FAQ   Search   Memberlist   Usergroups   Register   Profile   Log in to check your private messages   Log in 
Diana's Murder - Latest / Analysis
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Next Level Forum Index -> General Discussion
  ::  Previous topic :: Next topic  
Author Message
Fintan
Site Admin


Joined: 18 Jan 2006
Posts: 7737

PostPosted: Sun Dec 10, 2006 9:28 am    Post subject: Diana's Murder - Latest / Analysis Reply with quote

Former Top Cop Whitewashes Diana's Murder

The UK establishment's hand-picked cover-up cop has decided
that the murder of Diana was an "accident." Big surprise!

It's all a bit reminiscent of the 9/11 issue. A lot of diversionary claims
are manufactured and then dismissed. These claims get all the media
attention and the really substantial issues are ignored. Like this one:

Quote:


"Sceptics of the official account question why a crucial witness, the driver
of a second car involved in the crash, has never been identified and how
it took nearly two hours to get Diana to a hospital just four miles away
."

BBC


This exposes the Stevens' inquiry as the farce it is:

Quote:
Jeweler Was Told To Lie In Princess Diana Case

December 6, 2006 - Maira Oliveira - All Headline News Reporter

London, England (BANG) - A key witness in the inquiry into the death
of Britain's Princess Diana recently claimed police threatened him to
change his evidence.


Jeweler Alberto Repossi - who claims he sold Diana's lover Dodi Al Fayed
an engagement ring the day before the couple were killed in a car crash
in Paris on August 31, 1997 - alleges he was put under pressure by
investigators to retract the statement he gave to Lord Stevens, who is
leading the inquiry.

There is speculation that investigators did not want evidence that Diana
and Dodi were to become engaged to be made public, as it would fuel
conspiracy theories championed by Dodi's father Mohammed Al Fayed
that the princess was murdered as part of a secret plot to prevent her
from marrying a Muslim.

Repossi told Britain's Daily Express newspaper, "These are things which I
am absolutely certain about. They warned me if anyone lied to Lord
Stevens - and anyone could include the prime minister or even the secret
service - then he had the power to get people sent to prison.

He added, "They kept repeating the warnings of the risk to my reputation
and the bad press coverage I would get. But despite all this, I was not
prepared to change what I'd said before because it was the truth."

Repossi's testimony - backed up by receipts and CCTV footage - reveals
Dodi and Diana picked a $305,000 emerald and diamond ring from a
range of engagement bands called "Did-Moi Oui" which means "Tell Me
Yes" at his Monte Carlo jewelry store in August 1997.

Dodi - the son of Harrods owner, Mohammad Al Fayed - asked for the
ring to be sent to Repossi's Paris branch so he could collect it on August30.

Repossi said, "I strongly support any attempt to determine exactly what
caused this terrible tragedy. Until now I thought I could play my part by
co-operating fully with the inquiry. But my treatment during the
interviews has convinced me that they are not interested in establishing
the truth.
"

He continued, "My real concern is that attempts were certainly made to
get me to change what I knew to be the truth. I believe they were doing
this in order to support theories or conclusions they had already arrived
at before they saw me. They only seemed interested in trying to show
me I was lying."

The investigation is expected to conclude that the crash was an accident
due to driver Henri Paul being under the influence of alcohol and driving
over the speed limit.

http://www.allheadlinenews.com/articles/7005768564


The Observer headlines a claim that US Intel was bugging Diana, and
pushes further down their story the revelations that her driver was
working for French Intelligence.

Quote:
US bugged Diana's phone on night of death crash

Mark Townsend and Peter Allen in Paris
Sunday December 10, 2006 - The Observer

The American secret service was bugging Princess Diana's telephone conversations without the approval of the British security services on the night she died, according to the most comprehensive report on her death, to be published this week.

Among extraordinary details due to emerge in the report by former Metropolitan police commissioner Lord Stevens is the revelation that the US security service was bugging her calls in the hours before she was killed in a car crash in Paris.....

Scotland Yard's inquiry, published this Thursday, also throws up further intelligence links with the Princess of Wales on the night she died. The driver of the Mercedes, Henri Paul, was in the pay of the French equivalent of M15. Stevens traced 100,000 he had amassed in 14 French bank accounts though no payments have been linked to Diana's death.

Stevens's conclusion is that Diana, her companion Dodi Fayed, and Paul himself died in an accident caused by Paul driving too fast through the Pont de l'Alma underpass in Paris while under the influence of drink. The car was being pursued by photographers at the time.

Tests have confirmed that Paul was more than three times over the French drink-drive limit and was travelling at 'excessive' speed. The inquiry will quash a number of conspiracy theories that have circulated since 31 August 1997, among them that Diana was pregnant. It also found no evidence that the princess was planning to get engaged to Dodi, son of Mohamed Fayed.

The Harrods tycoon believes that Paul's blood samples were swapped to portray him as a drunk in an elaborate cover-up by the establishment to stop Diana marrying Dodi, a Muslim.

Stevens is expected to concede that while there was a mix-up it was an accident and that the original French post-mortem which found that Paul was three-times over the French drink-drive limit was correct.

He is also expected to discount the role of the white Fiat Uno which struck Diana's car shortly before the crash, even though British police officers have failed to track down the vehicle which left paintwork on the black Mercedes.

The inquiry will support the findings of the original French accident inquiry in criticising the paparazzi as a possible reason for encouraging Paul to speed. The 'bright light' theory - the claim that the driver was deliberately blinded by a beam immediately before the crash - is also dismissed by Stevens.

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,1968664,00.html


Dodi's father Mohammed Al Fayed has forced them to hold the
inquest in public. But it's a stacked deck anyway, as he well knows.

Quote:
Al Fayed wins bid to have Diana inquest held in public

07.12.06

Lady Elizabeth Butler-Sloss has decided to hold the preliminary
hearings of the Diana inquest in public, a spokesman for the Judicial
Communications Office said today.


Dame Elizabeth Butler-Sloss, a former senior judge, has come out of
retirement to hear the inquests into Princess Diana and Dodi's deaths.

Mohammed Al Fayed, the father of Diana's lover Dodi who was also killed
in the 1997 Paris car crash, had threatened legal action over the matter.

A spokesman for the JCO said Lady Butler-Sloss sent a letter to
interested parties outlining her change of mind.....

"The reasons she had in mind that led her to conclude initially that the meeting should be held in private were entirely pragmatic - such as the size of the courtroom."

Matters that will be decided at the preliminary hearing include whether a jury will sit on the inquest.

If so, they would be made up of members of the Royal Household as Diana was still considered a member of the Royal Family when she died.

LINK


Let's leave the final words on this to Diana' words in her letter;
to Mohammed al-Fayed; and to Britain's former Spy Boss:

Quote:
Conjecture was further fanned in 2004 by revelations that Diana had written a letter to her former butler Paul Burrell 10 months before her death in which she said she suspected Charles was trying to kill her.

"This particular phase in my life is the most dangerous," the letter said, according to excerpts leaked to the British media. "My husband is planning 'an accident' in my car, brake failure and serious head injury."

Al Fayed's father Mohamed, multi-millionaire owner of the exclusive London store Harrods, has campaigned ever since the deaths for a full public inquiry to be held into the events.

"It is absolute black and white horrendous murder," he said.

However suggestions of a murder plot have been dismissed by witnesses, officials and royal commentators.

Dame Stella Rimington, Britain's one-time spy chief, totally dismissed suggestions there had been a sinister plot.

"It was a car accident and that is that. Basically all conspiracy theories
are mad
," she said in a newspaper interview.

Following Stevens' report, preliminary inquest hearings will take place in early January under Elizabeth Butler-Sloss, a former senior judge who has stepped out of retirement to replace Burgess. An initial decision to hold them in private was overturned last week.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/story.cfm?c_id=2&ObjectID=10414705


Last edited by Fintan on Mon Aug 07, 2017 6:49 am; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
MichaelC



Joined: 06 Jul 2006
Posts: 2041

PostPosted: Sun Dec 10, 2006 9:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

But just what DID happen on that night?

For the last 9 years I have heard lots and lots of accusations but not ONE logistical outline of what might really have happened that night.

Fintan, do you have a minute-by-minute likely scenario?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Rumpl4skn



Joined: 11 Feb 2006
Posts: 2950
Location: 36� 3'N x 86�40'W

PostPosted: Sun Dec 10, 2006 11:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well, I'm just a preipheral observer, but my first impression is... if it took 2 hours to get her to a hospital 4 miles away, then all you do is cause an accident in a particular area, and make sure the "emergency response team" is more interested in delivering her to the morgue than the hospital.

Has anyone investigated the EMT's (or whatever they call them in France) and if there were any anomalies regarding their activities that evening? They would certainly have to have been compromised in some way, and someone certainly would have a clue. You don't have to buy off every witness, just the ones you think have a conscience and/or friends in higher places who aren't payroll (a rapidly decresing commodity these days, I admit).

_________________
"No matter what happens, ever... there's ALWAYS at least one reason. And the top reason is ALWAYS money."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
MichaelC



Joined: 06 Jul 2006
Posts: 2041

PostPosted: Sun Dec 10, 2006 11:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

For example, 911 was the work of American intelligence operatives on American soil.

Wouldn't it be a bit(or very) difficult for British intelligence to pull something like 'Diana's murder' on foreign soil? I mean, it would take a lot of cooperation with for the most part dis-interested and possibly hostile French. And also, why would the French have cooperated at all with something like this? What's in it for them?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Rumpl4skn



Joined: 11 Feb 2006
Posts: 2950
Location: 36� 3'N x 86�40'W

PostPosted: Sun Dec 10, 2006 11:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

MichaelC wrote:
For example, 911 was the work of American intelligence operatives on American soil.

Wouldn't it be a bit(or very) difficult for British intelligence to pull something like 'Diana's murder' on foreign soil? I mean, it would take a lot of cooperation with for the most part dis-interested and possibly hostile French. And also, why would the French have cooperated at all with something like this? What's in it for them?

You mean France, the G8 member nation?

How or why would their intel cooperate? Confused

_________________
"No matter what happens, ever... there's ALWAYS at least one reason. And the top reason is ALWAYS money."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
bornfree



Joined: 28 Jan 2006
Posts: 509

PostPosted: Sun Dec 10, 2006 3:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Rumpl4skn wrote:
MichaelC wrote:
For example, 911 was the work of American intelligence operatives on American soil.

Wouldn't it be a bit(or very) difficult for British intelligence to pull something like 'Diana's murder' on foreign soil? I mean, it would take a lot of cooperation with for the most part dis-interested and possibly hostile French. And also, why would the French have cooperated at all with something like this? What's in it for them?

You mean France, the G8 member nation?

How or why would their intel cooperate? Confused


It would seem that gang members are asked to kill someone to stay in the gang. So France must kill Diana to stay in the G8. This also gives cover to the real G8 gang member who ordered the hit. Its mafia all round.

I'll get rid of your problem if you agree to get rid of one of mine.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MichaelC



Joined: 06 Jul 2006
Posts: 2041

PostPosted: Sun Dec 10, 2006 3:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I fail to see what importance Diana could have had to "G8 business".

I mean, she was just sort of an annoying character who was a pain in the ass for the British Royal family.

But cetainly no $$billions were hanging on whether she remained breathing or not.

I guess I just don't get it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Fintan
Site Admin


Joined: 18 Jan 2006
Posts: 7737

PostPosted: Mon Dec 11, 2006 3:49 pm    Post subject: An Engagement with Death Reply with quote

Quote:
MichaelC: I fail to see what importance Diana could have had to "G8 business".

I mean, she was just sort of an annoying character who was a pain in the ass for the British Royal family. But cetainly no $$billions were hanging on whether she remained breathing or not. I guess I just don't get it.


Ok, maybe other people also don't get it, so.....

An Engagement with Death

Imagine the effect of Diana going out with some "muslimaniac",
or even married to some "muslimaniac" like Dodi al-Fayed....

...just as the 9/11 "anti-Muslim Crusade" was gearing up to drop
thousands of tons of bombs on Muslim women and children.

Including napalm and even cluster bombs.

Imagine what Diana's stance on all this would have been.
Imagine the UK anti-war resistance that would spring up
as the most popular member of Britain's Royal Family
took on the military-industrial establishment.

It would have made the invasion of Iraq impossible.
It would have made the UK's involvement in the "crusade" impossible.

As I reported above:

Quote:
Jeweler Alberto Repossi - who claims he sold Diana's lover Dodi Al Fayed
an engagement ring the day before the couple were killed in a car crash

in Paris on August 31, 1997 - alleges he was put under pressure by
investigators to retract the statement he gave to Lord Stevens, who is
leading the inquiry.
http://www.allheadlinenews.com/articles/7005768564

When Diana picked out that engagement ring with Dodi, the prepared plan
was sanctioned and went into high gear. After a public announcement
of an engagement a hit would have been difficult --because the
suspicions of the British public would have make it a very risky move.
The Palace might have been burned. (I'm only half kidding.)

So, Diana picked out an engagement ring, and was dead within 24hrs.

That's how to describe this to anybody who doubts she was murdered.

"Diana picked out an engagement ring, and was dead within 24hrs."

Then connect the dots for them.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Rumpl4skn



Joined: 11 Feb 2006
Posts: 2950
Location: 36� 3'N x 86�40'W

PostPosted: Mon Dec 11, 2006 6:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

We sometimes have a tendency to underestimate how important public opinion is. The globalist perps don't just go off half-cocked and do whatever they want without public support. They court, sway, or manufacture public opinion to fit the plan.

They didn't pull the trigger on Iraq War I when they decided it was necessary. GHW Bush didn't just invade Iraq when he felt like it - he had to manufacture a picture of the Iraqi's as bloodthirsty, maniacal killing machines first. That was the purpose of the "Kuwaiti incubator deaths" lie - get get the American public to see the Iraqi military as a collection of ruthless baby murderers.

Once that psy-op was pulled - enlisting the Kuwaiti ambassador's daughter posing as an 'anonymous' nurse, giving her tearful, coached testimony before Congress - public opinion swelled, and the War was a go.

The Brits knew what was already on the table for 2002, and they couldn't have a positive Arab role model and his hugely popular pacifist Brit wife speaking out against the war. You remove the threat before it is revealed WHY it is a threat. Then it's just an unfortunate 'accident'.

_________________
"No matter what happens, ever... there's ALWAYS at least one reason. And the top reason is ALWAYS money."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
zak247



Joined: 13 Apr 2006
Posts: 949

PostPosted: Mon Dec 11, 2006 7:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

MichaelC wrote:
I fail to see what importance Diana could have had to "G8 business".

I mean, she was just sort of an annoying character who was a pain in the ass for the British Royal family.

But cetainly no $$billions were hanging on whether she remained breathing or not.

I guess I just don't get it.


Fintan is right on the money here.
They couldnt have the mother of the future King of England married to a swarthy Moslem.
These Anglophiles mean business.

Thats why they killed her and Dody.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fintan
Site Admin


Joined: 18 Jan 2006
Posts: 7737

PostPosted: Wed Dec 13, 2006 11:10 pm    Post subject: Diana: The 18 missing witnesses Reply with quote

Quote:
Diana: The 18 missing witnesses in 4m inquiry

13/12/06 - By John Twomey UK Daily Express

EIGHTEEN key witnesses have been ignored by the 4million Lord Stevens inquiry into the death of Princess Diana.

Their evidence to French police had raised several questions about the fatal crash in Paris.

But detectives working on the three-year inquiry – which will publish its findings tomorrow – didn’t interview them to gather fresh testimony.

The revelations come after the Daily Express revealed disturbing allegations from a crucial witness in the Diana probe who claimed that British detectives tried to pressure him into changing parts of his evidence.

The claims by jeweller Alberto Repossi – who insists Diana and Dodi were engaged when they died in the crash – have been dismissed by the Operation Paget squad.

Lord Stevens’ inquiry was set up to finally discover the truth behind how Princess Diana’s Mercedes, driven by Henri Paul, came to crash in the Alma tunnel in Paris on August 31, 1997.

Dodi’s father Mohamed Al Fayed has spent the past nine years mounting a determined campaign for the truth, spending millions of pounds uncovering fundamental flaws in the original French inquiry.

He remains convinced that the pair were murdered in a plot organised by the British Establishment, including the intelligence services.

One of the many theories put forward is that the Princess’s car was struck by another vehicle as it entered the tunnel under the River Seine.

And yesterday it emerged that one family which gave detailed statements to French police – but not to their British counterparts – told how they saw two large cars heading at speed towards the Pont de L’Alma underpass in the shadow of the Eiffel Tower.

Moments later, the vehicles disappeared into the tunnel and the family heard the screeching of brakes, the “scrunching” of metal, a first sickening impact and a louder bang followed by the haunting sound of a jammed horn.

As the witnesses looked down into the underpass, they saw the wreckage of the Mercedes car which was carrying Diana and Dodi slewed across the carriageway. But there was no sign of the second car.

The family also told how a taxi, following at a normal distance, stopped at the tunnel entrance but no-one got out.

They also recalled seeing a mystery man running straight past them and into the tunnel. The family, which has declined to be named, was interviewed by Captain Eric Crosnier of the Paris crime squad shortly after the crash. The family says it has given no other interviews.

Lord Stevens will present his findings at a press conference to the world’s media tomorrow.

The former Metropolitan Police Commissioner is understood to have concluded that Diana and Dodi died because their chauffeur Henri Paul was drunk and driving too fast.

Paul was also killed and Dodi’s bodyguard, Trevor Rees-Jones, was seriously injured but survived.

Harrods owner Mr Al Fayed suspects British intelligence officers were involved in “organising” the crash and covering up afterwards.

He fears the deaths were ordered because the Establishment could not bear the thought of the mother of a future king being pregnant with a Muslim’s child.

Last week, his lawyers forced the former senior judge in charge of the inquest to back down over plans to hold preliminary hearings in private. Lady Butler-Sloss said she was persuaded to reverse her decision because of “strong public interest in the case”.

But Mr Al Fayed’s victory has only fuelled suspicions that a cover-up is being attempted.

Statements made by the French family have been backed up by another witness, Clifford Gooroovado, 41.

He said: “The Mercedes car was driving behind another car. The car in front of the Mercedes was probably running at normal speed. The consequence was that the Mercedes probably accelerated so hard in order to pull out and overtake this car.”

Grigori Rassinier, who was also near the underpass, said in a statement: “There were a number of cars in the tunnel and it was certainly possible that there was one or more other cars travelling ahead of the Mercedes at the time of the crash.”

Mr Rassinier said he had been contacted by the Operation Paget squad last year and offered to travel to London to give a statement. But he claims he never heard from them again.

Last week, the Daily Express revealed how Monte Carlo-based jeweller Mr Repossi alleged he was put under pressure to change his story during lengthy interviews with officers from Lord Stevens’ squad.

The jeweller claims – backed up by receipts and CCTV footage from his Monaco showroom – that Diana and Dodi picked out a 230,000 emerald and diamond band from a variety of engagement rings in a prestigious range called Dis-Moi Oui – Tell Me Yes.

Dodi later asked for the ring to be sent to the Repossi store at the Place Vendome in Paris, which the jeweller opened especially so he could visit on August 30 – the day before the crash.

The fabulous engagement ring was later left at Dodi’s Paris apartment where he had planned to present it to the princess. Detectives from Lord Stevens’ team interviewed Mr Repossi three times and his wife once.

In the final meeting in July this year, officers told him that the jewellery was not an engagement ring. Mr Repossi said: “They warned me that if anyone lied to Lord Stevens then he had the power to get people sent to prison,” he said.

“They kept repeating the warnings of the risk to my reputation and the bad press coverage I would get. But despite all this, I was not prepared to change what I’d said before because it was the truth.”

The inquiry team vehemently denies any attempt to put pressure on any witness to tell anything other than the truth.

Sources close to Lord Stevens’ investigation yesterday suggested that the 18 witnesses may not have been spoken to because their original statements were perfectly adequate and there was no need to interview them again.

http://express.lineone.net/news_detail.html?sku=874
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Rumpl4skn



Joined: 11 Feb 2006
Posts: 2950
Location: 36� 3'N x 86�40'W

PostPosted: Thu Dec 14, 2006 9:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The spin last night on MSNBC's Fucker Carlson show was along the predictable lines that "this Princess Di Thing is all being blown out of proportion" because the "incompetant govt officials" mishandled the situation, and now the "conspiracy theorists" are out of control. Again.

This truly is the problem, you know. Normal, non-conspiratorial things happen every day, but because of the scourge of "govt incompetence" (see: 9/11, Iraq War 2, 7/7 Bombings, Waco, Katrina, et al) , those whacky conspiracy theorists get the wrong idea, and voila, we have a problem manufactured out of thin air (see: 'Manufacturing Out Of Thin Air', Fed, The). There's nothing untoward going on in high places, folks, we just simply have to get better at ignoring these feelings of unease. Conspiracies are not the enemy - the "real killers" are those delusional types who toss away their generationally-entrenched blind faith in higher power (see: God, Govt, TV, etc.) and waste their time trying to research things that everyone of normal mind has already accepted as "shit" that "happens". As Rodney King said: "Can't we all just move along?"*

Please give generously, and with your help and generous donations, the governments of the world can hopefully stamp out Conspiracy Theorism in your lifetime, making the world a more placid, less cynical, unquestionably unquestioned, spent-plutonium sandbox for all of God's chillun. Oh wait... we already do donate generously to that. Confused

(*Obviously, I was kidding about the Rodney King quote. Rodney King's famous quote was: "Ow! Ouch! Hey, stop it! Owwwww!")

_________________
"No matter what happens, ever... there's ALWAYS at least one reason. And the top reason is ALWAYS money."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Next Level Forum Index -> General Discussion All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
Page 1 of 8

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group

Theme xand created by spleen.