The Late Diana, Princess of Wales, News Thread 7: October 2007-June 2008

[TheTruth]

Lol, I'm not against that idea but the thing is that this guy didn't know Diana so keeping her close by having a lock of her hair is more likely to be fanaticism . I also heard that when Irish (I think that's irish but not sure) people bury someone, they put some locks of family members and friends in the coffin.

[zhontella]

WORLD EXCLUSIVE: Diana's Mr Wonderful Hasnat Khan gives his first ever interview | the Daily Mail

Excerpt: "He says he has been upset by many of the criticisms levelled at the woman he once loved, and believes the memorial fountain was a poor way to commemorate the life of someone who had such a great impact on so many. "My feelings are that creating a fountain is not at all near how you can remember a great person. You put great people up as high as possible. Look at Nelson. Look at Queen Victoria," he says.
"I know a committee decided it but that little fountain doesn't do her any justice.......................historically great humans aren't remembered like that."

"I think she did great work for the country and for people all over the world – not just in the UK but everywhere. I think that is important."

[sirhon11234]

A very loyal man he is.

[TheTruth]

I think it was the right time for him to speak. The years following her death were completely invaded by tell-all books, breaking revelations ; I can't remember a year when one single book related to Diana wasn't published. 2007 has been mostly in the mood of respect (except perhaps The Diana Chronicles by Tina Brown). The silence of Mr. Khan is truly amazing. Many people would have spoken under these circumstances and these terrible gossips which were sometimes impossible to cope with. I have great respect for this man as well as for Mr. Gilbey who never talked either.

[Skydragon]

Originally Posted by zhontella

believes the memorial fountain was a poor way to commemorate the life of someone who had such a great impact on so many. "My feelings are that creating a fountain is not at all near how you can remember a great person. You put great people up as high as possible. Look at Nelson. Look at Queen Victoria," he says.

Although I don't think the drainage ditch/water trough is at all appropriate for Diana, to compare her to Nelson or Queen Victoria, is rather silly.

If he thought so much of her, why did he drop her? By hiding in Pakistan, he is showing himself to be a coward, even in her death, unwilling to stand up for the woman he says he loved!

[TheTruth]

Originally Posted by Skydragon

Although I don't think the drainage ditch/water trough is at all appropriate for Diana, to compare her to Nelson or Queen Victoria, is rather silly.

If he thought so much of her, why did he drop her? By hiding in Pakistan, he is showing himself to be a coward, even in her death, unwilling to stand up for the woman he says he loved!

As much as I respect him for his silence, I don't understand either why he left. I agree that it's difficult to go through a tragic story again but it's rather easy to say he loved her after he ditched her in such a way. Let's be honest, even if Diana made him jealous because of her "love story" with Dodi he would never have come back to her.

[TheTruth]

Khan to NOT testify in Inquest :
Surgeon who romanced Diana says he won't attend her inquest - Yahoo! News UK

[ysbel]

Originally Posted by Skydragon

If he thought so much of her, why did he drop her? By hiding in Pakistan, he is showing himself to be a coward, even in her death, unwilling to stand up for the woman he says he loved!

I don't think Khan's type of love was the knight in shining armor type. My guess is that his work with heart patients on death's door was so stressful that he didn't want a type of relationship with a 'damsel in distress' that he had to defend from her detractors all the time.

That does not mean that he did not care for Diana deeply. It's possible that he did care for her good qualities but that for his own self-preservation he decided to keep himself distant from the more troubling aspects of her life.

In my opinion, that is a healthy attitude to have and if Diana had had more people like that around, she may have been more motivated to curb some of her more destructive tendencies.

But I'm not impressed with his comment about the fountain. It is I agree not in keeping with his dignified silence of before and is totally unnecessary.

[zhontella]

Originally Posted by ysbel

But I'm not impressed with his comment about the fountain. It is I agree not in keeping with his dignified silence of before and is totally unnecessary.

I always thought of that fountain as a couple drainage ditches, and if the Windsors had any influence in its selection, then you have to hand it to them for their sense of humor.

[zhontella]

Originally Posted by Skydragon

By hiding in Pakistan, he is showing himself to be a coward, even in her death, unwilling to stand up for the woman he says he loved!

If he wanted to hide in Pakistan, he would have moved there sooner than to wait almost 10 years after Diana died before moving there. Plus his parents are getting elderly -- why wouldn't he want to live nearer to them? It's his home base.

[Skydragon]

Originally Posted by ysbel

I don't think Khan's type of love was the knight in shining armor type. My guess is that his work with heart patients on death's door was so stressful that he didn't want a type of relationship with a 'damsel in distress' that he had to defend from her detractors all the time. --SNIPPED-- But I'm not impressed with his comment about the fountain. It is I agree not in keeping with his dignified silence of before and is totally unnecessary.

I meant the news that he had moved himself back to Pakistan to avoid having to refuse to testify at the inquest.

Strange that he chose to speak to the Mail, I wonder if he has been paid for this non revelatory article.

[Skydragon]

Originally Posted by zhontella

I always thought of that fountain as a couple drainage ditches, and if the Windsors had any influence in its selection, then you have to hand it to them for their sense of humor.

The decision to spend the money from the Diana Fund had nothing to do with the Windsors, it was decided by a committee that included such notable people as Burrell, Monkton, Spencer & of course her sister, all of whom believed it is exactly what she would have wanted.

I'm not sure if they meant the fountain or the controversy.

[Chimene]

Originally Posted by Skydragon

I meant the news that he had moved himself back to Pakistan to avoid having to refuse to testify at the inquest.

I think his reason may be quite simple: he does not want to have to testify against someone he once cared about. He already knows that Diana was flawed, that's why he did not stay with her. Whose purpose would his testifying serve? I respect him for at least showing the woman some sympathy, but he's exaggerating with the QV comparison, of course.

Originally Posted by Skydragon

Strange that he chose to speak to the Mail, I wonder if he has been paid for this non revelatory article.

Your guess is as good as mine there.

[anbrida]

Originally Posted by Chimene

I think his reason may be quite simple: he does not want to have to testify against someone he once cared about. He already knows that Diana was flawed, that's why he did not stay with her. Whose purpose would his testifying serve? I respect him for at least showing the woman some sympathy, but he's exaggerating with the QV comparison, of course.

If he just intended to show "some" sympathy, why he would have to do that by "exaggerating" with the QV comparison. If he thought Diana was more flawed than good, why he would have said so many good words for her. That is not logical. If in my mind I just have "some" sympathy to one person, I would not "exaggerate" the compliment to that person. If I have to testify against one person under the law, I would not talk to a newspaper, saying how wonderful that person was. I would just shut up and say nothing.

[Chimene]

Originally Posted by anbrida

If he just intended to show "some" sympathy, why he would have to do that by "exaggerating" with the QV comparison. If he thought Diana was more flawed than good, why he would have said so many good words for her. That is not logical. If in my mind I just have "some" sympathy to one person, I would not "exaggerate" the compliment to that person. If I have to testify against one person under the law, I would not talk to a newspaper, saying how wonderful that person was.

That's one way of looking at it and perhaps you're right, but I just tried to understand where he could be coming from, which is why I used the word "may".

Originally Posted by anbrida

I would just shut up and say nothing.

I agree with you. I'm left only to guess, so you're right again my thinking is not logical.

[zhontella]

Originally Posted by Skydragon

........................ all of whom believed it is exactly what she would have wanted.

I'm not sure if they meant the fountain or the controversy.

Touché! No wonder poor Diana was paranoid. Her closest and dearest gave her a controversial drainage ditch as a memorial, believing it to be exactly what she would have wanted.

Originally Posted by Skydragon

..........Burrell, Monkton, Spencer & of course her sister...........

Well, I think Burrell was probably no real friend, and neither was the plant Monkton. Spencer who? And her sister -- McQ? I got the impression none of Diana's family were her friends -- if they were, she would have never married Charles.

[zhontella]

'Princess Diana preferred men with back hair,' says former police chief | the Daily Mail

'Princess Diana preferred men with back hair,' says former police chief

Does anyone but me see how this article by the Lord Stevens makes a total farce out of the entire 3 year / $10 million Paget Report? Either that or Lord Stevens had one too many gin and tonics when he called the Daily Mail!

"A friend, Adrian, has filed a complaint with the Press Complaints Commission, which I'm posting here with his permission."

-------------------------------------------------------------------
In response to the Mail on Sunday article, I have now submitted the
following complaint to the UK's Press Complaints Commission:

##

I wish to complain about this article on the following basis:

1. There is no evidence of accuracy for this report. It has been
ascertained, many years ago, that Diana found men with hairy backs
unattractive.

2. The Mail on Sunday has published an article which distorts the
public perception of a popular national identity - Diana, Princess of
Wales.

3. The article shows conjecture, not fact. There is no defined source
for these allegations, and no attributable citations.

4. By also noting that the men with whom it is known Diana shared
affecionate relationships do not have hairy backs, the newspaper has
strongly implied that Diana has engaged in a more promiscuous sex
life than is currently public knowledge, thus damaging her reputation.

5. It also implies that Diana had a sexual fetish not part of any
knowledge and this claim is damaging to her reputation.

6. By also printing a photograph of an excessively hairy back
alongside a library image of Diana, Princess of Wales, they have
attempted to build a misleading psychological connection between the
two unrelated images.

7. Even if this story were accurate, the assertions printed are an
intrusion into Diana's privacy and, if she were alive, she would have
grounds to complain.

8. Many members of the public are still grieving for a huge public
identity, especially in light of harrowing evidence heard at the
inquest into her death. One must assume that the inquest is also
difficult for her sons, Princes William and Harry. Therefore, this
article intrudes on grief by defaming the deceased in the most
disrespectful manner.

9. This story is not in the public interest. It is a tasteless and
false intrusion into the life of a national and global figure who is
now deceased and unable to defend themselves.

10. Most newspapers have, since 1997, curtailed writing obscene
stories about Diana, Princess of Wales. I believe that the Mail on
Sunday must be made an example of in this instance to prevent a harsh
precendent in defamation of national, deceased figures.

11. Resolution: I suggest that the Mail on Sunday apologise for the
story, acknowledge the offence caused to the public as evidenced in
the paper's own website comments and donate suitable sums to Diana's
charities at the time of her death: Centrepoint, Royal Marsden and
Great Ormond Street Hospitals, Leprosy Mission, National AIDS Trust
and the English National Ballet. In addition, I suggest that the
Landmine Survivors Network should also be a beneficiary of reprimand
for this rather grotesque "story".
-------------------------------------------------------------------

[Skydragon]

Originally Posted by zhontella

Well, I think Burrell was probably no real friend, and neither was the plant Monkton. Spencer who? And her sister -- McQ? I got the impression none of Diana's family were her friends -- if they were, she would have never married Charles.

I'm sorry, Charles Spencer & Sarah McCorquodale, from what I recall another of the culprits was Vivienne Parry. The final choice between two designs, was taken by Tessa Jowell, the minister for culture at the time!

[zhontella]

'Diana Chronicles' author Tina Brown talks in Palm Beach on princess' car accident, paparazzi

"It's a great tragedy that a woman who achieved so much will be fixed in the public memory in that last moment of folly," Brown said.

-----------------------
It always amuses me when these so-called journalists have to have the last word on Diana and all they reveal is their own megalomania. Fixed Folly -- the folly is fixed? Who is she trying to convince. Earth to Tina Brown, can you Hear Me?: That is not how most people remember Diana, sad to say.

[gfg02]

What if Diana HAD married the love of her life, Hasnat Khan? We imagine what her life could have been

What if Diana HAD married the love of her life, Hasnat Khan? We imagine what her life could have been | the Daily Mail