Webbo Posted 14 December 2006 Posted 14 December 2006 who cares? all the drama after she died wos ridiculous. yes it wos sad news and it was a bit of a shock, but some people went pathetically over the top
Finnegan Posted 14 December 2006 Posted 14 December 2006 Coulda sworn that wasn't there before. That's what Henri Paul said! that is what the driv... Nah, can't do it Got you covered, big man.
Zingari Posted 2 March 2007 Posted 2 March 2007 another twist in the long running saga; fayed wins jury appeal and wants charles and philip on the stand http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/6411091.stm
Thracian Posted 2 March 2007 Posted 2 March 2007 It was an accident. Period. In which case why has it taken over 10 years for the inquest to be concluded and for the facts to be published?. The answer is because so many things have gone on which so far defy explanation and which suggest malpractise and cover up far more than they suggest a simple accident. In my view the public don't particularly want to hear the truth. They are mostly like Dagenham Dave though not necessarily for the same reasons. But if it were your son or daughter killed in that crash you might feel differently. I certainly would. And especially considering there is so much evidence and are so many statements which simple do not add up and cannot add up together to reveal the truth. If a relative of yours had been killed in a simple car crash do you honestly think it would take over 10 years to conclude any inquest?. Or that anyone would be seeking to avoid the evidence being made public? The timescale is damning in itself and people like Al Fayed and the Daily Express deserve only admiration being so determined to get at the truth. I don't believe "simple accident" is the truth for one minute. I am not categorically saying it wasn't an accident. But simple, no way. There is much evidence which seems contradictory and much to be properly explained.
Head Honcho Posted 2 March 2007 Posted 2 March 2007 Maybe if it was your daughter or son you would. And I would hope then that you'd have the courage and perseverance to pursue the truth in the face of so many obstacles - the strongly suspected lies, malpractices, question avoidance, cover-ups, vested interests, and inconsistencies - regardless. You might not care but some of us do. And you can always find something else to listen to on the radio. I never met her but from much that I've read Princess Diana seemed much more a humanist than a monarchist despite her background and her nievity. As for the monarchy, there's no point in talking to you seeing as you so clearly have your views formed. I doubt very much the government would use a car crash to assasinate someone of her status. The chances of her not dying would be too great and a failed attempt would mean increased security making it harder for them to assasinate her in the future. Ok she died, but she could easily have lived. Her bodyguard Trevor Rees-Jones lived, it could quite easily have been Di who lived. They say her bodyguard survived because he wore a seatbelt. What if she wore a seatbelt? There'd be conspiracy theories if she'd died of cancer or old age even. Call me a cynic but remember these theories do one thing more then anything else. They sell newspapers and they sell advertising!
Thracian Posted 2 March 2007 Posted 2 March 2007 I doubt very much the government would use a car crash to assasinate someone of her status. The chances of her not dying would be too great and a failed attempt would mean increased security making it harder for them to assasinate her in the future. Ok she died, but she could easily have lived. Her bodyguard Trevor Rees-Jones lived, it could quite easily have been Di who lived. They say her bodyguard survived because he wore a seatbelt. What if she wore a seatbelt? There'd be conspiracy theories if she'd died of cancer or old age even. Call me a cynic but remember these theories do one thing more then anything else. They sell newspapers and they sell advertising! Although I wouldn't totally rule it out, I've not said or suggested she was assassinated - and your reasoning highlights the risks of attempting to kill someone in such a manner. But she may well have been under threat and when she died the whole machinery of cover up swung into action for various reasons and because of various concerns. That apparent covering up was, if the claims are to be believed and are proven, extensive, dishonest and totally out of order. People should be held to acount.
Rincewind Posted 2 March 2007 Posted 2 March 2007 I don't really care. It's taken so long because of who she was and Fayed has money and would not let it go. Maybe John Lennon was murdered by the CIA, Buddy Holly by the Klu Klux Klan for performing with black artists, Elvis Presley overfed by Weight watchers for being incurable. Surely if anyone wanted to assassinate Diana they would have come up with a better method than getting the driver drunk then hoping that the car would smash into a wall and going fast enough for her not surviving. People die in accidents every day. It's just when it happens to a high profile person all the paranoia is brought to the surface. At the time I thought what a sad loss and it inspired me to write this. ---------1------------ A PRAYER FOR DIANA Dear God What a waste of life Repeat the words in my head Why couldn't you have taken Jeremy Beadle instead? -----------2----------- ANSWER TO A PRAYER I may be the Almighty Mans' fate at my fingertips But even what I can withstand Does have its limits. Jeremy Beadle is still with us, so does that prove there is or there isn't a God?
Daggers Posted 2 March 2007 Author Posted 2 March 2007 ...this topic still rambling on is it... Wake me when we get a 'real news' day.
Geo V Posted 2 March 2007 Posted 2 March 2007 It was done by Lee Harvey Oswald. Everyone knows it but we are all in denial.
Manwell Pablo Posted 2 March 2007 Posted 2 March 2007 ...this topic still rambling on is it... Wake me when we get a 'real news' day. Wake up Dave, theres been a armed robbery in Bedford.
lookwhaticando Posted 2 March 2007 Posted 2 March 2007 ...this topic still rambling on is it... Wake me when we get a 'real news' day. You started it.
lookwhaticando Posted 2 March 2007 Posted 2 March 2007 I've changed my mind. I reckon the French did it. The inquest has taken so long because our poncy government didn't want to upset our European friends and partners... even though they shaft us all the time.
JoeyB Posted 2 March 2007 Posted 2 March 2007 and i got banned for less:p "Colonel Mustard with the lead pipe did it" that one ftw
Daggers Posted 2 March 2007 Author Posted 2 March 2007 You started it. I didn't - the driver did...he was the one that crashed while pissed and i got banned for less Shut up
Thracian Posted 2 March 2007 Posted 2 March 2007 I didn't - the driver did...he was the one that crashed while pissed Shut up You say he was pissed, others say the blood sample used wasn't his at all.
lookwhaticando Posted 2 March 2007 Posted 2 March 2007 You say he was pissed, others say the blood sample used wasn't his at all. Dave obviously has the inside track... I told you he started it.
Daggers Posted 2 March 2007 Author Posted 2 March 2007 You say... I say "I don't give a shit whether he was pissed or was indulging in a golden shower session with Di and Dodi at the time of the crash". And that is my considered position on the matter. Oh, but I'd prefer it to be the latter
Webbo Posted 2 March 2007 Posted 2 March 2007 You say he was pissed, others say the blood sample used wasn't his at all. i think you'll find that they did a DNA test recently and it is definitely his.
Zingari Posted 2 March 2007 Posted 2 March 2007 ...this topic still rambling on is it... Wake me when we get a 'real news' day. its back because of this latest development http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/6411091.stm
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.