The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #41  
Old 05-03-2005, 12:19 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 1,083
I found this on Al Fayed's web site and had to share it!
I thought it was quite amusing!
His views on Charles and Camillas wedding




People keep asking me what I think of the royal wedding.

Frankly, I would rather not think at all about Big Ears and Crocodilla making their marriage vows over the grave of Diana, Princess of Wales, a woman whose grace, charm and sheer goodness ought to shame her ex-husband and his mistress.

Of course Prince Charles is too arrogant to feel true remorse over the cruel way in which he and Mrs. Parker Bowles deceived Diana and drove her to the edge of despair.

A decent man would not be marrying the woman whose unprincipled behaviour helped to break up a marriage in which the real casualties were two little boys who were suddenly deprived of their happiness and security.

The selfishness of Charles makes me sick. If you are born a Prince, the privilege comes as standard. But in return you have to show nobility, leadership and, when required, self sacrifice.

The motto of every Prince of Wales is "Ich dien", German for "I serve". Charles is intent only on serving himself. He is willful. He has to have his own way. His mother, The Queen, was and is very much against his marriage to Mrs. Parker Bowles. She knows that it reflects very badly on her family and on the institution of monarchy.

Her husband, the German/Greek/Russian Duke of Edinburgh (what did the Scots do to deserve that?) cannot stand his petulant son and thinks he is a real moaner and whinger. He hardly ever speaks to him. He can hardly bear to look at him. He regards him as a loser. On this and only on this, I find myself in agreement with Phil the Greek.

I am told that both the Queen and her husband would have avoided the wedding if there had been any way of getting out of it. I understand that other members of the royal family would have done likewise. It is interesting that very few members of European royal houses will be present at the Guildhall in Windsor.

I applaud their principled stand. Why would anybody in their right mind want to attend a hole-in-the-corner affair in the smallest room available in a small building?

Why a small room? So that the Prince can pack it with his friends who will take up the seats meant for the general public. Why is this so important? Because otherwise, someone would almost certainly have raised an objection when the Registrar asked if there was any "good cause" why the marriage should not go ahead.

Of course there are plenty of good causes and both parties to the marriage know what they are. They conspired against Diana even as she was having her final fitting for her wedding dress.

She was only 20, an innocent girl, going into her marriage with every intention of making her husband happy and serving this country; I know her; she was a real patriot who would have done anything for the people of the United Kingdom and the Commonwealth.

Behind her back, Charles and his mistress cheated on her before the wedding and were even enjoying intimate telephone conversations during the honeymoon. Five years after the wedding, and after Diana had given birth to two strong and healthy sons, it was well known to the royal media corps that Charles was once again conducting a full-blown affair with Mrs. Parker Bowles.

Charles could have married Camilla in 1972, nine years before Diana was sacrificed on the royal altar for his convenience. Why on earth didn't he do it? It would have saved everybody an awful lot of trouble and Diana would be alive and happy today, free from the curse of the Windsors.

Diana was more royal than her husband. She was directly descended from Kind Charles 11, the Merry Monarch. Prince Charles, in contrast, is the progeny of German princlings and a classic example of what happens when there is in-breeding in humans: a distinctly odd look and an adled brain.

What is Camilla Parker Bowles? I remember her father running an off licence in Mayfair. There is nothing wrong with trade and I like it when people call me a shop-keeper or "the Egyptian grocer". It doesn't offend me; quite the contrary. But Mrs. PB behaves as if her family have always been part of the aristocracy. With that strange deep voice of hers, I am wondering if she is really a man in drag. She is certainly going to be a gift to all the female impersonators we have in this odd country.

Prince Charles was educated beyond his intelligence or else he would be able to see hoiw runous his conduct has been. He and Mrs. Parker Bowles are the most successful recruiting sergeants Republic has ever had. Republic is the pressure group campaiging for an elected head of state in Britain and an end to the medievel system of hereditary succession, from one member of the Mountbatten-Windsor family to another.

It is always a bad idea if controversy surrounds a wedding. If the wedding is a royal one, then it is almost always disastrous. A large per centage of the British people do not like the idea of Charles marrying Camilla Parker Bowles simply because they know how badly Diana was treated by them. They are right to be outraged.

Do you know, Diana told me that her husband carried around with him a pair of Mrs. Parker Bowles' underpants which he sniffed from time to time. Is that disgusting or what? Talk about feral. The man is no better than a dog in the street and yet he wants as to regard him as a prince of the royal blood. Talking of which, he was the man who said he wanted to be Mrs. PB's tampax. Even since, the Italian press have called him "Il Tampaccino".

And to think, he regularly stands up and tell the rest of us hows to behave. If it was not so sad, you would have to laugh.

I don't care what happens to Charles and his mistress now. If they had the decency to go away to Highgrove and live a private life there, I would say that that was okay, in the circumstances. He could mooch around his garden and they both could ride with the local hunt; truly the unpseakable in pursuit of the uneatable, as Oscar Wilde put it so brilliantly.

If they had any feelings at all, they would retire from public life. The Prince's great uncle, the Duke of Windsor, did just that when he felt he had to marry a divorced woman, in his case Mrs. Wallis Simpson. I could respect the Duke of Windsor and the Duchess for the exemplary way in which they lived their lives of exile.

That is not enough for Prince Charles, of course. He wants his wife and he wants the crown, even though that means wishing for the death of his mother. And believe you me, when the time comes he will want us all to call his wife Queen Camilla.

Just as I and many members of foreign royalty believe that the Windsor wedding may actually be illegal (and that's why they are not coming), it would be illegal for Camilla not be Queen if Charles came to the throne. Of course, secretly, he does want her to be Queen Camilla.

He has not been frank about that because he knows that many people would be horried and would simply not accept it. However, he thinks in time we will get used to it and he will get his way when, eventually, he succeeds to the throne.

Just as there has been a step-by-step introduction of Mrs. PB to the wider world, so there will be a step-by-step softening up process to get an increasingly indifferent public to accept Queen Camilla.

Already, it is revealed that Camilla will be Princess of Wales, which was at first denied by Charles' PR team at Clarence House. Charles must think that we are as stupid as he is.

It is a nightmare but the worst horrors will be visited upon the House of Mountbatten-Windsor and its dopey Prince. Most of the 60 countries of the Commonwealth will reject Charles if he is forced upon them as the titular Head of the Commonwealth. Most of the 16 countries that welcome the Queen as Head of State will simply say "No, thanks" to King Charles and Queen Camilla.

When the history of monarchy in Britain is written, from Alfred the Great to the 21st. Century, Prince Charles will be identified as the single figure who did most to destroy it, because of a woman who does not even have beauty to recommend her.

More than 50 years ago, the last king of Egypt, Farouk, predicted that in 100 years time, there would be only five kings left in the world: "The kings of hearts, clubs, diamonds, spades and the King of England". I do not think we shall have to wait that long to see the downfall of the British monarchy if Charles continues to have his way.

All that decent British people can do is to mean it when they sing "God Save the Queen". If the Queen lives as long as her mother, it may be that she outlives her stupid eldest son and the succession passes to King William the Fifth.

If so, the first thing I predict he will do as King is to restore posthumously to his mother the title Her Royal Highness. No one deserved the honour more than Diana, Princess of Wales and the stripping of the title from her was the defining act of a royal family that had lost the plot and the love of the people.

So, a plague on the Prince and his crocodile; let us always just remember Diana as the lovely person she was and will always be. She loved my son. He loved her. My whole family will always love Diana.

Here's the link if anyone wants to check it out
http://www.alfayed.com/details.asp?aid=145
__________________

__________________
  #42  
Old 05-03-2005, 01:48 PM
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: ***, United States
Posts: 16,897
Something tells me that King William the Fifth won't be counting Mohamed Al Fayed among his closest friends and advisors, regardless of the protestations of support. William seems to be quite close to both his father and his grandfather (I wonder why Al Fayed forgot to mention, in that list of nationalities, that Prince Philip is a great deal more Danish than Greek, German, or Russian), and I assume he knows the circumstances under which his mother died, in a Fayed-owned car driven by a Fayed employee who wasn't a professional driver and was under the influence, taking orders from a Fayed son. No wonder he's trying to deflect the blame.
__________________

__________________
  #43  
Old 05-03-2005, 02:15 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 1,045
Pretty funny, but he needs to get out more if he thinks the underwear thing is weird; a lot of guys are into that.
__________________
  #44  
Old 05-03-2005, 03:44 PM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: , United States
Posts: 27
I hate to break this to you but Charles did cheat on Camilla and Diana with even another woman and another after her. I think he is just one big Playboy that will never fully be satisfied with one woman. Also the likes of this situation tell you that since he's the Prince of Wales he thinks he can play around more than other men. He thinks that since he's the Prince he can hurt other people and throw their feelings to the ground for his. I am not very found of him at all. My opinion is that he probably will cheat or ooops I might be mistaken he is probably too old to get another mistress.!
__________________
  #45  
Old 05-03-2005, 09:24 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: , Canada
Posts: 3,220
Quote:
Originally Posted by blondebeauty123
I hate to break this to you but Charles did cheat on Camilla and Diana with even another woman and another after her. I think he is just one big Playboy that will never fully be satisfied with one woman. Also the likes of this situation tell you that since he's the Prince of Wales he thinks he can play around more than other men. He thinks that since he's the Prince he can hurt other people and throw their feelings to the ground for his. I am not very found of him at all. My opinion is that he probably will cheat or ooops I might be mistaken he is probably too old to get another mistress.!
I am not familiar with a third woman in Charles' life during his marriage to Diana and relationship with Camilla. Could you please provide a name and articles to support your notion that there was a third woman in Charles' life with whom he was also cheating on Diana with as well as Camilla?
__________________
  #46  
Old 05-04-2005, 01:39 AM
susan alicia's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: , Netherlands
Posts: 2,528
alexandria,

on the weddingday of charles and camilla the bbc presenters had guests to chat with about the wedding and one women, penny "something", she has written books about charles, diana and or camilla said that she did not buy the fairy tale that charles and camilla had not had other lovers besides each other.

It surprised me. But maybe middle aged english have a wilder life than we can imagine.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alexandria
I am not familiar with a third woman in Charles' life during his marriage to Diana and relationship with Camilla. Could you please provide a name and articles to support your notion that there was a third woman in Charles' life with whom he was also cheating on Diana with as well as Camilla?
__________________
  #47  
Old 05-04-2005, 01:49 AM
susan alicia's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: , Netherlands
Posts: 2,528
there is a lot of offensive stuff in his piece,
at his defense, imagine he is a heartbrokken man about the death of his son and he has a certain background where they express themselve like that. Read this posting after a certain middel eastern thread on this website was making me unhappy and got a bit of the same.

about the car and the employee, diana was too unprotected, she might have received some more protection from the royals/english government, one of the reasons she was being harrassed was partly because she was the ex wife of.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elspeth
Something tells me that King William the Fifth won't be counting Mohamed Al Fayed among his closest friends and advisors, regardless of the protestations of support. William seems to be quite close to both his father and his grandfather (I wonder why Al Fayed forgot to mention, in that list of nationalities, that Prince Philip is a great deal more Danish than Greek, German, or Russian), and I assume he knows the circumstances under which his mother died, in a Fayed-owned car driven by a Fayed employee who wasn't a professional driver and was under the influence, taking orders from a Fayed son. No wonder he's trying to deflect the blame.
__________________
  #48  
Old 05-04-2005, 04:49 AM
Warren's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 15,410
Name-calling

Quote:
Originally Posted by lashinka2002
I found this on Al Fayed's web site:

People keep asking me what I think of the royal wedding.
Frankly, I would rather not think at all about Big Ears and Crocodilla ...
So, a plague on the Prince and his crocodile
Wow, another reasoned and intelligent contribution to the debate, eh?

Perhaps the pathetic name-calling reflects more on Mr Al Fayed than it does on the targets of his bile.
.
__________________
  #49  
Old 05-04-2005, 04:55 AM
Yennie's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Skåne, Sweden
Posts: 2,599
Mr AlFayed is patetic. Who is he to be the spokesperson for Diana or anybody else?!
No his 15 minute of fame is over (yes I know he is a well known buissnessman and owner of Harrods) But what has that to do with Diana?
She spend a couple of months with his son... thats it...

and is he a racist to?! this line is just so
Quote:
Her husband, the German/Greek/Russian Duke of Edinburgh (what did the Scots do to deserve that
and last: Charles is after all just human. And we all deserves to be happy. He must really care for Camilla, they have been in love, for what, 35 years?
Yes he made a terrible misstake by cheating and there is no excuse for what he put Diana through, but I think we must all let go and realise that Charles and Camilla are happy together.
__________________
Life is like a box of chocolates... you'll never know what you're gonna get
  #50  
Old 05-04-2005, 09:41 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 1,083
Quote:
Originally Posted by susan alicia
about the car and the employee, diana was too unprotected, she might have received some more protection from the royals/english government, one of the reasons she was being harrassed was partly because she was the ex wife of.
I very much agree! I always thought that the RF was wrong to withdraw their protective services from Diana. After all, she was still the mother of the future heir, the most photographed woman in the world and very much in need of protection. She was all of these things because she married into the RF. I think that whoever made the decision to pull security from her assumed that she could hire other protection services but I'm sure there was no one she could trust. What utter fools!
__________________
  #51  
Old 05-04-2005, 11:24 AM
sara1981's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: North Little Rock, United States
Posts: 3,448
Quote:
Originally Posted by lashinka2002
I very much agree! I always thought that the RF was wrong to withdraw their protective services from Diana. After all, she was still the mother of the future heir, the most photographed woman in the world and very much in need of protection. She was all of these things because she married into the RF. I think that whoever made the decision to pull security from her assumed that she could hire other protection services but I'm sure there was no one she could trust. What utter fools!
yeah i would agree with you!

because Princess Diana needs more protection for what she BIG NEEDS! she is ex-wife of Prince Charles many people knew of her very much and she still future heir and many photographer getting pictures of her all the times in her life and no harassment for 15 years since 1981-1997 if Diana been gone somewhere and photographer will found the Princess Diana they published by magazines and newspaper and Diana would makes her more pissed off!

Originally Posted by susan alicia

about the car and the employee, diana was too unprotected, she might have received some more protection from the royals/english government, one of the reasons she was being harrassed was partly because she was the ex wife of.


yeah i would agree with you!

but Diana need more protect for what she needs! and include drivers and lots of more and she got rid include nanny,butler,chef and lots of more! but i cant believe she did that! and Diana making more harassment from photographer also! but she wont hurt from photographer heck no!

Sara Boyce
__________________
  #52  
Old 05-04-2005, 12:13 PM
selrahc4's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: , United States
Posts: 760
Quote:
Originally Posted by lashinka2002
I very much agree! I always thought that the RF was wrong to withdraw their protective services from Diana. After all, she was still the mother of the future heir, the most photographed woman in the world and very much in need of protection. She was all of these things because she married into the RF. I think that whoever made the decision to pull security from her assumed that she could hire other protection services but I'm sure there was no one she could trust. What utter fools!
It was Diana herself who chose not to have official protection after her divorce. It was offered and she was encouraged to have it, but she refused.
__________________
  #53  
Old 05-04-2005, 12:34 PM
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: ***, United States
Posts: 16,897
Quote:
Originally Posted by lashinka2002
I very much agree! I always thought that the RF was wrong to withdraw their protective services from Diana. After all, she was still the mother of the future heir, the most photographed woman in the world and very much in need of protection. She was all of these things because she married into the RF.
It seems to be pretty well established that the royal protection services were withdrawn from Diana at her request because she wanted her freedom and she thought the police bodyguards, being paid for by the royal family, were in the enemy camp. It seems that the Queen insisted that royal protection officers be assigned to the two princes, so they were there during the earlier criuse on Al Fayed's yacht when the two princes were there, but when Diana went back to have her cruise alone with Dodi, she didn't have any royal protection officers. It seems to have been her choice, not the choice of the royal family.

Quote:
I think that whoever made the decision to pull security from her assumed that she could hire other protection services but I'm sure there was no one she could trust. What utter fools!
The decision was apparently hers.
__________________
  #54  
Old 05-04-2005, 04:07 PM
susan alicia's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: , Netherlands
Posts: 2,528
did not know that she refused protection, can imagine security guards can make you feel less free.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elspeth
It seems to be pretty well established that the royal protection services were withdrawn from Diana at her request because she wanted her freedom and she thought the police bodyguards, being paid for by the royal family, were in the enemy camp. It seems that the Queen insisted that royal protection officers be assigned to the two princes, so they were there during the earlier criuse on Al Fayed's yacht when the two princes were there, but when Diana went back to have her cruise alone with Dodi, she didn't have any royal protection officers. It seems to have been her choice, not the choice of the royal family.



The decision was apparently hers.
__________________
  #55  
Old 05-05-2005, 08:02 AM
RoseMary's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: , United States
Posts: 150
Post

I agree with a lot of what Mr. Al-fyed's statements. Why didn't Charles marry Camilla? maybe the Queen didn't approve? Why carry on an affair?

Diana was a naive and pure-hearted 20 year old(believe me I am 22 and I am still naive) woman when she entered that marriage. Charles just wanted heirs. Camilla knowingly had an affair with a married man. Obviously by the time Charles and Diana divorced no one out of the three were completely innocent.

Diana was already suffering emotional damage because of abandonement from her mother but to have someone like your husband betray you like that. I am not saying Diana is perfect or deserves sainthood.
I do think that now Charles and Camilla belong together, they deserve each other. I don't consider the Charles and Camilla saga a love story, far from it. Although they do love eachother, they had plenty of chances to be together before Charles even met Diana. They have a lot of work ahead of them before they get my vote of confidence.
__________________
If you want something done right, do it yourself.
  #56  
Old 05-05-2005, 10:35 AM
sara1981's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: North Little Rock, United States
Posts: 3,448
Quote:
Originally Posted by RoseMary
I agree with a lot of what Mr. Al-fyed's statements. Why didn't Charles marry Camilla? maybe the Queen didn't approve? Why carry on an affair?

Diana was a naive and pure-hearted 20 year old(believe me I am 22 and I am still naive) woman when she entered that marriage. Charles just wanted heirs. Camilla knowingly had an affair with a married man. Obviously by the time Charles and Diana divorced no one out of the three were completely innocent.

Diana was already suffering emotional damage because of abandonement from her mother but to have someone like your husband betray you like that. I am not saying Diana is perfect or deserves sainthood.
I do think that now Charles and Camilla belong together, they deserve each other. I don't consider the Charles and Camilla saga a love story, far from it. Although they do love eachother, they had plenty of chances to be together before Charles even met Diana. They have a lot of work ahead of them before they get my vote of confidence.
when Prince Charles and Camilla in 1970's both would plans getting married in late 1970's but Prince Charles away for navy and Camilla got married to Andrew-Parker Bowlers they after Prince Charles got home from Navy but Charles really disappointment about Camilla got married that man! but i would knew that his grandmother the HM Queen Mother wont let Prince Charles get married to Camilla for BIG MORE REASONS! because of Prince Charles had affairs with Camilla before Diana if im correct or im wrong!

and he got married to late Diana,Princess of Wales and Prince Charles had pictures of Camilla when both in honeymoon and Diana told him dont bring pictures of her and Diana got upset! before Diana got married to Prince of Wales she wanted to wedding off! she told her sister about that im sure they later Prince Charles went seem Camilla after Prince Harry's birth when Diana carry Harry from Hospital but Diana really happy about birth.

Sara Boyce
__________________
  #57  
Old 05-05-2005, 02:37 PM
kobe's Avatar
Commoner
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 16
I competely agree. C&C belong together. Yet, I wouldn't trust either one of them. I don't believe Charles has what it takes to be a good monarch. For example King Bhumibol of Thailand is not an absolute monarch yet his people love and respect him in a semi-god way because he has championed the poor and democracy in his country. He has played a pivotal role in relations btw the military and the students. Charles to me is weak, i feel sorry for him because of his upbringing and lack of parental love. The most tragic thing is that Diana did not get the happy ending that she did deserve, instead C&C gets the happy ending. They both plotted a marriage and choose Diana to be their sacrifice. Honestly, if he wanted his marriage to succeed he should have either stood up to his parents to say this is the person I love and I will marry her or given her up. I am glad that they are happy, no one deserves misey yet it just doesn't seem fair.
__________________
  #58  
Old 05-05-2005, 02:56 PM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: , United States
Posts: 27
I read the book called Diana's Boys and The Mother They Loved. In that book it is about the tell all relashionship of diana and Charles marriage.
__________________
  #59  
Old 05-05-2005, 07:37 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 2,194
Quote:
Originally Posted by kobe
Honestly, if he wanted his marriage to succeed he should have either stood up to his parents to say this is the person I love and I will marry her or given her up. I am glad that they are happy, no one deserves misey yet it just doesn't seem fair.
But how do you stand up to Queen Elizabeth? She is a force not to be reconed with.
__________________
  #60  
Old 05-05-2005, 09:58 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Dallas, United States
Posts: 1,505
Well King Edward stood up to his family and his country so why not charles?


Quote:
Originally Posted by gaggleofcrazypeople
But how do you stand up to Queen Elizabeth? She is a force not to be reconed with.
__________________

__________________
*Under Construction*
Closed Thread

Tags
camilla, diana princess of wales, duchess of cornwall, prince charles, prince of wales, princess diana, relationships


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
Diana/Charles/Camilla's Relationships Part2 Warren The Prince of Wales and the Duchess of Cornwall 935 12-07-2005 07:49 PM
The Great Baby Guessing Challenge Part 4 Alexandria Royal Chit Chat 17 05-16-2005 08:02 PM
The Great Baby Guessing Challenge Part 3 Alexandria Royal Chit Chat 24 04-10-2005 06:33 PM
The Great Baby Guessing Challenge Part 2 Alexandria Royal Chit Chat 7 03-06-2005 12:20 PM
King Carl XVI Gustaf and Queen Silvia, Current Events Part 1: November 2002-June 2004 Josefine Current Events Archive 300 06-12-2004 08:13 AM




Additional Links
Popular Tags
abdication birth charlene crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess letizia crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit engagement fashion grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri hohenzollern infanta leonor infanta sofia jewellery jordan king abdullah ii king carl xvi gustav king constantine ii king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander luxembourg olympic games olympics ottoman poland pom prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince constantijn prince felipe prince floris prince maurits prince pieter-christiaan princess aimee princess anita princess astrid princess beatrix princess charlene princess claire princess laurentien princess letizia princess mabel princess madeleine princess marilene princess mary princess of asturias queen anne-marie queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen paola queen rania queen silvia royal royal fashion russia sofia hellqvist spain state visit the hague visit wedding winter olympics 2014



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:58 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]