This blog explores the contemporary political and cultural trends from a distinct perspective
I am not a conspiracy theorist
Published on December 15, 2006 By Bahu Virupaksha In Politics
The Establishment has finally spoken. Nearly 10 years after the tragic death of Princess Diana, a Report prepared by the British Establishment tries to do the impossible--square the circle. The fact that the death of Princess Diana appeared to follow exactly the same sequence of events as she predixcted to her buter seems to me to be crucial. She said that the Palace will try to kill her in a car accident and that happened within weeks of her making that prediction. Does that not appear too much of a coincidence? Moreover Princess Diana had become a raging thorn in the flesh of the Establishment and with a highly publ;isised courtship with a moslem, Dodi Fayed, she had the potential of shaking the throne to its very foundation. Lord Stevens spent a lot of time over the issue of the alleged pregnency of the Princess. To the best of my knowledge the French Autopcy report was silent over this issue as the Inquest was held only to assertain the cause of death.

The driver of the car Paul Henri has passed the Pilot's test for a License just days before the August 30, 1997 crash and he was declared to be fit, health and of stable mind. Suddenly we have the theory that the alchohol level in his blood was three times the average. Now everyone knows tha individuals have different levels of tolerance for alcholhol and even assuming that Paul had 3 times the national average does not make him an alchoholic. Moreover he was a member of the French secret service and this point makes his presence in the car suspect.

The princess who usually belt up herself was found to have had a disconnected seat belt with frayed edges. This has not been expalined.

The White Fiat Uno that brushed against the Benz as it sped its way into the tunnel has not been traced. Who were in the car and that car could easily have been traced because of the security cameras installed at the entrance of the Paris tunnel. Blaming the paparazzi seems to me to be a way o f deflecting the balme from the real movers and shakers of the conspiracy.

Having raised these points, I am firmly of the opinion that MI 6 when it carries out strikes of this nature will do so without leaving too many of its fingerprints. The loose ends in the case suggests that it was the job of a less professional body of killers compared to MI 6.

Comments
on Dec 15, 2006
This will always have questions around it - the same way the Kennedy assassination did and still does.

For the sake of our young Princes and our future King I wish people would just let it go. Every-time this is dredged up the boys must relive the loss of their beloved mother and our beloved Princess.

RIP Diana - we still love you and I will always admire you and your memory lives on in many of us.
on Dec 15, 2006
Diana was "murdered" by a drunken driver. No more, no less.
on Dec 15, 2006
I am not a conspiracy theorist

You could have fooled me.   
on Dec 15, 2006
Looks a lot like you are theorizing about conspiracies to me. What's the definition of a conspiracy theorist? Come on, only alcoholics can get drunk? How would Occam's razor cut this one?

on Dec 16, 2006

I am not a conspiracy theorist


You most assuredly are!
on Dec 16, 2006
I am not a conspiracy theorist in that I do recognise that events when fitted, as historiographers are prone to say, within the teleology of find sight events that have a simple chain of causation can be made to appear as if it is the product of a scheming intelligence. I am only saying that Lord Stevens has not succeeded in proving that the Establishment is in the clear. I am of the opinion that had the MI 6 carried out the strike they would have done so without a hint of conspiracy.
on Dec 16, 2006
RIP Diana - we still love you and I will always admire you and your memory lives on in many of us


I agree with the sentiment and I too wish that the memory of the Princess of Wales lives on.