Date Posted: 05-16-2011
" Hello Everyone,
I am disappointed but not altogether surprised that seemingly anyway the film
" Unlawful Killing " has not been one well received in Cannes on the French Riviera. At its
screening reporters walking out and its Director / Producer being heckled. Criticism
given to him for presenting a film documentary of impartiality being one funded by
Mohamed al - Fayed, Dodi's father, and his production company Allied Stars.
Mr. Keith Allen has already said that this financial backing followed his first
approaching various television networks and being denied assistance from them for his
film project. In the film no member of royalty, no former Prime Minister or Intelligence
Agency is directly held responsible for the incident in Paris in 1997; it is seen however to
present powerful evidence to support the fact that collectively a conspiracy was
organised, so evidence suppressed and the credibility of witnesses accounts undermined!
Mr. Allen also said that he was expecting this film to be something he'd be personally criticised for and I remain
personally enormously grateful to him for being brave enough to take it on and, hopefully anyway, someone influential
will appear and be seen to support him in his quest to separate fact from fiction, truth from lies, reality from fairy tale.
I will add that of course even negative criticism proves that the film is one being noticed and I sense that once viewed
publicly that it will be the dissenters who will find themselves being criticised as already in the public domain, in a
number of key areas worldwide, corruptions are being and will continue to be discovered and subsequently exposed.
Why then, begs the question, ought this film's findings and one released in the current climate when things of this
nature are being unmasked be any different ?
People are being made deliberately aware of things, the real deal as opposed to myths as all part of a necessary
global cleansing process and something directed by a far greater power than man himself can even begin to imagine,
much less appreciate and understand ! "
Date Posted: 05-14-2011
" Hello Everyone !
How amazing and seeming something so precisely timed, produced and directed by Christian, he channeling a message
from me about a film project, that just days later it then being announced publicly of being shown at the Cannes, Film
Festival of 2011 in the South of France.
Now of course I might well have known about future events happening, after all it wouldn't be the first time, but he with
no direct Media Connections and something that can indeed be checked up on and verified, how could Christian have
known? Another good guess... he's quite amazing in his accuracy too, isn't he?
I personally would imagine the films impact being something likened to Mt. Vesuvius erupting and with all the current
national disasters happening, not something to be ruled out either. Already causing controversy, as an article in a
British newspaper tells, and one which expresses the views by its Director and Producer Mr. Keith Allen and entitled
"Unlawful Killling" which was the inquests verdict for the events happening in Paris in 1997. I find it interesting that as
with my sites initials being D.S., so Diana Spencer, it such a coincidence that the initials U.K. are apparent!
Here then is the article below to read and inwardly digest. Incidentally the article also saying how in the documentary
factual evidence is presented that I left evidential proof that "The Windsors planned a car accident for me" and of
course as documented on my site already being the fact when first told of what had happened in France, Her Majesty
reported to have said " Someone must have greased the brakes " and H.R.H. the Duke of Edinburgh being born Philip of
Greece, though the Greek royal family living in exile, and actually his blood more Danish than Greek but in determining
this for yourselves means doing your homework ! "
With love from,
Summarization of article in DAILY MAIL OF 12 MAY 2011
Historian A.N. Wilson in a newspaper article in a leading British Newspaper recently condemned a new film
documentary which examines in depth the death in Paris, France of Diana, Princess of Wales in 1997. He expresses
contempt for anyone believing the incident taking her out and also her companion Dodi Fayed and their chauffeur for
the evening as having been anything other than a car accident.
Keith Allen an avid reader of his works and the Director and Producer of the film now being shown at the 2011 Film
Festival in Cannes, France, screened last night, recalls reading in Septemeber 2009 the historian's review of the
memoirs of Michael Mansfield Q.C. the barrister representing Mohamed al - Fayed at the inquest into the events
happening on August 31st 1997 resulting in his eldest son's death. Mr. Allen remembering this comment made by A.
N. Wilson " Mansfield has persuaded me that, as a matter of fact, there is something extremely fishy about Diana's
death in Paris" and so now wondering if this comment was made by the same A.N. Wilson?
Mr. Allen then explains in the article how having approached various T.V. networks for financial backing for his project
and being turned down by all, something he usually has no problem in receiving, Mohamed al - Fayed offered to do
In the documentary film which is already causing controversy is a photograph screen showing Diana, though injured,
alert following the incident so as Mr. Allen says one depicting a woman very much alive, not dying. He has been
criticised heavily for its inclusion accused of doing so for "Cheap Sensationalism" but he argues it is there for people
to see as it provides and supports medical evidence heard at the inquest that had Diana have been taken to the
hospital quicker, she might well have survived. Subsequently in delays, never properly explained, she was inside the
ambulance for over an hour in transportation to a hospital close to the scene of the incident though not the closest
one. The documentary asks what happened inside the ambulance during this time? Why did the official enquiry not
name or interview other people with Diana in that ambulance? It strongly raises the point that if police investigations
are as "Open and Thorough" as the public are led to believe and as are insisted on being, why were these means of
enquiry determining vital facts dismissed from the investigation conducted?
Mr .Allen saying that the film is not about a conspiracy happening before the "Crash" but after it at the inquest itself,
one which took 6 months to, in his opinion, bury the evidence as opposed to revealing it. Mr. Allen asks people to
judge for themselves having seen it but that it cannot be one shown in the U.K. as the questions that it raises asking
about the Official Coroner's conduct and that of Police Chiefs can lead to everyone involved being imprisoned under
contempt of court laws! He adding that never the less the film will be released world - wide so there will be plenty of
opportunity to see it.
Accused of seeking to make money out of a much loved and admired woman's death, he refuting this stating that
were this so he'd have signed up for another Hollywood Blockbuster but that he was well aware that the knives would
be out for him once this film became public knowledge, a project worked on diligently by him for the past three years.
Date Posted: 05-10-2011
" Hello Everyone,
In light of my message in regards to a film project I am quite literally involved in, provided this scene is not erased
from the final cut proving too controversial-hopefully not, please take serious note of the article appearing in the " I "
newspaper in London yesterday! I personally commend Mr. Allen for producing and directing a filmed banned from
being shown in the U.K. before even being released. He most certainly faces his reputation being, if not destroyed,
personally damaged deliberately using any means necessary as a consequence of his involvement but hopefully
perhaps my drawing attention to this fact now in advance will further illustrate the very real connection I have with
Christian. If this film is released it will give a far greater chance to people believing " Diana Speaks " as well as of course
being of enormous assistance in proving the reality of " Life after Death. The article is below.
The other article equally interesting and validating a number of points already drawn attention to in the contents of my
site, which is something I applaud happening naturally, and finally the latest news bulletin regarding Catherine and
Wills is that they are now soaking up the tropical sunshine on their delayed honeymoon in the Seychelles; so where
Wills took Catherine to tell her that she'd eventually be his wife soon after getting " Back for Good " at the Concert for
Diana " that he and Harry organised in my honour in 2007! "
Thank you for listening to me ,
May 9th 2011
Brad Pitt, Carla Broni - Sarkozy; First Lady of France and Robert Di Niro will all walk the red carpet of 2011 Cannes
Film Festival next week but the latest addition to the glittering roll - call of talent is one less internationally celebrated.
The former owner of Harrods, Mohamed al - Fayed, is to launch "Unlawful Killing" a controversial documentary film
produced and directed by Mr. Keith Allen. The subject of the film being the circumstances surrounding the death of
Diana, Princess of Wales in France in 1997. A spokesperson for the film said " Keith met Mohamed in 2004 to
discuss a project and they got to talking." Keith Allen himself saying that he is expressing a provable conspiracy
Mr. al - Fayed, the astute Egyptian business man, whose eldest son Dodi Fayed also died in Paris with Diana on
August 31st 1997 is expected to field questions from journalists about the film which illustrates vital evidence was
hidden from public scrutiny as by example the British Royals were exempted from giving evidence and how journalists
mis - reported what was happening !
May 10th 2011
Having spent five years investigating Paris, August 31st 1997 Australian based author John Morgan has produced a
new book pointing to the fact that toxicology test results carried out on the body of " Diana, Princess of Wales " and
vital documents were withheld from the inquest jury. Mr. Morgan claims to have uncovered conflicting evidence,
inconsistencies, mis- labelling of body samples, cover - ups and the fact many witnesses were not called to give
Apparently there existing two lots of samples, one belonging to Diana and held by the Metropolitan Poiice's
"Operation Paget ", the other body held by London's Charing Cross hospital. Diana's body having been embalmed in
France, no embalming fluid was detected in the toxicology samples tested. Documentation showing that there having
been interference from senior aides representing the Queen.
Losing her H.R.H. title in 1996 following the Royal Divorce, no longer an official member of royalty, it seems she
became royal again and only the Queen could have authorised this happening taking control of things from Balmoral
Leading Q.C. Michael Mansfield calling the series of books to be published the " MAGNUM OPUS " of the death crash
in Paris, France. Mohamed al - Fayed calling the writers books " HEROIC " adding that John Morgan has done more
to expose the facts of the case than the police in France and the U.K.
Financier: Mohamed Al Fayed Director: Keith Allen Innocent Victims??
( Rose's note: Many who follow this site will have noticed that Christian has included comments by his main guide
Cheng at various positions through out the site. As with all skills there is always growth. For some time Christian's
channeling has continued to grow and here we introduce material given to him via "Source". This is the "signature" that
is requested to be used for communication from this level of consciousness. Since these comments pertain to the film
we decided to include them here.)
1) "ONE OF THE MOST ANNOYING THINGS ANY DRIVER WILL TELL YOU IS WHEN THEY FIND THEIR
ROUTE TO THEIR DESTINATION BEING INTERRUPTED, BLOCKED BY A DIVERSION. SIMILARLY A USEFUL
AND POWERFUL DIVERSION READILY OPERATED BY THE MEDIA SUCCESSFULLY IS THAT OF DEFLECTION;
KNOWING THAT THE AVERAGE HUMAN CONCENTRATION SPAN IS MOST OFTEN LIMITED TO A FOCUS ON
THINGS HAPPENING IN THE MOMENT.
A PERFECT EXAMPLE OF THIS IS OCCURRING NOW WITH ARTICLES PRINTED AND CONCENTRATING ON
DEBUNKING MR. KEITH ALLEN AS OPPOSED TO BEING ATTENTIVE TO THE CONTENT OF THE
DOCUMENTARY FILM HE IS RESPONSIBLE FOR DIRECTING AND PRODUCING. THIS IS SYSTEMATICALLY
ATTEMPTING TO DISCREDIT HIM PERSONALLY SO THAT PEOPLE WILL NOT BE INTENT ON SEEING THE
FILM AND THE EXPLOSIVE CONTENT IT PRESENTS. THUS A STRATEGIC AND CLEVER MOVEMENT
HARBOURING A HIDDEN AGENDA.
I WOULD ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO BE BLINDED BY THE LIGHT AS OPPOSED TO BEING BLINDFOLD BY THE
DELIBERATE INTENTION OF THOSE NOT WISHING EYES TO SEE, TO JUDGING FOR YOURSELVES AND NOT
ALTERNATIVELY ALLOWING OTHERS TO JUDGE FOR YOU. ULTIMATELY DECEITS, DECEPTIONS AND
CORRUPTIONS ARE UNVEILED. THIS IS UNIVERSAL LAW SO THE PLANNED DESTINATION IS ONE
REACHED BUT ALL THE FASTER IF SUCH DIVERSIONS ARE AVOIDED IN THE SAME WAY THAT A DRIVER
WARNED OF A ROAD BLOCK ALONG THEIR ROUTE AHEAD OF THEIR JOURNEY WOULD SENSIBLY SEEK A
DIFFERENT ONE. IN THIS INSTANCE MEANING THAT THIS FILM NEEDS TO BE THE SUBJECT OF
CONCENTRATION, NOT KEITH ALLEN, AS THE STATEMENTS MADE ABOUT HIM ARE THE PERSONAL
VIEWPOINTS OF THOSE MAKING THEM BEING EXPRESSED SO NOT GOSPEL.
ASK YOURSELVES WHAT IS THE MORE COMFORTABLE FEELING: TO HONOUR YOURSELF AS A PERSON
AND TO DRAW YOUR OWN CONCLUSIONS OR TO ALLOW YOURSELF TO BEING MANIPULATED AS A PUPPET
FIGURE BY OTHERS WITHOUT CREDITING YOU HAVE A MIND OF YOUR OWN TO EVALUATE THINGS ?
VIEW THIS FILM DOCUMENTARY WITH EYES WIDE OPEN, NOT WITH EYES WIDE SHUT !
2) " ROSE CAMPBELL SENSIBLY BEING A WOMAN OF GREAT WISDOM AND INSIGHT, AS ALSO A KEEN
OBSERVER OF HUMAN NATURE, WAS A LITTLE UNEASY AT IT'S BEING EXPOSED CHRISTIAN HAS A
CONNECTION WITH, AS HAS BEEN MADE KNOWN TO HIM, " SOURCE".
THIS IS SOMETHING FOR PEOPLE TO EVALUATE AND DECIDE FOR THEMSELVES BUT IT IS NECESSARY TO
MAKE CLEAR TO THEM REASONS FOR MY ADVISING THEM TO DO SO. IT IS PERHAPS IMPORTANT TO
FIRST ASK WHO OR WHAT IS SOURCE ? THE ANSWER TO THIS BEING WHO OR WHATEVER YOU AS AN
INDIVIDUAL WITH YOUR OWN MIND PERSONALLY BELIEVE IT TO BE. CERTAINLY PEOPLE OUGHT NOT TO
BE UNANIMOUSLY IN AGREEMENT OF OPINION, THIS THEREBY NOT HONOURING PERSONAL INDIVIDUAL
INDEPENDENT EXPRESSION. THIS BEING THE ROOT CAUSE OF UNREST PREVALENT FROM TIME
IMMEMORIAL IN CULTURES AND SOCIETIES SUBJECTED TO, AS AN EXAMPLE, DICTATORSHIPS WHEN
FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND OPENLY EVEN FREEDOM OF THOUGHT ARE FORBIDDEN, SEEN AS A CRIME. THIS
IS WHY IN THE MIDDLE EAST PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN LIVING SUBJECTED TO BEING CONTROLLED ARE
NOW REBELLING AGAINST THIS CONTINUING!
IT IS HOWEVER VITAL FOR THIS WORK THAT CHRISTIAN IS SEEN TO BE HONEST, OTHERWISE RUNNING
THE RISK OF ACCUSATIONS OF HIS BEING A DECEIVER BECOMING SOMETHING VERY REAL. IF HE IS
FOUND GUILTY OF HARBOURING SECRETS, THIS THEN GIVING POWER TO THOSE DESPERATE FOR ANY
NUMBER OF REASONS TO PROVING HIS CONNECTION WITH THE ONE KNOWN TO THE WORLD MOST
RECENTLY AS " DIANA " BEING FAKE; HIS DOING SO TO EXPLOIT HER MEMORY AND FOR SELF - GAIN.
FOR THIS REASON HIS SEXUALITY HAS BEEN SOMETHING SPOKEN OF DURING ONE OF THE MANY AFTER -
LIFE INTERVIEWS EXCHANGED BETWEEN ROSE AND DIANA. CHRISTIAN HIMSELF, SO MEANING
" ANDREW RUSSELL - DAVIS", HAS LIVED A COLOURFUL LIFE AND ONE THEREFORE ENCOMPASSING A
MYRIAD OF EXPERIENCES WHICH ARE LEARNING CURVES BUT THIS PREFERABLE, SURELY, TO LIVING
ONE OF SHADES OF GREY WITH IGNORANCE AND NARROW MINDEDNESS RETAINED AS THE RESULT.
IT WAS OF NECESSITY THE ONE TO BE CHOSEN FOR THIS MISSION BEING SOMEONE PERSONALLY ABLE
TO RELATE TO MANY ISSUES THAT IN HER LIFE DIANA WAS INVOLVED WITH IN ONE CAPACITY OR
ANOTHER. IT ALSO IMPORTANT THAT IT WAS SOMEONE WHO COULD APPRECIATE AND UNDERSTAND
HER LIFE OF PRIVILEGE AND STATUS. CHRISTIAN'S FATHER WAS A MEMBER OF THE BRITISH
ESTABLISHMENT AND SOMEONE WHO ADVISED MINISTERS BEHIND THE SCENES, HIS OFFICE IN
WHITEHALL, LONDON OVERLOOKING THE CENOTAPH MEMORIAL. CHRISTIAN'S UPBRINGING WAS A
FINANCIALLY COMFORTABLE AND STABLE ONE BUT NOT ONE EMOTIONALLY CLOSE AND LOVING.
CHRISTIAN, LIKE DIANA, OFTEN FEELING A DEEP SENSE OF REJECTION AND BEING UNWANTED. AT A
YOUNG AGE SEXUALLY ASSAULTED, BUT SOMETHING IN COMMON WITH THE CLASS BRACKET HE WAS IN,
MUCH AS HIS FATHER KEEPING A MISTRESS, WAS KEPT A FAMILY SECRET.
IN HIS PERSONAL LIFE CHRISTIAN HAVING HAD PARTNERS WITH H.I.V., AND THOUGH HIMSELF NOT
AFFECTED, HE THEREFORE HAVING A KEEN UNDERSTANDING OF THE EMOTIONAL AS WELL AS THE
PHYSICAL EFFECTS THAT THE SUFFERERS OF THIS CONDITION ARE SUBJECT TO EXPERIENCING. A
RELATIONSHIP IN WHICH HIS LIFE WAS PHYSICALLY THREATENED RESULTING IN A COURT CASE IN
WHICH HE WAS ACCUSED OF STALKING THE ATTACKER IN A SIMILAR MANNER TO THE WAY DIANA
BEHAVED TOWARDS MR. OLIVER HOARE, AND LIKE DIANA, CHRISTIAN ESCAPING PROSECUTION. ALSO HE
HAVING BEEN THE THIRD PARTY IN A TRIANGLE RELATIONSHIP OF SOME DURATION, ABLE TO SPEAK
WITH AUTHORITY ABOUT THIS KIND OF SCENARIO AS HE ALSO CAN SPEAK ABOUT HAVING GROWN UP
WITH AN ALCOHOLIC PARENT.
THESE POINTS ARE BEING MADE CLEAR NOW IN ORDER THAT THEY CANNOT SUDDENLY COME OUT OF
THE CLOSET AND HAUNT HIM AND SLOW DOWN THE PROCESS OF THE WORK HE IS INVOLVED WITH. IT
MIGHT BE CLEARER NOW THAT HE IS ONE OF THE FEW WHO COULD WITH ALL AUTHENTICITY BE CALLED
UPON TO SOONER OR LATER ENSURE THAT IT IS GLOBALLY KNOWN, RECOGNISED AND RESPECTED THAT
" DIANA SPEAKS ". HE NOT FINDING THE PROSPECT OF THIS DAUNTING ENOUGH TO ABANDON IT AS
SOME MIGHT REALISE IT IS ACTUALLY AN UNENVIABLE POSITION TO BE PUT IN ... USE YOUR
IMAGINATIONS, DIANA IS DEAD! HIS BEING AN " UNKNOWN" HE CANNOT USE THIS ASSIGNMENT TO ADD
A PROVERBIAL FEATHER TO HIS CAP AS OTHERS MOST CERTAINLY WOULD GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY TO
DOING SO, AND LIKE ROSE CAMPBELL, BEFORE THIS INVOLVEMENT HAD NOT HIMSELF BEEN SOMEONE
WHO FOLLOWED THE DIANA STORY. IT WAS NECESSARY THERE BEING NO PRECONCEIVED IDEAS AND
INFLUENCES TO JEOPARDISE THINGS- AN OPERATION CONDUCTED IN INNOCENCE.
CHRISTIAN HIMSELF HAVING EVERY REASON TO BELIEVE IN HIS CONNECTION WITH " SOURCE ".
HAVING HAD A COLT 45 GUN IN HIS CHEST DURING A ROBBERY IN VENEZUELA, SOUTH AMERICA, BEEN
LITERALLY RUNNING FOR HIS LIFE FROM A NOTORIOUS EAST END GANG IN LONDON HAVING WITNESSED
AN EAST END HIT. THE POLICE ADVISING HIM TO MOVE OUT OF ENGLAND FOR A WHILE AND HE THEN
LIVING IN WALES FOR A YEAR. HE LATER BACK IN ENGLAND DODGING DEATH TWICE IN A COACH CRASH
AND LATER A TRAIN CRASH! CHRISTIAN HAVING SUBSTANTIALLY INHERITED FROM HIS PARENTS
OWNED HIS OWN PROPERTY AND CAR AND WAS THEN FINANCIALLY FLEECED LOSING EVERYTHING BUT
HIS LIFE HAS BEEN ONE OF AMAZING CHAPTERS AND CURRENTLY NOW HE IS IN THE PROCESS OF
WRITING A NEW PAGE IN THE BOOK OF HIS LIFE. HE LIVES PROTECTED TO TELL THE TALES AS
INCREDIBLE AS THEY HAVE BEEN, ARE AND WILL CONTINUE TO BE ! "
" SOURCE "
Note from Christian:
In reference to the undisputed FACT, which messages from the lady verify consistently, the lady knows ... things she
says proving to be accurate. I have this to say: Firstly I am not that wonderful a guesser. I'm sorry to disillusion some
people but if I were I'd not find myself in dire straits as I so often do, I'd second guess things and save myself from
them! Anyway, in regards to the film recently shown at the Cannes, Film Festival 2011 ...
It isn't really such a wonder that the film of Diana's demise in Paris, a British film by a British Director, would find itself
being panned by British critics and press in France. Without wishing to infer any disrespect to Anglo-French relations,
if it is proven to be accurate that the French colluded with the British in the events happening in Paris in 1997, as
Diana has strongly suggested happened, ironic then that this film examining those same events being first publicly
shown in the South of France. Diana's last holiday with Dodi also beginning on the French Riviera the same year.
Something of real embarrassment though had it have received any different a reception. Already it being known this
film, even prior to its public release, is one banned being shown in Britain. Had it have received great reviews,
something seriously compromising Anglo-French relations, so not a politically correct strategy to adopt. The decision
of the banning presumably having been one taken at the highest level! The French would have been likely to have
been blamed and subsequently held accountable for a British public outcry demanding that the banning of the film
being shown in Britain be rebuked!
I'm pretty certain, since particularly here in Britain there is such interest in Diana's eldest son William and his new wife
Catherine and rekindled interest in Diana, that the British people might well be interested in seeing a serious
documentary about the death of a very British girl who became globally known as the "People's Princess" and who,
after her death, in her own nation was given the title "England's Rose". An English Rose who died on foreign soil-- on
French soil in Paris on August 31st, 1997.
People who know me know that my favourite city has always been Paris and I have also had a French partner et oui
Je parle un peu Francais mais maintenant c'est dificil pour moi sans practique ici dans Londres, Angleterre, merci
bien ... just in case people think I might be nursing a personal prejudice against the French!