Run-up to the inquest into Diana's death

[love_cc]

Of course Diana was bugged because of her unique identity. It does not surprise us at all. I don't think senior royal family members truly have privacies. They were monitored by sevants, courtiers, journalists and now intelligence agencies. The most important thing of the investigation report is that it confirms my thought about the death of Diana was a car accident. If it were a murderer, the target was Dodi not Diana.
Let Diana rest in peace.

 

[sirhon11234]

If it were a murderer, the target was Dodi not Diana.
Let Diana rest in peace.

But if it was murder and Dodi was the intended target they got three for the price of one. Diana was still murdered. (speaking hypothetically)

 

[Madame Royale]

Well, actually, that wouldn't surprise me-MI6 bugging the White House. Bugging phone lines is routine for any security agency.

Well, it would me No can say that the CIA wouldn't know if M16 were bugging their phone lines...I strongly doubt that. And in the event that that were the case, I would be certain the CIA would have soon drawn a close to that without hesitation.

If M16 bugged Diana's phone, that is an entirely english affair with internal objectives (not condoning it of course). The fact that a foreign government agency felt it had a 'right' to do so is what I find somewhat hard to fathom.

of course, whether or not it did actually happen, is not certain (publically).

And sassie, I'm not trying to be disagreeable, just expressing my opinion on the matter

But how did the CIA get access to Diana's phone in order to bug it.

We are talking of the United States most senior intelligence agency afterall And its not her actual phone, rather her phone line.

 

[sassie]

Well, it would me No can say that the CIA wouldn't know if M16 were bugging their phone lines...I strongly doubt that. And in the event that that were the case, I would be certain the CIA would have soon drawn a close to that without hesitation.

If M16 bugged Diana's phone, that is an entirely english affair with internal objectives (not condoning it of course). The fact that a foreign government agency felt it had a 'right' to do so is what I find somewhat hard to fathom.

of course, whether or not it did actually happen, is not certain (publically).

And sassie, I'm not trying to be disagreeable, just expressing my opinion on the matter



We are talking of the United States most senior intelligence agency afterall And its not her actual phone, rather her phone line.

It's entirely probable-in fact, it's practically a given-that the CIA does know that MI6 is bugging their phone lines-which is why places like the White House, the intelligence agencies, Downing Street, etc., have specially built rooms, free of electronic surveillance and guarded around the clock, so that sensitive information can be discussed without being overheard.

Intelligence agencies use phone taps as conduits of information. It's an open secret. They not only bug, they also expect to be bugged.

Remember, these intelligence agencies build dossiers on people like Diana that contain information down to the smallest of personal details. Phone taps help them gather that information.

Mind you, I'm not saying it's morally right-because it isn't. But, intelligence agencies aren't known for being residents of the moral high ground.

 

[sirhon11234]

But what would the intelligence service monitor Diana for?

 

[sassie]

But what would the intelligence service monitor Diana for?

To gather information. Not only about her, but about people she associated with. Such as Mohammed al Fayed. A seemingly innocent phone conversation could reveal useful tidbits to an intelligence agency.

 

[sara1981]

Diana investigation set to report
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6170763.stm

 

[Madame Royale]

It's entirely probable-in fact, it's practically a given-that the CIA does know that MI6 is bugging their phone lines-which is why places like the White House, the intelligence agencies, Downing Street, etc., have specially built rooms, free of electronic surveillance and guarded around the clock, so that sensitive information can be discussed without being overheard.

Intelligence agencies use phone taps as conduits of information. It's an open secret. They not only bug, they also expect to be bugged.

Remember, these intelligence agencies build dossiers on people like Diana that contain information down to the smallest of personal details. Phone taps help them gather that information.

Mind you, I'm not saying it's morally right-because it isn't. But, intelligence agencies aren't known for being residents of the moral high ground.

You seem to know your fair share about the goings on of cross Atlantic intelligence surveillance, sassie. 'Anything' you wish to share?

Morals? What a repellent notion for those concerned!

 

[blackdaisies]

But what would the intelligence service monitor Diana for?

i remember them saying her friend was under investigation for something, but i can't remember what it was. she was the wife of an important person of some sort and they were in big trouble, but i can't remember.

i believe they had more reason to take dodi's life than diana's. it's obvious his business dealings were not safe if he were selling guns to another country for wars. i'm sure he was also under investigation for all kinds of things, so that is another reason why princess diana would be bugged. it all depends on who he was selling the guns to.

all these countries spy on each other, and that kind of gives you more options on whos telling the truth when something like this happens. each one has the story, but no one's telling.

i know most people think the conspiracy theories are crazy, but how could you make such an important figure wait almost 2 hours before she was finally admitted to the hospital. that is one of the main reason why she died, because they didn't get her there in enough time. if they don't charge them with murder, then they should charge them with negligence. the driver should have been fired or brought up on some kind of charges. there were a lot more other things that were wrong with her death and it would be impossible to name every thing that was not right in one email. i don't believe it could be an accident, but i do believe prince charles had nothing to do with it.

prince charles seems very harmless, and i feel bad for him because none of this would have ever happened if his mother would have approved his marriage to camilla in the first place. she was his first love and they finally ended up marrying anyway, so what a waste of time and bad feelings. diana was caught up in all of that being made the marter in the marriage. she was way too young for him, and they should have seen the break up coming and avoided the whole relationship altogether. she was very young.

 

[blackdaisies]

I'm afraid I can't see what possible reason there could be for watching such a thing. The expense of this is costing the British tax-payer a bomb and it's not on. An inquest was held. It's done. It's over. What I object to is certain groups calling for another inquest and another inquest when all they appear to be doing is getting some kind of fetishistic kick out of her demise whilst the rest of us pick up the bill. It's not only unfair but it's also quite ridiculous.

it gives the public to have access of how the people involved are to be questioned. it will probably last a few days, and if they get caught trying to hide something, the press will set them straight or cause a lot of bad publicity for it. i think it is a good idea to make sure she gets a fair trial, which is what she was afraid of because she thought the royal family was in control of everyone. it would be more for her benefit than the public's. it won't be anything new anyways. they are just going to rehash the same information over again. the trial has a better chance of not being prearranged than if it were held in private. if they are just doing it to show princess diana fans that she was given a fair trial, it may be in hopes to kill the conspiracy theories.

 

[sassie]

You seem to know your fair share about the goings on of cross Atlantic intelligence surveillance, sassie. 'Anything' you wish to share?

Morals? What a repellent notion for those concerned!

I am retired from federal law enforcement in the US-I picked up a few tips along the way.

 

[sassie]

She's cost us enough already without us paying for a concert.

That's a rather unkind and unfair assessment. "She" hasn't cost you anything since 1997. Diana can hardly be held responsible because conspiracy theorists refuse to accept the circumstances surrounding her death, and have pushed for this enquiry. Blame them and the relentless media for the money spent, not her.

The woman has been dead for nearly ten years-it's not as if the money spent is for her gratification.

 

[Skydragon]

We don't talk about the investigation, but was logic that a princess die i crash the british justice do an investigation

There was a complete investigation done by the French, that on the evidence, prooved it was an accident, so no it was not logical to have yet another investigation.
Nobody asked the British Taxpayer if they wanted their money put towards an investigation, if they had, I could almost guarantee that 99.9% of them would suddenly have been happy with the French verdict.

I wonder how the French feel about the insult, that their investigation was not to be trusted!

 

[Skydragon]

In regards to the inquiry...I too think its a waste of money but blaming Diana for the inquiry (since she has been dead since 1997 regardless of any letters, comments she may have made) is a little ridiculous in my mind and I don't have to be a taxpayer to have that opinion.

Not really, if she hadn't made her allegations, then there would probably not have been another inquiry.

We are all entitled to our opinions of course, I just wonder if you would hold the same opinion if they were using your taxes to fund it.

 

[Zonk]

Not really, if she hadn't made her allegations, then there would probably not have been another inquiry.

We are all entitled to our opinions of course, I just wonder if you would hold the same opinion if they were using your taxes to fund it.

Again, I think the inquiry is a waste of money. And for the record, I hate to see money wasted in general....whether its mine or not

 

[christinacg]

Does anyone ever think about the trauma that Diana's fragile state of mind put Charles through?? Also, what damage did she do to William by pouring all of her woes and delusions onto him??

I agree. Diana was a wonderful person but she did have problems that I think greatly affected those around her.

I have to say that al-Fayed is getting on my nerves. I think its been proven enough to show that it was an accident. He needs to accept that.

I also found this article that I didn't see posted anywhere else. Its about a jeweler who confirms that Dodi picked up an engagement ring for Diana the night they died and he wasn't allowed until now to talk about it due to the investigation.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20061212/en_afp/francebritainroyals_061212221621

 

[sassie]

Not really, if she hadn't made her allegations, then there would probably not have been another inquiry.

Well, actually, if Paul Burrell had not made her allegations public, then there would probably not have been another inquiry.

But, then, conspiracy theorists do always find something to hang their theories on.

 

[Madame Royale]

I am retired from federal law enforcement in the US-I picked up a few tips along the way.

Wonderful stuff, sassie

 

[ysbel]

But sassie, don't law enforcement officials get these types of leads quite often? If these leads aren't substantiated by hard evidence, I can't imagine that they often lead to ten year investigations by two different countries police forces.

If it had been a similar situation with a different woman with al-Fayed, do you think the investigation would have turned out this way?

 

[sassie]

But sassie, don't law enforcement officials get these types of leads quite often? If these leads aren't substantiated by hard evidence, I can't imagine that they often lead to ten year investigations by two different countries police forces.

Very true. The fact is that Paul Burrell, in publishing the abridged version of Diana's note, forced the hand of the English investigating agency. If it had been kept private, the note would have likely been...well, not disregarded, but, rather, privately considered in context with and outweighed by the findings of the French investigators. As it was, since the note was not substantiated by hard evidence, it was that very fact that needed to be seen to be investigated. The only way to do that was to start from scratch and to do it openly, otherwise the public outcry would continue unabated. I'm sure, on behalf of the Royal Family, there was also the desire to clear any lingering shadow from Charles' name and, by extension, the Queen and Prince Philip's.

After all, if you were publicly accused of conspiracy to commit murder, isn't it within your basic rights to just as publicly disprove the accusation?

If it had been a similar situation with a different woman with al-Fayed, do you think the investigation would have turned out this way?

No. It was a unique situation. The publication of the abridged note was the catalyst for the continuing investigation in this case. With a different woman, the French investigation would have sufficed.

 

[ysbel]

As it was, since the note was not substantiated by hard evidence, it was that very fact that needed to be seen to be investigated. The only way to do that was to start from scratch and to do it openly, otherwise the public outcry would continue unabated.

Yes, sassie that makes sense but the implication is disturbing that the majority of the effort seemed like a public relations exercise to show people they were doing all possible when they quite early on knew what the outcome what be.

These types of investigations can really turn the lives of the people involved upside down and to my mind should be pursued only when there is sufficient reason to believe the authorities are going to get something out of the investigation.

 

[ysbel]

On another note: the US agency accused of spying on Diana has denied it.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/12/12/diane.eavesdropping.ap/index.html

 

[sassie]

Yes, sassie that makes sense but the implication is disturbing that the majority of the effort seemed like a public relations exercise to show people they were doing all possible when they quite early on knew what the outcome what be.

These types of investigations can really turn the lives of the people involved upside down and to my mind should be pursued only when there is sufficient reason to believe the authorities are going to get something out of the investigation.

I absolutely agree, and I think the whole thing has become a too costly fiasco. The French investigators did a thorough job, and it should have been sufficient.

If nothing else, even as a public relations ploy, there is some degree of closure now. The conspiracy theories will not end-they never do-but, at least, the Queen and the government can now say that they went the distance to put the allegations to rest.

It's too bad that Paul Burrell can't be held responsible for the some of the money spent on the British inquiry.

 

[sassie]

On another note: the US agency accused of spying on Diana has denied it.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/12/12/diane.eavesdropping.ap/index.html

Interesting, considering that it was the CIA who was accused of tapping Diana's phone line, not the NSA.

 

[ysbel]

Interesting, considering that it was the CIA who was accused of tapping Diana's phone line, not the NSA.

Ah good point. So what you're saying is the denial is meaningless.

 

[Skydragon]

Princess Diana's sons briefed on the probe into her death: news reports

Princes William and Harry have been briefed on the conclusions of a British probe into the 1997 death of their mother Diana, Princess of Wales, news media reported Wednesday.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20061213/wl_uk_afp/britainroyalsdiana_061213192552

Video released of Dodi getting 'Diana's ring' hours before crash

An exclusive jeweller released a video which it said showed Dodi Al-Fayed picking up an engagement ring for Diana, Princess of Wales, just hours before both died in their 1997 Paris car crash.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20061213/en_afp/francebritainroyals_061213185659

You have to laugh when you read this 'advertisement'.

"making the images available after receiving authorisation from Mohamed Al-Fayed" - "The washed-out, black-and-white video, which was timestamped August 30, 1997, showed a man resembling Dodi Al-Fayed" - He could not confirm that the ring was for Diana.

 

[BeatrixFan]

I once had a boyfriend who resembled Johnny Depp but I ditched him because the endless film premieres wore me out.

Honestly! I mean, what they're really saying is - if you've got glaucoma, it's Dodi Al-Fayed but if you aren't Mr Magoo, it's not. God there are some crazies in this world.

 

[sassie]

I once had a boyfriend who resembled Johnny Depp but I ditched him because the endless film premieres wore me out.

Honestly! I mean, what they're really saying is - if you've got glaucoma, it's Dodi Al-Fayed but if you aren't Mr Magoo, it's not. God there are some crazies in this world.

And one of them owns Harrod's.

 

[Skydragon]

Having read the report on Diana's death, due to be published tomorrow, ITV have reported on William and Harry's anger with the paparazzi, who it is said were too busy taking photo's, to call for or offer help to the dying woman! Their concern that the last thing she ever saw was the flash from the cameras!

 

[Iluvbertie]

Having read the report on Diana's death, due to be published tomorrow, ITV have reported on William and Harry's anger with the paparazzi, who it is said were too busy taking photo's, to call for or offer help to the dying woman! Their concern that the last thing she ever saw was the flash from the cameras!

I wonder what they think about Al Fayed now saying that Lord Stephens report is a cover up and that the evidence is overwhelmingly in support of his conclusion of a murder - what that evidence is I don't know as everything I have read points to an accident but...

Didn't Al Fayed say some time ago that he believed that Lord Stephens would reach the right decision, namely agree with him, or words to that effect. Now that the Stephens report is allegedly going to support the French investigation Al Fayed is against this report as well.

I am sure that William and Harry would like him to shut up and let their mother rest in peace and accept that two investigations, taking over four years in total and costing millions of Pounds and Euros have reached the same conclusions.

Sure, I realise that he lost his son in the accident but more and more I am convinced that neither Dodi nor Diana needed to die - if they had used their brains and worn their seatbelts.