Was Diana murdered?

by Andy Wed Jun 21, 2017 11:36 am

According to a former Mi5 agent, he killed her.
Astounding confession made on his deathbed.
Ordered by Phillip as she was a threat to the monarchy.
As plausable as most theories.

http://yournewswire.com/mi5-agent-killed-princess-diana/

by Guest Wed Jun 21, 2017 11:42 am

There was no truth to the story, which originated with YourNewsWire, a fake news site. As is often the case with fake news, the article lacked critical details such as when and where the confession occurred or how the purported assassination took place, and no other credible news outlet (or even tabloid) reported the story.

The MI5 agent deathbed confession story was not the first of its type proffered by YourNewsWire, a site known for promoting baseless conspiracy theories.

http://www.snopes.com/retired-mi5-agent-confesses-on-deathbed-i-killed-princess-diana/

by Syl Wed Jun 21, 2017 11:48 am

I'm sure she was, but like the "who killed JFK' cover up, I don't believe the public will ever know for sure who or why.

by magica Wed Jun 21, 2017 12:14 pm

She was a loose cannon and had to be shut up. She was murdered but I think Dodi was also a target and they took them both out.

Camera's in the tunnel turned off, taking Diana to a hospital miles from the tunnel passing a nearer one, many things about this stink.

Who ordered her death, no idea, but would have to be an organisation who caused this like MI5 or some organisation like them.

by Syl Wed Jun 21, 2017 12:23 pm

magica wrote:She was a loose cannon and had to be shut up. She was murdered but I think Dodi was also a target and they took them both out.

Camera's in the tunnel turned off, taking Diana to a hospital miles from the tunnel passing a nearer one, many things about this stink.

Who ordered her death, no idea, but would have to be an organisation who caused this like MI5 or some organisation like them.

Mags, did you ever see the film footage of her when she was campaigning about the use of landmines. A journalist came up to her and said she had been called a "loose cannon" (it was the slimy toad Nicholas Soames who had apparently said this) she was visibly shaken, got back in the jeep and said she felt like crying.

This happened shortly before she was murdered....I thought that piece of film was very telling.

by Guest Wed Jun 21, 2017 12:30 pm

Syl wrote:
magica wrote:She was a loose cannon and had to be shut up. She was murdered but I think Dodi was also a target and they took them both out.

Camera's in the tunnel turned off, taking Diana to a hospital miles from the tunnel passing a nearer one, many things about this stink.

Who ordered her death, no idea, but would have to be an organisation who caused this like MI5 or some organisation like them.

Mags, did you ever see the film footage of her when she was campaigning about the use of landmines. A journalist came up to her and said she had been called a "loose cannon" (it was the slimy toad Nicholas Soames who had apparently said this) she was visibly shaken, got back in the jeep and said she felt like crying.

This happened shortly before she was murdered....I thought that piece of film was very telling.

People buy easily into too much conspiracy Syl

We should applaud her legacy.

http://time.com/4726237/prince-harry-princess-diana-kensington-palace-landmines/

by Syl Wed Jun 21, 2017 12:39 pm

Thorin wrote:
Syl wrote:

Mags, did you ever see the film footage of her when she was campaigning about the use of landmines. A journalist came up to her and said she had been called a "loose cannon" (it was the slimy toad Nicholas Soames who had apparently said this) she was visibly shaken, got back in the jeep and said she felt like crying.

This happened shortly before she was murdered....I thought that piece of film was very telling.

People buy easily into too much conspiracy Syl

We should applaud her legacy.

http://time.com/4726237/prince-harry-princess-diana-kensington-palace-landmines/

We should applaud her legacy Thor, and I think people do, not least by taking to their hearts her sons, who seem to have inherited her kindness and empathy with people.

I don't think its a conspiracy theory just because you don't buy the story peddled out that a little white car accidentally caused a crash which killed the most famous in the world and 2 of her entourage....then sort of vanished into thin air. Evil or Very Mad

I mean when a simple RTA happens the vehicles are normally traced quite quickly if one does a runner...especially when they have several international police forces investigating.

by HoratioTarr Wed Jun 21, 2017 12:43 pm

Who cares? I'm sick to death of hearing about who did or didn't bump her off. She was an attention seeking upper class thicko who bemoaned her lot. If Charles was cheating she should have fucked off and left him years earlier. But she didn't, because she loved the attention she got from the public and the adoration, and the lifestyle that went with it. Ironically, it came with a price. Tough shit. That's life. She'd have had something to really moan about with half a dozen kids, a violent husband and a job at Oxo in the packing department.

If she'd have worn a seatbelt in that car, instead of canoodling with Dodi, she might have survived. Common sense? She had none.

by Guest Wed Jun 21, 2017 12:45 pm

Syl wrote:
Thorin wrote:

People buy easily into too much conspiracy Syl

We should applaud her legacy.

http://time.com/4726237/prince-harry-princess-diana-kensington-palace-landmines/

We should applaud her legacy Thor, and I think people do, not least by taking to their hearts her sons, who seem to have inherited her kindness and empathy with people.

I don't think its a conspiracy theory just because you don't buy the story peddled out that a little white car accidentally caused a crash which killed the most famous in the world and 2 of her entourage....then sort of vanished into thin air.

I mean when a simple RTA happens the vehicles are normally traced quite quickly if one does a runner...especially when they have several international police forces investigating.

But what evidence is there that she was murdered?

None, just the minds of people that conspire top believe that she was and they do so, because she was an inspiring person. Who's life was cut short. When something so tragic like this happens, people want to believe it has to be some form of evil that has taken someone so amazing from us all. We may never know what happened, but people look to a good and evil concept often as to why people are taken from us. It then leads to ideas that are formed from this loss.

I may well be wrong, and that she may have been murdered, but I see no evidence of this and only the contrived opinions claiming that she was.

by Syl Wed Jun 21, 2017 12:52 pm

Thorin wrote:
Syl wrote:

We should applaud her legacy Thor, and I think people do, not least by taking to their hearts her sons, who seem to have inherited her kindness and empathy with people.

I don't think its a conspiracy theory just because you don't buy the story peddled out that a little white car accidentally caused a crash which killed the most famous in the world and 2 of her entourage....then sort of vanished into thin air.

I mean when a simple RTA happens the vehicles are normally traced quite quickly if one does a runner...especially when they have several international police forces investigating.

But what evidence is there that she was murdered?

None, just the minds of people that conspire top believe that she was and they do so, because she was an inspiring person. Who's life was cut short. When something so tragic like this happens, people want to believe it has to be some form of evil that has taken someone so amazing from us all. We may never know what happened, but people look to a good and evil concept often as to why people are taken from us. It then leads to ideas that are formed from this loss.

I may well be wrong, and that she may have been murdered, but I see no evidence of this and only the contrived opinions claiming that she was.

I saw quite a few documentaries about her death, there did seem to be lots of evidence that it wasn't just a normal rta, people who were on the scene first were ordered to not speak publicly or face prosecution if they did, the Dr who tended her before the police arrived and spoke to her, said she was semi conscious at the time, he was not even called to give any evidence when the crash was being investigated.
Odd that the recorded owner of the white fiat (it was traced years later) was also murdered.
Some may say its all coincidence.....I always thought she was murdered, but the bottom line is no one has concrete proof because it was covered up.

by Syl Wed Jun 21, 2017 12:56 pm

HoratioTarr wrote:Who cares? I'm sick to death of hearing about who did or didn't bump her off. She was an attention seeking upper class thicko who bemoaned her lot. If Charles was cheating she should have fucked off and left him years earlier. But she didn't, because she loved the attention she got from the public and the adoration, and the lifestyle that went with it. Ironically, it came with a price. Tough shit. That's life. She'd have had something to really moan about with half a dozen kids, a violent husband and a job at Oxo in the packing department.

If she'd have worn a seatbelt in that car, instead of canoodling with Dodi, she might have survived. Common sense? She had none.

It wont drop because its an unsolved mystery....like the JFK assassination...if people don't get answers they carry on talking and discussing about certain events.

Yes she did wallow in the attention and she was probably self centred and shallow a lot of the time, she was also kind and beautiful, a fairy tale princess to many, and like Marilyn Monroe and Elvis... beautiful people who meet sad ends remain popular long after their deaths.

by JulesV Wed Jun 21, 2017 1:00 pm

Angry Andy wrote:According to a former Mi5 agent, he killed her.
Astounding confession made on his deathbed.
Ordered by Phillip as she was a threat to the monarchy.
As plausable as most theories.

http://yournewswire.com/mi5-agent-killed-princess-diana/

No I don't personally believe she was murdered. Though her death certainly solved a lot of problems for them.

One thing I did notice though, having extensively read about their history in the past hundred years is that an inordinate number of gay and clinically insane royals met with fatal accidents... Sad

by JulesV Wed Jun 21, 2017 1:11 pm

The 3 biggest conspiracy theories of recent times surround

1. Diana's Death
2. Maddie MCanns disappearance
3. 9/11

Nothing else comes close to capturing our collective imaginations.

(The Kennedy's were a massive enigma too - chappadiquick & jfk's shooting - but that was a distant era).

by Fuzzy Zack Wed Jun 21, 2017 1:18 pm

Jules wrote:The 3 biggest conspiracy theories of recent times surround

1. Diana's Death
2. Maddie MCanns disappearance
3. 9/11

Nothing else comes close to capturing our collective imaginations.

(The Kennedy's were a massive enigma too - chappadiquick & jfk's shooting - but that was a distant era).

1. Killed by MI6 agent James Andanson.
2. Illuminati sacrifice. Allegedly purchased by Phillip Green for child sacrifice.
3. CIA instructed Khaled S. Masood

JFK: Lee Harvey was the only killer of JFK but was still a patsy.

Finsbury Park Attack: MI5. 2 MI5 agents escaped, leaving Darren Osborne. Also being investigated Richard Gere Evans.

by Fuzzy Zack Wed Jun 21, 2017 1:21 pm

Jo Cox: another illuminati sacrifice for Brexit.

by nicko Wed Jun 21, 2017 1:35 pm

She died because the driver was pissed and she had no seatbelt, end of !

by eddie Wed Jun 21, 2017 1:40 pm

Re the OP, this has been circulating for a couple of years, it's fake.

I do think she was murdered though but we will never find out.

by Guest Wed Jun 21, 2017 1:48 pm

Fuzzy Zack wrote:
Jules wrote:The 3 biggest conspiracy theories of recent times surround

1. Diana's Death
2. Maddie MCanns disappearance
3. 9/11

Nothing else comes close to capturing our collective imaginations.

(The Kennedy's were a massive enigma too - chappadiquick & jfk's shooting - but that was a distant era).

1. Killed by MI6 agent James Andanson.
2. Illuminati sacrifice. Allegedly purchased by Phillip Green for child sacrifice.
3. CIA instructed Khaled S. Masood

JFK: Lee Harvey was the only killer of JFK but was still a patsy.

Finsbury Park Attack: MI5. 2 MI5 agents escaped, leaving Darren Osborne. Also being investigated Richard Gere Evans.

UK Muslims show worrying belief in conspiracy theories, claims thinktank

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/dec/02/uk-Muslims-show-worrying-belief-in-conspiracy-theories-claims-thinktank

by Guest Wed Jun 21, 2017 1:49 pm

Syl wrote:
HoratioTarr wrote:Who cares? I'm sick to death of hearing about who did or didn't bump her off. She was an attention seeking upper class thicko who bemoaned her lot. If Charles was cheating she should have fucked off and left him years earlier. But she didn't, because she loved the attention she got from the public and the adoration, and the lifestyle that went with it. Ironically, it came with a price. Tough shit. That's life. She'd have had something to really moan about with half a dozen kids, a violent husband and a job at Oxo in the packing department.

If she'd have worn a seatbelt in that car, instead of canoodling with Dodi, she might have survived. Common sense? She had none.

It wont drop because its an unsolved mystery....like the JFK assassination...if people don't get answers they carry on talking and discussing about certain events.

Yes she did wallow in the attention and she was probably self centred and shallow a lot of the time, she was also kind and beautiful, a fairy tale princess to many, and like Marilyn Monroe and Elvis... beautiful people who meet sad ends remain popular long after their deaths.

I understand the draw to conspiracies on this. As I say, its more of not accepting the reality of these tragedies, that draws people to believe some greater evil has carried out such events

by HoratioTarr Wed Jun 21, 2017 2:06 pm

Syl wrote:
HoratioTarr wrote:Who cares? I'm sick to death of hearing about who did or didn't bump her off. She was an attention seeking upper class thicko who bemoaned her lot. If Charles was cheating she should have fucked off and left him years earlier. But she didn't, because she loved the attention she got from the public and the adoration, and the lifestyle that went with it. Ironically, it came with a price. Tough shit. That's life. She'd have had something to really moan about with half a dozen kids, a violent husband and a job at Oxo in the packing department.

If she'd have worn a seatbelt in that car, instead of canoodling with Dodi, she might have survived. Common sense? She had none.

It wont drop because its an unsolved mystery....like the JFK assassination...if people don't get answers they carry on talking and discussing about certain events.

Yes she did wallow in the attention and she was probably self centred and shallow a lot of the time, she was also kind and beautiful, a fairy tale princess to many, and like Marilyn Monroe and Elvis... beautiful people who meet sad ends remain popular long after their deaths.

You see, I have a problem with that word...beautiful. Sadly, that coloured most people's perception of her. The fairy tale princess with the good looks and large blue bashful eyes. Bashful eyes, my arse. She was a strong willed, spoiled contrary manipulative woman. Sure, she did kind things. And so she should. She was privileged and noble born and it was her job. She did a lot to drag the mothballs out of the Royal Establishment arse too, but then she also reaped the benefits from that Establishment, as did that old hypocrite, Princess Margaret, who chose her title and privilege over love and thereby went off the rails and lived the rest of her life unhappily. Vanity and happiness are rarely compatible.

by HoratioTarr Wed Jun 21, 2017 2:10 pm

Syl wrote:
HoratioTarr wrote:Who cares? I'm sick to death of hearing about who did or didn't bump her off. She was an attention seeking upper class thicko who bemoaned her lot. If Charles was cheating she should have fucked off and left him years earlier. But she didn't, because she loved the attention she got from the public and the adoration, and the lifestyle that went with it. Ironically, it came with a price. Tough shit. That's life. She'd have had something to really moan about with half a dozen kids, a violent husband and a job at Oxo in the packing department.

If she'd have worn a seatbelt in that car, instead of canoodling with Dodi, she might have survived. Common sense? She had none.

It wont drop because its an unsolved mystery....like the JFK assassination...if people don't get answers they carry on talking and discussing about certain events.

Yes she did wallow in the attention and she was probably self centred and shallow a lot of the time, she was also kind and beautiful, a fairy tale princess to many, and like Marilyn Monroe and Elvis... beautiful people who meet sad ends remain popular long after their deaths.

Oh, and Marilyn Monroe who danced with the Presidential devil, the Mob, sucked Hollywood cock to get her foot in the door, and screwed around for affection, and Elvis the Glutton who screwed around on his wife. Yeah, beautiful people. Please don't make them out to be saintly, paragons of virtue just because they were 'beautiful'.

by HoratioTarr Wed Jun 21, 2017 2:11 pm

nicko wrote:She died because the driver was pissed and she had no seatbelt, end of !

Exactly.

by Guest Wed Jun 21, 2017 2:19 pm

nicko wrote:She died because the driver was pissed and she had no seatbelt, end of !

+1

The only correct assessment of the accident.

by Fuzzy Zack Wed Jun 21, 2017 2:57 pm

Thorin wrote:
Fuzzy Zack wrote:

1. Killed by MI6 agent James Andanson.
2. Illuminati sacrifice. Allegedly purchased by Phillip Green for child sacrifice.
3. CIA instructed Khaled S. Masood

JFK: Lee Harvey was the only killer of JFK but was still a patsy.

Finsbury Park Attack: MI5. 2 MI5 agents escaped, leaving Darren Osborne. Also being investigated Richard Gere Evans.

UK Muslims show worrying belief in conspiracy theories, claims thinktank

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/dec/02/uk-Muslims-show-worrying-belief-in-conspiracy-theories-claims-thinktank

Lol!

You're such a prejudiced, bigotted retard.

Ever thought I may joking? tongue

by Guest Wed Jun 21, 2017 3:08 pm

Fuzzy Zack wrote:
Thorin wrote:

UK Muslims show worrying belief in conspiracy theories, claims thinktank

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/dec/02/uk-Muslims-show-worrying-belief-in-conspiracy-theories-claims-thinktank

Lol!

You're such a prejudiced, bigotted retard.

Ever thought I may joking?

Not really when you have argued for a 9/11 conspiracy

So how is it bigoted to point out this fact and that many Muslims buy into conspiracies.

There is an easy explanation as well, based around a concept of good and evil and those who cannot accept the reality of such tragic events. That they feel they have little to no control over their lives. I would say this happens more with those literally religious, so not just Muslims. The more people are controlled by fears, the more likely they will feel they have no control over their lives.

by eddie Wed Jun 21, 2017 3:50 pm

HoratioTarr wrote:
nicko wrote:She died because the driver was pissed and she had no seatbelt, end of !

Exactly.

Yet there's footage of Henri Paul, the driver, just before leaving to drive, looking very NOT pissed and bending and tying his laces quite soberly.

What of the "flash" that witnesses saw?

Why could they never locate the driver of the white car ad when they did he had coincidentally died?

I don't know what happened and who done it (don't buy into the the Royals doing it) but I don't necessarily believe the bullshit media spin.

by HoratioTarr Wed Jun 21, 2017 3:54 pm

eddie wrote:
HoratioTarr wrote:

Exactly.

Yet there's footage of Henri Paul, the driver, just before leaving to drive, looking very NOT pissed and bending and tying his laces quite soberly.

What of the "flash" that witnesses saw?

Why could they never locate the driver of the white car ad when they did he had coincidentally died?

I don't know what happened and who done it (don't buy into the the Royals doing it) but I don't necessarily believe the bullshit media spin.

They driving at 70 miles an hour in an underpass. The flash might have been a camera.

by magica Wed Jun 21, 2017 4:39 pm

nicko wrote:She died because the driver was pissed and she had no seatbelt, end of !

I don't believe that for one minute. The picture just before they crashed from photographer or one acting as such, was so bright, that caused him to crash. Far from consoling with Dodo,Diana was looking out the back window as they were chased.

by magica Wed Jun 21, 2017 4:41 pm

Syl wrote:
magica wrote:She was a loose cannon and had to be shut up. She was murdered but I think Dodi was also a target and they took them both out.

Camera's in the tunnel turned off, taking Diana to a hospital miles from the tunnel passing a nearer one, many things about this stink.

Who ordered her death, no idea, but would have to be an organisation who caused this like MI5 or some organisation like them.

Mags, did you ever see the film footage of her when she was campaigning about the use of landmines. A journalist came up to her and said she had been called a "loose cannon" (it was the slimy toad Nicholas Soames who had apparently said this) she was visibly shaken, got back in the jeep and said she felt like crying.

This happened shortly before she was murdered....I thought that piece of film was very telling.

No I didn't Syl, but it was heads on she was going to h ave a car crash, she mentioned this herself, beforehand.

by eddie Wed Jun 21, 2017 4:50 pm

HoratioTarr wrote:
eddie wrote:
HoratioTarr wrote:

Exactly.

Yet there's footage of Henri Paul, the driver, just before leaving to drive, looking very NOT pissed and bending and tying his laces quite soberly.

What of the "flash" that witnesses saw?

Why could they never locate the driver of the white car ad when they did he had coincidentally died?

I don't know what happened and who done it (don't buy into the the Royals doing it) but I don't necessarily believe the bullshit media spin.

They driving at 70 miles an hour in an underpass. The flash might have been a camera.

I think you'll find they ruled that out?

by nicko Wed Jun 21, 2017 4:50 pm

Booze, speed, no belt, crash, for fucks sake it was an ACCIDENT !!!!

by magica Wed Jun 21, 2017 5:05 pm

Nothing will convince me it was an accident Nicko. Neither was Kennedy shot by Oswald either.

by Original Quill Wed Jun 21, 2017 5:08 pm

HoratioTarr wrote:
Syl wrote:

It wont drop because its an unsolved mystery....like the JFK assassination...if people don't get answers they carry on talking and discussing about certain events.

Yes she did wallow in the attention and she was probably self centred and shallow a lot of the time, she was also kind and beautiful, a fairy tale princess to many, and like Marilyn Monroe and Elvis... beautiful people who meet sad ends remain popular long after their deaths.

You see, I have a problem with that word...beautiful. Sadly, that coloured most people's perception of her. The fairy tale princess with the good looks and large blue bashful eyes. Bashful eyes, my arse. She was a strong willed, spoiled contrary manipulative woman. Sure, she did kind things. And so she should. She was privileged and noble born and it was her job. She did a lot to drag the mothballs out of the Royal Establishment arse too, but then she also reaped the benefits from that Establishment, as did that old hypocrite, Princess Margaret, who chose her title and privilege over love and thereby went off the rails and lived the rest of her life unhappily. Vanity and happiness are rarely compatible.

But she did (together with Mary of Teck and the Queen Mum) return the monarchy to the Brits. Since the death of James I the monarchy has been in the exclusive hands of Germans, who married Germans (even Elizabeth II, married a Dane, whose mother was Alice of Battenberg). Finally, the women have come through.

by nicko Wed Jun 21, 2017 5:11 pm

You may have something in the Oswald/ Kennedy theory's, Looking at the film of the Murder Kennedy first jerk's back as if hit from the front, at almost the same time his head jerk's forward as he is hit by a bullet from the rear.

by eddie Wed Jun 21, 2017 5:17 pm

nicko wrote:Booze, speed, no belt, crash, for fucks sake it was an ACCIDENT !!!!

Oh right yes, because you were there. Rolling Eyes

by Syl Wed Jun 21, 2017 5:29 pm

HoratioTarr wrote:
Syl wrote:

It wont drop because its an unsolved mystery....like the JFK assassination...if people don't get answers they carry on talking and discussing about certain events.

Yes she did wallow in the attention and she was probably self centred and shallow a lot of the time, she was also kind and beautiful, a fairy tale princess to many, and like Marilyn Monroe and Elvis... beautiful people who meet sad ends remain popular long after their deaths.

You see, I have a problem with that word...beautiful. Sadly, that coloured most people's perception of her. The fairy tale princess with the good looks and large blue bashful eyes. Bashful eyes, my arse. She was a strong willed, spoiled contrary manipulative woman. Sure, she did kind things. And so she should. She was privileged and noble born and it was her job. She did a lot to drag the mothballs out of the Royal Establishment arse too, but then she also reaped the benefits from that Establishment, as did that old hypocrite, Princess Margaret, who chose her title and privilege over love and thereby went off the rails and lived the rest of her life unhappily. Vanity and happiness are rarely compatible.

Problematic or not, beauty captures the public imagination probably more than anything else in this world.
Had Diana looked like the back of a bus I doubt she would not have been loved by the public in the way she was.

Yes Diana was privileged in worldly goods, but I think had she found the one thing she was looking for, a man to love and be loved in return, her behaviour would have been different.

Why should a woman no matter what class she hails from be content to share her husband with some ugly old trout just because it was expected of her and that's the way it has always been in royal circles?
Would you??

by Syl Wed Jun 21, 2017 5:33 pm

Original Quill wrote:
HoratioTarr wrote:

You see, I have a problem with that word...beautiful. Sadly, that coloured most people's perception of her. The fairy tale princess with the good looks and large blue bashful eyes. Bashful eyes, my arse. She was a strong willed, spoiled contrary manipulative woman. Sure, she did kind things. And so she should. She was privileged and noble born and it was her job. She did a lot to drag the mothballs out of the Royal Establishment arse too, but then she also reaped the benefits from that Establishment, as did that old hypocrite, Princess Margaret, who chose her title and privilege over love and thereby went off the rails and lived the rest of her life unhappily. Vanity and happiness are rarely compatible.

But she did (together with Mary of Teck and the Queen Mum) return the monarchy to the Brits. Since the death of James I the monarchy has been in the exclusive hands of Germans, who married Germans (even Elizabeth II, married a Dane, whose mother was Alice of Battenberg). Finally, the women have come through.

Good point Quill. In spite of the fact she was a pain in the backside for the Royal family, she also did more to enhance their image than any one else (bar the queen) has in recent history.

The fact that she was loved and bore two sons to carry on the popular image she created probably saved the Royal family....at least for the next few decades.

by magica Wed Jun 21, 2017 5:37 pm

nicko wrote:You may have something in the Oswald/ Kennedy theory's, Looking at the film of the Murder Kennedy first jerk's back as if hit from the front, at almost the same time his head jerk's forward as he is hit by a bullet from the rear.

Yes there was a shot from the side which blew his brain out, hence Jackie climbing up the boot to retrieve it.

If Oswald shot him in the back of his head, I doubt that, someone finished him off.

by HoratioTarr Wed Jun 21, 2017 5:43 pm

Syl wrote:
HoratioTarr wrote:

You see, I have a problem with that word...beautiful. Sadly, that coloured most people's perception of her. The fairy tale princess with the good looks and large blue bashful eyes. Bashful eyes, my arse. She was a strong willed, spoiled contrary manipulative woman. Sure, she did kind things. And so she should. She was privileged and noble born and it was her job. She did a lot to drag the mothballs out of the Royal Establishment arse too, but then she also reaped the benefits from that Establishment, as did that old hypocrite, Princess Margaret, who chose her title and privilege over love and thereby went off the rails and lived the rest of her life unhappily. Vanity and happiness are rarely compatible.

Problematic or not, beauty captures the public imagination probably more than anything else in this world.
Had Diana looked like the back of a bus I doubt she would not have been loved by the public in the way she was.

Yes Diana was privileged in worldly goods, but I think had she found the one thing she was looking for, a man to love and be loved in return, her behaviour would have been different.

Why should a woman no matter what class she hails from be content to share her husband with some ugly old trout just because it was expected of her and that's the way it has always been in royal circles?
Would you??

So, you've just called Camilla ugly old trout because she's not beautiful to the eye? She can't help the way she looks and can't help her age either. But Charles still loved her. What does that tell you? It's not all about looks you know. Also, Diana knew about Camilla before she married Charles. Anyone with any sense would have backed off. Diana was, by her own admittance, thick.

by Syl Wed Jun 21, 2017 6:06 pm

HoratioTarr wrote:
Syl wrote:

Problematic or not, beauty captures the public imagination probably more than anything else in this world.
Had Diana looked like the back of a bus I doubt she would not have been loved by the public in the way she was.

Yes Diana was privileged in worldly goods, but I think had she found the one thing she was looking for, a man to love and be loved in return, her behaviour would have been different.

Why should a woman no matter what class she hails from be content to share her husband with some ugly old trout just because it was expected of her and that's the way it has always been in royal circles?
Would you??

So, you've just called Camilla ugly old trout because she's not beautiful to the eye? She can't help the way she looks and can't help her age either. But Charles still loved her. What does that tell you? It's not all about looks you know. Also, Diana knew about Camilla before she married Charles. Anyone with any sense would have backed off. Diana was, by her own admittance, thick.

Camilla is seen as an ugly old trout because that's the way she acted, like a wicked witch....ugliness doesn't always have to be physical.
Had Diana lived she would be mid 50's...hardly a youngster, but she would still be loved. Wink

I don't believe Diana knew for sure Camilla was still sniffing around before she married, didn't she find engraved cufflinks from her to Charles on her honeymoon which made her suspicious?
She was young and in love, she believed he loved her, though all the signs were there he didn't....."Whatever love is"...remember that remark?

by Original Quill Wed Jun 21, 2017 6:34 pm

HT wrote:Also, Diana knew about Camilla before she married Charles. Anyone with any sense would have backed off.

Dude...we all marry someone who has had a past, to varying degrees. We don't expect the spouse to carry on with a former gf.

It is too bad that Charles and Camille could not have gone straight to marriage, but that's what you get with all those royal pressures going on. He's like any other person today...he made a mistake and married the wrong woman. Shit happens.

by Raggamuffin Wed Jun 21, 2017 6:47 pm

It's really not a very efficient way to murder someone. She might easily have survived a crash.

by Raggamuffin Wed Jun 21, 2017 6:49 pm

Syl wrote:
HoratioTarr wrote:

So, you've just called Camilla ugly old trout because she's not beautiful to the eye? She can't help the way she looks and can't help her age either. But Charles still loved her. What does that tell you? It's not all about looks you know. Also, Diana knew about Camilla before she married Charles. Anyone with any sense would have backed off. Diana was, by her own admittance, thick.

Camilla is seen as an ugly old trout because that's the way she acted, like a wicked witch....ugliness doesn't always have to be physical.
Had Diana lived she would be mid 50's...hardly a youngster, but she would still be loved.

I don't believe Diana knew for sure Camilla was still sniffing around before she married, didn't she find engraved cufflinks from her to Charles on her honeymoon which made her suspicious?
She was young and in love, she believed he loved her, though all the signs were there he didn't....."Whatever love is"...remember that remark?

She was hardly an ugly old trout. She was only in her thirties when Charles married Diana, and she wasn't ugly.

by Raggamuffin Wed Jun 21, 2017 6:51 pm

magica wrote:
nicko wrote:You may have something in the Oswald/ Kennedy theory's, Looking at the film of the Murder Kennedy first jerk's back as if hit from the front, at almost the same time his head jerk's forward as he is hit by a bullet from the rear.

Yes there was a shot from the side which blew his brain out, hence Jackie climbing up the boot to retrieve it.

If Oswald shot him in the back of his head, I doubt that, someone finished him off.

She was climbing up to get someone to help IMO. He was shot from behind and the shot made his head bounce forward - he already had his head down from the first bullet, and he was leaning to the left. There is no report of an entry wound on the right side of his head.

by Syl Wed Jun 21, 2017 6:52 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:It's really not a very efficient way to murder someone. She might easily have survived a crash.

I think they made damn sure she didn't survive. Its also convenient that the only surviving passenger in that car suffers from permanent amnesia.

by Raggamuffin Wed Jun 21, 2017 6:52 pm

Syl wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:It's really not a very efficient way to murder someone. She might easily have survived a crash.

I think they made damn sure she didn't survive. Its also convenient that the only surviving passenger in that car suffers from permanent amnesia.

Now how would they do that? How could they be sure that the driver would drive so fast in a tunnel with pillars?

by Syl Wed Jun 21, 2017 7:05 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
Syl wrote:

I think they made damn sure she didn't survive. Its also convenient that the only surviving passenger in that car suffers from permanent amnesia.

Now how would they do that? How could they be sure that the driver would drive so fast in a tunnel with pillars?

If someone was waiting in the tunnel to deliberately cause mayhem it wouldn't really matter how fast he was driving would it. CCTV was turned off and bystanders said they saw an odd flash in the tunnel before the crash.

by magica Wed Jun 21, 2017 7:16 pm

Also there was a car blocking the way to go around the tunnel, so they had to go in it. This was planned imo.

by Syl Wed Jun 21, 2017 7:22 pm

magica wrote:Also there was a car blocking the way to go around the tunnel, so they had to go in it. This was planned imo.

Those 'dark forces' act in very mysterious ways when they want to bump someone off.
Remember the Russian who was stabbed with a poisoned brolly? Some things are stranger than fiction....but they happen anyway.

by Raggamuffin Wed Jun 21, 2017 7:28 pm

Syl wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

Now how would they do that? How could they be sure that the driver would drive so fast in a tunnel with pillars?

If someone was waiting in the tunnel to deliberately cause mayhem it wouldn't really matter how fast he was driving would it. CCTV was turned off and bystanders said they saw an odd flash in the tunnel before the crash.

How could a flash be guaranteed to cause an accident?

by Sponsored content