Date Posted: 4/11/12
" Hello Everyone,
This below is No 5. in a series of books available at $32.00 so not cheap. Though New Evidence presented, as said,
much if not all the details-- certainly the basic outline of them-- are documented or hinted about on my personal site for
free! I am posting information about it for people to see and wonder if the Media will have anything at all to say in its
regard, I would doubt it actually being gagged from doing so.
What it's publication this year determines most positively is the fact that the event in Paris is not 15 years later one
forgotten!
With love from,
Diana xx
Subject: MI6 Were Ordered to Assassinate Princess Diana: New Evidence Revealed
Date: Monday, 2 April, 2012, 22:12
An authoritative new book - published this week – names the killers of Princess Diana, and shows who gave them the
order to assassinate her.
This explosive, evidence-based book is the most shocking, revealing, yet factual work written on the 1997 Paris car
crash that took the lives of Princess Diana and her lover Dodi Fayed.
In Diana Inquest: Who Killed Princess Diana? investigative writer John Morgan reveals that the assassination of
Princess Diana was carried out by the British intelligence agency, MI6, on orders from senior members of the British
royal family.
Morgan has spent six years investigating the evidence relating to the crash in the Alma Tunnel, and the subsequent
cover-up by the British and French authorities. The Diana Inquest series of books are based on forensic analysis of
the testimony heard during the 2007-08 inquest, and also on evidence from the British police investigation that was
withheld from the inquest jury.
Shocking revelations in this latest volume include:
- evidence which demonstrates that the top three MI6 officers in Paris were replaced by more senior officers in the
days immediately prior to the Paris crash
- evidence of MI6 involvement in assassination plots against two high-profile world leaders in the 18 month period
leading up to the Diana assassination
- evidence exposing Rosa Monckton – wife of former newspaper editor, Dominic Lawson – as an MI6 agent who spied
on Princess Diana
- evidence that the royal Way Ahead Group – chaired by the Queen – played a significant role in the assassination
of Princess Diana
- evidence revealing that British Prime Minister, Tony Blair, had prior knowledge of the assassination.
John Morgan says that “at the 2007-08 inquest into the deaths of Princess Diana and Dodi Fayed, the judge, Lord
Justice Scott Baker, went to great lengths to prevent the jury from being able to piece together all the evidence that
could have allowed them to understand the roles played by MI6 and the royal family in the deaths”.
The author adds that the evidence he has uncovered in Who Killed Princess Diana? shows that “MI6 officers lied
repeatedly under oath during their cross-examinations at the inquest. And the royal private secretaries – Robert
Fellowes for the Queen and Miles Hunt-Davis for Prince Philip – also lied to cover up the role of the senior members
of the royal family in the assassinations.”
Morgan continues: “Given the many lies told by the MI6 officers, and the efforts by the royal private secretaries and
Scott Baker to suppress and cover-up vital evidence, the jury really had no hope of understanding the role played by
both the Secret Intelligence Service and the royal family in the 1997 assassination”.
A leading UK QC, Michael Mansfield, who served throughout the six months of the London inquest, stated in 2010: “I
have no doubt that the volumes written by John Morgan will come to be regarded as the ‘Magnum Opus’ on the crash
... that resulted in the unlawful killing of Diana, Princess of Wales and Dodi Al Fayed and the cover-up that followed.”
Diana Inquest: Who Killed Princess Diana? is available at Amazon: http://www.amazon.com/Diana-Inquest-Who-Killed-
Princess/dp/1475103417/ref=sr_1_11?ie=UTF8&qid=1333398839&sr=8-11
Date Posted: 4/11/12
US holds secret files on Diana
The Guardian Newspaper Article by David Hencke and Rob Evans
Friday August 6th 1999
It is a fact that conspiracy theorists have always dreamed about. Top secret files on Princess Diana and her closest
associates are held by the United States national security agency - and that is official.
The agency has told the Guardian that it is holding reports from foreign intelligence - thought to include MI5 and MI6 -
under both top secret and secret categories. It revealed their existence after the Guardian filed a request under the
US freedom of information act. The reports cannot be released because of "exceptionally grave damage to the
national security".
The documents on the dead princess seem to have arisen because of the company she kept rather than through any
attempt to target her, and the agency goes out of its way to say that it did not compile any of the spy reports itself.
"The reports contain only references to Princess Diana acquired incidentally from intelligence gathering. It is neither
NSA policy or practice to target British subjects in conducting our foreign intelligence mission. However, other
countries could communicate about these subjects; therefore, this agency could acquire intelligence concerning
British subjects," an agency statement said.
The agency rejected the Guardian's request to release the files on two grounds. As well as warning that "the
documents are classified because their disclosure could reasonably be expected to cause exceptionally grave
damage to the national security," the agency also says it needs to protect its sources.
The existence of documents on Diana, Princess of Wales has always been claimed by the owner of Harrods,
Mohamed Al Fayed, whose son, Dodi, died with the princess in a car crash in Paris in 1997. He believes reports which
claim that up to 1,056 page references to Diana exist in some 39 documents held by the NSA.
Mr Fayed has started a welter of court actions in Washington and Baltimore in an attempt to force the NSA, the
defence intelligence agency, and the CIA to release documents which he believes could throw light on the death of
the princess and his son.
He is also suing a group which demanded money for fabricated documents claiming that the intelligence services were
involved in a plot to assassinate the princess and her boyfriend that night. It is not known whether these documents
were held by the NSA, nor whether claims published last year that the agency was snooping on her love life were
correct.
Under Jack Straw's freedom of information bill Britain's security services would not be able to confirm or deny that they
were holding documents on Princess Diana. The services are covered by a blanket ban exempting them from
disclosing even documents' existence.
Diana's landmine crusade put Tories in a panic
The Guardian Newspaper Article by David Hencke and Rob Evans
Monday January 3rd 2000
A graphic account of how John Major's government was gripped by panic over Princess Diana's uncompromising
stance on a worldwide ban on landmines is revealed in previously secret diplomatic cables. The U.S. diplomatic
cables describe controversy over Angola visit !
They were sent by American ambassadors to the US secretary of state, Madeline Albright, during the princess's visit
to Angola. They reveal that the Americans believed Diana had 'bested' John Major and the foreign secretary, Malcolm
Rifkind, after a junior defence minister, Earl Howe, had accused her of being a 'loose cannon'.
They also contain a revealing insight into how she refused to 'wine and dine' the social elite and snubbed the
daughter of an African king in favour of meeting the Angolan people. Such attitudes caused considerable
embarrassment for the British ambassador in Angola, Roger Hart, who had to sneak in VIP guests to eat char sui and
bean sprouts with the princess.
The trip, in January 1997, caused huge controversy in the press when she appeared to endorse Labour's policy of a
worldwide ban on landmines. The US cables show that the Americans - who later cooled on the idea of a ban - could
scarcely conceal their delight at her strong stance and even told the British ambassador in Angola what a great
success her visit had been.
Blow-by-blow accounts of the princess's controversial visit were sent to Ms Albright from Admiral William Crowe, then
US ambassador to Britain, and Donald Steinberg, then US ambassador to Angola. The cables released to the
Guardian under the US freedom of information act would be banned from publication in Britain until 2072 because of
their mention of the royal family. Admiral Crowe's cable - written in the same colourful language as his outspoken
comments about the royals and William Hague after Diana's death - is headed 'Princess Di trips political landmine'.
'Controversy and/or room for misunderstanding was inherent in the princess's trip' because the British Red Cross
wanted an immediate worldwide ban on anti-personnel mines, while the government's position was that Britain would
not support a ban until all countries had signed a deal. Once the princess had made her statement supporting a
worldwide ban, she was attacked by Earl Howe for being 'ill-informed on the issue of anti-personnel mines' and a
'loose cannon' ' that Her Majesty's government did not need'.
Admiral Crowe says: 'Government officials immediately scrambled to repair the public relations damage and issued
statements affirming the government's commitment to 'working toward a worldwide ban on landmines'.' A Downing
Street spokesman was quoted as claiming there had been a 'misunderstanding' and that the princess's remarks were
not 'inconsistent with government policy'. He adds: 'Labour party officials used the flap to highlight differences
between Labour and the Conservative government on the landmine issue.'
Mr Steinberg tells Ms Albright from Luanda that by the time the three-day trip had finished the princess had 'bested a
political furore in London', adding that Mr Major and Mr Rifkind had 'stepped in to cool things off'. He also reports
approvingly of how she shunned celebrity status. 'She wanted a serious visit, not to be seen wining and dining with the
social elite. The daughter of the king of the Lundas wanted to meet with her British counterpart, but failed. The
princess accepted a dinner invitation hosted by first lady Ana Paula Dos Santos (the Angolan president's wife) on
condition that it be small (26 guests ate from a catered Chinese food buffet) short (it ended at 8.10pm) and there be
no press or speeches. Hart (the British ambassador) managed to get the local directors of Shell, BP and De Beers
invited. 'Hart himself held only a dinner for her and Red Cross officials.'
The reports also discloses that Mr Major's government had the added problem that Diana had been fully briefed of
the British position by the foreign office and the visit had been personally approved by the Queen. 'For her part, the
princess was looking for a new public cause to promote that would not conflict with the interests of other members of
the royal family.'
The US ambassador's report adds that originally the Red Cross wanted to send her to Vietnam or Cambodia but this
was ruled out by the foreign office as too dangerous. Mr Steinberg concludes: 'She was excited about the results and
talking about more visits to Vietnam, Cambodia, Kuwait and return engagement in Angola. No one can come to Angola
and see the human devastation caused by landmines and not be moved. We have told the British ambassador how
seriously the United States' government takes this problem and how much we appreciate Diana's support".
Date Posted: 4/11/12
Home - Truths!
"The reason for these articles being presented in the current messages area is a simple one: in both cases bluntly
exposing the corruption within the Media in this country, although as these articles prove there being the exceptions to
the rule in this regard. So in the first one we see documented the state of the current royal marriage and this something
looked into by me when Andrew in speaking with a Polish friend today about corruptions generally. The female friend,
who has just recently returned from a home visit, told him that the Polish press were reporting all was not well with
Charles and Camilla unofficially which is of course something covered in a precis already on my site having been
reported in the German press. As I said at the time "No smoke without fire!"
So doing my homework I have come across this report in this country's press and though something being officially
denied naturally, I would imagine being the truth as being his royal mistress would I imagine being a much more
exciting role than his wife, in my experience anyway!
Which brings me to the second article and this from Camilla al - Fayed one of the children of Mohamed from his second
marriage but therefore a step - sister of Dodi. It being widely reported that William and Harry were not happy and
enjoying their time with Dodi and I and the al - Fayed family on holiday in 1997 and this personal account of our time
altogether paints a rather different picture. The fact that she was personally invited by my boys to attend my memorial
service in London and so of course as Harry remarked in his speech remembering also that he and Wills were not the
only people to lose loved ones in the event in Paris of August 31st 1997 seems to rather illustrate this point!"
Diana.
Is all truly well within the Royal Marriage?
London: All may not be well between Prince Charles and his wife Camilla - the two are reportedly leading separate
lives as she has been struggling to cope with the pressures of being a royal.
The Duchess of Cornwall regularly leaves her husband and escapes to her old country house at Ray Mill House in the
Cotswolds where she is free from the red carpet world, Prince Charles' demanding ways, and being on show at public
events, Camilla revealed her secret getaways to her hairdresser confidante Jo Hansford, who has been with her for 20
years.
Jo said: "Ray Mill House is her escape. She likes to be in her own home. With that kind of life how can you ever be a
normal person? He was born into it, she wasn't, she came into it much later in life.
"Why would he want to take on all her family, then feel uncomfortable being in another situation? That escape is
fantastic from her point of view."
In fact, Buckingham Palace officials are also "concerned" over 64-year-old Camilla's disappearing acts, which take
place every 10 days and the heir to the British throne has discussed the issue with her, the newspaper said.
A royal aide said: "This is causing concern about the future. She goes off at least once a week or every 10 days to
escape. Charles is worried and irritated and has spoken to her. But she thinks he is being unfair.
"He is used to getting his own way but Camilla feels that now, within reason, she is going to lead her own life. They are
not talking about divorce, they are mature people. This is how they make their marriage work."
However, a spokesman for Charles and Camilla said: "They are not leading separate lives, they do joint engagements
and individual engagements to maximise the impact the royals have."
"As I said about Charles and I on Panorama " We made a good team!" It does seem history is rather repeating itself to a
certain extent doesn't it but would agree another royal divorce being unnegotiable, Her Majesty would see to that!"
Diana.
Camilla al - Fayed remembers time spent with her family and step - brother Dodi and Diana and her boys in
the South of France in 1997
In the summer of 1997, Diana, William and Harry were the guests of Mohamed al - Fayed, the Egyptian-born
billionaire, on board his luxury yacht in the South of France. Mr. al - Fayed had purchased the Jonikal, a luxury £15
million yacht, as soon as Diana had accepted his invitation to join his family in St Tropez. It was his way of
safeguarding his Royal guests and ensuring they had maximum privacy. He also hoped to play Cupid between the
Princess and his eldest son, Dodi.
Diana and her sons flew to the south of France on his private Gulfstream jet on July 11, 1997. William and Harry had
known Mohamed’s other children – Jasmine, Camilla and Omar – for several years, and they had already spent some
of that summer together in London. According to Camilla, she and her siblings had been invited to the newly-
refurbished games room at Kensington Palace to play computer games with the Princes. Harry was the self-
proclaimed king of Sonic The Hedgehog.
Camilla, the youngest of Mohamed al - Fayed’s four children from his second marriage says: ‘That summer we all
became a team. I was 11 at the time and my sister Jasmine was 15. We used to hang out with William and Harry all the
time at Kensington Palace. We were all so excited about spending the summer together and it was wonderful. We
adored each other and we did everything together.‘There were reports that we didn’t get along but that wasn’t true. I
have nothing but happy memories of that summer. It was great fun being with Diana – she was so beautiful and kind
and she doted on us all. ‘She would tuck us up in bed like we were her own children. We were all very close – it’s just
that no one really knew about our friendship. ‘You have to remember we weren’t star-struck by having the Princes and
Diana around. We’d have Michael Jackson to tea, so for us it was very normal to have famous people around. I
remember that Harry was very much a mummy’s boy and he always wanted Diana’s attention. ‘He and Omar did have
an argument but there was no fight as was reported in the newspapers. The truth is they fell out over a bed.
‘Our mother told Omar to give up his bed for Harry, because he was our guest but Omar didn’t want to. He wasn’t
having any of it and I remember there was a lot of shouting and door-slamming but no fisticuffs.‘We were all laughing
about it afterwards, especially Diana, who thought it was so funny.
‘William was quieter than Harry and a real gentleman. I always remember he had impeccable manners and you could
tell even then that he had been groomed for the top job. ‘He would always open doors for his mother and make sure
she was comfortable and happy. He was the perfect little Prince.’
However, after the death of Diana and Dodi in a car accident at the end of the summer, Camilla didn’t have any
contact with the Princes for the next ten years. Then, in August 2007, she was invited to a memorial service for Diana.
William and Harry had written to her personally.‘I was very surprised,’ she says. ‘I was the only one in my family to be
asked along, no surprise they couldn’t ask my father. I still don’t know to this day why they invited me.
‘I was very nervous about going. I hadn’t seen or spoken to William since the summer Dodi and Diana died. We were
desperate to write to them or speak with them, but we were told not to have any contact, which was very hard because
we had all grown close that summer. I couldn’t believe I was finally going to be able to see William and Harry at the
memorial service. ‘I had Elton John and David Furnish to look after me – they are very dear friends and they were an
amazing support. Without them I don’t know if I could have gone. I spoke to William and Harry and they both thanked
me for coming. I would have loved to talk to them more but it wasn’t really the time or the place. ‘We both lost loved
ones that day of August 31st 1997 – our lives were both torn apart. I lost my step - brother and it has taken me years
to be able to talk about that summer. It was a tragedy that destroyed both our families.‘For me it was very important
that I was there to represent my father and our family, and it was very honourable of the boys to invite me. I’m so glad
I went.’
"So you see you really cannot and should not believe everything you read as it will be a deliberated opinion expressed
as opposed to the truth!"
Diana.
Date Posted: 4/11/12
"Hello Everyone!
Have you heard the latest news? Brought to my attention by a truth seeker Anne for which I am most grateful as
I missed it! Even more bizarre than other tales about me and apparently news to me that the daughter I so longed for,
and made no secret of this fact, I already had and she conceived and born before William and Harry! Aas the Globe
Magazine is insinuating on their front cover as seen, the woman is now in her 30's, come out, come out wherever you
are or ought that to be whoever you are? I am amazed that she has not sold her story globally.
This is apparently to do with a new book entitlled 'The Disappearance of Olivia' a fictional story by Nancy E.
Ryan about the main character Olivia Franklin spending her entire life being told that she looks like Princess Diana- so
big blue eyes and a big nose to match then- and I do hope that in the novel she has better luck in love than I did and not
experience, finally finding love and companionship and then being bumped off for all her trouble!
It seems like I am still being used in whatever fashion to sell magazines and to make headlines though I am
quite sure this one were it to be taken seriously of course ensuring that in her Diamond Jubilee year, Her Majesty has
corgis .. er sorry kittens! It reminds me very much of when Madonna first came into vogue telling people she was the
illegitimate daughter of Marilyn Monroe, do people remember that? Later Madonna doing a parody of the set of
"Diamonds are a girl's best friend" Marilyn's solo show - stopping number from the 1953 film "Gentlemen Prefer
Blondes"--- as Charles and Harry do, so I dyed mine! So too Andrew's favourite, Madonna, who emmulated the movie
star icon for the video of her hit song "Material Girl".
I am sure if my boys apparently anyway welcome the Duchess of Cornwall in their lives, albeit from a
distance, likewise they would do so their step - sister. I wonder who her father is? Let's see, such a list to draw from, yes
of course Andrew Parker - Bowles---explaining why a woman scorned in revenge Camilla stole my husband from me!
Why didn't I understand that? Of course also having had an affair with Andrew herself, why the Princess Royal couldn't
stand me! It all makes so much more sense now but as I have previously said on my site where is Camilla and Charles's
love child? I am sure the Globe can be relied upon to find them!"
With love from,
Diana xx
" Hello Everyone,
This below is No 5. in a series of books available at $32.00 so not cheap. Though New Evidence presented, as said,
much if not all the details-- certainly the basic outline of them-- are documented or hinted about on my personal site for
free! I am posting information about it for people to see and wonder if the Media will have anything at all to say in its
regard, I would doubt it actually being gagged from doing so.
What it's publication this year determines most positively is the fact that the event in Paris is not 15 years later one
forgotten!
With love from,
Diana xx
Subject: MI6 Were Ordered to Assassinate Princess Diana: New Evidence Revealed
Date: Monday, 2 April, 2012, 22:12
An authoritative new book - published this week – names the killers of Princess Diana, and shows who gave them the
order to assassinate her.
This explosive, evidence-based book is the most shocking, revealing, yet factual work written on the 1997 Paris car
crash that took the lives of Princess Diana and her lover Dodi Fayed.
In Diana Inquest: Who Killed Princess Diana? investigative writer John Morgan reveals that the assassination of
Princess Diana was carried out by the British intelligence agency, MI6, on orders from senior members of the British
royal family.
Morgan has spent six years investigating the evidence relating to the crash in the Alma Tunnel, and the subsequent
cover-up by the British and French authorities. The Diana Inquest series of books are based on forensic analysis of
the testimony heard during the 2007-08 inquest, and also on evidence from the British police investigation that was
withheld from the inquest jury.
Shocking revelations in this latest volume include:
- evidence which demonstrates that the top three MI6 officers in Paris were replaced by more senior officers in the
days immediately prior to the Paris crash
- evidence of MI6 involvement in assassination plots against two high-profile world leaders in the 18 month period
leading up to the Diana assassination
- evidence exposing Rosa Monckton – wife of former newspaper editor, Dominic Lawson – as an MI6 agent who spied
on Princess Diana
- evidence that the royal Way Ahead Group – chaired by the Queen – played a significant role in the assassination
of Princess Diana
- evidence revealing that British Prime Minister, Tony Blair, had prior knowledge of the assassination.
John Morgan says that “at the 2007-08 inquest into the deaths of Princess Diana and Dodi Fayed, the judge, Lord
Justice Scott Baker, went to great lengths to prevent the jury from being able to piece together all the evidence that
could have allowed them to understand the roles played by MI6 and the royal family in the deaths”.
The author adds that the evidence he has uncovered in Who Killed Princess Diana? shows that “MI6 officers lied
repeatedly under oath during their cross-examinations at the inquest. And the royal private secretaries – Robert
Fellowes for the Queen and Miles Hunt-Davis for Prince Philip – also lied to cover up the role of the senior members
of the royal family in the assassinations.”
Morgan continues: “Given the many lies told by the MI6 officers, and the efforts by the royal private secretaries and
Scott Baker to suppress and cover-up vital evidence, the jury really had no hope of understanding the role played by
both the Secret Intelligence Service and the royal family in the 1997 assassination”.
A leading UK QC, Michael Mansfield, who served throughout the six months of the London inquest, stated in 2010: “I
have no doubt that the volumes written by John Morgan will come to be regarded as the ‘Magnum Opus’ on the crash
... that resulted in the unlawful killing of Diana, Princess of Wales and Dodi Al Fayed and the cover-up that followed.”
Diana Inquest: Who Killed Princess Diana? is available at Amazon: http://www.amazon.com/Diana-Inquest-Who-Killed-
Princess/dp/1475103417/ref=sr_1_11?ie=UTF8&qid=1333398839&sr=8-11
Date Posted: 4/11/12
US holds secret files on Diana
The Guardian Newspaper Article by David Hencke and Rob Evans
Friday August 6th 1999
It is a fact that conspiracy theorists have always dreamed about. Top secret files on Princess Diana and her closest
associates are held by the United States national security agency - and that is official.
The agency has told the Guardian that it is holding reports from foreign intelligence - thought to include MI5 and MI6 -
under both top secret and secret categories. It revealed their existence after the Guardian filed a request under the
US freedom of information act. The reports cannot be released because of "exceptionally grave damage to the
national security".
The documents on the dead princess seem to have arisen because of the company she kept rather than through any
attempt to target her, and the agency goes out of its way to say that it did not compile any of the spy reports itself.
"The reports contain only references to Princess Diana acquired incidentally from intelligence gathering. It is neither
NSA policy or practice to target British subjects in conducting our foreign intelligence mission. However, other
countries could communicate about these subjects; therefore, this agency could acquire intelligence concerning
British subjects," an agency statement said.
The agency rejected the Guardian's request to release the files on two grounds. As well as warning that "the
documents are classified because their disclosure could reasonably be expected to cause exceptionally grave
damage to the national security," the agency also says it needs to protect its sources.
The existence of documents on Diana, Princess of Wales has always been claimed by the owner of Harrods,
Mohamed Al Fayed, whose son, Dodi, died with the princess in a car crash in Paris in 1997. He believes reports which
claim that up to 1,056 page references to Diana exist in some 39 documents held by the NSA.
Mr Fayed has started a welter of court actions in Washington and Baltimore in an attempt to force the NSA, the
defence intelligence agency, and the CIA to release documents which he believes could throw light on the death of
the princess and his son.
He is also suing a group which demanded money for fabricated documents claiming that the intelligence services were
involved in a plot to assassinate the princess and her boyfriend that night. It is not known whether these documents
were held by the NSA, nor whether claims published last year that the agency was snooping on her love life were
correct.
Under Jack Straw's freedom of information bill Britain's security services would not be able to confirm or deny that they
were holding documents on Princess Diana. The services are covered by a blanket ban exempting them from
disclosing even documents' existence.
Diana's landmine crusade put Tories in a panic
The Guardian Newspaper Article by David Hencke and Rob Evans
Monday January 3rd 2000
A graphic account of how John Major's government was gripped by panic over Princess Diana's uncompromising
stance on a worldwide ban on landmines is revealed in previously secret diplomatic cables. The U.S. diplomatic
cables describe controversy over Angola visit !
They were sent by American ambassadors to the US secretary of state, Madeline Albright, during the princess's visit
to Angola. They reveal that the Americans believed Diana had 'bested' John Major and the foreign secretary, Malcolm
Rifkind, after a junior defence minister, Earl Howe, had accused her of being a 'loose cannon'.
They also contain a revealing insight into how she refused to 'wine and dine' the social elite and snubbed the
daughter of an African king in favour of meeting the Angolan people. Such attitudes caused considerable
embarrassment for the British ambassador in Angola, Roger Hart, who had to sneak in VIP guests to eat char sui and
bean sprouts with the princess.
The trip, in January 1997, caused huge controversy in the press when she appeared to endorse Labour's policy of a
worldwide ban on landmines. The US cables show that the Americans - who later cooled on the idea of a ban - could
scarcely conceal their delight at her strong stance and even told the British ambassador in Angola what a great
success her visit had been.
Blow-by-blow accounts of the princess's controversial visit were sent to Ms Albright from Admiral William Crowe, then
US ambassador to Britain, and Donald Steinberg, then US ambassador to Angola. The cables released to the
Guardian under the US freedom of information act would be banned from publication in Britain until 2072 because of
their mention of the royal family. Admiral Crowe's cable - written in the same colourful language as his outspoken
comments about the royals and William Hague after Diana's death - is headed 'Princess Di trips political landmine'.
'Controversy and/or room for misunderstanding was inherent in the princess's trip' because the British Red Cross
wanted an immediate worldwide ban on anti-personnel mines, while the government's position was that Britain would
not support a ban until all countries had signed a deal. Once the princess had made her statement supporting a
worldwide ban, she was attacked by Earl Howe for being 'ill-informed on the issue of anti-personnel mines' and a
'loose cannon' ' that Her Majesty's government did not need'.
Admiral Crowe says: 'Government officials immediately scrambled to repair the public relations damage and issued
statements affirming the government's commitment to 'working toward a worldwide ban on landmines'.' A Downing
Street spokesman was quoted as claiming there had been a 'misunderstanding' and that the princess's remarks were
not 'inconsistent with government policy'. He adds: 'Labour party officials used the flap to highlight differences
between Labour and the Conservative government on the landmine issue.'
Mr Steinberg tells Ms Albright from Luanda that by the time the three-day trip had finished the princess had 'bested a
political furore in London', adding that Mr Major and Mr Rifkind had 'stepped in to cool things off'. He also reports
approvingly of how she shunned celebrity status. 'She wanted a serious visit, not to be seen wining and dining with the
social elite. The daughter of the king of the Lundas wanted to meet with her British counterpart, but failed. The
princess accepted a dinner invitation hosted by first lady Ana Paula Dos Santos (the Angolan president's wife) on
condition that it be small (26 guests ate from a catered Chinese food buffet) short (it ended at 8.10pm) and there be
no press or speeches. Hart (the British ambassador) managed to get the local directors of Shell, BP and De Beers
invited. 'Hart himself held only a dinner for her and Red Cross officials.'
The reports also discloses that Mr Major's government had the added problem that Diana had been fully briefed of
the British position by the foreign office and the visit had been personally approved by the Queen. 'For her part, the
princess was looking for a new public cause to promote that would not conflict with the interests of other members of
the royal family.'
The US ambassador's report adds that originally the Red Cross wanted to send her to Vietnam or Cambodia but this
was ruled out by the foreign office as too dangerous. Mr Steinberg concludes: 'She was excited about the results and
talking about more visits to Vietnam, Cambodia, Kuwait and return engagement in Angola. No one can come to Angola
and see the human devastation caused by landmines and not be moved. We have told the British ambassador how
seriously the United States' government takes this problem and how much we appreciate Diana's support".
Date Posted: 4/11/12
Home - Truths!
"The reason for these articles being presented in the current messages area is a simple one: in both cases bluntly
exposing the corruption within the Media in this country, although as these articles prove there being the exceptions to
the rule in this regard. So in the first one we see documented the state of the current royal marriage and this something
looked into by me when Andrew in speaking with a Polish friend today about corruptions generally. The female friend,
who has just recently returned from a home visit, told him that the Polish press were reporting all was not well with
Charles and Camilla unofficially which is of course something covered in a precis already on my site having been
reported in the German press. As I said at the time "No smoke without fire!"
So doing my homework I have come across this report in this country's press and though something being officially
denied naturally, I would imagine being the truth as being his royal mistress would I imagine being a much more
exciting role than his wife, in my experience anyway!
Which brings me to the second article and this from Camilla al - Fayed one of the children of Mohamed from his second
marriage but therefore a step - sister of Dodi. It being widely reported that William and Harry were not happy and
enjoying their time with Dodi and I and the al - Fayed family on holiday in 1997 and this personal account of our time
altogether paints a rather different picture. The fact that she was personally invited by my boys to attend my memorial
service in London and so of course as Harry remarked in his speech remembering also that he and Wills were not the
only people to lose loved ones in the event in Paris of August 31st 1997 seems to rather illustrate this point!"
Diana.
Is all truly well within the Royal Marriage?
London: All may not be well between Prince Charles and his wife Camilla - the two are reportedly leading separate
lives as she has been struggling to cope with the pressures of being a royal.
The Duchess of Cornwall regularly leaves her husband and escapes to her old country house at Ray Mill House in the
Cotswolds where she is free from the red carpet world, Prince Charles' demanding ways, and being on show at public
events, Camilla revealed her secret getaways to her hairdresser confidante Jo Hansford, who has been with her for 20
years.
Jo said: "Ray Mill House is her escape. She likes to be in her own home. With that kind of life how can you ever be a
normal person? He was born into it, she wasn't, she came into it much later in life.
"Why would he want to take on all her family, then feel uncomfortable being in another situation? That escape is
fantastic from her point of view."
In fact, Buckingham Palace officials are also "concerned" over 64-year-old Camilla's disappearing acts, which take
place every 10 days and the heir to the British throne has discussed the issue with her, the newspaper said.
A royal aide said: "This is causing concern about the future. She goes off at least once a week or every 10 days to
escape. Charles is worried and irritated and has spoken to her. But she thinks he is being unfair.
"He is used to getting his own way but Camilla feels that now, within reason, she is going to lead her own life. They are
not talking about divorce, they are mature people. This is how they make their marriage work."
However, a spokesman for Charles and Camilla said: "They are not leading separate lives, they do joint engagements
and individual engagements to maximise the impact the royals have."
"As I said about Charles and I on Panorama " We made a good team!" It does seem history is rather repeating itself to a
certain extent doesn't it but would agree another royal divorce being unnegotiable, Her Majesty would see to that!"
Diana.
Camilla al - Fayed remembers time spent with her family and step - brother Dodi and Diana and her boys in
the South of France in 1997
In the summer of 1997, Diana, William and Harry were the guests of Mohamed al - Fayed, the Egyptian-born
billionaire, on board his luxury yacht in the South of France. Mr. al - Fayed had purchased the Jonikal, a luxury £15
million yacht, as soon as Diana had accepted his invitation to join his family in St Tropez. It was his way of
safeguarding his Royal guests and ensuring they had maximum privacy. He also hoped to play Cupid between the
Princess and his eldest son, Dodi.
Diana and her sons flew to the south of France on his private Gulfstream jet on July 11, 1997. William and Harry had
known Mohamed’s other children – Jasmine, Camilla and Omar – for several years, and they had already spent some
of that summer together in London. According to Camilla, she and her siblings had been invited to the newly-
refurbished games room at Kensington Palace to play computer games with the Princes. Harry was the self-
proclaimed king of Sonic The Hedgehog.
Camilla, the youngest of Mohamed al - Fayed’s four children from his second marriage says: ‘That summer we all
became a team. I was 11 at the time and my sister Jasmine was 15. We used to hang out with William and Harry all the
time at Kensington Palace. We were all so excited about spending the summer together and it was wonderful. We
adored each other and we did everything together.‘There were reports that we didn’t get along but that wasn’t true. I
have nothing but happy memories of that summer. It was great fun being with Diana – she was so beautiful and kind
and she doted on us all. ‘She would tuck us up in bed like we were her own children. We were all very close – it’s just
that no one really knew about our friendship. ‘You have to remember we weren’t star-struck by having the Princes and
Diana around. We’d have Michael Jackson to tea, so for us it was very normal to have famous people around. I
remember that Harry was very much a mummy’s boy and he always wanted Diana’s attention. ‘He and Omar did have
an argument but there was no fight as was reported in the newspapers. The truth is they fell out over a bed.
‘Our mother told Omar to give up his bed for Harry, because he was our guest but Omar didn’t want to. He wasn’t
having any of it and I remember there was a lot of shouting and door-slamming but no fisticuffs.‘We were all laughing
about it afterwards, especially Diana, who thought it was so funny.
‘William was quieter than Harry and a real gentleman. I always remember he had impeccable manners and you could
tell even then that he had been groomed for the top job. ‘He would always open doors for his mother and make sure
she was comfortable and happy. He was the perfect little Prince.’
However, after the death of Diana and Dodi in a car accident at the end of the summer, Camilla didn’t have any
contact with the Princes for the next ten years. Then, in August 2007, she was invited to a memorial service for Diana.
William and Harry had written to her personally.‘I was very surprised,’ she says. ‘I was the only one in my family to be
asked along, no surprise they couldn’t ask my father. I still don’t know to this day why they invited me.
‘I was very nervous about going. I hadn’t seen or spoken to William since the summer Dodi and Diana died. We were
desperate to write to them or speak with them, but we were told not to have any contact, which was very hard because
we had all grown close that summer. I couldn’t believe I was finally going to be able to see William and Harry at the
memorial service. ‘I had Elton John and David Furnish to look after me – they are very dear friends and they were an
amazing support. Without them I don’t know if I could have gone. I spoke to William and Harry and they both thanked
me for coming. I would have loved to talk to them more but it wasn’t really the time or the place. ‘We both lost loved
ones that day of August 31st 1997 – our lives were both torn apart. I lost my step - brother and it has taken me years
to be able to talk about that summer. It was a tragedy that destroyed both our families.‘For me it was very important
that I was there to represent my father and our family, and it was very honourable of the boys to invite me. I’m so glad
I went.’
"So you see you really cannot and should not believe everything you read as it will be a deliberated opinion expressed
as opposed to the truth!"
Diana.
Date Posted: 4/11/12
"Hello Everyone!
Have you heard the latest news? Brought to my attention by a truth seeker Anne for which I am most grateful as
I missed it! Even more bizarre than other tales about me and apparently news to me that the daughter I so longed for,
and made no secret of this fact, I already had and she conceived and born before William and Harry! Aas the Globe
Magazine is insinuating on their front cover as seen, the woman is now in her 30's, come out, come out wherever you
are or ought that to be whoever you are? I am amazed that she has not sold her story globally.
This is apparently to do with a new book entitlled 'The Disappearance of Olivia' a fictional story by Nancy E.
Ryan about the main character Olivia Franklin spending her entire life being told that she looks like Princess Diana- so
big blue eyes and a big nose to match then- and I do hope that in the novel she has better luck in love than I did and not
experience, finally finding love and companionship and then being bumped off for all her trouble!
It seems like I am still being used in whatever fashion to sell magazines and to make headlines though I am
quite sure this one were it to be taken seriously of course ensuring that in her Diamond Jubilee year, Her Majesty has
corgis .. er sorry kittens! It reminds me very much of when Madonna first came into vogue telling people she was the
illegitimate daughter of Marilyn Monroe, do people remember that? Later Madonna doing a parody of the set of
"Diamonds are a girl's best friend" Marilyn's solo show - stopping number from the 1953 film "Gentlemen Prefer
Blondes"--- as Charles and Harry do, so I dyed mine! So too Andrew's favourite, Madonna, who emmulated the movie
star icon for the video of her hit song "Material Girl".
I am sure if my boys apparently anyway welcome the Duchess of Cornwall in their lives, albeit from a
distance, likewise they would do so their step - sister. I wonder who her father is? Let's see, such a list to draw from, yes
of course Andrew Parker - Bowles---explaining why a woman scorned in revenge Camilla stole my husband from me!
Why didn't I understand that? Of course also having had an affair with Andrew herself, why the Princess Royal couldn't
stand me! It all makes so much more sense now but as I have previously said on my site where is Camilla and Charles's
love child? I am sure the Globe can be relied upon to find them!"
With love from,
Diana xx
Globe Magazine Cover
and the potential photo
of Diana that was used
to Photoshop the
daughter's face. You
be the judge!
and the potential photo
of Diana that was used
to Photoshop the
daughter's face. You
be the judge!
