FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > President v Monarchy
President v Monarchy
Jump to: Newest in thread
 |
By *ssex_tom OP Man
over a year ago
Chelmsford |
The Queen has her diamond Jubilee and in the not too distant future Charles may be king. If there was a vote between Republic and Monarchy and if Reput then who would be the first President..
President Boris in the right place at the right time ? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I’d happily go to war on behalf of Her Majesty and take out every Republican . That’s my stance since Charles I copped it in 1649, happy with a constitutional monarchy - Bob |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I find it very suspicious that the royals seem to live so long compared to the rest of us
Really? "
queen mum queen her hubby even chucky have out lived all my elderly relatives so just going by personal experience here but yeah |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I find it very suspicious that the royals seem to live so long compared to the rest of us
Our last King Died at 56.like 80odd years ago "
70 years ago actually!
And still well under average life expectancy even then. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The Queen has her diamond Jubilee ...
That was in 2012. This year is the platinum jubilee.
President or Monarchy
Boris or Charles ?
"
I think Boris would be a better Royal than Charles. He's a bit of a Henry VIII throwback with those wives and parties. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"President or Monarchy"
Easy, monarchy.
Look at all the tourists that come over here to see Buckingham Palace and watch the guards trooping around. Would they do that for a UK president?
Look at the long line of foreign dignitaries wanting an audience with the Queen. Would they queue up to meet a president?
It helps the country enormously to have a person that can hold official state banquets to impress foreign leaders, without having to also engage in politics. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *amantMan
over a year ago
Alnmouth |
I think if I were to choose, I'd like to see a German-style non-executive President. We absolutely need a head of state but I neither believe in the nonsense of royalty, nor the point of a directly elected president. I believe entirely in representative democracy.
If you talk about tourism, people wouldn't stop coming if we were to become a Republic. If anything, more could come, more people visit France than the UK. Though that is by no means an endorsement of violent revolution.
As for an elected President, we would almost certainly elect an unsavoury president. We saw what damage that can do in the states and for what? Why give one individual that much power? It's just unnecessary and not a path that would be wise to follow. President Blair perhaps? Or Farage? While I would've quite liked Paddy Ashdown or Denis Healey, the reality of it is, the wrong person would end up getting the job.
I think Germany strikes a good balance in terms of its head of state, though like every other democracy, it has its issues too. Federalisation, separation of powers, PR...I could go on. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Firstly we need a written constitution that lays down the rights and responsibilities of every citizen.
I am not in favour of royal blood line as a head of state it’s just so Middle Ages in my view. Perhaps the non executive type of head of state is the answer and he or she is elected to office.
And.....there can never be true democracy in a society when the second chamber of government is an unelected body populated by class distinctions. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Would our President have to be British? The Royal Family come from German stock.
Macron of France ?"
Jurgen Klopp would be great, and it would make the Scousers sing the National Anthem.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"President or Monarchy
Easy, monarchy.
Look at all the tourists that come over here to see Buckingham Palace and watch the guards trooping around. Would they do that for a UK president?
Look at the long line of foreign dignitaries wanting an audience with the Queen. Would they queue up to meet a president?
It helps the country enormously to have a person that can hold official state banquets to impress foreign leaders, without having to also engage in politics."
Good Heavens. Rather superfluous reasons to have the monarchy over a presidency! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"President or Monarchy
Easy, monarchy.
Look at all the tourists that come over here to see Buckingham Palace and watch the guards trooping around. Would they do that for a UK president?
Look at the long line of foreign dignitaries wanting an audience with the Queen. Would they queue up to meet a president?
It helps the country enormously to have a person that can hold official state banquets to impress foreign leaders, without having to also engage in politics."
Playing the Devil’s advocate here and I’m not suggesting off with their heads.
France abolished their monarchy over 200 years ago (I believe) and it hasn’t affected tourism. It’s one of the most visited countries in the world.
Is it a strong enough argument to justify having a monarch? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *eroy1000Man
over a year ago
milton keynes |
"The Queen has her diamond Jubilee and in the not too distant future Charles may be king. If there was a vote between Republic and Monarchy and if Reput then who would be the first President..
President Boris in the right place at the right time ?"
What would this future president do? Would they not get to involved with politics like monarchs or be more like the American president? Apart from possibly being elected, what will be the difference |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Good Heavens. Rather superfluous reasons to have the monarchy over a presidency!
So which sort of President would you rather have, and what would be the benefits of having them?"
Well I would suggest a head of state should be elected not be installed as an accident of birth. An elected HOS would reflect the broad spectrum of the society he or she represents. No one can vote Andrew out the succession line it’s his birth right should he be called.
It’s all a bit too class divided for my liking. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Firstly we need a written constitution that lays down the rights and responsibilities of every citizen.
I am not in favour of royal blood line as a head of state it’s just so Middle Ages in my view. Perhaps the non executive type of head of state is the answer and he or she is elected to office.
And.....there can never be true democracy in a society when the second chamber of government is an unelected body populated by class distinctions. "
The UK is often said to have an ‘unwritten’ constitution. This is not strictly correct. It is largely written, but in different documents. But it has never been codified, brought together in a single document.
UK does have a constitution, to be found in leading statutes, conventions, judicial decisions, and treaties.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ackal1Couple
over a year ago
Manchester |
Get rid of the monarchy after Liz . She’s earned a quiet retirement .
Clear out the lords and finally get rid of our feudal class system which has held us back for decades.
Richard Attenborough for the first President. Everyone likes him and he’s non partisan ( maybe green leaning but not a bad thing)
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Firstly we need a written constitution that lays down the rights and responsibilities of every citizen.
I am not in favour of royal blood line as a head of state it’s just so Middle Ages in my view. Perhaps the non executive type of head of state is the answer and he or she is elected to office.
And.....there can never be true democracy in a society when the second chamber of government is an unelected body populated by class distinctions.
The UK is often said to have an ‘unwritten’ constitution. This is not strictly correct. It is largely written, but in different documents. But it has never been codified, brought together in a single document.
UK does have a constitution, to be found in leading statutes, conventions, judicial decisions, and treaties.
"
The nearest document to a written constitution is the Magna Carta. Your assertion that statutes, judicial dictates and treaties form an unwritten constitution is floored as those missives should be based on the constitution and bill of rights. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Get rid of the monarchy after Liz . She’s earned a quiet retirement .
Clear out the lords and finally get rid of our feudal class system which has held us back for decades.
Richard Attenborough for the first President. Everyone likes him and he’s non partisan ( maybe green leaning but not a bad thing)
"
Unfortunately poor Dickie went to that great stage in the sky some years ago. That said he was a lord and may still be sitting by the mace claiming his £300 a day attendance allowance no one would notice? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ackal1Couple
over a year ago
Manchester |
"Get rid of the monarchy after Liz . She’s earned a quiet retirement .
Clear out the lords and finally get rid of our feudal class system which has held us back for decades.
Richard Attenborough for the first President. Everyone likes him and he’s non partisan ( maybe green leaning but not a bad thing)
Unfortunately poor Dickie went to that great stage in the sky some years ago. That said he was a lord and may still be sitting by the mace claiming his £300 a day attendance allowance no one would notice?"
Ouch.
I stand corrected and hang head in shame . David is his name .
You may be right about Richard though.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Well I would suggest a head of state should be elected not be installed as an accident of birth. An elected HOS would reflect the broad spectrum of the society he or she represents. No one can vote Andrew out the succession line it’s his birth right should he be called.
It’s all a bit too class divided for my liking."
Part of the benefit of the monarchy is in having a head of state that doesn't actually have any real power. That allows us to have someone to charm and impress foreigners, without having to engage in diplomatic discussions with them.
If we voted in a president, then that person would become a representative of the people, and would be a political entity.
I don't really care about the royals. I'd be happy with having a random person picked each time, but that method wouldn't impress the rest of the world.
At least having the one family and primogeniture confers the weight of history, and allows us to have all that pageantry without looking stupid. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Firstly we need a written constitution that lays down the rights and responsibilities of every citizen.
I am not in favour of royal blood line as a head of state it’s just so Middle Ages in my view. Perhaps the non executive type of head of state is the answer and he or she is elected to office.
And.....there can never be true democracy in a society when the second chamber of government is an unelected body populated by class distinctions.
The UK is often said to have an ‘unwritten’ constitution. This is not strictly correct. It is largely written, but in different documents. But it has never been codified, brought together in a single document.
UK does have a constitution, to be found in leading statutes, conventions, judicial decisions, and treaties.
The nearest document to a written constitution is the Magna Carta. Your assertion that statutes, judicial dictates and treaties form an unwritten constitution is floored as those missives should be based on the constitution and bill of rights. "
Uncodified constitution is harder to understand, but they are written as I stated earlier. I have no issues seeing a written in to a single document. However, it doesn’t means it’s going to better then the status quo. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The Queen has her diamond Jubilee and in the not too distant future Charles may be king. If there was a vote between Republic and Monarchy and if Reput then who would be the first President..
President Boris in the right place at the right time ?"
president but not Boris |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *coptoCouple
over a year ago
Côte d'Azur & Great Yarmouth |
“Look at all the tourists that come over here to see Buckingham Palace and watch the guards trooping around”
Whatever the arguments for or against the monarchy, the “tourism” one is BOLLOCKS! Do tourists visit Hampton Court expecting to see Henry VIII? Or Stratford-upon-Avon thinking they might bump into Shakespeare? Stonehenge to see the Druids?
No studies have been made (nor ever will be) to establish whether revenue from “Royal Tourism” is greater or less than what it costs the tax-payer to keep them. And what then becomes the criteria for a good or bad monarch? Charles generated more tourist dollars per year than William but less than Queen Viktoria?
No, not the old tourism chestnut please… |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *coptoCouple
over a year ago
Côte d'Azur & Great Yarmouth |
"If we voted in a president, then that person would become a representative of the people, and would be a political entity"
Not necessarily: how many people could name the Bundespräsident or his party?
Or even France's Prime Minister? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *amantMan
over a year ago
Alnmouth |
I just think this debate will never end and it would be much more fruitful to turn our attention to the HoL. While I would never question the need for an upper chamber, what we have could be replaced with broad agreement of what a democratically-elected upper house could look like. Replacing the royals is akin to brexit, there are any amount of alternatives and some are certainly worse than what we have. Voting to replace them just opens up possibilities and there isn't an obvious alternative. A non-executive President would be my preferred option, though I'd even rather keep royalty than have President Johnson with the power Presidents have in places like the states. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"“Look at all the tourists that come over here to see Buckingham Palace and watch the guards trooping around”
Whatever the arguments for or against the monarchy, the “tourism” one is BOLLOCKS! Do tourists visit Hampton Court expecting to see Henry VIII? Or Stratford-upon-Avon thinking they might bump into Shakespeare? Stonehenge to see the Druids?
No studies have been made (nor ever will be) to establish whether revenue from “Royal Tourism” is greater or less than what it costs the tax-payer to keep them. And what then becomes the criteria for a good or bad monarch? Charles generated more tourist dollars per year than William but less than Queen Viktoria?
No, not the old tourism chestnut please…"
exactly that how does Paris Amsterdam Tokyo New York Rome do without a monarch |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I find it very suspicious that the royals seem to live so long compared to the rest of us
Really? queen mum queen her hubby even chucky have out lived all my elderly relatives so just going by personal experience here but yeah "
Rich eat well, don’t have to do manual labour, have access to best medical advice, can take holidays to relive stress etc.
Poor not so much, hardly rocket science. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Or as another alternative. How about a civil war. Winner takes the throne. That’s how they landed there in the first place, so why all of a sudden start voting?
Leave vs Remain? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
""If we voted in a president, then that person would become a representative of the people, and would be a political entity"
Not necessarily: how many people could name the Bundespräsident or his party?
Or even France's Prime Minister?"
Playing devils avocado . Why should we Brits care to know who the prime minster of France or the German equivalent. If it’s for pub trivia then I’d understand. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Or as another alternative. How about a civil war. Winner takes the throne. That’s how they landed there in the first place, so why all of a sudden start voting?
Leave vs Remain?"
if it was a vote you would still complain about the outcome tho lol |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Or as another alternative. How about a civil war. Winner takes the throne. That’s how they landed there in the first place, so why all of a sudden start voting?
Leave vs Remain?"
Since the UK's armed forces swear an allegiance to the Monarch I can see who would win that civil war.
Maybe that's not a bad idea after all.! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Or as another alternative. How about a civil war. Winner takes the throne. That’s how they landed there in the first place, so why all of a sudden start voting?
Leave vs Remain?
Since the UK's armed forces swear an allegiance to the Monarch I can see who would win that civil war.
Maybe that's not a bad idea after all.!"
Lol. Yes I remember the brainwashing about the flag and monarch! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Britain should never become a republic. I’d vote for the monarchy too.
Why? Are republics bad? "
Not as I am aware. But in the days of fuel poverty food banks and cuts in public spending can we afford the monarchy. If they were all paid the National minimum wage I’d say crack on but the figures in the sovereign grant are eye watering. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ackal1Couple
over a year ago
Manchester |
"Britain should never become a republic. I’d vote for the monarchy too.
Why? Are republics bad?
Not as I am aware. But in the days of fuel poverty food banks and cuts in public spending can we afford the monarchy. If they were all paid the National minimum wage I’d say crack on but the figures in the sovereign grant are eye watering."
Wait until you see the new Boris yacht., oh and his planes. We are a small country with a government pretending we are a global power . We no longer have an empire to rob but our government spend as if we do.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Britain should never become a republic. I’d vote for the monarchy too.
Why? Are republics bad?
Not as I am aware. But in the days of fuel poverty food banks and cuts in public spending can we afford the monarchy. If they were all paid the National minimum wage I’d say crack on but the figures in the sovereign grant are eye watering.
Wait until you see the new Boris yacht., oh and his planes. We are a small country with a government pretending we are a global power . We no longer have an empire to rob but our government spend as if we do.
"
The total Sovereign Grant for the last financial year was £82.2m - made up of a core grant of £49.3m and an extra £32.9m to help pay for the 10-year £369m refurbishment project of Buckingham Palace.
And we have food banks. Please tell me I am be simplistically naive when a family with a net worth of over a billion pounds is given this kind of money money ? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *eroy1000Man
over a year ago
milton keynes |
"Britain should never become a republic. I’d vote for the monarchy too.
Why? Are republics bad?
Not as I am aware. But in the days of fuel poverty food banks and cuts in public spending can we afford the monarchy. If they were all paid the National minimum wage I’d say crack on but the figures in the sovereign grant are eye watering.
Wait until you see the new Boris yacht., oh and his planes. We are a small country with a government pretending we are a global power . We no longer have an empire to rob but our government spend as if we do.
The total Sovereign Grant for the last financial year was £82.2m - made up of a core grant of £49.3m and an extra £32.9m to help pay for the 10-year £369m refurbishment project of Buckingham Palace.
And we have food banks. Please tell me I am be simplistically naive when a family with a net worth of over a billion pounds is given this kind of money money ?"
The sovereign Grant is between 15 to 25% of what the monarch pays the government beforehand. Basically the crown estate (owned by the monarch) pays its profits to the government who take between 75 and 85% and then pay back what's left which is called the sovereign Grant. If memory serves lately it's been the 25% due to the refurbished you mentioned. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Tonight's Football Result:
The Queen, 1. Liverpool, 0.
That'll teach 'em not to sing the National Anthem.  "
Coincidental that it would be Real (Royal) Madrid. A team with history to the Spanish monarchy. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Tonight's Football Result:
The Queen, 1. Liverpool, 0.
That'll teach 'em not to sing the National Anthem.
Coincidental that it would be Real (Royal) Madrid. A team with history to the Spanish monarchy. "
No coincidence, the Queen has many powers  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ackal1Couple
over a year ago
Manchester |
"Britain should never become a republic. I’d vote for the monarchy too.
Why? Are republics bad?
Not as I am aware. But in the days of fuel poverty food banks and cuts in public spending can we afford the monarchy. If they were all paid the National minimum wage I’d say crack on but the figures in the sovereign grant are eye watering.
Wait until you see the new Boris yacht., oh and his planes. We are a small country with a government pretending we are a global power . We no longer have an empire to rob but our government spend as if we do.
The total Sovereign Grant for the last financial year was £82.2m - made up of a core grant of £49.3m and an extra £32.9m to help pay for the 10-year £369m refurbishment project of Buckingham Palace.
And we have food banks. Please tell me I am be simplistically naive when a family with a net worth of over a billion pounds is given this kind of money money ?"
The land enclosures act stole the land from the people and gave it to those in favour who were mostly loyal to the crown for obvious financial reasons. What you have now is the descendants of that land grab ruling over us.
Why would they care about a few million to the crown. They have made billions from their theft and they’re not paying those millions to the crown. You are.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The land enclosures act stole the land from the people and gave it to those in favour who were mostly loyal to the crown for obvious financial reasons. What you have now is the descendants of that land grab ruling over us"
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"King Charles or president Tony Blair thats the choice ?"
The choice of a HOS should be determined by the people via free election every 5 years. The post should be salaried with a state residence.
What’s not to like |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"King Charles or president Tony Blair thats the choice ?
The choice of a HOS should be determined by the people via free election every 5 years. The post should be salaried with a state residence.
What’s not to like"
That's not an answer has to be King Charles end of. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"King Charles or president Tony Blair thats the choice ?
The choice of a HOS should be determined by the people via free election every 5 years. The post should be salaried with a state residence.
What’s not to like
That's not an answer has to be King Charles end of."
What’s Tony Blair got to do with it? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"King Charles or president Tony Blair thats the choice ?
The choice of a HOS should be determined by the people via free election every 5 years. The post should be salaried with a state residence.
What’s not to like
That's not an answer has to be King Charles end of.
What’s Tony Blair got to do with it?"
You have to ask ? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"King Charles or president Tony Blair thats the choice ?
The choice of a HOS should be determined by the people via free election every 5 years. The post should be salaried with a state residence.
What’s not to like
That's not an answer has to be King Charles end of.
What’s Tony Blair got to do with it?
You have to ask ?"
Seemingly so.
Please do explain? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"King Charles or president Tony Blair thats the choice ?
The choice of a HOS should be determined by the people via free election every 5 years. The post should be salaried with a state residence.
What’s not to like
That's not an answer has to be King Charles end of.
What’s Tony Blair got to do with it?
You have to ask ?
Seemingly so.
Please do explain?"
Blair was trying to be the EU leader,with his friends in lets say high places would be pushed to the front of the que |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I'll stick with the monarchy.
All you will get as a president is another stuffed suit politician, quite likely one that failed in real politics.
He/she will have little or no power as that would stay with parliament.
At least with the monarchy we get the history and a few trimmings.
Figurehead presidents are usually nonentities who are shuffled in on a "jobs for the boys" basis.
For example can anybody on here name the "president" (not chancellor) of Germany without looking it up?
I can't and I live there. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The Queen has her diamond Jubilee and in the not too distant future Charles may be king. If there was a vote between Republic and Monarchy and if Reput then who would be the first President..
President Boris in the right place at the right time ?"
Flipping heck! Has Joey Essex hijacked this account? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Good Heavens. Rather superfluous reasons to have the monarchy over a presidency!
So which sort of President would you rather have, and what would be the benefits of having them?
Well I would suggest a head of state should be elected not be installed as an accident of birth. An elected HOS would reflect the broad spectrum of the society he or she represents. No one can vote Andrew out the succession line it’s his birth right should he be called.
It’s all a bit too class divided for my liking."
Like Trump represented broad spectrum in US?? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Good Heavens. Rather superfluous reasons to have the monarchy over a presidency!
So which sort of President would you rather have, and what would be the benefits of having them?
Well I would suggest a head of state should be elected not be installed as an accident of birth. An elected HOS would reflect the broad spectrum of the society he or she represents. No one can vote Andrew out the succession line it’s his birth right should he be called.
It’s all a bit too class divided for my liking.
Like Trump represented broad spectrum in US??"
He won an election? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Britain should never become a republic. I’d vote for the monarchy too.
Why? Are republics bad?
Not as I am aware. But in the days of fuel poverty food banks and cuts in public spending can we afford the monarchy. If they were all paid the National minimum wage I’d say crack on but the figures in the sovereign grant are eye watering.
Wait until you see the new Boris yacht., oh and his planes. We are a small country with a government pretending we are a global power . We no longer have an empire to rob but our government spend as if we do.
The total Sovereign Grant for the last financial year was £82.2m - made up of a core grant of £49.3m and an extra £32.9m to help pay for the 10-year £369m refurbishment project of Buckingham Palace.
And we have food banks. Please tell me I am be simplistically naive when a family with a net worth of over a billion pounds is given this kind of money money ?"
exactly it’s fucking rank asif they need the money |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
