Was Princess Diana Murdered?

[garinda]

Originally Posted by Boeing Guy

No doubt that will be explained away as a Double or Tripple Bluff, or maybe 'that's what they would expect us to do...." type thing or some other.

Personally I love the ignore any rebuttal, such as No Seat Belts being worn by any occupant although the right hand seat front passenger survived, thanks to Mercedes Benz Airbags. Of course it then follows if the Rear Right hand seat passenger had been wearing a seatbelt she would have survived a very survivable car crash.
Or the issue with the French emergency services in particular The SMUR and the fact they treat emergencys different to most of the rest of the world ( dammed French!)
But of course no one said she was not killed, but you get slated if you question a opinion and back that up with some facts.

Perhaps it was all some eleborate suicide, and she'd planned it all herself.

She had teased the press, a short time before whilst in the south of France, that they were in for a big suprise.

That'd be quite a feat, for a girl with only one O-level....in hamster care.

[jaysay]

Originally Posted by Boeing Guy

No doubt that will be explained away as a Double or Tripple Bluff, or maybe 'that's what they would expect us to do...." type thing or some other.

Personally I love the ignore any rebuttal, such as No Seat Belts being worn by any occupant although the right hand seat front passenger survived, thanks to Mercedes Benz Airbags. Of course it then follows if the Rear Right hand seat passenger had been wearing a seatbelt she would have survived a very survivable car crash.
Or the issue with the French emergency services in particular The SMUR and the fact they treat emergencys different to most of the rest of the world ( dammed French!)
But of course no one said she was not killed, but you get slated if you question a opinion and back that up with some facts.

I have to say that Diana had every right to a life, just as Charles had, lets face it it wasn't a secret he was knocking Camilla off while he was married, none of this would have happened if he had been allowed to marry her in the first place, its obvious that the establishment HAS LEARNT ITS LESSON, with William being allowed to marry a woman of His choice

[susie123]

Originally Posted by jaysay

I have to say that Diana had every right to a life, just as Charles had, lets face it it wasn't a secret he was knocking Camilla off while he was married, none of this would have happened if he had been allowed to marry her in the first place, its obvious that the establishment HAS LEARNT ITS LESSON, with William being allowed to marry a woman of His choice

Very well put, John. Totally agree.

[garinda]

Originally Posted by kestrelx

The issue is and why I brought it up - it's the Queens Diamond Jubilee and they are all out waving their little flags. I'm left wondering if the system at what ever level had the mother of the 2 Princes bumped off and everyones Oblivious to it!

The issue is; if Diana was alive, would she be a problem to this Royal Charade??? I think she probably would have been a problem to them and that is one motive for it to have happened. My gut feeling tells me she was, more than any other conspiracy theory! The poll say 72% yes - so a lot of people agree.

Whatever her beef with Charles, Diana was raised an aristocrat, and was an ardent monarchist.

She didn't want to rock the boat, and destabilise the system.

She wanted her son to become King, even if she didn't want her ex-husband to sit on the throne.

Diana certainly wasn't a republican.

[susie123]

Originally Posted by kestrelx

The issue is and why I brought it up - it's the Queens Diamond Jubilee and they are all out waving their little flags. I'm left wondering if the system at what ever level had the mother of the 2 Princes bumped off and everyones Oblivious to it!

The issue is; if Diana was alive, would she be a problem to this Royal Charade??? I think she probably would have been a problem to them and that is one motive for it to have happened. My gut feeling tells me she was, more than any other conspiracy theory! The poll say 72% yes - so a lot of people agree.

So you think she was murdered 15 years ago to prevent her causing problems at the Diamond Jubilee - which given the queen's age it was not a certainty she would get this far and it would ever happen. 72% of people (that's out of 25 voters on Accyweb) like to think she was murdered but I'm not sure they would agree with that reason

[jaysay]

Originally Posted by garinda

Whatever her beef with Charles, Diana was raised an aristocrat, and was an ardent monarchist.

She didn't want to rock the boat, and destabilise the system.

She wanted her son to become King, even if she didn't want her ex-husband to sit on the throne.

Diana certainly wasn't a republican.

Well I for one haven't voted in this inane poll, but your right about Diana, Rindi, she despised Charles because of the way she'd been treated and would have moved the earth if she thought she push William to the front at his expense

[garinda]

Originally Posted by jaysay

I have to say that Diana had every right to a life, just as Charles had, lets face it it wasn't a secret he was knocking Camilla off while he was married, none of this would have happened if he had been allowed to marry her in the first place, its obvious that the establishment HAS LEARNT ITS LESSON, with William being allowed to marry a woman of His choice

She was used, as some virginal broodmare.

She was young, naive, and as the product of a broken home, hopeful that her marrriage to the Prince of Wales would last forever, unlike her own parents' union.

She had every right to a private life, after it was clear her husband had never loved her.

I've seen with my own eyes some of what she put up with after her divorce.

If any dick head with a camera had called my Mum a slut, a slag, or worse, in the hope of getting a good picture to flog, I'd have put their lights out.

[kestrelx]

Originally Posted by susie123

So you think she was murdered 15 years ago to prevent her causing problems at the Diamond Jubilee - which given the queen's age it was not a certainty she would get this far and it would ever happen. 72% of people (that's out of 25 voters on Accyweb) like to think she was murdered but I'm not sure they would agree with that reason

Naa I mentioned the Diamond Jubilee as an example - but I meant as a generalization. Royal divorces at the level are a rarity - I just can't see how it would have been for her with Camilla and Charles getting re-married etc. The the kind of infuence Diana would have over her sons military activity when she was campaigning against land mines and that may have lead to other issues relating to the arms dealers providing the weapons based in the UK. Don't you think that is a conflict of interests, a threat to the Royal family.

Could she have become an embarassment; for example on the front page of the Sun; Harry out in Afghanistan on a tour of duty! Then over on the front page of the Independant, Diana campaigning against arms dealers selling weapons over in some far flung dictatorship! I'D THINK THAT WAS TOTALLY UNACCEPTABLE TO THIS COUNTRY! (in their view not mine!")

[susie123]

Originally Posted by kestrelx

Naa I mentioned the Diamond Jubilee as an example - but I meant as a generalization. Royal divorces at the level are a rarity - I just can't see how it would have been for her with Camilla and Charles getting re-married etc. The the kind of infuence Diana would have over her sons military activity when she was campaigning against land mines and that may have lead to other issues relating to the arms dealers providing the weapons based in the UK. Don't you think that is a conflict of interests, a threat to the Royal family.

Charles and Camilla did not marry until several years after Diana's death by which time Diana herself would probably have remarried and moved on or become even more mentally unstable than she probably was and been confined to some sort of institution.

[garinda]

She's dead.

It was sad.

As it is when anyone snuffs it prematurely.

Who really still cares how she died, besides her immediate family?

I doubt mulling it over on Accy Web is going to throw any new light on the matter, if umpteen inquests, and investigations failed to do so.

[kestrelx]

Originally Posted by susie123

I don't think Barry George would be too pleased to hear that no one has been prosecuted for that murder. OK there is no conviction at the moment but George was tried and convicted but the conviction was quashed after three appeals. He was then tried again and acquitted.

Well it would appear that her death was a deliberate "Professional Hit" the person who did it may have been on a motor bike or something - left no traces and vanished - the Police then framed Barry George as they have several other people over the years!

[kestrelx]

Originally Posted by garinda

I don't have to remember, being an atheist.

He was just some nice hippy, who's had a very successful P.R. campaign carried out in his name, in the years following his death.



I can't explain the grief we saw after Diana's death.

Perhaps some people have never experienced the untimely death of someone they knew personally, and like JFK, or Elvis, because of the media, felt some connection to a person they never knew.

Like I said, it was all very odd to witness, but can't imagine it happening again.

I never cried about Diana - felt shocked but it never turned to tears. Witnessed the phenomena of fields of flowers outside the palace and saw people lining Whitehall and Westminster the night before her funeral, setting up sleeping bags and camping cookers etc so they could have a few comforts while they waited.

It's easy to explain the grief; she was a member of the Royal Family that's why - and due to her "cute" factor and the few things she did for charity etc - she became a talisman for all the martyrs across the land! - to vent their grief in floods of tears and bouquets of flowers.

[Margaret Pilkington]

However you saw Princess Diana(and everyone has their opnions)......she connected with 'ordinary' people....something that wasn't notable in other members of the senior Royals.......she brought a breath of fresh air to the Royal family...almost modernising it.

She did not deserve to be treated in the way that Charles treated her. He basically used her as a brood mare.......which is Ok if you know that is what is happening (and are happy to comply)....I don't think Diana knew it....and the alarm bells should have been ringing at the time of their engagement when charles was asked about 'love' and he gave some ludicrous reply....she should have run a mile right then, but she didn't.....and who knows what mental tactics were used on her in the early days of the marriage......in fact, who really knows the truth about all of the scandals and things that went on long before she died.
She died in tragic circumstances.......maybe some of it was her fault(she wasn't, allegedly, wearing her seat belt - how true do we know this assertion to be......just because it is what we are told doesn't automatically make it the truth...as in many other instances.
She died.....and that is it. I am reluctant to speak ill of the dead(it must be a generational thing) however, I would make an exception in Tony Blairs case.

[kestrelx]

Originally Posted by Margaret Pilkington

However you saw Princess Diana(and everyone has their opnions)......she connected with 'ordinary' people....something that wasn't notable in other members of the senior Royals.......she brought a breath of fresh air to the Royal family...almost modernising it.

She did not deserve to be treated in the way that Charles treated her. He basically used her as a brood mare.......which is Ok if you know that is what is happening (and are happy to comply)....I don't think Diana knew it....and the alarm bells should have been ringing at the time of their engagement when charles was asked about 'love' and he gave some ludicrous reply....she should have run a mile right then, but she didn't.....and who knows what mental tactics were used on her in the early days of the marriage......in fact, who really knows the truth about all of the scandals and things that went on long before she died.
She died in tragic circumstances.......maybe some of it was her fault(she wasn't, allegedly, wearing her seat belt - how true do we know this assertion to be......just because it is what we are told doesn't automatically make it the truth...as in many other instances.
She died.....and that is it. I am reluctant to speak ill of the dead(it must be a generational thing) however, I would make an exception in Tony Blairs case.

Very well said Margaret! Particularly the point about her not wearing a seat belt that could have been made up as you say, also that Henri Paul was drunk. The length of time it took to investigate it - didn't a witness say they saw a white Fiat flash a light at the car and pass it and I saw on a program that a white Fiat was found burnt out in some woodlands.

[Margaret Pilkington]

I am not saying that this happened,(all I'm saying is it is possible) but just say she was found in a condition where she could have been saved by medical intervention....but that wasn't what the 'powers that be' had in mind.......she could have been terminated by an injection of some substance.......but hey, we won't ever know because she was embalmed......her blood was drained out of her(against French Law) so no toxicology tests could ever be performed.

There are things(if you believe the books and the media) that just do not add up.
So it isn't really surprising that the conspiracy theories abound.
My gut feeling(though I haven't voted) is, that she was bumped off.
Dead pricesses tell no tales and cause no further problems