‘Spies taped Diana’s crash and bugged her phone’

UK Daily Express

By: Donal MacIntyre

Published: Sunday 15th September 2013

BRITISH spies would have recorded the last moments of ­Princess Diana and her boyfriend Dodi Fayed by bugging their mobile phones, it is claimed.

A key UK security industry source who served in the military told the Sunday Express that GCHQ remotely switched on recorder modes right up to the moment the couple took their fatal Paris car trip.

If made public, the phone recordings could help throw light on sensational claims by former SAS serviceman ­Soldier N that Diana was murdered by an SAS assassination squad.

The bugging claim came as a separate Sunday Express investigation revealed that film footage of Diana’s last hours was “kept secret”. An exhaustive inquiry in the French cap­ital has confirmed the existence of CCTV records of the night Diana died in August 1997.

Many belong to private companies who used France’s strict privacy laws to avoid having to hand them over to the police.


Be the first to comment - What do you think?
Posted by Curator - September 15, 2013 at 7:38 pm

Categories: 2013 News, Just a Coincidence   Tags:

How David Cameron knew of Princess Diana ‘murder plot’

UK Daily Express

Saturday 14th September 2013

DAVID CAMERON and the head of the Army knew the SAS were allegedly responsible for the murder of Princess Diana – but failed to tell police.

The Prime Minister and General Sir Peter Wall were sent copies of a letter claiming members of the elite regiment killed the princess.

They and Defence Secretary Philip Hammond, who also received the letter, now face being questioned by Scotland Yard over why they did not act and remained silent.

Number 10 and the Ministry of Defence were informed of the alleged crime in February by the wife of a former SAS soldier, the Daily Express can reveal. Scotland Yard is now investigating the murder claims but detectives only learned of the allegations following a complaint by Mohammed Al Fayed, whose son Dodi died alongside Diana.

The wife of the SAS veteran, who can only be identified as Soldier N, wrote to General Wall amid fears that her life was in danger from her husband.

She sent copies to Mr Cameron and Mr Hammond. Also enclosed were copies of a letter sent by her mother to the ­ SAS’s commanding officer in September 2011 which contained the original allegation linking the SAS to the death of Diana.

A key passage in the wife’s letter says her husband threatened to make her “disappear” by tampering with her car.


Be the first to comment - What do you think?
Posted by Curator - September 15, 2013 at 10:00 am

Categories: 2013 News   Tags:

August 2013 (Non-)Developments – Our Thoughts.

Commentary: DianaAssassination.com

Saturday 24th August 2013

Lets try and keep this short.

Well it has been an interesting week for the mainstream media and the Diana affair.  One in which the lacklustre parasites that otherwise call themselves mainstream journalists have once again lost the plot.

I’d hate to agree with Ken Wharfe (Diana’s former bodyguard) whom has towed the party line all these years, but this whole affair seems like one big publicity stunt and not much more.  Or rather to put it into context, the intention in furthering the idea that maybe it was an assassination is as a publicity stunt.  To those with brains and discernment we’ve thought/felt/known that all along anyway.

As I have stated a few days ago on here in another commentary, the press love, if not to lie, to twist and spin the truth.  So many news reports have claimed that in 2008, an all singing all dancing enquiry in front of the Royal Court of Justice (there’s a conflict of interest… Royal) found that the ‘drunk driver and paparazzi’ were to blame for the death and nothing more.

Hang on a minute…

The drunk part was never proven and the jury verdict in their limited capacity was in actual fact “unlawful killing, grossly negligent driving of the following vehicles and of the Mercedes”.  Not the paparazzi.  The ‘following vehicles’ were not identified for the most part.

So where do we expect this to go?  Nowhere really.  There was a report yesterday that Prince Charles and Mohamed Al Fayed have been contacted by the police probing this latest claim that the SAS killed Diana.  Well okay.

So nothing to do with building up to a certain propaganda film coming out soon?  No?

You decide.  But do some homework first.  Maybe watch the Keith Allen film Unlawful Killing.  Oh no sorry you can’t, it’s been banned in the UK.

Lets’s just leave it there for now, I think the point has been made.


Be the first to comment - What do you think?
Posted by Curator - August 24, 2013 at 8:58 pm

Categories: 2013 News   Tags:

Princess Diana death: Cops probe sensational claim she was killed by the SAS

The allegation emerged at the second court martial of Sergeant Danny Nightingale, who was found guilty of illegally possessing a gun and ammunition

Sunday Mirror – 18th August 2013

Police are investigating a sensational claim that the SAS was involved in the death of Princess Diana, reports Sean Rayment.

The allegation emerged at the second court martial of Sergeant Danny Nightingale, who was found guilty of illegally possessing a gun and ammunition.

It came in a letter to the elite unit’s commanding officer by the parents-in-law of a special forces sniper, known only as Soldier N, who was Sgt Nightingale’s former housemate and a key witness for the prosecution.

The letter said Solider N boasted the SAS “was behind Princess Diana’s death”.



OUR COMMENTARY: It is worth noting that most other news articles are omitting that the ‘new claim’ originated from an SAS soldier, or they are being quite vague about it.  Nothing sensational about that though.

Others like The Sun are running with headlines such as: Scotland Yard studies claims Diana was ‘assassinated by rogue SAS man’.

Most controversial (but not surprising) is that these news outlets keep throwing out that the Royal Inquest found a verdict of unlawful killing due to both the negligence of ‘drunk’ chauffeur Henri Paul and the paparazzi.

The truth is that the verdict from April 2008 was ‘unlawful killing, grossly negligent driving of the pursuing vehicles and of the Mercedes’. There was no evidence that the driver of the Mercedes (Henri Paul) was drunk in fact. But more importantly, you will see that there was no mention of the paparazzi in this verdict. The drivers of the ‘pursuing vehicles’ were never identified.

Don’t hold your breath for the mainstream media to go balls to the wall with any real analysis over this story.  The mainstream media in the UK is bought and paid for and acts as little more than the official mouthpiece for the Royal establishment. 

Hence the popularity of this website and the material that we freely promote in our Literature section will continue to grow as the masses increasingly reject the ‘accident theory’.

Webmaster: DianaAssassination.com

Sunday 18th August 2013

Be the first to comment - What do you think?
Posted by Curator - August 18, 2013 at 9:00 am

Categories: 2013 News   Tags:

New Diana death information ‘assessed’ by Scotland Yard

BBC NEWS – Saturday 17th August 2013

The Metropolitan Police is assessing new information it has recently received about the deaths of Princess Diana and Dodi Al Fayed in 1997.

Scotland Yard says it is “scoping” the details and “assessing its relevance and credibility”.

It said it was “not a re-investigation” into the deaths of the couple in a Paris car crash on 31 August 1997.

An inquest in 2008 found they were unlawfully killed due to the “gross negligence” of their driver.

In a statement, the Metropolitan Police said the assessment would be carried out by officers from the Specialist Crime and Operations Command.


Be the first to comment - What do you think?
Posted by Curator - August 17, 2013 at 5:19 pm

Categories: 2013 News   Tags:

ARTICLE: The Unlawful Killing of Princess Diana and Dodi Al-Fayed

A call to arms to all anti-NWO activist: Resist royal cyber-bullying with all available means


Published 08th March 2013

Three days ago, the Rebel Site got taken offline by its hosting firm under the provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998. The offense: I had republished the 2011 British documentary “Unlawful Killing” produced by Allied Star, a London-based film company owned by Egyptian billionaire Mohamed Al-Fayed, the father of Dodi Al-Fayed. The documentary implicates – amongst other things – the British royal family in the murder of the couple and its cover-up.

Youtube and Vimeo had already deleted the video a few weeks earlier, forcing me to host it directly on the Rebel Site. Two emails sent to me shortly after by the lawyers of my hosting firm unfortunately got intercepted by the spam filter. In those emails they advised me that they had received a complaint by a London based law firm, claiming the hosting of the video was in breach of their client’s copyrights. Since I didn’t receive the emails I obviously couldn’t comply with their request, forcing my hosting company of 7.5 years to disable the site.

Grudgingly, I deleted the video as demanded to get the site back online as soon as possible. However, I sent a letter back to the lawyers, with a 10 days deadline to provide written evidence that the plaintiff’s law firm was acting on behalf of the copyright owner, Allied Star. I also sent an email to Mohamed Al-Fayed, asking for permission to publish the film. The reply of his office was swift. It confirmed that they had requested the London law firm to make me take down the video. The only reason they gave was that the film had been taken off the market.

It becomes clear, when watching the documentary, that Dodi’s father deeply loved his son and was shattered by his death. Why would he spend millions to produce and promote a documentary on the suspicious circumstances surrounding his death and shortly later take it off the market without giving much reason? The only explanation that makes sense is that he has been put under enormous pressure to do so. Not only has he been bullied to take his film off the market, but the blackmailers made it his problem to prevent others from republishing it.

Personally, I don’t respond well to bullying. I hate bullies and fight them with all available means. Thankfully I’m not alone. In this case of cyber-bullying, resistance is not only civil duty, but easy. Be warned though! It would be illegal to locate a copy of the “Unlawful Killing” documentary via any BitTorrent site and distribute it to as many people as possible. It would be illegal to burn CDs and pass them to all your friends. It would be illegal to upload the video to video hosting sites under its own or slightly altered name. And it would be illegal to create a torrent of your own on BitTorrent sites and share it for other people to download. But it is not illegal, to publish this article, share, email and republish it on your blog, and that’s exactly what I’m asking all of my readers to do. Make it go viral.


Be the first to comment - What do you think?
Posted by Curator - March 8, 2013 at 7:43 pm

Categories: BANNED! in the UK - 'Unlawful Killing'   Tags:

Diana Assassination 15 Years on – The Jack Blood Show – Wednesday 12th September 2012


September 12th 2012 Live Broadcast: Jack Blood (still stricken by the CC Flu) reports on the recent Mid east chaos aka, selection Psy Op.

Hour two: Joseph Skelton joins Jack to discuss his research on the Princess Diana Assassination (www.dianaassassination.com).

Listen to and/or download the show in full here.

Thanks to Jack for having us on his show.

Be the first to comment - What do you think?
Posted by Curator - September 14, 2012 at 6:02 pm

Categories: Multimedia   Tags:

FLASHBACK TO JULY 1997: Marriage of Charles poses risk to church

OUR COMMENTARY, 12th SEPT 2012: We are often tasked with the question of a motive as to why Diana was assassinated.  In our research it is self-evident that there was not just one reason, but many factors to at least consider.

To the New World Order, Diana was a threat not only to the Military Industrial Complex that they control (see her successful campaign against the use of landmines at the time of her death).  She was a threat in terms of undermining the Monarchy and beyond that, the establishment of the Church and State.

This is evidenced in the following article.  It is indicative if not chilling to note that this was published only a few weeks prior to Diana’s death.

As we and others have documented elsewhere, this constitutional mess (i.e. well publicised love triangle of Charles, Camilla and Diana) as it was seen at the time was something that the British Intelligence Services (secret societies known in the public arena as MI5/6) needed to discontinue. 

It is our contention that in June 1997, two months prior to Diana’s accident, an unsuccessful attempt was made on the life of Camilla within the borders of the UK.  See our collection of information on this here.  Following this failure, the contract was shifted over to target Diana by another arm of the same Intelligence Service network.  This time it was carried out successfully outside the borders of the UK, in Paris.

To the shock of the British people, their icon, their legend was now gone and the same people that killed her, span a story publicly of ‘motor accident’.  First blaming the paparazzi photographers, then landing the blame in the lap of the driver, Henri Paul.

To anyone with two brain cells to rub together this was no accident.  Here we look at one of the several motives that is essential to understanding why she was killed.  Due to Fair Use limitations we have not copied the full body article below, however the last two paragraphs are indeed worthy of note in this regard.



HEADLINE: Marriage of Charles poses risk to church

Article by Colin Brown

The Independent

Published 19th July 1997


The Parliamentary aide to the Lord Chancellor yesterday said a constitutional crisis over the marriage of Charles and Camilla Parker Bowles would lead to the disestablishment of the Church.

The warning by Tony Wright, a Parliamentary private secretary to Lord Irvine, will be seen as part of the softening up exercise for the public to accept the eventual marriage between the Prince and his mistress, in spite of the denials by Downing Street and the Palace that it is contemplated.

The controversy over the marriage is likely to strengthen the opinion among some MPs that the Government’s constitutional reforms should include cutting the links between the Church and the state.




Last night’s party at Highgrove, thrown by the Prince to celebrate Mrs Parker Bowles’ 50th birthday, was part of the charm offensive to overcome public hostility stemming from his divorce from Princess Diana.

The Prince has been seeking advice from confidants on how best to introduce her to a wider public.


Be the first to comment - What do you think?
Posted by Curator - September 12, 2012 at 1:41 pm

Categories: Motives   Tags:

FLASHBACK: Prince Philip pictured at Nazi funeral

Article by Andrew Levy

Daily Mail

Published 06th March 2006


Prince Philip has broken a 60-year public silence about his family’s links with the Nazis.

In a frank interview, he said they found Hitler’s attempts to restore Germany’s power and prestige ‘attractive’ and admitted they had ‘inhibitions about the Jews’.

The revelations come in a book about German royalty kowtowing to the Nazis, which features photographs never published in the UK.

They include one of Philip aged 16 at the 1937 funeral of his elder sister Cecile, flanked by relatives in SS and Brownshirt uniforms.


Be the first to comment - What do you think?
Posted by Curator - June 27, 2012 at 6:08 pm

Categories: Prince Philip Exposed   Tags:

FLASHBACK: Di Told Me She Was in Danger

The Mirror

Published 2003-2004 (Exact date unknown)


DIANA confided in a royal biographer that she feared for her life just two months before her death.

Ingrid Seward was told by Diana that she felt her life had been in danger, in a heart-to-heart chat at Kensington Palace.

Ms Seward said: “We were having what she called a girlie chat and she just opened up. She told me exactly what she said in her letter to Burrell.

“She told me: ‘I know this sounds silly now, but I did really worry about the brakes on my car’.

“Diana said this to me at the end of June 1997. She was convinced there were people out to get her. We laughed about it. She didn’t tell me who they were. She was quite canny.

“She obviously took it quite seriously and said that she had the apartment swept for bugs.

“I spent the morning with her. Everything she told me was amazing. I was under trust not to repeat what she said.

“I couldn’t believe what she was saying. It was pretty extraordinary.”

Ms Seward, who wrote what Diana told her in an article 12 months ago, added: “Diana avoided saying who these people were who were after her.

“She was trying to emphasise the mistrust she felt for everybody and feeling completely isolated. It must have been pretty scary.

“I knew she was also fearful they would take the boys away from her, and was genuinely worried that would happen.



Be the first to comment - What do you think?
Posted by Curator - June 17, 2012 at 5:39 pm

Categories: Just a Coincidence   Tags:

Next Page »