If only the driver had been a muslim then he almost certainly wouldn`t have been drink driving and Diana would still be alive .

you cant believe the crash was caused by the driver being drunk,if you look at all the facts the evidence clearly points to the fact someone had her killed,all the motive was there and to be honest i totaly agree she had to go

Originally Posted by twt

you cant believe the crash was caused by the driver being drunk,if you look at all the facts the evidence clearly points to the fact someone had her killed,all the motive was there and to be honest i totaly agree she had to go

Enquiry after enquiry have gone over the whole thing its very simple a car driven by someone who was well over the drink drive limit crashed ....killing henri paul, Diana and Dodi the inquest will come to the same conclusion.

you are probably right about the outcome of the inquest,but you have to consider it is possible she was murdered,do you not agree she could not be allowed to marry Dodi ?

I agree, she could not have been allowed to marry Dodi becuase of the effect it would have on the royal families future.

Originally Posted by twt

you are probably right about the outcome of the inquest,but you have to consider it is possible she was murdered,do you not agree she could not be allowed to marry Dodi ?

The only person saying they were likely to marry is Mohamed Al Fayed he says this because it helps with the ridiculous story he has come up with to try and divert attention from the simple truth that one of his employees while drunk caused the death of his son and Diana ....as conspiracy theories go its a shocker.... Prince Philip/MI6 death squad ! You could have come up with something a tinsy winsy bit more believable couldn't you ?

Originally Posted by TheLegalEagle

I agree, she could not have been allowed to marry Dodi becuase of the effect it would have on the royal families future.

I agree that, if Diana was ever entertaining the though of marrying a Muslim, then she was incredibly stupid.

I agree that, if that were the case, there must have been many a sigh of relief at her death.

I think it highly unlikely that the event that caused her death was a plot, but,.there was a survivor to the crash, her bodyguard. Nothing has ever been heard from him, he disappeared into obscurity soon after.
This alone is enough to make people smell a rat.

I am sure that there was a contingency plan involving our security forces that would have eliminated Dodi at least had they announced an engagement.

Originally Posted by twt

you are probably right about the outcome of the inquest,

Hi,

it is indeed probable that the inquest, based upon all the evidence, will arrive at the obvious conclusion reached by all prior inquiries and establish that the chauffeur drow the car at an illegal speed beyond his ability to control the Mercedes 600 and lost control smashing it at high speed into an imovable concrete pillar. That neither of the back seat passengers had seat belts on and she was lying with her head in his lap led to her being crushed as her partner was thrown forward at speed due to immediate deceleration.

The crush injuries led to the rupture of one or more major blood vessels internally - an injury that was unsustainable but survivable, to some extent, until moved - which inevitably led to immediate and fatal blood loss.

Originally Posted by twt

but you have to consider it is possible she was murdered,

There being absoluitely no evidence to support this fantasy - to keep making such a comment does rather undermine the individual putting it forward. There was never one shred of evidence to support the fantasy and in the intervening years not one shred of evidence has been produced.
Further there was absolutely no circumstantial evidence that would have made it either logical to effect her death nor any method more ridiculous to use than that which is claimed!

Originally Posted by twt

do you not agree she could not be allowed to marry Dodi ?

Firstly one only has the claims of one clearly obsessed berieved Father that this was even the slightest possibility. There is not one shred of evidence to support his fancifull claims.
When one considers that Edward VIII married the divorced social climbing Wallace Simpson who was well known for her prowess at felatio and was latched onto the particularly stupid and frequently drunk King whilst conducting a relationship, far from clandestine, with a used car salesman. Their marriage was effected!
Consider the marriage of her brother to a model of no social status.
Consider the fact that Diana's husband has been permitted to marry his doxy after a prolongued adulterous relationship whilst they were ALL married.
These marriages have all taken place - without fancifull and rather poorly thought through and incredibly badly executed execution the circumstances of which are so amateur as to ONLY satisf the tittle tattle of the ill informed and the prurient exploitation of the gutter press.

Had Diana married her cat - it is unlikely that ANYONE would have flinched, whether the cat was Muslim, jewish or even a satanist.

Consider who her Father married!!

Now consider the deliberate efforts of the NWO & seemingly Common Purpose to undermine the substantive superstitions of the past seeking to introduce fear as the new 'religion' be its gods SARS, Bird Flu, Pandemic, Climate Change, F&M or Global Warming.

What could aid the proletariate chavvery of the scum that has risen in governance as politicians better than Diana marrying, in default of her cat, the son of an Egytian of dubious morality, integrity and plausibility?

Regards,
Greg L-W.

I think Royality played a part, I think with their throne under threat they could be quite ruthless.

Originally Posted by King Fisher

I think Royality played a part, I think with their throne under threat they could be quite ruthless.

Hi,

do you think the moon is made of cheese and that the landings were filmed in a shed at district 72.3/4s too - as there is no evidence whatsoever either actual or circumstantial to uphold such fantasies!

Where in lay a threat to the monarchy?

Even an idiot or an amateur would endeavour to effect a hit with no control of ANY of the variables and acting on an offchance.

Sorry but get real!

Regards,
Greg L-W.

Originally Posted by Albion 69

If only the driver had been a muslim then he almost certainly wouldn`t have been drink driving and Diana would still be alive .

Pretty ironic lol.

I believe this 'theory' that she was killed off, personally. I don't think England would have been ready to accept Dodi. Ugh, politics, the throne.. it's all a dirty business.

I THINK SHE WAS KILLED BY WILL CARLINGS EX WIFE WHO WANTED REVENGE ON DIANA FOR THE OUTLANDISH WAY THE PRINCESS HANDLED HER HUSBANDS EBBING TOOL TO THE POINT OF BURSTING.

Originally Posted by nicky mondiego

I THINK SHE WAS KILLED BY WILL CARLINGS EX WIFE WHO WANTED REVENGE ON DIANA FOR THE OUTLANDISH WAY THE PRINCESS HANDLED HER HUSBANDS EBBING TOOL TO THE POINT OF BURSTING.

At least thats a bit more believable than Al Fayeds ridiculous tale

I have little interest in the Royal family but one thing strikes me about this story. I have read that Prince Charles and his father are supposedly implicated in the death of Diana. However, this is discounted out of hand, afterall how could they kill the mother of their sons, grandsons respectively?
My point, and one which I have never seen mentioned, is that William and Harry are clearly not Prince Charles' sons. Harry is the spitting image of James Hewit and William looks very much like one if his mother's earlier conquests. Certainly neither look remotely like their alleged "father".
This being the case, the original reason the royal family can not be involved is simply unfounded and in fact Diana's obvious indiscretions could actually be a motive!

So by your logic are we going to start denying people's paternity just because they do not look like their fathers ? I know conspiracy theories are fun for people to indulge in, but you have to have rather more evidence to support you than that.

I could be entirely wrong, I am just surprised no one in the media or anywhere else appears to have questioned the paternity of the princes. Diana is known to have had several affairs and it seems like a big coincidence that her sons just happen to look very like two of her partners, and not at all like prince Charles.
Perhaps it is just too awkward a situation to deal with. If Charles is not the father, where does that leave William's succession and moreover the future of the royal family?

After 12 years and we are still no nearer the truth!