Was Diana murdered?

by Andy Wed Jun 21, 2017 11:36 am

First topic message reminder :

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 nicko Thu Jun 22, 2017 4:42 pm

What's the problem? he loves her, she loves him, and they show it, best of luck to the pair of 'em.

PS,Why pick on her looks?

by magica Thu Jun 22, 2017 4:45 pm

They've always loved each other, just wasn't allowed to marry back then. Charles always looks so happy now since he's been able to have Camilla by his side, as his wife.

by Syl Thu Jun 22, 2017 5:16 pm

magica wrote:
Syl wrote:

Sorry, in hindsight I realise I was being unfair to battered crabs.

I've never seen a battered crab

I have eaten a few dressed ones....delicious. Cool

by magica Thu Jun 22, 2017 5:25 pm

Ugh I couldn't eat anything like that, but then I am a veggie. Smile

by Syl Thu Jun 22, 2017 5:28 pm

magica wrote:Ugh I couldn't eat anything like that, but then I am a veggie.

Sadly I don't think there is a veggie alternative, you could have the empty shell and fill it with beans or something. Razz

by HoratioTarr Thu Jun 22, 2017 5:30 pm

Syl wrote:
magica wrote:

Shame was he loved Camilla but because she wasn't a virgin, he got sorted out with Diana. Being young she thought he loved her, he didn't. Before this Camilla was married off.

Shows their love was pure, still together now. If he could've married her back in 1974, none of this would've happened.

I would hardly call their love pure when they had an adulterous relationship for years, but yes, had they married early they would not have put a young impressionable girl through all the trauma they did.

Diana spread it about a bit too.

by HoratioTarr Thu Jun 22, 2017 5:31 pm

eddie wrote:
HoratioTarr wrote:

Don't you think that if someone wanted her bumped off, they wouldn't use a method that was so hit and miss?

You mean like poison in her chalice?

Any method you use will cause suspicion. Perhaps it was supposed to only be a warning but she died anyway?

A warning for what? She was divorced from Charles and getting on with her life. What exact threat was she?

by HoratioTarr Thu Jun 22, 2017 5:33 pm

Syl wrote:
HoratioTarr wrote:

I think the thing here is how people are influenced by physical beauty in that they make judgements on their character based purely on that person's face. Beauty does open doors, and yes, we all admire it and perhaps wish we had more of it, but it's still sad that people who don't possess looks or have better looking competition, get judged or pushed aside.

I think if a person is already in the public eye looks alone wont have much sway with the public if the person doesn't come across as genuine or nice.

Trying to think of examples....

Liz Hurley, many consider her to be beautiful, and she was cheated on very publicly which usually garners public sympathy, but she isn't really popular because she comes across (in interviews) as snobbish and quite full of herself.

Adele...doesn't fit the stereotypical image of beauty and swears like a trouper...seems to universally loved.

So what exactly did Camilla do to alienate the public? Apart from her boat race or age that is?

by Syl Thu Jun 22, 2017 5:37 pm

HoratioTarr wrote:
Syl wrote:

I would hardly call their love pure when they had an adulterous relationship for years, but yes, had they married early they would not have put a young impressionable girl through all the trauma they did.

Diana spread it about a bit too.

Yes she did, but I doubt she would have if he had been faithful to her in the first place.
No matter which way anyone tries to rewrite history...Diana was a young innocent virgin who married a man who was in love with someone else.
The other woman pretended to be some sort of muse for the young princess, whilst shagging her husband behind her back...which in my book makes Camilla an exceedingly unattractive woman.
Diana was disposed of, Camilla slides into her place, job done for her, job done for Charles, everyone lives happily ever after.

That's if you can be happy when you have built your life on someone else's misery.

by Andy Thu Jun 22, 2017 5:37 pm

She was sharing Charles's semen with Diana.

by eddie Thu Jun 22, 2017 6:23 pm

I'm sort of with nicko on this. Charles and Camilla were in love, couldn't marry and then continued to see eachother behind his wife's back and then they married and yes, they seem finally happy at last.

If that's not two people who are genuinely in love, I don't know what is.

by Raggamuffin Thu Jun 22, 2017 6:25 pm

nicko wrote:What's the problem? he loves her, she loves him, and they show it, best of luck to the pair of 'em.

PS,Why pick on her looks?

Because people are judgemental nicko. I expect they're not exactly oil paintings themselves ... Razz

by Raggamuffin Thu Jun 22, 2017 6:27 pm

Diana must have known about Camilla when she agreed to marry Charles - she knew they were close at least. I expect she liked the idea of being a princess though, so she overlooked it. Don't get me wrong - I liked Diana, but she should have married someone nearer her own age, or gone out and had some fun - she was only 19 when she got married.

by Syl Thu Jun 22, 2017 6:41 pm

I think people forget that Charles was surrounded by staff and aides who covered up for him...she had no one to turn to really, she was expected to fit in and act like previous royal wives.

Eddie, I believe Charles and Camilla are genuinly in love, I doubt anyone could ever dispute that.

by Raggamuffin Thu Jun 22, 2017 6:42 pm

I don't know about "in love", but they're much better suited to each other really.

by magica Thu Jun 22, 2017 6:46 pm

I don't think it was their choice. Queen mum and Diana Nan thought this up between them.

Diana and Charles were thrown together. He had to marry, Diana was available. Maybe she thought he loved her and went along with it. His heart was Camillas, always was.

Sadly he didn't have those feelings for Diana who and let's get this right, played on it. She loved being photographed even telling the press where she would be.

She split other marriages, and wanted to be painted as the victim.

If she hadn't died, I think she would be living in America and away from Royalty. Now a days she wouldn't be so reverred either.

I feel she was used but she must've known,but we will ever know, as she's dead.

by magica Thu Jun 22, 2017 6:49 pm

Syl wrote:
magica wrote:Ugh I couldn't eat anything like that, but then I am a veggie.

Sadly I don't think there is a veggie alternative, you could have the empty shell and fill it with beans or something.

by Raggamuffin Thu Jun 22, 2017 6:51 pm

magica wrote:I don't think it was their choice. Queen mum and Diana Nan thought this up between them.

Diana and Charles were thrown together. He had to marry, Diana was available. Maybe she thought he loved her and went along with it. His heart was Camillas, always was.

Sadly he didn't have those feelings for Diana who and let's get this right, played on it. She loved being photographed even telling the press where she would be.

She split other marriages, and wanted to be painted as the victim.

If she hadn't died, I think she would be living in America and away from Royalty. Now a days she wouldn't be so reverred either.

I feel she was used but she must've known,but we will ever know, as she's dead.

Of course they had a choice, especially Diana. Charles didn't have to marry actually. No, they made a choice, and it turned out to be a bad one. Charles wasn't old at the time, but he'd been brought up as the heir to the throne, so he was kind of serious. Diana was young, and had hardly lived really.

by magica Thu Jun 22, 2017 6:54 pm

He was told he had to marry, Diana was there, put forward by her nan. Diana's family were friends with Royalty, so it seemed a good match. It wasn't.

by magica Thu Jun 22, 2017 6:56 pm

If as I said before, he could've married Camilla in the first place, none of this would have happened.

by Raggamuffin Thu Jun 22, 2017 6:56 pm

magica wrote:He was told he had to marry, Diana was there, put forward by her nan. Diana's family were friends with Royalty, so it seemed a good match. It wasn't.

He was a grown man - he didn't have to do anything. Diana didn't have to agree to marry him either. Despite her youth, she was an adult.

by Raggamuffin Thu Jun 22, 2017 6:57 pm

magica wrote:If as I said before, he could've married Camilla in the first place, none of this would have happened.

A lot has been said about that, but maybe she preferred Parker-Bowles at the time, or maybe Charles didn't want to get married at all at the time.

by Syl Thu Jun 22, 2017 7:01 pm

magica wrote:He was told he had to marry, Diana was there, put forward by her nan. Diana's family were friends with Royalty, so it seemed a good match. It wasn't.

Charles was definitely under pressure to marry, his 'playboy' lifestyle by all accounts pissed his father off, who never seemed to take to his son the same way he took to his daughter anyway, Charles always seemed in awe of his dad, I'm sure he did exactly what he was told to do.

Diana was in love, I believe she was urged to marry but she was free to make that choice...she just, unfortunately for her, chose badly.

by Syl Thu Jun 22, 2017 7:05 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
magica wrote:If as I said before, he could've married Camilla in the first place, none of this would have happened.

A lot has been said about that, but maybe she preferred Parker-Bowles at the time, or maybe Charles didn't want to get married at all at the time.

She wasn't a virgin, I think that had a lot to do with it.
Royal protocol today is nothing like it was back then.

by eddie Thu Jun 22, 2017 7:06 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:I don't know about "in love", but they're much better suited to each other really.

Well if they're not "in love" after being pulled apart and still finding a way to be together....then what is being "in love"?

by Syl Thu Jun 22, 2017 7:12 pm

eddie wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:I don't know about "in love", but they're much better suited to each other really.

Well if they're not "in love" after being pulled apart and still finding a way to be together....then what is being "in love"?

Remember Charles on his engagement to Diana, the interviewer said "and you are both in love"...she said "Of course" he said..."Whatever 'in love' means"....she should have run for the hills as soon as the camera was turned off.

by HoratioTarr Thu Jun 22, 2017 7:16 pm

Syl wrote:
eddie wrote:

Well if they're not "in love" after being pulled apart and still finding a way to be together....then what is being "in love"?

Remember Charles on his engagement to Diana, the interviewer said "and you are both in love"...she said "Of course" he said..."Whatever 'in love' means"....she should have run for the hills as soon as the camera was turned off.

What a thing to say. The whole nation was like....you fucking dick.

by Syl Thu Jun 22, 2017 7:17 pm

HoratioTarr wrote:
Syl wrote:

Remember Charles on his engagement to Diana, the interviewer said "and you are both in love"...she said "Of course" he said..."Whatever 'in love' means"....she should have run for the hills as soon as the camera was turned off.

What a thing to say. The whole nation was like....you fucking dick.

Yep...and the camera lingered on her face, she looked devastated.

by HoratioTarr Thu Jun 22, 2017 7:24 pm

Syl wrote:
HoratioTarr wrote:

What a thing to say. The whole nation was like....you fucking dick.

Yep...and the camera lingered on her face, she looked devastated.

It didn't linger on her face. It never panned in at all. I think he just made a dumb male gaff. The camera did pan into their interlocked fingers though, with him stroking her hand. I think he's a product of his parents and showing emotion was just not the done thing when one's been born with a silver spoon up one's arse.

by eddie Thu Jun 22, 2017 7:26 pm

Syl wrote:
eddie wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:I don't know about "in love", but they're much better suited to each other really.

Well if they're not "in love" after being pulled apart and still finding a way to be together....then what is being "in love"?

Remember Charles on his engagement to Diana, the interviewer said "and you are both in love"...she said "Of course" he said..."Whatever 'in love' means"....she should have run for the hills as soon as the camera was turned off.

That was his message to Camilla: "I am not in love with this woman who's hand I'm holding"

by Syl Thu Jun 22, 2017 7:30 pm

HoratioTarr wrote:
Syl wrote:

Yep...and the camera lingered on her face, she looked devastated.

It didn't linger on her face. It never panned in at all. I think he just made a dumb male gaff. The camera did pan into their interlocked fingers though, with him stroking her hand. I think he's a product of his parents and showing emotion was just not the done thing when one's been born with a silver spoon up one's arse.

I have seen a video where the camera did stay on her face. She answered another question, but you could see she was devastated, it was right at the end of the interview.
She even spoke about it afterwards, saying how hurt she had been......obviously after the marriage had finished.

by HoratioTarr Thu Jun 22, 2017 7:36 pm

eddie wrote:
Syl wrote:

Remember Charles on his engagement to Diana, the interviewer said "and you are both in love"...she said "Of course" he said..."Whatever 'in love' means"....she should have run for the hills as soon as the camera was turned off.

That was his message to Camilla: "I am not in love with this woman who's hand I'm holding"

Possibly. If he'd had a bit of backbone he might have stood up to his parents and refused to marry someone he didn't love.

by Raggamuffin Thu Jun 22, 2017 7:37 pm

eddie wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:I don't know about "in love", but they're much better suited to each other really.

Well if they're not "in love" after being pulled apart and still finding a way to be together....then what is being "in love"?

That's more like infatuation. I think they're comfortable together, and they get on well and share the same interests.

by Raggamuffin Thu Jun 22, 2017 7:40 pm

Syl wrote:
eddie wrote:

Well if they're not "in love" after being pulled apart and still finding a way to be together....then what is being "in love"?

Remember Charles on his engagement to Diana, the interviewer said "and you are both in love"...she said "Of course" he said..."Whatever 'in love' means"....she should have run for the hills as soon as the camera was turned off.

Yes, but she didn't sound that sincere either IMO.

by eddie Thu Jun 22, 2017 7:42 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
Syl wrote:
eddie wrote:

Well if they're not "in love" after being pulled apart and still finding a way to be together....then what is being "in love"?

Remember Charles on his engagement to Diana, the interviewer said "and you are both in love"...she said "Of course" he said..."Whatever 'in love' means"....she should have run for the hills as soon as the camera was turned off.

Yes, but she didn't sound that sincere either IMO.

I agree.

by HoratioTarr Thu Jun 22, 2017 7:45 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
Syl wrote:

Remember Charles on his engagement to Diana, the interviewer said "and you are both in love"...she said "Of course" he said..."Whatever 'in love' means"....she should have run for the hills as soon as the camera was turned off.

Yes, but she didn't sound that sincere either IMO.

True. If you watch the footage it all looks a bit tense and forced...and desperate. I think both of them were hoping it would work out, but they were so different in so many ways, it was doomed from the start and possibly even without Camilla. I think it would have been unhappy even if he'd remained faithful to her and she to him.

by HoratioTarr Thu Jun 22, 2017 7:55 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
Syl wrote:

Remember Charles on his engagement to Diana, the interviewer said "and you are both in love"...she said "Of course" he said..."Whatever 'in love' means"....she should have run for the hills as soon as the camera was turned off.

Yes, but she didn't sound that sincere either IMO.

I remember seeing some footage of her being interviewed and she told how she slapped her father's face for remarrying after his divorce. Like her father has no life of his own and no choice to get on with his life by remarrying someone of his choice? You'd think her and her siblings would have wished him all the best, even if they didn't like his choice of wife.

by Raggamuffin Thu Jun 22, 2017 8:01 pm

HoratioTarr wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

Yes, but she didn't sound that sincere either IMO.

I remember seeing some footage of her being interviewed and she told how she slapped her father's face for remarrying after his divorce. Like her father has no life of his own and no choice to get on with his life by remarrying someone of his choice? You'd think her and her siblings would have wished him all the best, even if they didn't like his choice of wife.

I think that's understandable though.

by Syl Thu Jun 22, 2017 8:39 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
eddie wrote:

Well if they're not "in love" after being pulled apart and still finding a way to be together....then what is being "in love"?

That's more like infatuation. I think they're comfortable together, and they get on well and share the same interests.

They obviously always fancied each other....didn't he once say he wished he could be her tampax so he could be near her all the time.....or something equally nauseating. pale

edit.....here it is. A married man talking to his married mistress......classy pair.

"As the couple carried on a romantic relationship from the 1970s and into their marriages to other people, a flirty conversation between Camilla and Charles was caught on tape and published in 1992.
The tapes included an exchange in which Charles said he wanted to be Camilla's tampon:

Charles: "Oh god. I'll just live inside your trousers or something. It would be much easier!"
Camilla: (Laughs.) "What are you going to turn into, a pair of knickers?" (Both laugh). "Oh, you're going to come back as a pair of knickers."
Charles: "Or, God forbid, a Tampax. Just my luck!" (Laughs.)
Camilla: "You are a complete idiot!" (Laughs.) "Oh, what a wonderful idea!"
Needless to say, it was mortifying for the royal family and Charles’s wife at the time Princess Diana, as well the heir to the throne and Camilla."

by magica Thu Jun 22, 2017 8:43 pm

Syl wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

That's more like infatuation. I think they're comfortable together, and they get on well and share the same interests.

They obviously always fancied each other....didn't he once say he wished he could be her tampax so he could be inside her all the time.....or something equally nauseating.

Dirty talk

Yuk What a Face

by Syl Thu Jun 22, 2017 8:45 pm

magica wrote:
Syl wrote:

They obviously always fancied each other....didn't he once say he wished he could be her tampax so he could be inside her all the time.....or something equally nauseating.

Dirty talk

Yuk

I just edited the post....I found the conversation which was published when their phone chat was hacked.

by Raggamuffin Thu Jun 22, 2017 8:45 pm

Syl wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

That's more like infatuation. I think they're comfortable together, and they get on well and share the same interests.

They obviously always fancied each other....didn't he once say he wished he could be her tampax so he could be near her all the time.....or something equally nauseating.

edit.....here it is. A married man talking to his married mistress......classy pair.

"As the couple carried on a romantic relationship from the 1970s and into their marriages to other people, a flirty conversation between Camilla and Charles was caught on tape and published in 1992.
The tapes included an exchange in which Charles said he wanted to be Camilla's tampon:

Charles: "Oh god. I'll just live inside your trousers or something. It would be much easier!"
Camilla: (Laughs.) "What are you going to turn into, a pair of knickers?" (Both laugh). "Oh, you're going to come back as a pair of knickers."
Charles: "Or, God forbid, a Tampax. Just my luck!" (Laughs.)
Camilla: "You are a complete idiot!" (Laughs.) "Oh, what a wonderful idea!"
Needless to say, it was mortifying for the royal family and Charles’s wife at the time Princess Diana, as well the heir to the throne and Camilla."

That was 25 years ago!

by Syl Thu Jun 22, 2017 8:47 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
Syl wrote:

They obviously always fancied each other....didn't he once say he wished he could be her tampax so he could be near her all the time.....or something equally nauseating.

edit.....here it is. A married man talking to his married mistress......classy pair.

"As the couple carried on a romantic relationship from the 1970s and into their marriages to other people, a flirty conversation between Camilla and Charles was caught on tape and published in 1992.
The tapes included an exchange in which Charles said he wanted to be Camilla's tampon:

Charles: "Oh god. I'll just live inside your trousers or something. It would be much easier!"
Camilla: (Laughs.) "What are you going to turn into, a pair of knickers?" (Both laugh). "Oh, you're going to come back as a pair of knickers."
Charles: "Or, God forbid, a Tampax. Just my luck!" (Laughs.)
Camilla: "You are a complete idiot!" (Laughs.) "Oh, what a wonderful idea!"
Needless to say, it was mortifying for the royal family and Charles’s wife at the time Princess Diana, as well the heir to the throne and Camilla."

That was 25 years ago!

So?
They fancied each other then and they are still together now...sounds more than infatuation to me.

by Raggamuffin Thu Jun 22, 2017 8:49 pm

Syl wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

That was 25 years ago!

So?
They fancied each other then and they are still together now...sounds more than infatuation to me.

I didn't say it was infatuation, I said that being "in love" would be infatuation. I expect they get on well.

by Syl Thu Jun 22, 2017 8:55 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
Syl wrote:

So?
They fancied each other then and they are still together now...sounds more than infatuation to me.

I didn't say it was infatuation, I said that being "in love" would be infatuation. I expect they get on well.

There is a huge difference between 'being in love' and 'infatuation'....not sure what you are trying to say really.

To be honest I couldn't care less if they are in love or not.....but like Diana said when she was his wife..."there are three of us in this marriage so it got a bit crowded"....well now there are just the two of them...so they got what they wanted.

by Raggamuffin Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:07 pm

Syl wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

I didn't say it was infatuation, I said that being "in love" would be infatuation. I expect they get on well.

There is a huge difference between 'being in love' and 'infatuation'....not sure what you are trying to say really.

To be honest I couldn't care less if they are in love or not.....but like Diana said when she was his wife..."there are three of us in this marriage so it got a bit crowded"....well now there are just the two of them...so they got what they wanted.

I don't think there is a difference actually.

by HoratioTarr Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:08 pm

Syl wrote:
HoratioTarr wrote:

Diana spread it about a bit too.

Yes she did, but I doubt she would have if he had been faithful to her in the first place.
No matter which way anyone tries to rewrite history...Diana was a young innocent virgin who married a man who was in love with someone else.
The other woman pretended to be some sort of muse for the young princess, whilst shagging her husband behind her back...which in my book makes Camilla an exceedingly unattractive woman.
Diana was disposed of, Camilla slides into her place, job done for her, job done for Charles, everyone lives happily ever after.

That's if you can be happy when you have built your life on someone else's misery.

Diana had a flirtation with her married bodyguard. She knew he had a wife and carried on anyway. Did she consider that woman's feelings? I doubt it.

by Syl Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:15 pm

HoratioTarr wrote:
Syl wrote:

Yes she did, but I doubt she would have if he had been faithful to her in the first place.
No matter which way anyone tries to rewrite history...Diana was a young innocent virgin who married a man who was in love with someone else.
The other woman pretended to be some sort of muse for the young princess, whilst shagging her husband behind her back...which in my book makes Camilla an exceedingly unattractive woman.
Diana was disposed of, Camilla slides into her place, job done for her, job done for Charles, everyone lives happily ever after.

That's if you can be happy when you have built your life on someone else's misery.

Diana had a flirtation with her married bodyguard. She knew he had a wife and carried on anyway. Did she consider that woman's feelings? I doubt it.

She never painted herself as an angel did she?
She said she turned to him because Charles had abandoned her, she claimed she fell in love with him, he was duly sacked, and soon after he died.
Prince Charles told her he was dead a couple of minutes before she had to face the press at some gala or other....very spiteful.

She thought he may have been murdered...she was possibly right.

by Syl Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:17 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
Syl wrote:

There is a huge difference between 'being in love' and 'infatuation'....not sure what you are trying to say really.

To be honest I couldn't care less if they are in love or not.....but like Diana said when she was his wife..."there are three of us in this marriage so it got a bit crowded"....well now there are just the two of them...so they got what they wanted.

I don't think there is a difference actually.

Oh right...I think differently.

by Syl Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:18 pm

Diana talks about her life, her feelings and her affairs in these tapes.
Not made public till years after she died.

by Sponsored content