UK Sceptics Please Help - Princess Di

[Foolmewunz]

CNN here (Hong Kong) ran a story on the anniversary of the death. Maybe 25% on remebrances and 75% on conspiracy.

I can only locate opinion blogs on the subject, and Wikipedia seems to have left it up in the air.

Is there a "Gravy" out there breaking down these theories into manageable components? I'm really having trouble wrapping my arms around this and I'd appreciate any source material anyone could direct me towards.

I live amongst a lot of British ex-pats, and have been a little surprised to hear a number of them espouse belief in what I had considered to be a CT. The most popular argument seeming to be 'the Royals did it'.

The only investigative piece I saw was the one on Discovery Channel. If you could get past the pandering* of the voice-over announcer, it actually did a pretty good job of debunking almost everything that the CTers were rallying behind.

*Pandering? The documentary was pretty good, as I mentioned, but the producers seemed to think they needed to spike the interest levels. After each segment, heading into commercial break, the voice-over would say something like, "So - the sounds heard that night clearly could have been just the echo in the tunnel..... BUT WAS THAT ALL?" Woooooooo. It was pretty pathetic - I kept wondering if they bought a good documentary and then futzed around with it.

[fsol]

The Daily Express newspaper in the UK will every once in a while lead with "Shocking new Evidence in Diana crash!" They just can't leave it alone for some reason.

http://www.express.co.uk/

[brodski]

The Daily Express newspaper in the UK will every once in a while lead with "Shocking new Evidence in Diana crash!" They just can't leave it alone for some reason.

http://www.express.co.uk/
It sells papers, and the headline is slightly more interesting than "Diana still dead after 9 years- exclusive" ;)

[Shrinker]

I'm afraid I don't have details but I saw a very interesting documentary in the UK about this. They picked over all the claims and counter-claims and found the CT severely lacking, and (surprise surprise) founded on misquotes and distortions. The conclusion they reached was that the driving force behind all the conspiracy theories is Mohammed Al Fayed (sp?). They claimed that he was unwilling to face the guilt of having given them a drunk driver and so was desperately trying to pin blame on anyone else who came by. They showed how he had spent millions doing 'investigation' and making Loose Change style documentaries.

The documentary was probably shown on UK Channel 4, maybe as part of the Secret Histories series, but I can't be sure of that.

[mrfreeze]

If you happen to be able to remember the title of that at some point let me know, the g/f has been bugging me about this particular one for a while, and since I don't give a damn about the royal family I had nothing to throw at her to discredit it.

[Shrinker]

I think it was this
http://www.channel4.com/life/microsites/D/diana_conspiracy/

The blurb mentions an interview with the head of the investigation. I do remember a segment like that, and it was very revealing. ie. he didn't believe the things CTists were saying he believed.

[Mancman]

The most popular argument seeming to be 'the Royals did it'.


Yeah, apparently M16 carried it out because Diana was going to marry and/or was rumoured to be pregnant by Dodi Al Fayed, and the royals didn't want to be associated with a muslim.

Another mad theory I've heard is that she was murdered by a consortium of corporations that manufacture landmines, as she had campaigned against their use in third world countries. :boggled:

[sophia8]

If you happen to be able to remember the title of that at some point let me know, the g/f has been bugging me about this particular one for a while, and since I don't give a damn about the royal family I had nothing to throw at her to discredit it.
Try this thread (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=448272#post448272)

[walthrup48]

The Daily Express newspaper in the UK will every once in a while lead with "Shocking new Evidence in Diana crash!" They just can't leave it alone for some reason.

http://www.express.co.uk/

God, if it was "once in a while" it might be bearable but it's closer to a front page article every week, excluding the "new revelations!" banner splashes advertising smaller articles which feature inbetween. See what I mean (http://www.bigdaddymerk.co.uk/mailwatchnew/?cat=5)

I know of two Diana death conspiracy programmes that are rebroadcast infrequently. There's the channel 4 doc mentioned above (repeated earlier this week as it happens) and the Sky version (Who Killed Diana? Sky 3 tonight, 11pm).

Edit: I've just noticed that I've got a copy of the Diana Conspiracy in my "to watch" pile. I'll post a breakdown of the prog later tonight.

[Darat]

The Daily Express newspaper in the UK will every once in a while lead with "Shocking new Evidence in Diana crash!" They just can't leave it alone for some reason.

http://www.express.co.uk/

"once in while"!? Understatement of the week I think! Today's headline (noticed when I was filling the car up) "Justice for Diana" with big photo of her (before she died).

[brodski]

"once in while"!? Understatement of the week I think! Today's headline (noticed when I was filling the car up) "Justice for Diana" with big photo of her (before she died).
Just wait until next year :(

[Foolmewunz]

......M16..... :boggled:

Well Prince Charlie himself wins this argument for me, even amongst bleary-eyed CTers in a pub! Nothing like a little irreverant mockery to back a drunk down from a dumb debating point.

Them: "The Queen had it done 'cuz she couldn't stand the embarassment..."
Me: To the tune of "If I Were a Rich Man"..... "I wish I was a Tam-pax...." "Yeah, if the Queen killed Di, what's she gonna do to Camilla - have her evaporated?"

Thanx thus far. I was kinda hoping, like I said, that you had a Gravy out there who'd just had enough of this crap and had shredded the bits into smaller bits. I'll go scrounging around some of the Who Kille Our Rose sites. There's always someone ready to debunk. You're English, after all!;)

[Gord_in_Toronto]

I did a little bit of research shortly after her death on "pyschic" predictions of any problems predicted for her on that date. The best I could find was one that Charles would have a "bad hair day" on that day. I e-mailed my comment to the UK association of psychics (or what ever it is) and never got a response.

If the silly [Rule 8] had been wearing she seatbelt, she probably would be with us today.

Gord
-----------

[sleahead]

I ......If the silly [Rule 8] had been wearing she seatbelt, she probably would be with us today.

Gord
-----------

I was once asked, on another forum, if I believed Diana had been assasinated. I replied no and that it is a very strange assasination attempt that can be foiled by simply wearing your seatbelt. Within about a week afterwards, the Daily Express ran a "Diana's seatbelt sabotaged?" story. They must be watching me!

[walthrup48]

The programme points the finger squarely at Fayed for perpetuating the conspiracies surrounding Diana's death. Fayed apparently believes that the Royal Family had her bumped off, unable to accept that Willim and Harry could have a Muslim as a stepdad.

Fayed's claims that are examined in the prog:

Dodi and Diana were about to get engaged.
They were planning to buy a house together.
Diana was pregnant.
Henri Paul's blood samples were switched or tampered with.
There were inconsistencies in the carbon monoxide levels of Henri Paul's blood.
A flash seen before the accident could have contributed to its cause.
The untraced Fiat Uno was part of an assassination plot.
The ambulance took too long to get her to hospital.
More time should have given to the examination of the tunnel before it reopened.

I'll post more details later today.

[tkingdoll]

Bearing in mind that we will probably never know the truth behind that night's events, and bearing in mind that this particular tragedy only involved a few people, I'm not entirely convinced there's any harm in the Diana conspiracy theories. But maybe that's just my anti-monarchy bias creeping in. Maybe deep down I'm hoping if people believe it wuz the Queen wot dunnit, that's one step closer to abolishing her status.

[sillyhead]

I ran across some "interesting" stuff while roaming about (I can't say it was research, because it wasn't) reading stuff about the Gosch kid. And now I can post urls!!

http://www.rumormillnews.com/RAYE_LET_TO_MALACHI.htm


"That fact that he is openly living with another woman while being married to me is not`my main concern right now. Another, even more sinister aspect has crept into this sordid tale.
Someone is leaking information to an investigator in Chicago stating that an intelligence unit based in Bristol, England was behind the murder of Princess Diana. It is clear to me that someone is trying to set up my husband and his girlfriend as the assassins of Diana."


Of course, this guy was also involved in October Surprise, "transporting whites," a lot of money laundering, test-piloting seeecret aircraft, highly skilled at mind control since a child, and the heir to a very complicated joining of two Royal Families. Oh, and he's one of Faction II, which is the Illuminati (I think. I'm a bit saturated at this point). Anyhow, fun to read. (:

[fsol]

God, if it was "once in a while" it might be bearable but it's closer to a front page article every week, excluding the "new revelations!" banner splashes advertising smaller articles which feature inbetween. See what I mean (http://www.bigdaddymerk.co.uk/mailwatchnew/?cat=5)

I know of two Diana death conspiracy programmes that are rebroadcast infrequently. There's the channel 4 doc mentioned above (repeated earlier this week as it happens) and the Sky version (Who Killed Diana? Sky 3 tonight, 11pm).

Edit: I've just noticed that I've got a copy of the Diana Conspiracy in my "to watch" pile. I'll post a breakdown of the prog later tonight.

Shows how much atttention I've been paying then.

[Shrinker]

Bearing in mind that we will probably never know the truth behind that night's events, and bearing in mind that this particular tragedy only involved a few people, I'm not entirely convinced there's any harm in the Diana conspiracy theories. But maybe that's just my anti-monarchy bias creeping in. Maybe deep down I'm hoping if people believe it wuz the Queen wot dunnit, that's one step closer to abolishing her status.

People cling to their CTs for different reasons. Hoping the Monarchy will abolish itself is one that, as you imply, is quite harmless. However I used to work with a muslim guy who used to pass around the 'killed because she was converting to islam' quite frequently. He'd got it from his muslim friends, and if his visible anger was anything to go by thos guys were cooking up an awful lot of resentment over virtually nothing. I'm sure you can see how misinformation like that could be used to manipulate impressionable young muslims.

[valis]

People cling to their CTs for different reasons. Hoping the Monarchy will abolish itself is one that, as you imply, is quite harmless. However I used to work with a muslim guy who used to pass around the 'killed because she was converting to islam' quite frequently. He'd got it from his muslim friends, and if his visible anger was anything to go by thos guys were cooking up an awful lot of resentment over virtually nothing. I'm sure you can see how misinformation like that could be used to manipulate impressionable young muslims.

Actually it is understandable why people stick to these theories. At least a plausible motive can be found in this case. The next King being raised in a Muslim household is not a totally absurd reason for a assination plot.

Similarly when an avowed communist that defected to the USSR and then returned to the US shoots the president, it is only natural to look for something fishy.

I am not saying that there is any proof just that you can at least construct a plausible scenario.

Unlike certain other CTs that I can't see any coherant reason for.

[Darat]

Actually it is understandable why people stick to these theories. At least a plausible motive can be found in this case. The next King being raised in a Muslim household is not a totally absurd reason for a assination plot.

Similarly when an avowed communist that defected to the USSR and then returned to the US shoots the president, it is only natural to look for something fishy.

I am not saying that there is any proof just that you can at least construct a plausible scenario.

Unlike certain other CTs that I can't see any coherant reason for.
The Queen can legally control how the heirs to the throne are educated and so on.

[valis]

The Queen can legally control how the heirs to the throne are educated and so on.

I am sure she can.

However I can picture where there might be a tad bit of resentment when the Princess dumps the Prince and takes up with a wealthy Muslim. People have killed over a lot less.

I am not saying the royals did it. I am saying it at least is a plausible reason.

[Soapy Sam]

There is a movie about to be released , starring Helen Mirren as the present Queen Elizabeth (not to be confused with QE1 of England, also recently played by Mirren.)
I expect all manner of covert publicity for the film, which will probably involve stirring this particular pot of golden muck yet again.

[tkingdoll]

People cling to their CTs for different reasons. Hoping the Monarchy will abolish itself is one that, as you imply, is quite harmless. However I used to work with a muslim guy who used to pass around the 'killed because she was converting to islam' quite frequently. He'd got it from his muslim friends, and if his visible anger was anything to go by thos guys were cooking up an awful lot of resentment over virtually nothing. I'm sure you can see how misinformation like that could be used to manipulate impressionable young muslims.

Yes, you're right. I didn't think of it like that, but it is a propoganda tool. Interesting perspective, thanks!

[StewartP]

For the same reason that our human brians have evolved to recognise pattern, we cannot accept that important people can have ordinary mundane deaths.

If a Parisian family dies in a car crash on the periphique it's just a statistic. A figure as large as Diana can't just die in a drink/drive crash. It's too banal. So we try to make up for it by inventing CTs.

Elvis can't just die of drugs and dietery disorder, its too sordid, too trailer park trash for the King.

Marilyn Monroe can't just die of depression and drink.

We seek epic ends for our epic celebs.

[valis]

For the same reason that our human brians have evolved to recognise pattern, we cannot accept that important people can have ordinary mundane deaths.

If a Parisian family dies in a car crash on the periphique it's just a statistic. A figure as large as Diana can't just die in a drink/drive crash. It's too banal. So we try to make up for it by inventing CTs.

Elvis can't just die of drugs and dietery disorder, its too sordid, too trailer park trash for the King.

Marilyn Monroe can't just die of depression and drink.

We seek epic ends for our epic celebs.

Again, just to beat a dead horse. Monroe was having or had in the past affairs with the President, his brother and a powerful organized crime figure. It would not be absurd to think about the people who would be better off with her dead.

The problem comes when you claim things to be true based only on the fact that you can create a plausible sounding scenerio for them.

[Ersby]

Fortean Studies did a pretty comprehansive review of the conspiracy threories. (I can't remember which volume)

The idea that Diana would've had to convert to Islam doesn't really stand up since Dodi's previous non-muslim wife didn't have to.

[CptColumbo]

Does anyone remember the name of the dcoumentary that talked to British Stand-up comics, who were censored regarding any Diana material? They had one who read the lyrics to "Candle in the Wind," and asked what they had to do with Diana. I think I saw it on A&E in the US.

[Sword_Of_Truth]

The conspiracy theories surrounding Princess Dianas death are slightly more plausible than other theories surrounding certain other recent events.

This, if for no other reason, that in light of the thousand odd year history of the English Crown, it wouldn't exactly have been an unusual thing. :p

[Dog Town]

Any CT that could plaus be in the few, is poss. Di, hell... easy! But as stated above, risky to rely on a seat belt! The Mob took down JFK, no doubt in my mind! Grew up in Big D!

[NeilC]

You have to admit there are some very odd things about the investigation.

[Darat]

You have to admit there are some very odd things about the investigation.

I don't know which oddness you are referring to but I remember at the time some of the apparent oddness was probably just because the French do some things in a different way to us and have a very different legal system. Also I remember at the time some confusion caused by the fact that France has public officials with the same title (Judge comes to mind) as some UK public officials but they have quite different responsibilities, duties and authority then their UK equivalent.

[brodski]

The conspiracy theories surrounding Princess Dianas death are slightly more plausible than other theories surrounding certain other recent events.

This, if for no other reason, that in light of the thousand odd year history of the English Crown, it wouldn't exactly have been an unusual thing. :p

Yes it would be, the traditional course of action would have been a publicly declared order to murder, none of this secret conspiracy crap. :p

[Brainache]

Yes it would be, the traditional course of action would have been a publicly declared order to murder, none of this secret conspiracy crap. :p

Slight derail here, but did I see a report or something not too long ago about the skeletons of two small boys found walled up inside one of the royal castles ? The castle was being renovated or something and the implication was that they were the remains of some usurper's nephews.
It is entirely possible that I am misrembering(is that a word?) this.

[NeilC]

No I mean genuinly odd.

Obviously I'm only going from newspaper accounts like most people but as I understand it the pathologist and toxicologist who carried out Paul's post-mortem are both beng investigated. Could be unsubstantiated media rumour.

[The Atheist]

Bearing in mind that we will probably never know the truth behind that night's events,

Sorry, tkingdoll, that's a shocker.

Given Diana's prominence, I'd say it's probably the best-documented car crash in history. I believe we know exactly what happened that night, step by fateful step. Cause and effect at every step of the way.

The conspiracy theories surrounding Princess Dianas death are slightly more plausible than other theories surrounding certain other recent events.

Same applies. What part's plausible?

As mentioned above - she was in a car driven by a drunken bum and she didn't wear a seat-belt. The bodyguard in the front seat who did wear his seat belt survived the crash. I'm just amazed that someone managed to fit a CT around the death, there is very little room to manoeuvre.

I've found that people who are most susceptible to CT regarding Diana are women who were fervent admierers of Diana when she was alive. There are truly unbelievable numbers of otherwise quite sane Kiwi chicks who ascribe to the CT version of events.

Much as I give two hoots about anything to do with the Royal Family (unlike the Royle Family, who are great), I did see Diana as having the same "x factor" which makes one pretty woman a superstar and the other a waitress. Women wanted to be Diana's friend. People hurt when a loved one dies and especially when it's a loved one whom you never met it's an extremely attractive and compelling idea that someone is to blame - other than the logical place for the blame - on the woman who let a pissed-up alco drive her at 100mph.

In response to the OP, this is one of those things where there's nothing you can say or do to convince people that the CT around Diana's death is as false as a two-bob watch. The offical "investigation" is, I believe coming to an end shortly. The results will confirm exactly what we already know about the crash, the CTists will scream "cover-up" and she'll be back on Page 1. brodski summed it up perfectly with his headline: "Diana Still Dead", it's just not going to sell, while a conspiracy involving UK's current most polpular migrant type is going to sell the roof off.

The entire Diana Marketing Industry is not about to let a little thing like death stand in the way of making money out of her. Give it another 50 years and people will be calling for beatification.(if Anglicans do that?)

[NeilC]

I also couldn't give a toss about Diana or the royals but the investigation into her death was bizarre.

Nobody seems to be able to explain the level of carbon monoxide in Paul's blood. He supposedly died instantly. So how did it get into his body? There seems to have been at the least a cock up with blood samples.

[Mancman]

Slight derail here, but did I see a report or something not too long ago about the skeletons of two small boys found walled up inside one of the royal castles ? The castle was being renovated or something and the implication was that they were the remains of some usurper's nephews.
It is entirely possible that I am misrembering(is that a word?) this.

Aye. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Princes_in_the_Tower)

[Brainache]

I reckon it was this bloke who killed those princes coz he's got an evil name:

John Howard, later the first Duke of Norfolk of the current creation, was a claimant to the estate of the Mowbray Dukes of Norfolk. He was given custody of the Tower of London under less than regular circumstances the night the Princes are supposed to have disappeared from the Tower. He had opportunity and motive—Richard, Duke of York, was also Duke of Norfolk in right of his deceased child bride Anne, the daughter of the last Mowbray Duke.

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Same applies. What part's plausible?

Pretty much that someone in the royal family would want to do it. They have a history, after all.

Beyond that, it's as you said; most documented car crash in history. Car crashes may be dramatic, but they are notoriously unreliable as means of assasination. There's no way to deliberately rig a vehicular incident to produce a garanteed fatality in one specific passenger that would have escaped the 10,000 papparazi who weren't directly involved.

[walthrup48]

Sunday 10th December
BBC2 9pm-10pm
How Diana Died: The Conspiracy Files
"This programme investigates allegations that Princess Diana was murdered by the secret service on the orders of the British establishment. "
Source: BBC2 schedule listings

[Shaun from Scotland]

I remember reading an article by Andy McNab (the SAS Bravo Two Zero Guy) and he couldn't beleive how stupid the conspiracy theories where. If some nefarious elements in the Government had wanted to kill her it would have been much easier to setup an ambush, riddle the car with bullets and blame it on the IRA. No need for a complicated plot and much less dangerous.

[Polaris]

For the same reason that our human brians have evolved to recognise pattern, we cannot accept that important people can have ordinary mundane deaths.

If a Parisian family dies in a car crash on the periphique it's just a statistic. A figure as large as Diana can't just die in a drink/drive crash. It's too banal. So we try to make up for it by inventing CTs.

Elvis can't just die of drugs and dietery disorder, its too sordid, too trailer park trash for the King.

Marilyn Monroe can't just die of depression and drink.

We seek epic ends for our epic celebs.

I wonder why there aren't equally odd conspiracy freakshows around the deaths of other equally great (or greater) celebrities who die, like Jimmi Hendrix, John Belushi, James Dean, Jane Mansfield (I mean other than the urban myth that she was decapitated), etc. Is there a prerequisite that a celeb must be sufficiently blonde?

The idea that Diana would've had to convert to Islam doesn't really stand up since Dodi's previous non-muslim wife didn't have to.

Muslim men can marry non-Muslim women, and the women don't have to convert, and Dodi Fayed didn't seem to have the need to push the issue. I suppose any kid produced by those two would have likely been raised as a Muslim, but I don't know if that's a claim the CTs point to in the Diana case.

[maccy]

I wonder why there aren't equally odd conspiracy freakshows around the deaths of other equally great (or greater) celebrities who die, like Jimmi Hendrix, John Belushi, James Dean, Jane Mansfield (I mean other than the urban myth that she was decapitated), etc. Is there a prerequisite that a celeb must be sufficiently blonde?

Jimi Hendrix:

http://www.maebrussell.com/Articles%20and%20Notes/Covert%20War%20Against%20Rock.html
http://www.jfkmontreal.com/john_lennon/Chapter12.htm
http://www.illuminati-news.com/art-and-mc/field-of-art.htm
http://www.rockmine.com/Hendrix/ASM.html

John Belushi:

http://www.maebrussell.com/Transcriptions/537%20side%202.html
http://www.altx.com/interzones2/gregory.html

James Dean, sketchier but mentioned in these articles:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14960099/
http://www.eye.net/eye/issue/issue_11.16.95/NEWS/nak1116.php
http://www.thetruthaboutdavinci.com/conspiracy-theories.html

and there's some "Death Inc." stuff:

http://www.kshaddock.com/deathinc_tv/home.html

I'm pretty sure this is a spoof, though.

Jayne Mansfield, again pretty sketchy, but there's some mention about a connection with JFK:

http://www.thewatcherfiles.com/bloodlines/kennedy.htm
http://www.maebrussell.com/Bibliography%20Sheets/607s1.html

in some rambling about Timex watches and fear:

http://www.anu.edu.au/HRC/first_and_last/works/feareverywhere.htm

Plus there's all that stuff about Anton LaVey, such as:

http://atn2002.tripod.com/intersections/id3.html
http://www.clydelewis.com/dis/helter/helter.html

I suppose some people would take this indicate Illuminati involvement in her death.

[Polaris]

Jimi Hendrix:

http://www.maebrussell.com/Articles%20and%20Notes/Covert%20War%20Against%20Rock.html
http://www.jfkmontreal.com/john_lennon/Chapter12.htm
http://www.illuminati-news.com/art-and-mc/field-of-art.htm
http://www.rockmine.com/Hendrix/ASM.html

John Belushi:

http://www.maebrussell.com/Transcriptions/537%20side%202.html
http://www.altx.com/interzones2/gregory.html

James Dean, sketchier but mentioned in these articles:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14960099/
http://www.eye.net/eye/issue/issue_11.16.95/NEWS/nak1116.php
http://www.thetruthaboutdavinci.com/conspiracy-theories.html

and there's some "Death Inc." stuff:

http://www.kshaddock.com/deathinc_tv/home.html

I'm pretty sure this is a spoof, though.

Jayne Mansfield, again pretty sketchy, but there's some mention about a connection with JFK:

http://www.thewatcherfiles.com/bloodlines/kennedy.htm
http://www.maebrussell.com/Bibliography%20Sheets/607s1.html

in some rambling about Timex watches and fear:

http://www.anu.edu.au/HRC/first_and_last/works/feareverywhere.htm

Plus there's all that stuff about Anton LaVey, such as:

http://atn2002.tripod.com/intersections/id3.html
http://www.clydelewis.com/dis/helter/helter.html

I suppose some people would take this indicate Illuminati involvement in her death.

...shutting up now. :jaw-dropp

[maccy]

...shutting up now. :jaw-dropp

I've a horrible feeling that there it's impossible to invent a conspiracy theory that you can't subsequently find on Google.

[MG1962]

As mentioned above - she was in a car driven by a drunken bum and she didn't wear a seat-belt. The bodyguard in the front seat who did wear his seat belt survived the crash. I'm just amazed that someone managed to fit a CT around the death, there is very little room to manoeuvre.


Not really - a number of the trailing media reported the fiat and the flash. The Paris police took the report seriously enough to do a search for the vehicle.

The bottom line - speed killed them. The car had been heavily modified, but still caried almost stock shock absorbers.

Anyone who has driven a heavily loaded vehicle over a road dip will understand exactly what this does

[walthrup48]

Bump, Sunday. It's the first prog of a series and guess which other conspiracy theory they examine.

"The Conspiracy Files series returns in the New Year to examine the conspiracies surrounding the 9/11 attacks, the Oklahoma bomb, and the death of Dr David Kelly."

Edit: 9/11 prog link (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/6160775.stm).

[walthrup48]

An interesting report (and preview of the forthcoming programme) has just been broadcast on the BBC 10 o'clock news (first item). Usually available to view online after broadcast here (http://news.bbc.co.uk/) (click TV and radio programmes bar).

[Foolmewunz]

An interesting report (and preview of the forthcoming programme) has just been broadcast on the BBC 10 o'clock news (first item). Usually available to view online after broadcast here (http://news.bbc.co.uk/) (click TV and radio programmes bar).

Thanx for the link. Found this article from last night that may be a preview of what the program will cover. Thankfully, it appears they're debunking the theory more than fueling it, but I'd like to see the whole episode tomorrow. I was getting concerned.... I respect the BBC, generally, and the thought that they were falling into conspiracy paranoia was worrisome. Hopefully they treat the 9/11 show the same way.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6162041.stm

[NickUK]

BBC's 'have your say' page on the Diana conspiracy here (http://newsforums.bbc.co.uk/nol/thread.jspa?threadID=4927&&&edition=1&ttl=20061209125851)

Some woowo - "WE WON'T WAKE UP!!!11one" - but a lot of people aren't convinced it was a conspiracy.

[uk_dave]

The BBC does a good line in programmes which build an issue up only to debunk it.

Horizon did an excellent job on Intelligent Design some months back - first 20 mins stating the case for ID, remainder of programme pulverising it into dust.

I expect the same when they come to do 9/11 :)

Actually, that got me wondering: Recall the fairly recent decision by the beeb to edit that erroneous web report claiming that the hijackers were still alive? Can just imagine researcher for the 9/11 episode coming across that and saying "Hey guys...."

[NickUK]

The BBC does a good line in programmes which build an issue up only to debunk it.

Horizon did an excellent job on Intelligent Design some months back - first 20 mins stating the case for ID, remainder of programme pulverising it into dust.

I expect the same when they come to do 9/11 :)

Actually, that got me wondering: Recall the fairly recent decision by the beeb to edit that erroneous web report claiming that the hijackers were still alive? Can just imagine researcher for the 9/11 episode coming across that and saying "Hey guys...."

Ha :D

I wish they'd do the same with the picture of the WTC core that Christophera is still using on his web page. I think that was originally from the BBC no?

[Big Les]

I agree to an extent Dave, but increasingly the Beeb seem to be coming from the "all viewpoints are valid" angle, and relying on the obvious insanity of what they're showing to make those with any ability to think for themselves, what the situation is with X bit of woo. The danger of not pressing home the point is that many casual viewers won't get it, and won't question it. Let alone the already-indoctrinated. I'm brought to mind of the docu on the new age healer woman and her teenage daughter "protege", where (I think) the BBC were happy to just let them talk, and didn't challenge or counter anything they said.

[sophia8]

I'm brought to mind of the docu on the new age healer woman and her teenage daughter "protege", where (I think) the BBC were happy to just let them talk, and didn't challenge or counter anything they said.I seem to remember that program wasn't an investigation, but a Jon Ronson-style "stick them in front of a camera and let them make idiots of themselves" show.

[RecoveringYuppy]

I have to grant the CT theories around Di's death a bit of plausibility. A lot of people around my office work with keyboards and none of them has ever hinted that Car Pole Tunnel syndrome can be fatal. So I just can't buy the official story.

[walthrup48]

There's an interview with Mohamed Al Fayed on tonight's ITV main news regarding the Diana report (published tomorrow), 6.30pm - 7pm.Unsurprisingly, he doesn't agree with it's alleged conclusions.

[fsol]

Does anyone remember the name of the dcoumentary that talked to British Stand-up comics, who were censored regarding any Diana material? They had one who read the lyrics to "Candle in the Wind," and asked what they had to do with Diana. I think I saw it on A&E in the US.

I don't know about that, but this always makes me laugh...


F_Gvove0kfA

[westprog]

Moneypenny: Better go in James. This looks important.

M: Ah, 007. Sit down.

Bond: I was on holiday, sir.

M: Sorry, 007, this is more important. We have a very important job for you. The assassination of Princess Diana and her fiance Dodi Fayed.

Bond: Good God! Why, sir?

M: The silly girl is apparently planning to marry the feller. And she's pregnant. At least that's what we read on the Web. The constitutional implications are horrendous.

Bond: I don't see why, sir. She's divorced, after all. I don't see how there are any constitutional implications. Suppose she did become a Muslim. What would it matter?

M: What if the boys converted, Bond? You know that young boys idolise their stepfathers.

Bond: Can't the Queen just forbid them to see him sir? Wouldn't that be easier than an assassination?

M: Not our decision, Bond. Orders from higher up. Mr Prescott is handling this personally.

Bond: Very well, sir.

M: Now, you'll be coordinating with Mathis of the Deuxieme Bureau. You worked with him before.

Bond: Mathis, sir? What has he got to do with this?

M: It's been decided to carry out the assassination in France. It will be a joint British/French operation, like Concorde, or the Channel Tunnel. You'll need to ensure that the French police, judiciary and hospital staff are all properly briefed. It's to be a fake car crash.

Bond: With respect sir, doesn't that complicate things hugely? I'm very fond of Mathis, but I wouldn't trust the French to keep quiet for an operation this big. It's very risky. Why not do it in Knightsbridge, with our own people?

M: Prescott says Paris, Bond, and that's that.

(Speaks into microphone on desk).

M: Q, will you come in please?

(Q enters)

Q: Is this Operation Blonde Bombshell, sir?

M: Yes, Q. Tell Bond about the car we're giving him. Bond, you need to ram the Fayed armoured Mercedes off the road.

Bond: Tricky job, sir, to make sure they're all killed. I'll need the right vehicle.

Q: Indeed you will, Bond. That's why we're giving you a Fiat Uno.

Bond: A what... A Fiat... Why on Earth....

Q: More inconspicuous, Bond. The last thing anyone would expect is for someone to ram a Mercedes with a Fiat.

Bond: But... but...

(M & Q start giggling)

Bond: Bastards. You had me going there.

[Big Les]

The final final verdict:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6179275.stm

Supposedly the report is due out online, but I can't yet find it (Radio 4 said they would link to it).

I heard "Al" Fayed on Radio 4 this morning spouting unmitigated and textbook CT nonsense about the report commissioner being "got to" in some way and that he'd be ignoring the results of the report because "only he" knew the truth. No evidence, just speculation. The presenter gave him short shrift thankfully.

Yet STILL (http://comment.independent.co.uk/columnists_a_l/mary_dejevsky/article2067629.ece) elements of the media won't accept this. The article linked says:

I do not generally favour conspiracy theories, preferring the cock-up school of history. I never blamed the US government for the Oklahoma bomb and divined no darker secret behind the planes that smashed into the World Trade Centre. I don't see Dr David Kelly's death as anything other than suicide. I don't even believe the Prime Minister lied about Iraq's lethal weapons; I fear he believed in every last tonne. Nor can I offer any explanation for the poisoning of the former spy, Alexander Litvinenko. I just do not think it was in Putin's interests to have ordered it.

Diana's death is different. There has been too much secrecy. Too many people have tried too hard to convince us we should not believe what we do believe for us to accept that it was only an accident. Which reminds me of something else I don't believe: that only one in three Britons shares this view.

Textbook argument from incredulity as far as I can see. It reminds me of 9/11 CTists denouncing all other CT fruitcakes before them, and proceeding to repeat the same mistakes in their own pet context. Sigh.

[scotth]

If Darat had not already nominated westprog, I'd be doing it.

Great work westprog.

[Big Les]

Found the full report. It's a doozy. I don't suppose there's any point in starting a separate thread about it:

http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/news/nol/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/14_12_06_diana_report.pdf

If you don't fancy 871 pages, here's my summary in the form of a direct quote:

None of the occupants of the car was wearing a seat belt at the time of the impact.

Case damn well closed.

[chillzero]

I heard "Al" Fayed on Radio 4 this morning spouting unmitigated and textbook CT nonsense about the report commissioner being "got to" in some way and that he'd be ignoring the results of the report because "only he" knew the truth. No evidence, just speculation. The presenter gave him short shrift thankfully.

He's a grieving father.
Most grieving fathers will feel that the best has never been enough for their children, when it comes to situations like this. It is hard to accept the death of those who should outlive you and carry on your legacy.

It is only because he is so rich that he has the opportunity to bring more attention to his grief, and resultant theories, than most can. It is good that the presenter gave his theories short thrift, but I hope they still treated him with the respect he deserves as a father.

[Big Les]

He's a grieving father.
Most grieving fathers will feel that the best has never been enough for their children, when it comes to situations like this. It is hard to accept the death of those who should outlive you and carry on your legacy.

It is only because he is so rich that he has the opportunity to bring more attention to his grief, and resultant theories, than most can. It is good that the presenter gave his theories short thrift, but I hope they still treated him with the respect he deserves as a father.

He was sufficiently respectful, but did not pull any punches in insisting on Fayed explaining what evidence there was for his claims. You can listen to the interview (go forward to 8:20am) here. (http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio/aod/radio4_aod.shtml?radio4/today)

I don't see why the irrationality consequent to grief should be considered any more than any other brand of irrationality. What Fayed has claimed is patently absurd, and just before the public enquiry he fought for was released, he said he would ignore it.

If anything, the fact that he is a grieving father is exactly why his subjective, baseless speculation should be discounted out of hand.

[Darat]

...snip...

If anything, the fact that he is a grieving father is exactly why his subjective, baseless speculation should be discounted out of hand.

And let's be blunt also because his general acquaintance with facts can at best be described as slight!

[westprog]

If anything, the fact that he is a grieving father is exactly why his subjective, baseless speculation should be discounted out of hand.

A grieving, guilty father. Paul was working for Al Fayed. If it wasn't MI6 it was ultimately his fault.

[richardm]

What is the secrecy that people keep going on about? I hadn't noticed any.

[chillzero]

If anything, the fact that he is a grieving father is exactly why his subjective, baseless speculation should be discounted out of hand.

Agreed. I was focussing on the fact that his position gives him the ability to air these views more than most, not meaning to imply he was correct.

[Larry Lovage]

I thought you were excusing his actions. I wouldn't think of him as a "grieving father" given that his bereavement was nine years ago- at least not in the sense of his waking up every morning unable to face the day because of the loss of Dodi. Frankly, however, the length, expense and thoroughness of the investigation and its 900 page report I'm afraid just makes Al Fayed look something of a fool when he dismisses it sight unseen (as well pointed out above, the very investigation he had himself lobbied for). Before he latched onto this conspiracy theory that enabled him to pretty much say what he liked about a British Establishment that he feels has slighted him, he was an almost buffonish but still quite sharp businessman who had managed to defeat Tiny Rowland and other big business names at their own game.

[chillzero]

I thought you were excusing his actions.
No.
I just think many other parents go through this same nightmare, but without the platform to play it out like this, or having this kind of attention lavished on them.

[rikzilla]

It was a set up. Diana was about to go to Mecca for the Haj and the Royals had to take her down. It's obvious! There was no damage to the tunnel sheeple!!! that car collapsed into it's own footprint!!

Wake up and smell the thermate!

[Big Les]

He was convinced of a UK government conspiracy against him well before his son was killed; look at the whole citizenship/passport fiasco. His claims have been roundly debunked, and he needs to STFU.

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

I apologize, as I haven't been following this thread, but hopefully this will be of some small value: http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20061214/ts_nm/britain_diana_inquiry_dc_6

[walthrup48]

Thumbs up for the Sun: Now let her rest (http://www.thesun.co.uk/)
Thumbs down for you-know-who: Diana: It's a whitewash (http://www.express.co.uk/)

[Graham2001]

Pretty much that someone in the royal family would want to do it. They have a history, after all.

Beyond that, it's as you said; most documented car crash in history. Car crashes may be dramatic, but they are notoriously unreliable as means of assasination. There's no way to deliberately rig a vehicular incident to produce a garanteed fatality in one specific passenger that would have escaped the 10,000 papparazi who weren't directly involved.

As its Christmas Eve I decided to watch Ronin (http://tinyurl.com/vshk4) (...well the films set around Christmas Time) and it suddenly hit me, has anyone, in the whole 'Diana Conspiracy' milieu tried to link John Frankenheimer to the 'conspiracy' the same way that Kubrick is linked to the Moon Hoax?

The film does have that climactic car chase through the Paris tunnel system (which always puts a chill up my spine) and it would not surprise me if someone tried to tie production to what happened on the night of the 31/08/97, say by claiming that the conspirators borrowed some of the films stuntmen....

[The Pig]

Bump, Sunday. It's the first prog of a series and guess which other conspiracy theory they examine.

"The Conspiracy Files series returns in the New Year to examine the conspiracies surrounding the 9/11 attacks, the Oklahoma bomb, and the death of Dr David Kelly."

Edit: 9/11 prog link (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/6160775.stm).Jim Fetzer has been interviewed for the 9/11 programme. Steven Jones turned them down.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/mike_rudin/