Run-up to the inquest into Diana's death

[Henri M.]

All of Al-Fayeds claims were denied:

1 - the chauffeur (in Al-Fayed's service!) was not drunk at all, it was a complot to kill Diana
2 - Diana was pregnant from Dodi, therefore they wanted to kill her
3 - Diana's last words were a declaration of love to Dodi

At 1: the chauffeur (in Al-Fayed's service!) had three times the maximum amount of alcohol in his blood, and DNA has proven it was the chauffeur's blood

At 2: the autopsy has learned that Diana was not pregnant at all

At 3: Frédéric Mailliez, the doctor who gave first assistance to Diana in that tunnel, declared she was unconscious, she moved her hands but had not said anything.

So, it was just:

+ drunk driving
+ high speed
+ dark slippery tunnel
+ no seatbelts
= asking for problems

The problem is that so many people simply can not believe that such an icon, such a beautiful lady, one of the world's most famous women, can die so unglamorous in a concrete tunnel. But helas...

 

[Jo of Palatine]

Well next week we should all have had a chance to read the 'key points' in the preliminary report and then those that firmly believe that she was killed, by whoever, can start shouting 'cover up!

The reason al Fayed keeps shouting 'murder', is because he can't accept that his driver, in his car, caused the deaths of his son and Diana, that the protection he offered them both, that night was totally useless, IMO.

You're right with Al Fayed, IMHO... it was his responsibility and he failed to protect them. I don't know how many books on Diana claim that the way the Al Fayed's have treated their employees made it possible that Henri Paul drove without anyone stopping him. Lest of all that poor excuse for a bodyguard.

So Al Fayed has to live with that responsibility and he searches for a way out on crying "murder". Anyone knows that a person who has a proof of whatever kind that it was murder would leave Al Fayed's office a rich man/woman, if he gave Al Fayed that proof, but noone turned up, so there simply is none! It'sa different with the Kennedy-killing: if there had been somebody like Al Fayed with these tons of money in the picture we would have heard the truth already. But noone really was interested in who shot Kennedy, thus no result. With Diana, at least Al Fayed and Scotland Yard (probably the RF as well) want to know, thus we will get the truth. And IMHo we will get to know that it really was a sad, sad accident.

 

[sirhon11234]

Well not everyone will be satisfied with the inquest's results. People who had believed that Diana's death was a result of murder might be disappointed. Will we ever know what really happened that night possibly or possibly not. But for now Diana's death was an accident.

 

[Jo of Palatine]

Will we ever know what really happened that night possibly or possibly not.

The thing is that you either believe the verdict or you don't. If you believe it, then yes, you will know what really happened. If you don't believe it, no, you won't ever know. That's the dilemma here. How will somebody know what's the truth if he/she did not investigate the case him/herself? You either trust those who investigated or you don't. There is no other way.

 

[BeatrixFan]

I think it's important to realise that Al Fayed has alot to lose. He wants a British passport - he's desperate for it. Now, the other problem is Al Fayed has been involved in some very dodgy dealings - questions in parliament etc. He's not only a social liability but a political liability and unfortunately, he doesn't put his point across well at all. He's generally regarded as a nutter.

 

[sassie]

It's also definitely possible that al Fayed saw 'Diana my daughter in law' as a means towards acceptability within the British Establishment. Since that didn't happen, he is using her the only way he has left-reminding the public constantly of the 'romance' between Diana and Dodi. Hence the 'pregnancy', the 'engagement', the statue at Harrods, etc.

I have compassion for al Fayed-to lose a child is a horrible thing-but the man is not rowing with all his oars in the water.

 

[karla64]

Charles to brief his sons on report into Diana's death

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-2496630,00.html

 

[sara1981]

A to Z of Princess Diana's Death
http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2-2006570125,00.html

Tests 'prove' Diana driver drunk
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6162041.stm

Report: Diana's Driver Was Drunk
http://people.aol.com/people/article/0,26334,1568450,00.html

Report: Princess Diana driver was drunk
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061210/ap_on_re_eu/britain_diana

Report: Diana's driver was drunk
http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/europe/12/09/britain.diana.ap/index.html

 

[Warren]

Charles to brief his sons on report into Diana's death
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-2496630,00.html

In this report al-Fayed is accusing the BBC of either being "very naive" or, upping the ante, "complicit in the ongoing coverup".
Obviously the tentacles of this conspiracy reach far wider than any of us have ever imagined.

 

[corazon]

for mohamed al fayed diana and dodi only was a business, we can know if diana really was in love with dodi or if yet loved the pakistani doctor of if she loved charles, we cant know, may be was casualitly that she die with dodi that night in paris

 

[Skydragon]

the statue at Harrods, etc.

I have compassion for al Fayed-to lose a child is a horrible thing-but the man is not rowing with all his oars in the water.

Yes it must be awful for him but, to put such a memorial up, the statue is awful, tacky, yuk.

I think you are right about seeing her as a means to an end. For years he has tried to buy into British society, then the government. He probably saw Diana as the 'door' to it all, that as the 'step grandparent' to the future King, he would finally have 'made it'. He was naive if he thought that anyone but the 'hangers on' would socialise with him. The man has definitely become even more 'unhinged', (he was always strange, he chose the wrong colour pink for his little castle and then blamed the painters. ), Now because he has been unable to get planning permission for one or other of his schemes, he is saying he will 'pull out of scotland'. Bloody good riddance.

 

[Australian]

American secret service agents reportedly bugged late British royal DIANA, PRINCESS OF WALES' telephone conversations on the night she died - without permission from their British counterparts.

http://www.cinemablend.com/celebrity/Princess-Di-Stalked-By-Secret-Agents-Before-Death-1972.html

AL FAYED: DI PROOF IS FAKED
By Susie Boniface

HARRODS boss Mohamed Al Fayed has hit out at a BBC documentary which says the crash that killed his son and Princess Diana was definitely accidental.

http://www.sundaymirror.co.uk/news/tm_headline=al-fayed--di-proof-is-faked-&method=full&objectid=18238578&siteid=62484-name_page.html​

 

[Madame Royale]

American secret service agents reportedly bugged late British royal DIANA, PRINCESS OF WALES' telephone conversations on the night she died - without permission from their British counterparts.

I'd certainly hope this was not the case.

 

[iowabelle]

Inquest into Death of Diana

I don't think it would be surprising at all, since she was advocating doing away with landmines, travelling to Pakistan and associating with Fayeds and Khashoggis. (I don't think she was personally doing anything wrong but Diana was not as cautious as she might have been.)

If it is true, though, I think this would certainly raise questions in her sons' minds about how much freedom/privacy they really have.

 

[sassie]

I think it's possible, but not anything more than a routine procedure. It's not a secret that the CIA bugs phones of a lot of 'high ranking' individuals. In this case, it's only relevant, I think, if there was something on one of those phone calls which indicated that Diana was afraid for her life or that she was aware of a murder plot. Obviously, there wasn't, or it would have come out by now.

It's a brouhaha to sell more newspapers at this point. Nothing more.

 

[Madame Royale]

It's not a secret that the CIA bugs phones of a lot of 'high ranking' individuals.

But the thing is that (if this is the case) they bugged the telephone line of Diana - Princess of Wales. I mean, we are talking of a member of the British royal family who hardly posed a security threat to the USA or her interests.

I'm sure M16 bugging the White House wouldn't go down too well, would it

 

[sirhon11234]

But the question is why ? Diana was a member of royal family and the mother of the future king of England. What would be the purpose to bug Diana's telephone. She was just very high profile Princess.

 

[BeatrixFan]

Who was meddling in very serious issues. The moment she started going anywhere near Palestine she was begging to be bugged.

 

[sirhon11234]

But she was in Pakistan on a humanatarian trip. Not a political one. I wonder if she was bugged as a result of her landmine campaign.

 

[BeatrixFan]

Any public figure carrying out humanitarian work can be seen as representing a country. Although her visit was a private one, the connotation could have been that this was the West (at least Britain) taking sides. And that's something that would need careful watching by all security services.

 

[sirhon11234]

But Charles and Camilla went to Pakistan last month. Is it possible that are being bugged by intelligent services now?

 

[BeatrixFan]

Thats different. They were official representatives of Britain. Diana wasn't but she may have been believed to be representing Britain by the authorities in Pakistan which could have led to serious difficulties.

 

[sassie]

But the thing is that (if this is the case) they bugged the telephone line of Diana - Princess of Wales. I mean, we are talking of a member of the British royal family who hardly posed a security threat to the USA or her interests.

I'm sure M16 bugging the White House wouldn't go down too well, would it

Well, actually, that wouldn't surprise me-MI6 bugging the White House. Bugging phone lines is routine for any security agency.

No, of course, Diana didn't pose a threat. But, it's possible that the the CIA wasn't the only ones bugging her phones, either. Fact is, as a member of the Royal Family, they and other agencies may have been doing it just as a routine matter of keeping track of her movements and future plans.

Security agencies have to get their information from somewhere. Informants, tapped phones lines, spies-isn't that all part of the security game?

 

[BeatrixFan]

And lets not forget that Diana did release stories to attract press packs (as do most people in the public eye).

 

[Oppie]

Well, actually, that wouldn't surprise me-MI6 bugging the White House. Bugging phone lines is routine for any security agency.

17 security agencies according to an episode of West Wing. (Bartlet For America)

Wouldn't surprise me if Charles and Camilla phones were bugged too whenever they were out of the UK. Any hotel phone would be bugged especially if you were staying at a well known hotel. Even I have had my phone bugged (not in Canada) and I am nobody special.

 

[sara1981]

But the question is why ? Diana was a member of royal family and the mother of the future king of England. What would be the purpose to bug Diana's telephone. She was just very high profile Princess.

she not part of HRH because of her divorces from Prince Charles in 1996 almost 10 years ago but HM Queen Elizabeth II strip her titles dues her divorces to Prince Charles but Diana and Charles been split since 1992 for 4 years but HM Queen Elizabeth ahead to processing divorces of Waleses but Diana dont like get divorces like her parents had it.

but Diana still known as Diana,Princess of Wales after her divorces or Princess Diana whatevers but no HRH dues Queen says but Diana can going in public called as whatevers names.

 

[sirhon11234]

Thanks, Sara1981 but I already know all about that HRH business. I was confused that the CIA would bug Princess Diana's phone.

But how did the CIA get access to Diana's phone in order to bug it.

 

[blackdaisies]

princess diana news addresses

Met protection 'would have prevented Diana's death'

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-23377730-details/Diana%20wouldn't%20have%20died%20if%20Scotland%20Yard%20had%20been%20protecting%20her/article.do


Diana coroner stood down because he is key witness

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=421547&in_page_id=1766&ito=1490


Diana verdict: An accident. But did US bug her calls?

http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/legal/article2062482.ece

 

[blackdaisies]

cover up

i dont believe the verdict. i think they proved she was murdered. why else were all the security cameras in the tunnel suddenly shut off in the tunnel just before the accident and why else was there a 2 hour ambulance drive to go 4 miles? these people are crazy. what about the video of henry paul not drinking for 3 hours before he got into the car? with that amount of alcohol and said drugs he used in his system, he wouldn't have been able to walk to the car let alone drive it. they are lieing.

of course everything the royal family does is spyed on by agents, but the sad part is they do it for tabloid money not for their protection. they are a bunch of dirtbags. i really don't see how they can lie in public and create such an unreality. it's not possible for any of the findings they say they have abling them to declare this an accident. i'm really dissappointed and i think tony blair is behind some of it. he's also behind the spy killings lately in the press. i wish they would impeach him.

 

[sirhon11234]

I don't know what to believe any more alot of things just don't add up. But there have been blood tests that has proven Henri Paul drunk that night and could have caused the accident. I don't believe that the prime minister or TRF had anything to do with the accident. The people who believe in a conspiracy now believe that Diana wasn't the original target Dodi was.