View Active Topics          Latest 100 Topics          View Your Posts          Switch to Mobile

Princess Diana Assassination Conspiracy

Discuss Conspiracies and Cover Ups - e.g. 9/11 Truth, JFK Assassination, New World Order, Roswell, Moon Hoax, Secret Societies, etc. whatever conspiracy floats your boat.

Re: Evidence that Princess Diana was murdered

Postby ProfWag » 11 May 2010, 20:34

Nostradamus wrote:[*] He claims that Prince Charles uses his large ears as a communication device to communicate with his reptillian brethren on Sirius 6 in the Aformsa glaxy. [/list]

Believe it or not, I had lunch with Prince Charles back about 20 years ago and the one thing that surprised me more than anything was that his ears were nowhere near as big as I thought they were. In fact, they looked quite normal to me...
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54






Re: Princess Diana Assassination Conspiracy

Postby Scepcop » 23 Jul 2012, 20:46

A controversial documentary delving into the details of Princess Diana's death will not see the light of day in the United States or Britain.
The film, "Unlawful Killing," directed by Keith Allen, claims the princess and her boyfriend, Dodi Al Fayed, were murdered in a plot involving her former father-in-law, Prince Philip. The movie was financed by Dodi Al Fayed's father, Mohamed Al Fayed, who has always believed the deaths were suspicious and not an accident.

News articles:

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/con ... nance.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... u-wont-see

News videos about the banned film and its implications:







Here is a 4 hour documentary about Princess Diana and the conspiracy behind her assassination by Illuminati expert and British filmmaker Chris Everard:



Description:

A Message From British Film Director, CHRIS EVERARD:
Since 1997, I have been investigating the crash which killed Princess Diana, her companion, Dodi AlFayed, the driver, Henri Paul, and massively wounded ex-paratrooper Trevor Rees-Jones. LADY DIE represents nearly ten years of research by myself, DAVID ICKE and the co-authors of the book "Diana: The Hidden Evidence", JON KING and JOHN BEVERIDGE.

A Mercedes S280 of the exact model and year was purchased in order that tests could be made for this documentary. The film has a running time of nearly 4 hours and leaves no stone unturned.

The horrific history of the royal family is exposed, including the faked suicide/murder of Stephen Ward, Prince Philip's links with the Profumo scandal, Occult Cocktail Parties at the Cliveden Estate in the 1960s, the exorcism of Stephen Wards cottage, the double murder of two young princes in the Tower of London, the forced euthenasia of King George in 1936 - his killing was timed to coincide with the morning edition of The Times newspaper - and, of course, the film features a full investigation into the crash which killed Princess Diana.

I assembled a Scotland Yard-style incident board for the making of this documentary, which reveals hitherto unknown information about many of the characters involved in the plot to kill Diana.

The film explores the hand-written note which Diana gave to her butler - and another given for safe keeping to her lawyer - which explicitly said that a fake car crash, one which would result in death, was being planned by people working for Prince Charles.

DAVID ICKE bravely puts forward his research, based on confidantes of Princess Diana, which suggests that the crash in Paris was the beginning of a gruesome occult ritual with the time and place of the crash being chosen carefully to coincide with ancient Satanic Rites. Davids excellent book THE BIGGEST SECRET is also discussed in this film.

What exactly did the Queen mean when she warned Diana's butler PAUL BURREL, that there were "dark and mysterious forces" at work in Britain?

What was Henri Paul doing the hours immediately before he turned up for work on that fateful night?

Why was the SIPA press agency in Paris broken into following the death of a Paparazzi photographer?

Who were the senior MI6 and MI5 agents in the tunnel on the night of the crash?

Why was Klaus Werner deported after standing vigil outside Dianas apartment?

All these questions and much more are answered in this film, which was edited in a constantly moving vehicle and deposited at the DVD factories on the day that the British inquiry heard the father of Dodi AlFayed pronounce that his sons death was a case of Black & White MURDER.

The historical part of this film proves, using extensive photos, newspaper cuttings, film clips and testimonies, that the royal family have stabbed and slashed their way to power throughout the ages.

The producers have invoked FAIR USE guidelines in the making of this film. All proceeds will be used to offer subsidised courses in film making, which will be announced later this year.

I would like to thank all the patient and loyal subscribers to the Enigma Channel your support has made this important film possible.

Our comment: Another first-class release from Enigma Motion Pictures. When you learn the information this disk contains you'll completely understand why the Diana inquest will not and indeed cannot ever conclude there was a conspiracy by the Royals to kill her. This is another major piece of the conspiracy puzzle and a powerful one at that.
“Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
User avatar
Scepcop
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3256
Joined: 16 May 2009, 07:29

Re: Princess Diana Assassination Conspiracy

Postby ProfWag » 23 Jul 2012, 23:31

Scepcop wrote:DAVID ICKE bravely puts forward his research, based on confidantes of Princess Diana, which suggests that the crash in Paris was the beginning of a gruesome occult ritual with the time and place of the crash being chosen carefully to coincide with ancient Satanic Rites. Davids excellent book THE BIGGEST SECRET is also discussed in this film.

Wow! If David Icke's involved then it just has to be great 'cause we all know he's not controversial in any way... :roll:
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: Princess Diana Assassination Conspiracy

Postby Scepcop » 24 Jul 2012, 09:30

Here David Icke explains what really happened to Princess Diana, and the inner secrets about the Royal Family. It's very mind blowing.



ProfWag, how do you explain the carbon monoxide found in the driver's body, which must have incapacitated him?

Why were the cameras inside the tunnel switched off, when they were on for every other tunnel in Paris?

Why did it take them nearly 2 hours to get Diana to the hospital when it was just 3 miles away? Isn't it because they had to wait for her to die in the tunnel first, as part of the occult ritual sacrifice they were doing?

Why is there a massive cover up if it was just an accident?

So if they assassinate someone and make it look like an accident, then it MUST be an accident, in your book?

What if you were killed and it was made to look like an accident? Does that mean it must be an accident?
“Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
User avatar
Scepcop
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3256
Joined: 16 May 2009, 07:29

Re: Princess Diana Assassination Conspiracy

Postby Arouet » 24 Jul 2012, 10:02

I gotta say - I find David Icke tremendously entertaining. If he got together with a good wrtier and penned a script, I'd go see that movie!
User avatar
Arouet
 
Posts: 2544
Joined: 07 Aug 2010, 03:07

Re: Princess Diana Assassination Conspiracy

Postby ProfWag » 24 Jul 2012, 20:46

Scepcop wrote:ProfWag, how do you explain the carbon monoxide found in the driver's body, which must have incapacitated him?

Why were the cameras inside the tunnel switched off, when they were on for every other tunnel in Paris?

Why did it take them nearly 2 hours to get Diana to the hospital when it was just 3 miles away? Isn't it because they had to wait for her to die in the tunnel first, as part of the occult ritual sacrifice they were doing?

Why is there a massive cover up if it was just an accident?

So if they assassinate someone and make it look like an accident, then it MUST be an accident, in your book?

What if you were killed and it was made to look like an accident? Does that mean it must be an accident?

I'm sorry Scepcop, but where did I say it wasn't a conspiracy? Can you read minds now? I just made a comment that that alluded to my perception that I don't think David Icke is a very good source for basing anopinion on.
Read the facts of a case Scepcop and form your own opinion for once, would you? You may come up with the same conclusion, which is fine, but wouldn't you feel better knowing that it's your educated opinion rather than someone else's?
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: Princess Diana Assassination Conspiracy

Postby ProfWag » 24 Jul 2012, 21:04

Scepcop wrote:ProfWag, how do you explain the carbon monoxide found in the driver's body, which must have incapacitated him?

Why were the cameras inside the tunnel switched off, when they were on for every other tunnel in Paris?

Why did it take them nearly 2 hours to get Diana to the hospital when it was just 3 miles away? Isn't it because they had to wait for her to die in the tunnel first, as part of the occult ritual sacrifice they were doing?

Why is there a massive cover up if it was just an accident?

So if they assassinate someone and make it look like an accident, then it MUST be an accident, in your book?

What if you were killed and it was made to look like an accident? Does that mean it must be an accident?

1) And yet, video surveillance really didn’t show him to be incapacitated. He IS said to have had 3 times the legal limit of alcohol in his system though.
2) Because the company that monitors those cameras close at 11:00 p.m. Every night.
3) It took them nearly a half an hour to remove her from the seriously damaged car. After that, she went into cardiac arrest and they spent considerable time reviving her--which they succeeded at for a time.
4) Have you ever read British tabloids?
5) No. Not in the least. It could have been an assassination. I’m just investigating the evidence presented.
6) What if I was killed in an accident but someone wanted it to look like murder?
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: Princess Diana Assassination Conspiracy

Postby Scepcop » 26 Jul 2012, 20:18

I just watched the 4 hour film on Lady Die above by Chris Everard, and wow, I learned a few things I didn't know before:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s2dSXEZp9io

- When the ambulance reached Princess Diana and put her inside, it took about 90 minutes to get to the hospital which was only 3 miles away! Chris Everard drove from that tunnel to the hospital in the film and showed that even if you drove at 30mph, you would have only needed 11 minutes to get to the hospital. So the fact that the ambulance took 90 minutes is extremely suspicious. It's obvious that something sinister was going on in that ambulance (such as them finishing her off and completing their Illuminati occult sacrifice ritual?). It would have had to be moving at 2 mph to move 3 miles in 90 minutes! That stinks to high heaven! How do the propagandists who say that it was just a simple drunk driving accident explain that?

- The mercedes that Diana crashed in was stolen a few weeks prior, and then found by the police. When it was found, nothing in it was missing except for a microchip that controlled the navigation device. Obviously, it was rigged with something when it was returned, probably some kind of remote control steering device.

- The intelligence agents would not let engineers from Mercedes company inspect or examine the crashed vehicle for some reason. Obviously, because they would have discovered that it was rigged and tampered with?

- The cameras in the tunnel where Diana died were turned off and were the only ones in Paris that were turned off that night. They are usually on though. No one can explain why they were off. Gee what a coincidence.

- The driver Henri Paul had carbon monoxide in his blood, which could not have come from cigarettes. Obviously, he was incapacitated somehow.

- The body guard who survived the crash doesn't remember what happened (how convenient), but he says that if the driver Henri Paul had been drunk, that he would never have let him drive the car.

- Diana wrote a note saying that her life was in danger and that they were planning a car accident for her. You can see it here:

Image

Obviously, something stinks to high heaven. There's no question it was an assassination and conspiracy.

Gee, I wonder what the pseudoskeptics will say about all this? I don't get why they believe that conspiracies and cover ups and assassinations by the elite don't exist? What is their basis? Why do they believe that the official version of everything must be the only truth? What if I had a pseudoskeptic killed and made it look like a suicide or accident? Would that mean that it really was a suicide or accident, because it looks that way?

After all, in their book, there's no such thing as a cover up or suppression of evidence. Every official story and every cover story must be true in their book. To them, authority/establishment = truth. Totally illogical. Spock or Data would never agree with that. So why do pseudoskeptics call themselves "rational", when Spock or Data or the Vulcan race would never agree with them or find their beliefs to be logical? I don't get it.

All they do is lie and yell "there's no evidence" over and over again, no matter how much evidence exists. Are these pseudoskeptics shills and disinfo agents who are lying deliberately? What is their incentive to protect the establishment, unless they are paid by them?
“Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
User avatar
Scepcop
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3256
Joined: 16 May 2009, 07:29

Re: Princess Diana Assassination Conspiracy

Postby ProfWag » 26 Jul 2012, 20:44

Scepcop, you obviously didn't review the post immediately preceding yours. All you did was regurgitate an earlier post of yours. Are you open to the truth or do you insist that there is no other explanation than "it was a conspiracy?"
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: Princess Diana Assassination Conspiracy

Postby SydneyPSIder » 20 Sep 2012, 16:45

Scepcop wrote:I just watched the 4 hour film on Lady Die above by Chris Everard, and wow, I learned a few things I didn't know before:

- When the ambulance reached Princess Diana and put her inside, it took about 90 minutes to get to the hospital which was only 3 miles away! Chris Everard drove from that tunnel to the hospital in the film and showed that even if you drove at 30mph, you would have only needed 11 minutes to get to the hospital. So the fact that the ambulance took 90 minutes is extremely suspicious. It's obvious that something sinister was going on in that ambulance (such as them finishing her off and completing their Illuminati occult sacrifice ritual?). It would have had to be moving at 2 mph to move 3 miles in 90 minutes! That stinks to high heaven! How do the propagandists who say that it was just a simple drunk driving accident explain that?

- The mercedes that Diana crashed in was stolen a few weeks prior, and then found by the police. When it was found, nothing in it was missing except for a microchip that controlled the navigation device. Obviously, it was rigged with something when it was returned, probably some kind of remote control steering device.

- The intelligence agents would not let engineers from Mercedes company inspect or examine the crashed vehicle for some reason. Obviously, because they would have discovered that it was rigged and tampered with?

- The cameras in the tunnel where Diana died were turned off and were the only ones in Paris that were turned off that night. They are usually on though. No one can explain why they were off. Gee what a coincidence.

- The driver Henri Paul had carbon monoxide in his blood, which could not have come from cigarettes. Obviously, he was incapacitated somehow.

- The body guard who survived the crash doesn't remember what happened (how convenient), but he says that if the driver Henri Paul had been drunk, that he would never have let him drive the car.

- Diana wrote a note saying that her life was in danger and that they were planning a car accident for her. You can see it here:

Obviously, something stinks to high heaven. There's no question it was an assassination and conspiracy.

Gee, I wonder what the pseudoskeptics will say about all this? I don't get why they believe that conspiracies and cover ups and assassinations by the elite don't exist? What is their basis? Why do they believe that the official version of everything must be the only truth? What if I had a pseudoskeptic killed and made it look like a suicide or accident? Would that mean that it really was a suicide or accident, because it looks that way?

After all, in their book, there's no such thing as a cover up or suppression of evidence. Every official story and every cover story must be true in their book. To them, authority/establishment = truth. Totally illogical. Spock or Data would never agree with that. So why do pseudoskeptics call themselves "rational", when Spock or Data or the Vulcan race would never agree with them or find their beliefs to be logical? I don't get it.

All they do is lie and yell "there's no evidence" over and over again, no matter how much evidence exists. Are these pseudoskeptics shills and disinfo agents who are lying deliberately? What is their incentive to protect the establishment, unless they are paid by them?

Based on some of the foregoing and putting 2 and 2 together, this is what I think most plausibly and achievably happened:

- MI6 planted a remote-controlled C-4 plastic explosive device in the steering area of the engine bay some time earlier during servicing as noted.
- they lined up an emergency patsy replacement driver (Henri Paul), the fact that he'd had a couple of drinks that evening -- all the better. They would have called him in at short notice after he'd already settled down at home for a red wine or two as was his prerogative, absolutely insisted they needed him, and conveniently ignored the alcohol on his breath when he showed up for the gig.
- an MI6 agent as a passenger on the motorbike following the Mercedes entered the tunnel and let off the remote-controlled plastic explosive at a safe distance, causing the car to veer all over the road and hit some pillars. A 'flash' was observed in the tunnel according to the paps, which was the explosion. Other less likely explanations such as an extremely bright flash device designed to dazzle the driver have been put forward, these are far less likely and harder to conceal or pull off.
- when emergency vehicles and the tainted ambulance got to the scene, Diana wasn't dead enough, so they spent another hour killing her in the ambulance before getting to the hospital a short distance away.
- the C-4 plastic explosive damage to the engine bay of the car is the reason they would not allow Mercedes engineers to inspect the car, or anyone else, in case residue and other abnormalities were found. The explosive creates a great twisted up engine bay for media pics however.

No 'remote control steering device' needed, such a thing doesn't exist. C-4 plastic explosive solves all the problems in the world.

And yes, Icke is crap.
SydneyPSIder
 
Posts: 1124
Joined: 10 Sep 2012, 18:24

Re: Princess Diana Assassination Conspiracy

Postby Arouet » 21 Sep 2012, 04:36

SydneyPSIder wrote:- MI6 planted a remote-controlled C-4 plastic explosive device in the steering area of the engine bay some time earlier during servicing as noted.
- they lined up an emergency patsy replacement driver (Henri Paul), the fact that he'd had a couple of drinks that evening -- all the better.


I'm not one to pull out Okham's Razor very often, and I'll admit that I've done next to no research on this topic (not being british, as sad as it was it just doesn't interest me that much), but when you've got a drunk driver, why do we need to go to, we have a drunk driver AND there's a massive conspiracy...
User avatar
Arouet
 
Posts: 2544
Joined: 07 Aug 2010, 03:07

Re: Princess Diana Assassination Conspiracy

Postby NinjaPuppy » 21 Sep 2012, 05:42

Arouet wrote:I'm not one to pull out Okham's Razor very often, and I'll admit that I've done next to no research on this topic (not being british, as sad as it was it just doesn't interest me that much), but when you've got a drunk driver, why do we need to go to, we have a drunk driver AND there's a massive conspiracy...

Because it make for a better story when the person in question is much admired. ;)
User avatar
NinjaPuppy
 
Posts: 4002
Joined: 28 Jul 2009, 20:44

Re: Princess Diana Assassination Conspiracy

Postby SydneyPSIder » 21 Sep 2012, 06:37

Arouet wrote:
SydneyPSIder wrote:- MI6 planted a remote-controlled C-4 plastic explosive device in the steering area of the engine bay some time earlier during servicing as noted.
- they lined up an emergency patsy replacement driver (Henri Paul), the fact that he'd had a couple of drinks that evening -- all the better.


I'm not one to pull out Okham's Razor very often, and I'll admit that I've done next to no research on this topic (not being british, as sad as it was it just doesn't interest me that much), but when you've got a drunk driver, why do we need to go to, we have a drunk driver AND there's a massive conspiracy...

Because Lady Diana was a VIP, they don't just pull any driver in from home in any state of consciousness -- no professional driver can have had any alcohol in the past xx hours before attending for duty -- her bodyguard/s should have rejected the guy. I work in a half-assed logistics company that's not even serious and our 'on call' guys cannot have anything to drink on the days they are on call and get paid extra for the hassle. We don't even really know for sure if he was drunk, that is the 'official' report -- what we have are pieces of evidence that we can count on, some supplied by the paps pursuing her that night, concerning seeing a flash in the tunnel, and the fact she was in an ambulance going nowhere for an hour or two rather than being rushed to a nearby hospital facility with all the right equipment -- along with her foreknowledge and inkling that she was going to be targeted in a car accident -- other royals have been knocked off in this fashion in the past. Of course they use a 'drunk driver' as a cover story, that way it will get past people like you very easily. MI6 aren't stupid.
SydneyPSIder
 
Posts: 1124
Joined: 10 Sep 2012, 18:24

Re: Princess Diana Assassination Conspiracy

Postby Arouet » 21 Sep 2012, 09:53

What are the reasons to reject simple incompetence? People make mistakes. i don't consider myself stupid but I've made some pretty large mistakes in my time.

The setup you describe also sounds very complicated and fraught with danger. I mean, how'd they get a drunk guy to agree to drive the car anyway? How'd they know he'd go along with it? How'd they know the crash caused by the explosion would result in the death of the desired parties? I'm a personal injury lawyer and the vast majority of accidents don't result in death. I had a client whose car literally flipped on its head. She had a brain injury, her husband sitting beside her had minor injuries. Unless the car was going to go into the water, a car accident seems to me like a pretty terrible way to try and kill someone. There's just no way to control it sufficiently.
User avatar
Arouet
 
Posts: 2544
Joined: 07 Aug 2010, 03:07

Re: Princess Diana Assassination Conspiracy

Postby SydneyPSIder » 21 Sep 2012, 09:59

Arouet wrote:What are the reasons to reject simple incompetence? People make mistakes. i don't consider myself stupid but I've made some pretty large mistakes in my time.

The setup you describe also sounds very complicated and fraught with danger. I mean, how'd they get a drunk guy to agree to drive the car anyway? How'd they know he'd go along with it? How'd they know the crash caused by the explosion would result in the death of the desired parties? I'm a personal injury lawyer and the vast majority of accidents don't result in death. I had a client whose car literally flipped on its head. She had a brain injury, her husband sitting beside her had minor injuries. Unless the car was going to go into the water, a car accident seems to me like a pretty terrible way to try and kill someone. There's just no way to control it sufficiently.

Of course you have, Arouet, of course you have.

People in power know you can make things happen and make people do things by the simple power of authority -- 'command and control' -- if necessary, threaten jobs, livelihood, etc. If you tell an employee to do something, they will do it. That's how the modern hierarchical capitalist system has been set up.
SydneyPSIder
 
Posts: 1124
Joined: 10 Sep 2012, 18:24

PreviousNext

Return to Conspiracies / Cover Ups

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 1 guest