What Was MI6 Team Doing In Paris The Night Princess Diana Died?

One thing I want to add..

Harry and William, they saw a lot of what happened behind the scenes (The family grieving etc) so don't you think they would have cottoned on to something If the royals were involved?
You can bet they have searched the net and seen all the conspiracy theory's and asked their Dad and others about it.
Charles and Diana's marriage was far from perfect but like otherside said there is no real reason to bump her off, Dodi on the other hand...
Oh and even If she did have a child with Dodi he/she would have not been in any line to the throne.

reply to post by boymonkey74


I noticed during the documentary that they narrator talks about the Royals the film makers approached to make comment, he listed Prince William and Harry how sick is that. What was Mr. Allan going to say “hey boys what do you think about your dad and grandfather using spies to kill your mum”

How sick is that, how upsetting would that have been for them.

The whole documentary is utter BS.

I know there are a lot of members who are imploring people to watch it am telling you not to because I think it lowered by IQ.

And like I keep saying, there I zero motivation for assassinating Diana.

reply to post by boymonkey74

Harry and William, they saw a lot of what happened behind the scenes (The family grieving etc) so don't you think they would have cottoned on to something If the royals were involved?

You make an assumption. Do you think William and Harry live in a three bed terraced house to overhear nan and gramps planning the funeral?

You can bet they have searched the net and seen all the conspiracy theory's and asked their Dad and others about it.

Possibly but they could have been brought up to have contempt for the musings of the great unwashed and not bothered with the internet as a source of entertainment.

Charles and Diana's marriage was far from perfect but like otherside said there is no real reason to bump her off, Dodi on the other hand...

You are suggesting that the royals had a possible reason for bumping off Dodi. Clearly you have no interest in honest discourse.

Oh and even If she did have a child with Dodi he/she would have not been in any line to the throne.

I think you are trying to conflate matters. Nobody has suggested that Diana and Dodi's child would be in line for the throne other than you.

What many people are saying is that a racists in power would never accept a half brown and Muslim half brother to a future king of Britain.

reply to post by DoorKnobEddie

Not saying the royals wanted Dodi bumped off but in my opinion Dodi would have had more enemy's than Diana.
Oh and calling them racists....prove it.
Face it you just do not like the royals and wish to tarnish them anyway you can.
You have made the assumptions in this thread backed by a one way docu/movie which was written by a person sued twice for making stuff up, financed by a person who hates the royal family and directed by a person who hasn't got the guts to show it in the UK because he knows he would get sued to bankruptcy.
You have said things about the intelligence service which is just wrong and expect people to believe you lol.
Okay whatever.
Oh and OP you have got this thread in the ATS radio thing tonight at 1am good on you

One last thing Diana was loved by many people and her death effected many and many want someone to blame but seeing the driver (you know the one who the unlawful killing was against) died, people look for other reasons and other people to blame, so people make stuff up or look at things the wrong way.
Not everything in life in a conspiracy.
Oh and how much money is being made by people writing and making this stuff up? notice they are always trying to sell a book so they put something juicy in there.

This issue is interesting.

If you want to know who killed Dianna and why you need to dig deeper,get past Charles remarrying,that was happening one way or another,this goes much deeper than that.

Dodis father is putting his money in the wrong places in his quest for answers.

There is a historical connection,look back in the Royal Family line and list how many wives of the Royal family men were killed ,murdered and otherwise sacrificed---seriously count and post the numbers and the names.Then put Diannas at the bottom of the list.This is nothing new for the wife of a Royal Family member.

To find Diannas murderers and Dodis murderers you need to trace the history of many such murders connected to the Royal Family,and it isnt necessarily the Family catalysing the deaths.Dont assume this,it may be much bigger than this,in fact it is,ha ha ha.


And then what do you do,what can you do.

Revenge is at hand for Dodis father and for Dianna because one of her sons has the fire in him and he will see an end to this one day.People will pay because one day those guilty will be served to that son on a silver platter,not to Dodis father but to Diannas son,they need him on their side sooner or later.

If Dodis dad wants to honor his son then he needs to support that young son of Diannas who wll be his hand of vengance in the future.

Princess Dianna was chosen to bear Royal children for a reason,an important one that isnt as secret as people may think.Her genetic heritage was the determining factor,her DNA.She ADDED tremendously to the Royal bloodline and its WHAT she added that is important.Critical in fact.

It was a hit alright and it was indiscriminate,it was NOT professional enough to be Royal Family related,way to loud and improper.It goes beyond the Royal Familys awareness and control.It is a protectionary measure structured like a terrorist cell..The benefactors do not know what is happening at all.The Royal Family has no knowledge of these actions.The pound of flesh Dodis dad is seeking must come from the right place to carry any meaning in his sons remeberance,it must be the RIGHT people.It will cost more than he estimates to recieve this pound of flesh.Much much more.

If M16 was present it was in a recon role ,most probably acting on behalf of the Royal Family in a protectionist measure.Whoever did this was not involved with M16.But you can bet M16 was reconing those involved wether they were aware of it or not,this could have been a fortuitous coincidence.Maybe Dodis dad and the Queen should be working together on this .

I think Dodis dad needs to call the peoples court to session online and simply offer a several million dollar reward for info on this crime,money talks if it is put in the right places.So far its been put in the wrong places,for gods sakes they solved the JFK assasination online already,why not this.Offer money and come through with it and people will pass the word,next thing you know MILLIONS of people will be trying to help piece things together,believe me somewhere out there there is a man or woman sitting at their computer who will look at the details and immediatly have an epiphany,and solve this issue.That is a 100% fact.A certainty.

100,000 bucks here,100,000 bucks there,5000 bucks over there,spread some cash around online and you will see things you wont believe begin to happen.Go to the people for answers,there are savants all over the place who will help you. find the truth,this is what the internet is the best at-- finding the truth--,people just dont understand how to use the data properly.

There is a possibility that the driver was evading a potential threat based on his escalating speed and the evidence that another car was involved,potentially there could have been an immediate threat percieved and acted upon,a bait move that initiated the high speeds,people assume he was speeding to avoid papparazi,but maybe not.

This type of planning and execution of a plan is very detailed and has hallmarks that must fit others like it,this method seems tried and proven and no one would rely on anything less in a case like this,so the signature is here to use as a template for a forensic data sweep of cyberspace.

You see,once you learn how to use the internet ANYTHING becomes possible.But you need NUMBERS on your side to utilise the human factor in your searches and crossreferencing,computers are nowhere near humans when it comes to combining analytics and cross referencing data on the fly.

If that specific area was chosen as the killzone then there had to have been pre-planning involved,which means evidence of subtle manipulations of many many things to ensure the dynamic situation or setup occured.

Dodis dad could have created a boardgame containing real evidence that encourages people to actively solve questions about the crime,or an online game that does the same thing interactively.Anything that can acess large numbe

reply to post by one4all


Thanks for your valuable contribution.
The bread crumbs you left are very tempting.

reply to post by boymonkey74


"Oh and OP you have got this thread in the ATS radio thing tonight at 1am good on you "
Thanks for that information, I will try to have a listen to it.

Have you seen the picture of Diana in the Unlawful Killing video? I know you don't want to watch it but just look at 29:55 so you can compare it to the one in the link. I hope you will have a look to see the difference, It's not graphic or anything like that.


@ OP, I hope you will look at the picture in the video as well, it's nothing like the one in the link.
I'm pleased to hear your thread will be discussed on ATS Live, great news.

Originally posted by boymonkey74
The reason it will never be shown in the UK is If it was the filmmakers/writers would be sued and they would lose.

No, they would not be sued. As if the Royal Family would sue the maker of this film and bring unwanted publicity to the issue of its involvement in Diana's death that would induce lots of people to see it!

Originally posted by boymonkey74
MAF financed the film, one of the writers has been sued twice (succesfully) for making stuff up.
I watched it and although it is very well done/produced I didn't believe it.
Also the unlawful killing verdict was aimed at Henri Paul, he is the bad guy in this for being drunk, he unlawfully killed his passengers.

The idea that Henri Paul was drunk is merely a conspiracy theory without proof or even supporting evidence.

I love the way that people who accept "official" stories believe the unproven tripe that the stories contain, yet are quick to dismiss assertions that they disagree with as "unproven conspiracy theories".

Originally posted by micpsi
No, they would not be sued.

So why dont they release it. The lawyers for the movie have more knowledge than you, and they suggested 87 changes that would have to be made so they would not be sued.

Remember, it is not a banned movie.

reply to post by hellobruce


Like I stated previously, which Monkeyboy agreed with, where in the heck would they release it in the UK?
Please, if you know of a way or a place that would be willing to show this documentary, please enlighten us. Maybe if you have a good suggestion to where this could be shown in the UK, someone might read it and take your suggestion.

reply to post by Afterthought


No problems,JFK has been done already so what really challenging thing is next,well of course this issue.

This is a funny world we all share and amazing things can happen if you are paying attention in the right places at the right times.

JFK was solved by understanding the mentality of the planners using intuition then the dissemination of several catalysts in cyberspace,seeds if you will being cast.

All the assasins were ordered not to hit the First Lady--whoever made that codicile is the weak link the one responsible for breaking this open---,the rest is simply using a ruler to find the shooting lanes and then pictures and videos to find the positions and then the same resources to follow peoples lines of vision via a 3-d model of dealy plaza,toss in using the reflections in cars and windows ect to verify data and suddenly the crime is being solved,no one ever expected that we could sit at home and acess all this data,every person in and out of Dealy Plaza that day has been accurately identified,every person with even the remotest connection has been interviewed on Youtube and told their own truths,this crime is essentially solved by the peopleofo the people and for the people in the PEOPLES COURT of cyberspace.

If you want the truth and justice today you need to look to your fellow man,this is truly a brave new world,cyberspace is where its at.


If you want to find out what happened to Dianna and Dodi then you need to ask the people for their help,you need to respect them for who and what they represent--the truth--and then you will get what you seek.And no power on earth can stop you from achieving this goal,as long as you respect the source nature will do the rest,you must allow yourself to be immersed into the river of cyberspace,learn to keep your head up and then learn how to surf the data currents.Once you learn this you will respect how important other regular people are to your cause,you will understand the tremendous assets they are each and every one of them.Like any buisness either you will suceed or fail,but until you jump in you will never know which destiny you will be the master of.

Dianna has many Knights crusading on her behalf even as we speak,and Dodi is with her so naturally time will bring their truth out together.Their is a centuries old crusade that is still hot and heavy today seeking out the truths we all need here,we simply need to allow things to naturally evolve and be observant and not try to manipulate events or data transfers,just wait and watch and nurture the passion behind the crusade for truth that burns like an ember within ourselves.


If you want to join this crusade all you need to do is use youtube and google and begin to learn the data and the facts.let your mind question and analyse everything and then get online and discuss and share your ideas,you may be more powerful and influential in history than you could ever have imagined.

iirc, surveillance outside the hotel revealed 2 blokes lingering outside for hours. They were dressed in UK style flight jackets w/o patches, and with the corresponding haircuts. if you saw the images, you'd know these guys were really fishy.

Jon King, author of Princess Diana: The Evidence, is interviewed on television in the video embedded below. I think this interview is quite good.

I know that the question of motive has preoccupied some people who cannot fathom why anyone would want to murder the Princess. For me, Muslim boyfriend, saying nasty things about Prince Phillip and threatening a multi-billion dollar segment of the arms industry would not be enough to make me murder her.

Personally, I would only murder her if my own life depended on it. But that's me.

When one inquires into the various motives for murder one discovers that some people will commit murder for the most trivial reasons. I read about one case where a person threw his girlfriend off a 12th floor balcony as a result of a fight over chopsticks. This begs the question, "Was Princess Diana over-controlling at the dinner table in Chinese restaurants?"

Now, Prince Phillip has been quoted as saying that he would like to return to earth reincarnated as a deadly virus in order to kill a large portion of the earth's population. I'm not sure that one could call that "intent to commit murder". Probably not. And, as far as I know he has never been quoted as saying, "I'd like to throttle that little bitch.", in reference to Princess Diana.

So I think we can rule Prince Phillip out, as to intent, at least.

But what about arms traders? Are they venal enough and paranoiac enough to regard Princess Diana, a pretty but somewhat fragile individual, emotionally speaking, as a threat serious enough to eliminate by murder? I don't know. They haven't commented to my knowledge.

What about the FO? With Princess Diana making foreign policy, might the FO begin to feel . . . superfluous?

Surely, the Royal Family were irritated by her. They might well have felt "upstaged" by her. But enough to murder? Surely not.

Would others murder on behalf of the Royal Family, or the FO, unbidden, simply knowing that the elimination of the Princess might be desired in certain quarters?

The Princess was certainly loved by her sons, but did anyone else in the Royal Family love her . . . enough to make sure that some over zealous functionary in some "secret service" did not bump her off? Did the Royals guard their speech around overzealous functionaries to make sure that one of them did not get the wrong impression from an incautiously spoken bit of invective directed at the Princess? We'll never know.

This conversation is interesting. Did you know that you can steer a car with it's brakes? No? Neither do the men in this conversation.

reply to post by ipsedixit


Excellent comment. Many thanks and I will make time to watch the video you linked before making a worthy response.

reply to post by DoorKnobEddie
This OP does not represent any real info that MI6 was in Paris. The guy even says that their will never be any documentaiton on this. It could be a flat out lie as far was the info posted here in this read.

Originally posted by Logarock
reply to post by DoorKnobEddie

 

This OP does not represent any real info that MI6 was in Paris. The guy even says that their will never be any documentaiton on this. It could be a flat out lie as far was the info posted here in this read.

You should get yourself informed before making comments here. The Lord Stevens inquiry admitted that MI6 men were in Paris at the time of Diana's death but that they were unaware of her presence there.
news.bbc.co.uk...

Ha! It really expected us to believe THAT?!!!!!

The names of the two MI6 men were Richard Spearman & Nicholas Langham.

reply to post by Logarock


Well it’s obvious that there were SIS officers present in Paris that night,


One of my contentions however is that the OP has not explained the significant of this and furthermore it does not prove that SIS had any role in assassinating Diana.

So again OP I ask you


What significance to you think the presence of 3 senior SIS officers in Paris that night has if any.

Originally posted by Logarock
reply to post by DoorKnobEddie

 

This OP does not represent any real info that MI6 was in Paris. The guy even says that their will never be any documentaiton on this. It could be a flat out lie as far was the info posted here in this read.

It is clear that you are playing the player and not the ball. You are just stuffing words into my mouth because you have zero arguments.

I linked a report about Russians, the have a sophisticated intelligence service, claiming that senior MI6 officials were in Paris specifically on the day of Diana's death.

And what the heck is this:

The guy even says that their will never be any documentaiton on this.

When did I make such a claim? Even if we had confessions from the killers of Diana, if they are still alive, you would probably argue against it.

Originally posted by OtherSideOfTheCoin
reply to post by Logarock

 

Well it’s obvious that there were SIS officers present in Paris that night,


One of my contentions however is that the OP has not explained the significant of this and furthermore it does not prove that SIS had any role in assassinating Diana.

Of course not. It was just coincidence, wasn't it?

Just as it was just coincidence (wasn't it?) that Sir Robert Fellowes (currently Lord Fellowes), private secretary to the Queen and brother-in-law to Princess Diana, was identified by a wireless operator at the British Embassy in Paris when he entered the wireless room moments before Diana left the Ritz Hotel and ordered everyone out, including permanent staff.*


*What The Wireless Operator Witnessed On August 31, 1997:

Apparently, a few minutes to midnight, on August 30th, 1997, the regular wireless operator at the British Embassy in Paris was booted out of his office (the communications room which relayed and handled encrypted messages between the embassy and various sensitive locations within the UK).

Sworn to The Official Secrets Act until 2000 (hence his silence), the wireless operator in question had the following astounding recollection about how events unfolded that night:

A few minutes to midnight, two well-spoken public school types (takes one to know one) burst into the communications room and ordered him to vacate the room and not return until otherwise informed to the contrary!

Years later he angrily identified one of the men who kicked him out as follows: "It was that b*****d Fellowes. He turfed me out of my own office. He was in Paris the night Diana died!"

Fellowes of course had his alibi ready made for the subsequent inquiry:
www.independent.co.uk...< br /> Trouble was, no one could verify it, so we have only his unsubstantiated word for it. But, of course, a gentleman never lies....