yes. ive always believed that there was something not quite right about the way diana died. there was controversy towards the end of her marriage to charles, then the divorce and her meeting non-english men. i believe her relationship with dodi was serious enough, and there could well have been the prospect of talk about marriage even if they were'nt officially engaged. if she was being tapped by US security services which has been proved, whose to say the british were'nt doing the same. i think that there was a real fear from those in authority that she would marry dodi, and they were not prepared for that to happen. certainly no offspring of his into the royal family. they can say what they like, but anyone i have spoken to feel that her death was no accident, and the british intelligence were involved. its easy enough to say henri paul was drunk conclusively as blood tests prove it etc, but how does anyone know that wasn't switched for sure? if they wanted to make something disappear im sure they could. who's to say she wasn't pregnant? higher sources would never let something like that be revealed, can you imagine the scandal! noone will ever really know the truth, but there will always be doubts in my mind. i certainly do not believe it was a straightforward accident, merely caused by henri's drinking and speeding. then this mystery car? only now this final report comes out they make a suposition that it could have been some journalist or whatever. doesn't wash. everyone knows charles wanted to be with camilla, but i think it was more the threat of having the fayed's and any future offspring as lineage to the throne that was the royal families threat. it could never happen!
they could not say what really happened if it was not an accident, so after all this time and nearly £4 million pounds later they only confirm the mystery. it doesn't sit right!
if a national paper did a poll, i bet you would find that alot of people doubt the 'accident theory'.
2006-12-15 10:52:25
·
answer #1
·
answered by emzc 4
·
5⤊
2⤋
No I really dont believe it's a whitewash. Diana was elevated to near immortal status so when she died it was 'oh how could she just die like that in an accident, there must have been a conspiracy to get rid of her...blah blah etc etc'. The fact was the driver was very drunk, he'd taken drugs too, they werent wearing seatbelts (except for the survivor), so when they hit the concrete pillars at 60 mph with the French paparazzi behind them, she became with her companion another rta. But because it's diana and because a man (dodi's father) gone mad through grief refuses to accept the ordinariness of the incident, he and thousands of others have convinced themselves it was a secret plot to get rid of them. Quite frankly I'm sick of still hearing about it nearly a decade later. Let her rest in peace and give her boys a break.
2006-12-15 11:44:00
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
2⤋
I think it is a diversion.
Something other than what anyone ever talks about happened after the crash which was, indeed, as accidental as it seemed and seems. That's not what I have a problem with.
My suspicions concern the reports which everyone forgets, if they ever knew about them, that Diana didn't die in the crash but only once she was taken to hospital and had been behind closed doors for a several hours with no-one saying anything about her condition during that time. Her bodyguard's amnesia is far too convenient, too.
I was working night shift when it happened and the radio reported every scrap of information they could get at the time. When I finished my shift and went home to bed, she had survived the crash. No one, at that time, had considered her injuries might be life threatening which is why there was no great rush to get her to a hospital immediately after. She'd worn a seatbelt and it saved her life. She didn't die. The body shipped back to the UK was a Jane Doe junkie corpse disguised to look like her. After all, she wasn't really THAT distinctive looking, and it's not like it needed to look 'lifelike'.! Diana herself, meanwhile was slinking off to S.E. Asia to live incognito like she'd been wanting to do for ages, anyway.
Since then, there's been the tsunami and I reckon she must have been on one of the obliterated beaches at the time cause right after that happened, Charlie got much bolder with plans for the rest of his life. He didn't dare before because he knew she wasn't really gone.
2006-12-15 13:44:36
·
answer #3
·
answered by Frog Five 5
·
1⤊
2⤋
curiously, Prince William became defended by ability of Britain's Ministry of Defence Sunday after landing a Royal Air tension helicopter at his female pal's homestead throughout the time of a practise consultation. The MoD mentioned the exercising became an agreed part of his practise as an RAF pilot and gave him the possibility to prepare a ability needed to flying in wrestle zones. the latest landing on April 3 were "totally approved." in accordance to the information, battlefield helicopter crews mechanically prepare landing in fields and limited areas far flung from their airfields as a considered necessary part of their practise for operations. those notably honed qualifications are used on an universal basis in conflict zones mutually with Iraq and Afghanistan. It extra that when the helicopter landed, it became on the floor for 20 seconds and no person have been given on or off. The exercising became "a recurring practise sortie that executed needed practise aims.
2016-12-11 09:54:52
·
answer #4
·
answered by vannostrand 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
It was a foregone conclusion that it would be a whitewash....
People say about the bodyguard wearing a seat belt and surviving, but this guy was being paid to protect her so why did he allow her to get into a car which was to be driven by someone who was allegedly stoned out of his mind on drugs and booze....
Nothing adds up.
2006-12-15 19:47:41
·
answer #5
·
answered by sarch_uk 7
·
2⤊
1⤋
i think the report was a whitewash to protect charles and the other members of the royal family that were involved with her murder!
2006-12-17 18:52:01
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
Yes I do, and I agree that the most obvious reason might have been her relationship with Dodi, but I have an open mind as to who else might have wanted her dead. She was a figurehead for campaigns which had they been successful would have meant the loss of millions of dollars for certain commercial organisations. Just think of her interest in the anti-landmine campaign. This report will not bring closure to the speculation.
2006-12-15 11:38:39
·
answer #7
·
answered by 1feather 2
·
3⤊
2⤋
Too many people involved to have it completely whitewashed. On the other hand, we will never know for sure. It isn't logical they would have sped that fast to get away from cameras. Something happened, we will never know. One of the greatest people to have married into the Royal line died. That is the fact that we really have to come to deal with.
Charles "That Cheeky Lad"
2006-12-15 10:36:55
·
answer #8
·
answered by Charles-CeeJay_UK_ USA/CheekyLad 7
·
3⤊
4⤋
We all knew what the answer would be - we'll never know the truth. Whatever happened, it's all controlled if they want it controlled. Look at the Saudi bribes scandal investigation - stopped. Why? Because the government wanted it stopped. Just like that. Don't you just love democracy?
2006-12-15 10:39:30
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
6⤊
2⤋
Totally a whitewash.
Report release on the day to draw attention away from the 'cash for peerages' affair. Good distraction. Well done Mr Blair.
2006-12-15 10:38:32
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
6⤊
3⤋