The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #201  
Old 11-14-2005, 11:12 PM
Queen Mary I's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Tampa, United States
Posts: 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elspeth
These days, you don't have to kill a person to take away his power; you just take away his power while leaving him to be an ineffectual ornament. Tony Blair is nibbling away at the monarchy as it is. The Queen was very lucky when she took the throne that she had a Prime Minister who understood the advantages of monarchy and didn't try to undercut the position of monarch; Prince William will be a sitting duck for Tony Blair if the Queen died during Tony Blair's Prime Ministership and William rather than Charles took over. It'd be partly because of William's inexperience but also because the fact of leapfrogging Charles, who's been Prince of Wales since forever, would point up a weakness in the royal family, and that weakness would be exploited to whatever extent the politicians thought they could get away with.

Most of the time when there's been a young monarch, either the monarch has suffered or the country has suffered or both. I'd like to see a much better reason for it this time than that people want to punish Charles for what happened to Diana.
I just don't believe the Populace would allow Tony Blair to undercut the Monarchy. And especially now that Blair seems to be sinking in the Popularity polls ala GW Bush.

I think Charles and Clarence House are aware that Camilla 'where the Monarchy is supposed to unite Camilla is a divisive figure' as one person on television put it very well. This is the reason of course why Clarence House has bothered with artifice and nonsense of 'Duchess' and 'Princess Consort' Titles and such. They were looking at the polls, or feeling the pulse of the Kingdom or something when someone cooked that idea of Titles up. There are people pro and against but in the end Charles will be King with his wealth and priveledges to comfort him.

I don't believe it is Charles the people are against-it is the prospect of a Queen Camilla. It may take a few more years for the majority to stomache it. That is imo.

And I must add that I believe William will be a great, and beloved King. No matter when he ascends. As beloved as Victoria, and Elizabeth I in their day. He is very intelligent and will not allow anyone to undercut him or the Monarchy. And there are many examples of Monarchs who ascended the throne no older than William-such as Elizabeth I. And they reigned long and prospered.
__________________

__________________
Happy New Year-Here's to Peace On Earth
  #202  
Old 11-14-2005, 11:12 PM
corazon's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: -In some dark place-, Argentina
Posts: 2,080
Elspeth, I respect much you, I am VERY monarchist, queen can leave the throne to charles many times (married with diana and not) and she don't do.
For my, william will be BEST king but the law is the law. I respect the queen, the diana's fans don't punish Charles for what happened to Diana, we want the best for england.
And for us the best is william in the throne, only is that. For many people (charles especially) diana never exist, amd this is hard to accepted for many people, I bit of respect to the mother of the future king is sufficient.
__________________

__________________
Today the world has embraced new royal Princesses in the form of Mary of Denmark and Maxima of the Netherlands. But it's questionable whether even these hugely popular, increasingly glamorous future Queens will ever capture the world's imagination in the same way as Diana.
As Mario acknowledges: "She really was a true Princess".
-www.theroyalist.net-
  #203  
Old 11-14-2005, 11:20 PM
corazon's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: -In some dark place-, Argentina
Posts: 2,080
Princejonnhy25 I have a thing to said to you, WE (diana's fans) not call camilla duchess of cornwall, the royal house said as she must be called, not us. If you are happy calling camilla princess of wales and to diana calling lady diana is great for you, not are my problem, but WE call camilla like the royal house said.
The legally is the legally and the fast are the fast. The royal house was VERY CLEAR about this.
__________________
Today the world has embraced new royal Princesses in the form of Mary of Denmark and Maxima of the Netherlands. But it's questionable whether even these hugely popular, increasingly glamorous future Queens will ever capture the world's imagination in the same way as Diana.
As Mario acknowledges: "She really was a true Princess".
-www.theroyalist.net-
  #204  
Old 11-14-2005, 11:22 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 589
What's the range of royal duty? I think it includes too many things to list. Cutting the ribbons,having overseas visits, planting trees, trooping the color are just parts of them.They also need to devote not only money but their promotions in charities.I think Prince Charles told his father he did not want to be a performing monkey in 1970s. He wanted to build his own role as the Prince of Wales in the following decades before he becomes King.

Then Prince Charles tried to find his own unique goal in his duty: to set Prince's trust,to commercialise his Duchy of Cornwall, to build some summer schools, sorts of things. So complex to list all. I can't. Prince Charles tries to be a modern Prince of Wales. I think Prince William should learn how to deal these things.Too many things to learn and too many things to partipate in before he becomes the King. That's why Prince William needs to go to HSBC and learn the management of royal estates. I think Queen, the Duke and Prince Charles and other royal advisors all think it is important for Prince William to have more experience.

I would say I admire Prince Charles for his achievements. He definded his role as Prince of Wales and will continue to refine his role. It is what a modern monarch about. We always ask the monarch to modernise, that's the way they do it. Even Prince Charles does not show strong leadship, but he has good forward ideas about the modernisation of the monarch and royal family.
__________________
  #205  
Old 11-14-2005, 11:51 PM
Princejohnny25's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: , Antarctica
Posts: 2,033
Quote:
Princejonnhy25 I have a thing to said to you, WE (diana's fans) not call camilla duchess of cornwall, the royal house said as she must be called, not us. If you are happy calling camilla princess of wales and to diana calling lady diana is great for you, not are my problem, but WE call camilla like the royal house said.
The legally is the legally and the fast are the fast. The royal house was VERY CLEAR about this.
First of all Corazon, I have never called Camilla The Princess of Wales. I actually like the Duchess of Cornwall title better for her. I call Diana what she was appropiatly. Dont go off making crazy accusations.

Quote:
I just cannot agree with some of the posters who state that the duties expected of Royalty is such a 'burden'. Cutting ribbons? Christening Ships? Parades on fancy horses? Meeting dignitaries? Wearing ancient and priceless jewelry? (My ENVY is showing LOL!), taking what appears to be a Holiday (we call them Vacations in States) seemingly at least one week per month Globe-trotting all over the World?? I should be so 'burdened' LOL!
How miss informed you are Queen Mary. You are caught up in the fairytale and glamour of the monarchy that Diana created. Royalty is a burden like no other. To never be oneself, to be controlled by the crown, have no say and show no feeling, be controlled by politicans and protocal, never being able to have dreams. Being a royal is something I would never wish on anyone. It is a path only the strong can take. William is a young little boy with no experience. The monarchy would collapse in months if he were king after elizabeth. He has no controll. He shows no reason to be proclaimed as a future beloved and great king. He is shy and smart. That is all we know about him. Listen to reality people.
__________________
  #206  
Old 11-15-2005, 12:25 AM
Queen Mary I's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Tampa, United States
Posts: 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by Princejonnhy25
First of all Corazon, I have never called Camilla The Princess of Wales. I actually like the Duchess of Cornwall title better for her. I call Diana what she was appropiatly. Dont go off making crazy accusations.



How miss informed you are Queen Mary. You are caught up in the fairytale and glamour of the monarchy that Diana created. Royalty is a burden like no other. To never be oneself, to be controlled by the crown, have no say and show no feeling, be controlled by politicans and protocal, never being able to have dreams. Being a royal is something I would never wish on anyone. It is a path only the strong can take. William is a young little boy with no experience. The monarchy would collapse in months if he were king after elizabeth. He has no controll. He shows no reason to be proclaimed as a future beloved and great king. He is shy and smart. That is all we know about him. Listen to reality people.
I am not misinformed and my post had nothing to do with Diana. I don't think I even mentioned the poor dead Princess anywhere in my previous post. What does she have to do with it??

You didn't seem to read my post through. I said everyone's life is different and I am sure it has it's pressures but to me anyway it is not the same as living check to check. And I don' believe anyone is going to interfere with Willaim's dreams, least of all a politician. And he does not seem the kind to let protocol get in the way like his father. I remember their ski trip where he seemed to be holding his father up against the press. That kid has a good head on his shoulders. It was Charles's own father who was once quoted as saying 'if only Charle's had Anne's b--ls'. With a father like that it is no wonder Prince Charles seemed unsure of himself or seemed not to know his own mind in his youth.

That the Monarchy would collapse if William were to follow Elizabeth rather than Charles is your opinion. God forbid but if the POW suffered a fatal heart attack tonight-William would be ready because they have been preparing him to be ready since he was a fetus. And that is my opinion. He has his Uncles Andrew and Edward too, and I dare say the Princess Royal, and his Spencer relations and all would help him to get through. A grandson asceding to the throne would not be unique to William. I don't think you are giving him enough credit. He's not some helpless deer in headlights. His father is far better prepared with the benefit of years on his side-but William seems to have his head far more together than his dad at the same age. And as I mentioned on that ski slope-it seemed the roles were reversed. William was the one looking after Charles. He will be fine whenever his time comes-whether it is now, next year, 20 years from now or 40.

You seem no more informed than I. These are all our personal opinions. Unless we actually live in the actual Palaces or Royal fishbowls none of us can really know. It is all what we observe, and read, and perceive. And from there we deduce.
__________________
Happy New Year-Here's to Peace On Earth
  #207  
Old 11-15-2005, 01:46 AM
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: ***, United States
Posts: 16,897
Quote:
I just don't believe the Populace would allow Tony Blair to undercut the Monarchy. And especially now that Blair seems to be sinking in the Popularity polls ala GW Bush.
He's already doing it. Most people either don't know, don't care, or don't think there's anything they can do about it. A young, inexperienced king would be no match for him, however popular. The Household took advantage of Elizabeth II's inexperience, powerful politicians have taken advantage of young monarchs for centuries, and there's no reason to believe that things would be any different next time around. There's very little that a young and untried king could do to rein in a prime minister who's hell-bent on going his own way and not particularly interested in listening to advice.

Charles is somewhat less insulated from the real world than the Queen is, and he'll be able to continue William's education in kingship for long enough for William to get some experience and confidence. People who want Charles to just go away so Diana's son can take over and so Charles and Camilla can be forgotten are really not taking into account the role of monarch as part of the government.
__________________
  #208  
Old 11-15-2005, 01:49 AM
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: ***, United States
Posts: 16,897
Quote:
For my, william will be BEST king but the law is the law. I respect the queen, the diana's fans don't punish Charles for what happened to Diana, we want the best for england.
And for us the best is william in the throne, only is that.
If this has nothing to do with Diana, then why do you think William would make a better king than Charles?
__________________
  #209  
Old 11-15-2005, 01:56 AM
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: ***, United States
Posts: 16,897
Quote:
A grandson asceding to the throne would not be unique to William.
No, there have been a couple of other cases. One of them was a pretty well unmitigated disaster, partly because the king concerned was so young. Not that I'm suggesting that William would turn out to be like Richard II, but precedent in this case isn't exactly encouraging.

I'm sure that if he were to become king tomorrow, everybody would muddle through somehow, but it would be a much less optimal situation than for him to be more mature and stable in his personal life. The Queen didn't have much time to devote to her family once she took over as monarch, and she'd been married for four or five years at the time. It would be an awful lot to ask of William that he take on a job that would consume his life when he was still this young and his personal life wasn't settled. And I still don't see how it would be an advantage from the point of view of the monarch's duty as part of the government process.
__________________
  #210  
Old 11-15-2005, 02:15 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 589
Only Prince Charles has been prepared to be the next King. Anne, Andrew and Edward have nothing to do that. No one can replace Prince Charles' existence or offer his experince to Prince William. Remeber what happened after the 1936 abdication crisis. When Edward VIII decided to abidicate, it was such a shock because he was the one received the proper training to be the King. Not another son. The Duke of York,later George VI can just collapse but luckily he had Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother to support and help him. The duke does not favour Charles because they are two people with the opposite charactersitics. Duke is too tough for Charles and Charles is too soft for his father. They cannot understand each other in their ways of thinking and doing things. Charles is certainly not the ideal son of their parents. He may be alike George VI more than his parents. But Charles still make himself a good Prince of Wales and achieved more things than expected.

I still insist that, Prince William needs his father's guidance and experience and have some experience by himself before he becomes King. Moreover, I hope that Prince William can establish his family first and spend more time with his wife and kids before he takes the top job. Being a good monarch is not that easy. I think it is a strict job and so Charles has been trained for years to do the job. I think Diana's fans should think about William's personal life and his feelings rather than put such a big burden on him by their opinions. Prince William won't be happy with the arrangment. Being King is not a happy job, it is a duty and an obligation. I think Nicholas Soames said similar things about the job of POW.
__________________
  #211  
Old 11-15-2005, 02:33 AM
Queen Mary I's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Tampa, United States
Posts: 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by love_cc
Only Prince Charles has been prepared to be the next King. Anne, Andrew and Edward have nothing to do that. No one can replace Prince Charles' existence or offer his experince to Prince William. Remeber what happened after the 1936 abdication crisis. When Edward VIII decided to abidicate, it was such a shock because he was the one received the proper training to be the King. Not another son. The Duke of York,later George VI can just collapse but luckily he had Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother to support and help him.

I still insist that, Prince William needs his father's guidance and experience and have some experience by himself before he becomes King. Moreover, I hope that Prince William can establish his family first and spend more time with his wife and kids before he takes the top job. Being a good monarch is not that easy. I think it is a strict job and so Charles has been trained for years to do the job. I think Diana's fans should think about William's personal life and his feelings rather than put such a big burden on him by their opinions. Prince William won't be happy with the arrangment. Being King is not a happy job, it is a duty and an obligation. I think Nicholas Soames said similar things about the job of POW.
The Monarchy has endured Henry VIII's brutality to six wives, survived the Reformation, Oliver Cromwell, and the Abdication. It is alive and kicking and it will still be here a thousand years from now imo.

Tony Blair is yesterday's newspaper imo. His ship is badly listing, and sinking fast for aligning himself to our {derogatory comment deleted - Elspeth} President.

I believe Williams's older relatives are better prepared than implied. He was not even in existence when Prince Charles was born-what if Princess Elizabeth had died in childbirth? Would the Monarchy not have survived? I believe it would have. Prince Phillip in that case would have been Regent I think-if George VI passed away. The Duke is not the most diplomatic Prince in all the lands but there it is. Queen Elizabeth II's children I am sure were all as prepared as they could be for anything long before William was even an idea.

And as you wrote George VI had his Queen Consort Elizabeth to help him. And William has his own loving relatives as well. I don't know that the late Queen Mum is or would have been a better support mechanism than any of her descendants. I give William's relations a bit more credit than that-and in particular Prince Andrew who if memory serves was earmarked as Regent if William ascended to the Crown as a minor. I believe they are all better prepared especially in this day and age than we think. They are not as insulated as they once were and most of the Royals of consenting age have been around the block a time or two.

Sure William needs his father-most of us do. But as his mom's tragic death proved life isn't predictable. Anything can happen and like most of us I believe William can rise above it.
__________________
Happy New Year-Here's to Peace On Earth
  #212  
Old 11-15-2005, 04:00 AM
ysbel's Avatar
Heir Apparent
TRF Author
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 5,390
I think most people's belief in William is rather a hope that he will turn out better than his father. He hasn't done enough to show what kind of King he would be.

From what we know of him so far, he is at best ambivalent about his royal status. He wants to be a normal young man. That's laudable but not realistic given his birthright. He, like other heirs to the throne, is going to have to come to terms with his unique position.

At his age, Charles had carried out many more official royal duties. He opened a Privy Council and gave an address to Parliament. Some of that can't be helped, Charles was the heir to the throne and William is not. Some things William cannot do until he is heir to the throne. That is a compelling reason even if you favor William over Charles to have Charles reign so that William can undertake the more formal role of heir to the throne.

Monarchies are more in danger now than when Henry VIII was king. Back then, they got rid of the king but still accepted the rightness of the monarchy. Present-day monarchs are not that secure.

Queen Mary I, if Charles dies today, I'm sure that William and the Queen will do their best to carry on. It is the hallmark and the strength of the monarchy. But having William succeed his grandmother is not something that they would ever want to do by choice if there is another alternative.
__________________
  #213  
Old 11-15-2005, 08:54 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 think most people's belief in William is rather a hope that he will turn out better than his father.
If you look at what Charles has achieved through out his life, (the Princes Trust one that is well known) quietly and without the fanfare that some seem to require, we can only hope that William will be as good if he becomes Prince of Wales.:)
__________________
  #214  
Old 11-15-2005, 09:10 AM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,943
Quote:
Originally Posted by Queen Mary I
I said everyone's life is different and I am sure it has it's pressures but to me anyway it is not the same as living check to check. .
No I can't imagine it's the same as waiting for a cheque but, can you imagine having to justify your every thought, word and deed.
Can you imagine sites, magazines and people dedicated to your ex wife, critisizing your personal choice of wife, lifestyle, even your choice of underwear? Not being able to make a move without bodyguards, people wanting to hurt or kill you, being unable to pop to the shops or the cinema. Having people from different nations on websites discussing whether you are fit to do the job you have been trained to do, the job some people, with a misguided sense of loyalty, want to give to a younger person in support of the same ex wife.
I just wonder how anyone who has been passed over for promotion, how the Wife/husband who has been left for a younger model would feel about that.
__________________
  #215  
Old 11-15-2005, 12:29 PM
corazon's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: -In some dark place-, Argentina
Posts: 2,080
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elspeth
If this has nothing to do with Diana, then why do you think William would make a better king than Charles?
In my personal opinion, william will be a best kinh than charles, nothing more.
__________________
Today the world has embraced new royal Princesses in the form of Mary of Denmark and Maxima of the Netherlands. But it's questionable whether even these hugely popular, increasingly glamorous future Queens will ever capture the world's imagination in the same way as Diana.
As Mario acknowledges: "She really was a true Princess".
-www.theroyalist.net-
  #216  
Old 11-15-2005, 12:35 PM
BeatrixFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,843
Well thats pretty impossible to determine. If he were to become King tomorrow, Charles would be a good King because he has experience and a full knowledge of the role. If William became King tomorrow, we'd have all hell break loose - he wouldn't have a clue. For example, how would he host a State Banquet when he hasn't even attended one?

You can only tell how good a King or Queen's reign was when it's over. I will see the reigns of Elizabeth II and Charles III end and although I doubt I'll see William V's reach its close, only then will I make my personal decision on how good a King William has been. It isn't for us to judge our Sovereigns. That duty lies with a greater power.
__________________
  #217  
Old 11-15-2005, 12:36 PM
corazon's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: -In some dark place-, Argentina
Posts: 2,080
Quote:
Originally Posted by Princejonnhy25
First of all Corazon, I have never called Camilla The Princess of Wales. I actually like the Duchess of Cornwall title better for her. I call Diana what she was appropiatly. Dont go off making crazy accusations.

You're call me crazy?
Well, you daid some tmes camilla IS LEGALLY princess of wales and DIANA IS lady diana, all is true but the royal house day how camilla must be called, not me or another diana fan.
If the palace it gives to an official comunicated (it is only an example) camillawill be named call HRH Duchess of cornwall and diana, princess of wales, this are the facts. You thinks camilla must be called princess of wales is for great for you, but she is duchess of cronwall as said the royal house.
Lady louise is legally HRH princess of wessex but the royal house said she is lady louise windsor.
I only do like the royal house said, the queen have 80 years and 53 like monarch, she knows what does and because it does.
__________________
Today the world has embraced new royal Princesses in the form of Mary of Denmark and Maxima of the Netherlands. But it's questionable whether even these hugely popular, increasingly glamorous future Queens will ever capture the world's imagination in the same way as Diana.
As Mario acknowledges: "She really was a true Princess".
-www.theroyalist.net-
  #218  
Old 11-15-2005, 12:38 PM
BeatrixFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,843
Woah! Slow down. I think the problem here is the common title and the full title. Camilla is commonly known as the Duchess of Cornwall but her full title is Princess of Wales etc etc so it isn't wrong to call her Princess of Wales but its not the common way of refering to her.
__________________
  #219  
Old 11-15-2005, 12:56 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: , United States
Posts: 2,736
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeatrixFan
Woah! Slow down. I think the problem here is the common title and the full title. Camilla is commonly known as the Duchess of Cornwall but her full title is Princess of Wales etc etc so it isn't wrong to call her Princess of Wales but its not the common way of refering to her.
It is incorrect to refer to Camilla as The Princess of Wales because she is styled The Duchess of Cornwall. The same thing with Louise. She is correctly referred to as The Lady Louise Windsor, regardless of the fact that her legal title is HRH Princess Louise of Wessex.

Their styles have been determined by the will of the Sovereign, along with their precedence within the family.
__________________
  #220  
Old 11-15-2005, 12:58 PM
magnik's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Warsaw, Poland
Posts: 3,681
I wouldn't be surprise that if (somehow) he will be a king some day it wouldn't be like it was with Edward VII - short reign.
But I've hope that EII will be a queen for a long long time. I have nothing against if she will has an age like her mother or princess Alice and after her Willy become a king. But who knows what future bring...:)

Btw. what is the age for a man in GB when he go to retire? Maybe if the Queen will live very long Charles go retire or smth like that?
__________________

__________________
Closed Thread

Tags
prince charles, prince of wales


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
Charles and Camilla Current Events 4: Oct - Nov 2005 Elspeth Current Events Archive 248 11-18-2005 02:47 PM
Will Charles Ever Reign? grecka The Prince of Wales and the Duchess of Cornwall 641 11-07-2005 08:22 AM
Charles and Camilla: Current events 2: Sept - Oct 2005 Elspeth Current Events Archive 199 10-04-2005 04:45 AM
Prince Charles and Camilla Parker-Bowles 6: Feb - April 2005 Alexandria Current Events Archive 183 04-09-2005 07:54 PM
Prince Charles and Camilla Parker-Bowles 5: Nov 2004 - Feb 2005 Elspeth Current Events Archive 188 02-27-2005 09:48 AM




Additional Links
Popular Tags
birth carl philip charlene chris o'neill crown prince frederik 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 olympics ottoman poland pom pregnancy president komorowski prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince felipe prince floris prince maurits prince pieter-christiaan princess aimee princess anita princess beatrix princess charlene princess claire 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 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 06:35 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]