:28 AM
scooter's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: katonah, United States
Posts: 2,331
My point Skydragon, is when reputable books (I'm not talking about Kitty Kelly) which have been thoroughly vetted by the publishing house to check for any inaccuracies with the thought of protecting the publishing house from a libel charge, are discounted here by certain posters because they are not complementary to their favorite. The truth is the truth, regardless if some dont care for it. And Jo, I dont constantly harp about deleted posts. However when I have one that has been backed up by multiple sources deleted, I think I have the right to question why. Especially given Elspeths earlier statement in this thread that if 'something has been written in a book or article that it is generally considered reliable, especially if it shows up in more than one, then we are prepared to accept it as a correct account'. As far as the meeting at the polo field 'Charles and Camilla the Love Story' by Caroline Graham quotes an eyewitness to the infamous Your Great Grandpa opening statement, so apparantly they were not alone (how anyone could be thought to be alone at a polo match really makes no sense). The same book quotes Steven Barry, then valet to Prince Charles on Charles and Camilla spending the night together the night before the Charles and Diana nuptuals as "We all knew how he felt about Camilla. It was a very emotional last assignation for them both. But to do it on that night was truly incredible. Certainly incredibly daring, if not incredibly stupid". We all know there are no secrets from the valet. When you take widely published eyewitness accounts written in a reputable book and respond by saying: I dont believe them. There has been no statement from the palace and everything else is an urban legend, that, to me, is ridiculous. Do you really expect Camilla to issue a proclamation saying 'Why yes that's exactly how it happened'?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 10-20-2008, 10:56 AM
TheTruth's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Between the first and second floor of the Eiffel Tower, France
Posts: 2,682
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jo of Palatine View Post
You say one should consider if a quote could be true or not. That's a very important point when evaluating sources and quotes. For example the infamous quote allegedly by Camilla when she first met the Prince of Wales: My ancestor and yours were lovers, how about us (or something along that line. Could that be true?

I personally doubt it for two reasons: first of all - why should Miss Shand believe that HRH knows her ancestry when she first meets him? A quote like that only works if both are immediately informed. Would she have chanced that he didn't understand the innuendo? What then? She would have been forced to explain and be put in a position no lady ever wants to find herself in. just imagine the disgrace.

Secondly she must have known before how the prince reacts to talk about his ancestor's affairs. After all, Edward VII. cheated on his queen with Mrs. Keppel.It is one thing to know that, it is another to refer to such a thing on the first meeting with the prince. I doubt Camilla would have been so careless with her chance of finding introduction into the Royal circles, especially as she was on the search of a suitable husband back then. Would she have told all via the prince that she was used goods and easy to be had? How stupid do people believe Camilla has been?
I agree with you; it sounds quite laughable that someone could place this sort of quote during a first meeting. However, I don't see it as something making Camilla appear as stupid. We don't know her so we can't say if she's rather spontaneous, bold or totally the opposite. Why she would have said that? I don't know but why not?
__________________

Please, help find a cure for ALS

Because it matters...
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 10-20-2008, 10:59 AM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,943
Quote:
Originally Posted by scooter View Post
My point Skydragon, is when reputable books (I'm not talking about Kitty Kelly) which have been thoroughly vetted by the publishing house to check for any inaccuracies with the thought of protecting the publishing house from a libel charge, are discounted here by certain posters because they are not complementary to their favorite. The truth is the truth, regardless if some dont care for it.
And yet many of these reliable books only repeat a rumour, with no basis in fact if it is not backed up by a source, ie, the person who said it. Yes publishing houses will check their books, but with the sure and certain knowledge that an injunction or libel accusation will not be forthcoming and if there is any chance of either, publish in the US!
It would be wonderful if these books stuck solely to the truth, but they don't many will state a rumour or something they have read in a tabloid as fact. Even on here, something read in a tabloid will be taken as gospel and half the time if you actually read past the fiest few lines, you find the article itself says 'it is rumoured'. The 'it's rumoured', never makes it as far as TRF thread.
Quote:
As far as the meeting at the polo field 'Charles and Camilla the Love Story' by Caroline Graham quotes an eyewitness to the infamous Your Great Grandpa opening statement, so apparantly they were not alone (how anyone could be thought to be alone at a polo match really makes no sense).
Clearly you never attended a polo match here in the 70's or 80's, where it was perfectly feasable, even now there is the privacy of the horsebox.
Quote:
Again, The same book quotes Steven Barry, then valet to Prince Charles on Charles and Camilla spending the night together the night before the Charles and Diana nuptuals as "We all knew how he felt about Camilla.
Disputed by the valet himself I believe.
Quote:
We all know there are no secrets from the valet.
Do we, from some that I have read it is unlikely indeed
Quote:
When you take widely published eyewitness accounts written in a reputable book and respond by saying: I dont believe them. There has been no statement from the palace and everything else is an urban legend, that, to me, is ridiculous. Do you really expect Camilla to issue a proclamation saying 'Why yes that's exactly how it happened'?
It is the suggestion of 'widely published eyewitness accounts' that I have a problem with, because half the time it is private conversations and private moments they are apparently claiming to have witnessed and we all know their presence would have been unlikely, there again they are pretty safe as we know that there will be no denial, no lawsuit. I had a quick look back through some of my posts and I haven't yet found any evidence that I have said 'There has been no statement from the palace', and it is exaggerations and misquotes that cause the problems, afaic.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 10-20-2008, 12:33 PM
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: ***, United States
Posts: 16,897
As long as we're talking about the veracity of sources, this is pretty much my take on it.

If something comes from an actual interview that we can see or hear ourselves or an authorised or official transcript of an interview, a Buckingham Palace (or equivalent) statement or press release, or an official or otherwise authoritative biography, I think it's safe to assume that it's worth taking seriously. Doesn't mean it's necessarily true - I remember how Buckingham Palace was denying the relationship between Princess Anne and Mark Philips until five minutes before the engagement announcement - but at least it's authoritative (I suppose officially sanctioned bald-faced lies are at least authoritative ).

Transcripts of interviews or conversations have to be treated a bit carefully unless they've been approved by one of the sources; as Skydragon pointed out, the placement of a comma can be significant to the meaning, and the original interview or conversation wouldn't have had punctuation, so there's sometimes some guesswork involved. This is especially the case if the interview itself isn't available to watch or listen to.

Anything in a gossipy biography, article, or TV programme, or in an autobiography, should be treated with a certain amount of suspicion because the author is probably pushing an agenda. It never hurts to try and match information from this sort of book or article with something from an authoritative source. I think we're all familiar with the way that even supposedly authoritative TV documentaries can make fairly serious mistakes sometimes, so it's always worth taking a bit of time to fact-check. However, if one of these documentaries contains footage of interviews with people like Martin Charteris, Pamela Mountbatten, or Margaret Rhodes, the chances are that it's generally pretty believable. Doesn't hurt to remember that editing of interviews and other footage can give misleading impressions (such as the Annie Liebowitz incident in the trailer for the documentary), but if the information in these articles or documentaries is broadly in line with previous information, it's probably safe to take it seriously.

Second- or third-hand reports of conversations aren't the same thing as live interviews. I don't know how many times I've heard "Philip told Charles he could go back to his mistress after five years of marriage if he didn't want to stay with Diana" as though Prince Philip was on the record as having said this. When you probe a bit, it turns out that this is something that Diana told a friend, a friend told Andrew Morton, and Andrew Morton wrote in his book. "Andrew Morton said that someone told him that Diana said that Charles said that Philip said," or even the more true "Andrew Morton said that in one of the tapes passed to him by James Colthurst Diana said that Charles said that Philip said," is a very different thing from "Philip said." Same with this business of Camilla's "how about it?" opening gambit to Charles (and also, apparently, same with some of Wallis Simpson's early conversations with Edward); if these things are said in private and we hear about them in ways other than the royal (or whoever said them) confirming that they were in fact said, then they aren't authoritative statements. Doesn't mean they can't be used in TRF threads, but they shouldn't be given the same weight as a direct quote from the Dimbleby interview or the Panorama interview or the Queen's statement after Diana's death, to give a few examples.

Newspaper and TV reports of royal events are probably reliable, but reliability is increased if more than one independent source say the same thing. If half a dozen reports of a visit talk about an enthusiastic crowd greeting Camilla and one report talks about half a dozen sullen-looking people, the report that's been backed up by other reports is more likely to be true, even it it isn't saying what you might prefer to hear.

Stuff that's picked up from tabloid sources, with the "a close friend/someone close to/a member of the household told me" level of verification, should be taken with a massive pinch of salt. With these papers and magazines it pays to read very closely and with critical-thinking skills fully engaged, because some of these authors are masters at juxtaposing a fairly well-known fact, an urban legend, and a personal opinion in such a way that the existence of the fact appears to lend legitimacy to the rest of it.

Unfortunately Photoshopping isn't entirely unknown in photos accompanying royal stories. At least we have some pretty knowledgeable people here who'll know if Kate Middleton's head appears on someone else's body who happens to be having a wardrobe malfunction, or if Camilla has been Photoshopped to look ten years older (or younger), but if a photo looks unlikely for whatever reason, it may be because it's been tampered with.

Stuff that's posted at other forums or in blogs, where a person with no inside knowledge at all is taking it upon herself to claim to know the thought processes and motivations of people like Camilla, Kate, William, Charles, and Diana, should be dismissed as fabrication.

Buckingham Palace, and to a lesser extent Clarence House, tend to respond to most of these press allegations with silence. That doesn't mean they're tacitly admitting that the allegations are true.

I probably haven't covered anything, and feel free to disagree, but that's my opinion, for what it's worth.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 10-20-2008, 02:19 PM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,943
And your opinion seems to be worth taking note of!
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 10-20-2008, 08:56 PM
scooter's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: katonah, United States
Posts: 2,331
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheTruth View Post
I agree with you; it sounds quite laughable that someone could place this sort of quote during a first meeting. However, I don't see it as something making Camilla appear as stupid. We don't know her so we can't say if she's rather spontaneous, bold or totally the opposite. Why she would have said that? I don't know but why not?
I dont think Camilla is stupid, quite the contrary. I think she is an extremely intelligent person who knows how to go about getting exactly what she wants. As far as it sounding laughable, this was the swinging 70's (The Truth, difficult as it may seem to someone of your age this was a-ok at that time) and the 'Coffee tea or me' come on was quite an every day occurance. That book, which was quite the puff piece on Charles and Camilla directly quoted an eyewitness on the polo grounds. And as far as the Steven Barry quote, a few pages later the overnighter with Camilla the night before the C and D nuptuals was confirmed by Andrew Parker-Bowles' brother. Is he a liar too?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 10-20-2008, 09:09 PM
scooter's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: katonah, United States
Posts: 2,331
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elspeth View Post
If something is written in a book or article that's generally considered reliable, especially if it shows up in more than one of them, then we're prepared to accept it as a correct account.

If something like that has been contradicted officially by Buckingham Palace, Clarence House, or any of the other offices of the royals, then it should be presented in the threads as appearing to be verified and correct but officially contradicted.

The purpose of this thread is to help build up a track record of citations from reliable sources for various events and occurrences to help our members when someone challenges them to provide chapter and verse on a topic, since not everyone has all the reference books to hand.
Elspeth I am confused by your more recent post. Does the above earlier statement no longer represent the standard for TRF? I would like to follow the guidelines of what is accepted as 'confirmed source' but it's more than a little bit confusing when the goal posts keeps moving. Especially in light of the fact that regardless of what the standard you guys set, certain posters keep denying the veracity of various well published respected sources, because 'there has been no statement from the palace and in the absence of one, it's all an urban legend'. If XYZ is the standard as accepted by TRF and certain posters keep saying we dont believe it, and the Mods dont squash it, how are we to have a conversation on any subject?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 10-20-2008, 09:30 PM
Mermaid1962's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NearTheCoast, Canada
Posts: 5,154
When was this confirmed by Parker-Bowles' brother? I've never come across that particular claim.

Quote:
Originally Posted by scooter View Post
And as far as the Steven Barry quote, a few pages later the overnighter with Camilla the night before the C and D nuptuals was confirmed by Andrew Parker-Bowles' brother. Is he a liar too?
__________________

__________________
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


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Questions about Royals and General Miscellania kcc Royal Life and Lifestyle 66 04-04-2014 07:50 PM
Username questions Daneborn Forum Announcements and Admin 44 04-15-2013 10:52 AM
Fun Questions... michelle Princely Family of Monaco 67 08-21-2010 07:14 AM
Citation of Sources in British Forum Threads Elspeth British Royals 1 10-24-2008 01:23 PM




Additional Links
Popular Tags
abdication birth charlene crown prince felipe crown prince haakon crown princess letizia crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit crown princess victoria current events duchess of cambridge dutch royal history fashion genealogy grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri hohenzollern infanta elena infanta leonor 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 olympics ottoman palace picture of the month pom prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince constantijn prince felipe prince floris prince pieter-christiaan princess alexia (2005 -) princess anita princess ariane princess beatrix princess catharina-amalia princess charlene princess claire princess laurentien princess letizia princess mabel princess madeleine princess margriet princess marilene princess mary queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen paola queen rania queen silvia queen sofia royal russia sofia hellqvist spain state visit visit wedding



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:57 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]