dosxuk Posted August 21, 2013 Share Posted August 21, 2013 David Icke has been shown to right on all sorts of things. He's been right almost as often as the Freemen on the Land lot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anna B Posted August 21, 2013 Share Posted August 21, 2013 And the link to this "evidence" is where? In your "scenario" above - what if the driver had only driven at 30 mph - what if he'd braked in a straight line? How did they know the route to be taken by the car anyway? Do you drive? I know I've been dazzled on a couple of occasions - neither caused me to swerve. Link: http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk - 'Coroners inquest into the deaths of Diana Princess of Wales and Mr Dodi Al Fayed' Hearing Transcripts: 13th feb - Richard Tomlinson. Secret Intelligence officer MI6 (video link from France) For a simpler version google his name in Wikipeadia and read it all, not just first bit. The Media did a hatchet job on him like they tried to do to Paul Burrell, saying he was nuts with an axe to grind, but his information was confirmed by another MI6 Officer. (And the plot was originally to assassinate Slobodan Milosovic) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Longcol Posted August 21, 2013 Share Posted August 21, 2013 Link: http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk - 'Coroners inquest into the deaths of Diana Princess of Wales and Mr Dodi Al Fayed' Hearing Transcripts: 13th feb - Richard Tomlinson. Secret Intelligence officer MI6 (video link from France) For a simpler version google his name in Wikipeadia and read it all, not just first bit. The Media did a hatchet job on him like they tried to do to Paul Burrell, saying he was nuts with an axe to grind, but his information was confirmed by another MI6 Officer. (And the plot was originally to assassinate Slobodan Milosovic) You're link doesn't take me to any transcript. Anyhow - why would a flash of light cause a driver to swerve on a straight road? As the alleged plan against Milosevic was never carried out - perhaps it was dismissed as impractical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anna B Posted August 21, 2013 Share Posted August 21, 2013 You're link doesn't take me to any transcript. Anyhow - why would a flash of light cause a driver to swerve on a straight road? As the alleged plan against Milosevic was never carried out - perhaps it was dismissed as impractical. Put 'Transcript of inquest into death of Diana Princess of Wales' into Google, and click on 'Hearing Transcripts' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Longcol Posted August 21, 2013 Share Posted August 21, 2013 Put 'Transcript of inquest into death of Diana Princess of Wales' into Google, and click on 'Hearing Transcripts' So, let me ask you again - why would a flash of light cause someone to swerve on a straight road? You naturally know that the alleged Milosevic plot involved a stroboscope. No reports of a strobe in Paris in 1997 - in fact not all witnesses mention a flash of light. Would a flash of light be unusual in a city at night? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anna B Posted August 21, 2013 Share Posted August 21, 2013 So, let me ask you again - why would a flash of light cause someone to swerve on a straight road? You naturally know that the alleged Milosevic plot involved a stroboscope. No reports of a strobe in Paris in 1997 - in fact not all witnesses mention a flash of light. Would a flash of light be unusual in a city at night? Milosovic plot did involve a strobe light. What appeared to be a Strobe light was reported in tunnel, not by everybody but enough to ask questions. I don't know how it works but I know a man who does (read transcript) Rear end shunt of a big car by a small car also well demonstrated on you tube even though it was reported as being impossible, - and what about that white fiat and the matching paint marks on Diana's car? What about the missing photographs/ documents? What about the deaths of journalist....? There are enough anomolies that were never satisfactorily answered. A whitewash. But as Vresistance says, I'm betting the truth will out eventually, probably when all those who could be held responsible have died. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Longcol Posted August 21, 2013 Share Posted August 21, 2013 Milosovic plot did involve a strobe light. What appeared to be a Strobe light was reported in tunnel, not by everybody but enough to ask questions. I don't know how it works but I know a man who does (read transcript) Rear end shunt of a big car by a small car also well demonstrated on you tube even though it was reported as being impossible, - and what about that white fiat and the matching paint marks on Diana's car? What about the missing photographs/ documents? What about the deaths of journalist....? What about them? They are all dealt with in the Paget Report in detail as far as I can see. 3 Investigations, millions spent by Al-Fayed, not one shred of evidence brought to court to suggest foul play. Perhaps the driver lost control through excess speed and excess alcohol - ever thought that might happen - something that happens regularly? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anna B Posted August 21, 2013 Share Posted August 21, 2013 What about them? They are all dealt with in the Paget Report in detail as far as I can see. 3 Investigations, millions spent by Al-Fayed, not one shred of evidence brought to court to suggest foul play. Perhaps the driver lost control through excess speed and excess alcohol - ever thought that might happen - something that happens regularly? Yes it might have been a simple accident, but the balance of probability to my mind is that it wasn't. The things which you say were adequately dealt with weren't at all. The Fiat Uno is a good example. Explain what appened to that if you think it was adequately explained. It was brushed under the carpet. And let's face it other public enquiries, etc have been whitewashes and found wanting, and verdicts changed, so it wouldn't be the first time. They are not always the arbitters of the unassailable truth. This was just too big to fail. The verdict had to be accidental death - (which it wasn't actually, it was unlawful killing, that's a bit strange in itself...) or the entire Monarchy could have fallen. A lot of perfectly sane people think she was killed. I'm sorry but they can't all be dismissed as nutters. It's amazing that everybody who thinks there was a plot: Al Fayed, Paul Burrell, Richard Tomlinson, many witnesses, many members of the public, even Diana herself are all 'nutters.' They must be, because the press says so. Once again you're allowing yourself to be told what to think, and how to judge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Longcol Posted August 21, 2013 Share Posted August 21, 2013 Yes it might have been a simple accident, but the balance of probability to my mind is that it wasn't. The balance of probability - hmmmmmmmmmm. Your "logic" would seem to say that because MI6 allegedly had a plot to kill Milosevic by a car crash (that never took place) then it is more probable that Diana's death was due to this than excess speed with a driver with excess alcohol - for which there must be thousands of examples. That's one helluva leap in probability. I note you've never explained why, despite being asked several times, a driver would necessarily swerve on a straight road if - and it is only if - they were momentarily dazzled by a light. ---------- Post added 22-08-2013 at 01:07 ---------- Y This was just too big to fail. The verdict had to be accidental death - (which it wasn't actually, it was unlawful killing, that's a bit strange in itself...) or the entire Monarchy could have fallen. As has been pointed out to you before the verdict of unlawful killing was stated as due to gross negligence by the driver (Henri Paul) and the following vehicles (the paparazzi) and cited as factors the fact that the deceased were not wearing seatbelts and the driver was over the limit. Stop trying to pretend that the verdict was something else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anna B Posted August 22, 2013 Share Posted August 22, 2013 The balance of probability - hmmmmmmmmmm. Your "logic" would seem to say that because MI6 allegedly had a plot to kill Milosevic by a car crash (that never took place) then it is more probable that Diana's death was due to this than excess speed with a driver with excess alcohol - for which there must be thousands of examples. That's one helluva leap in probability. I note you've never explained why, despite being asked several times, a driver would necessarily swerve on a straight road if - and it is only if - they were momentarily dazzled by a light. Well the one thing we can agree on is he did swerve / crash on a straight road, bright light or not. Personally I think it's more likely he was shunted from behind by the white Fiat Uno, possibly in conjunction with a strobe light. I note you have avoided the issue of the white car which was never fully explained (nor the unusual death of its owner) in spite of it being mentioned several times. Surely I don't really need to go over all the arguments yet again, they are very well documented and argued in many different formats, books, articles, videos etc. for anyone who cares to look. I think if you did a little of your own research and became better informed from reliable sources, you might not agree with it all but would at least no longer regard anyone who thinks there's no smoke without fire, as 'nutters.' The devil's in the detail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.