| Date Posted: 05/05/12 DIANA: WILL THEY KILL ME LIKE VERSACE? The Sunday Express 26th June 2005 SPEAKING FOR THE FIRST TIME, THE PRINCESS'S BODYGUARD TELLS SECRETS OF HER LAST DAYS WORLD EXCLUSIVE By David Paul PRINCESS Diana was convinced she was about to be assassinated in the days before she died, according to a new witness. Former bodyguard Lee Sansum has told the Sunday Express of Diana's deepest fears - magnified by the shooting of her friend Gianni Versace - before she made her fateful final journey through the streets of Paris. His revelations will fuel growing speculation that the car crash in which Diana lost her life in August 1997 was deliberate. Mr Sansum, who worked for Harrods owner Mohamed Al Fayed, has broken an eight-year silence to talk about the day Diana learned of Versace's murder and how she even asked him: "Do you think they could kill me?" Mr Sansum told how he had been ordered to protect Diana when she flew to France's Cote d'Azur for a lavish holiday with her lover Dodi Fayed. But her joy at spending time on the Fayed family's £21million yacht with Dodi and her young sons William and Harry was shattered when fashion designer Versace was gunned down outside his Florida mansion. Mr Sansum, 43, said: "The Princess was on board the Fayed family's yacht, the Jonikel, and on July 15, the morning the news broke about Versace, I was heading towards my cabin and bumped into her standing on one of the glass fronted viewing decks. "She was wearing a swimsuit with shorts and a thin blouse over the top and was looking out towards the sea. I said, 'Good morning Ma'am'. It was obvious she had been crying. "She said to me, 'Have you heard the news about Versace?' I said I had. She was really upset. "She was crying and I couldn't stop myself, so I put my arms out to comfort her and I gave her a hug. It was weird and I suddenly thought, 'Lee what are you doing?' and stepped back. "She said to me, 'What do you think has happened? Do you think Gianni Versace was assassinated? Who do you think has killed him? Do you think they could kill me?' "I had got to know her quite well during the holiday and by then I took that to mean someone official killing her. She didn't say, 'Do you think anyone could kill me?' She said 'they'. I think she meant government agencies. "I told her she was perfectly safe with us just to calm her down. It was all I could do. "I felt she was very troubled, not just by Versace's death, but for her own safety." Diana had arrived at Al Fayed's stunning villa complex in St Tropez on July 11, 1997, accompanied by William and Harry. The trio enjoyed 10 days in the South of France before flying home to London. On July 22, Diana flew to Milan to attend Versace's funeral. But she flew back to St Tropez on July 31 for a second holiday with Dodi on board the Jonikel yacht - this time without her sons. Diana was anxious for a distraction with the first anniversary of her divorce looming large in her thoughts. The couple spent several happy days cruising off the coast of Sardinia. One night they enjoyed an open-air barbecue on a small island, their food served by a butler dressed in coat tails. It was just four weeks later, on the night of August 30, that Diana and Dodi died in Paris. Mr Al Fayed has consistently refused to accept that Henri Paul, a chauffeur at the Paris Ritz hotel, was to blame for the crash in a Paris underpass. It has been claimed that Paul was high on a cocktail of drink and drugs as he climbed behind the wheel of the Mercedes limousine in which he, Diana and Dodi were killed. Mr Al Fayed is convinced the couple were actually victims of a sinister plot involving British intelligence. French judges have now ordered a fresh inquiry into claims that tests on Paul's blood after he died were fabricated. Last year Paul Burrell, Diana's former butler, caused a sensation when he revealed details of a note the Princess had written alleging that the Prince of Wales was plotting to have her killed in a car crash. She wrote: "He is planning an accident in my car, brake failure and serious head injury to make the path clear for him to (re)marry." In fact, Diana's fears about a link between Versace's death and an attempt on her own life were groundless. The fashion designer was shot by gay serial killer Andrew Cunanan, who went on a gun rampage killing five men before taking his own life while hiding on a Miami houseboat. But Mr Al Fayed insists that in the last weeks of her life Diana repeatedly told him she was receiving death threats. Lord Stevens, the former Metropolitan Police chief, is leading a £2million inquiry into the Paris tragedy. He had been due to file his report this month - six months later than initially planned. Murder has not been ruled out. Investigators are not now expected to complete the inquiry until the end of the year, delaying an inquest into Diana's death by royal coroner Michael Burgess until next January. During a 10-year Army career, Mr Sansum, a former sergeant in the Special Investigation's Branch of the Royal Military Police, worked on top secret undercover missions in Northern Ireland. Last night said he too could not accept the drink-drive theory for the Paris death crash. Mr Sansum, who now runs a chain of karate schools in Elgin and Inverness, in Scotland, said: "I worked for the Al Fayeds for four years and knew Diana's personal bodyguard Trevor Rees-Jones well. I know that when you worked with Trevor drink was an absolute no-no. "I don't give much credence to the story that Henri Paul was drunk. Trevor would never have allowed the Princess to get in the car if he had smelled of drink. It just seems to me that we haven't got the whole story yet. "I spoke to Kez Wingfield, another of the Fayed bodyguards, shortly after the crash. He had been in a decoy car getting the paparazzi photographers off Diana's trail that night and he told me the guy, Henri Paul, wasn't drunk. I'd be happy to tell the Stevens inquiry everything I know. The truth is the Princess feared she was about to be killed in the final weeks of her life." Earlier this month it emerged that Mr Paul, who earned just £20,000 a year as a Ritz chauffeur, had deposited £75,000 into 13 different bank accounts before the crash. The cash has added to speculation that he was in the pay of British spymasters. Months after the tragedy Mr Sansum helped carry Mr Rees-Jones, who suffered massive injuries in the crash, to Dodi's mausoleum on the Fayed family estate in Oxted, Surrey. Mr Sansum said: "Trevor was mentally and physically screwed up. He was confused and said: 'Lee, this is the most important thing going on in the world and I just don't know anything about it' but he did tell me that Henri Paul had not been drinking. "Whatever the truth about that awful night is, we don't know it yet and I suspect we won't until the security services can be persuaded to reveal everything they know." "Hello Everyone, Thank you for drawing my attention to these points and I think this message from me ought to be added to the precis. I have always said that Dodi and his father argued that night or disagreed perhaps being a better turn of phrase as Mohammed did not think it wise we left the hotel at all, it was Dodi's decision to do so hence full security for us not something organised by Mohamed as in England, Dodi had on the call made to his father seemingly agreed to stay put as opposed to prolonging the conversation having made up his mind we would be leaving, I in agreement with Mohamed to stay where we were. As for someone tipping off our movements, well guilty of doing that myself on the Jonikal wanting the headlines on us and ensuring we got them not Charles and Camilla but I did not know Dodi's plan to leave the hotel that night and so certainly had no time to call anyone to tell them of this decision on his part but he called Henri Paul who was Deputy Head of Secuirty at the Ritz and close to Dodi anyway would have been aware of our movements as of course would primary bodyguards Trevor and Kez." With love from, Diana xx 8th May 2006 By Rod Chaytor for the Mirror DIANA EXCLUSIVE: CAR PARTS DESTROYED CLUES that could hold the key to Princess Diana's car death have been destroyed. They include the right front wing and right front door of the car she was in when it crashed in Paris - said to have been hit seconds before by a mystery Fiat Uno. The door was reduced to twisted scrap in a fire in a secure attic storeroom in the Palais de Justice in Paris in 1999. Its loss with other evidence from the French investigation was kept quiet by French authorities. The car wing was destroyed - possibly crushed - on the orders of a judge in June 2003 after criminal proceedings against nine photographers were ended by France's highest court. The decision was again not made public. After a six-month investigation by the Mirror, a French judge last week insisted the fire was an accident and the destruction of the wing was routine once all legal moves in a case were exhausted. But it will fuel conspiracy theories, which have been supported by Harrods owner Mohamed al Fayed, that the princess was murdered and the plot covered up. Diana and her lover Dodi Fayed, Mr al Fayed's son, died when their Mercedes, driven by Henri Paul, crashed in a tunnel on August 31, 1997. The wing and door bore traces of a sideswipe with a white Fiat Uno. Fragments of a rear light cluster from a Fiat Uno are said to have been found at the scene. Police failed to trace the car. Royal coroner Michael Burgess announced his own inquiry, headed by former Metropolitan Police chief Lord Stevens, in January 2004. Mr Burgess had the wrecked Merc shipped to England last July so crash experts could carry out tests. The fact it was incomplete, meaning they could not re-create the crash, was not revealed. Scotland Yard, which speaks for Stevens's team, would not answer our questions. A spokesman said: "We refuse to discuss it. That's not even not confirming or denying. We don't want to talk about it." French authorities stress they have done everything possible to aid the British probe. They said Stevens's team were given their test results on the paintwork and full 6,800-page report into Diana's death. Deputy Public Prosecutor Sylvie Petit-Leclair, the senior judge in the Justice Ministry liaising with the Stevens team, told the Mirror: "The door was destroyed in a fire on May 26, 1999. "A number of other items were also destroyed in the fire. It includes the right hand sill of the car and a hubcap from the left side and traces of paint from pillars and the pavement at the scene." But they had been examined by forensic scientists and "the reports are in the dossier sent to the UK. "The destruction of the right front wing was ordered by a judge carried out on June 17, 2003. "French procedure permits the destruction of objects once all legal actions have terminated. "It is open to anyone to apply for restitution of evidence before it is destroyed. Mr al Fayed could have asked for restitution of the parts. We have no record of a request. "At this time we had heard nothing from the British on an inquiry. The first notification and request for assistance came from Mr Burgess on August 22, 2003." By then she had halted destruction of the rest of the wreck after a civil servant happened to read in a magazine about a British probe. Saturday June 9,2007 by Padraic Flanagan for Daily Express Prince Philip hates me Diana said PRINCESS Diana was haunted by fears she would be murdered, and told friends of her concerns about Prince Philip’s animosity to her. “He really hates me and would like to see me disappear,” she said. The Princess, who died in a Paris car crash in 1997, repeatedly made clear her belief that she would be the victim of an Establishment conspiracy. Her fashion designer friend Roberto Devorik explained that the Princess had spoken about how she would be killed in a fake accident. “They will do it when I am in a small plane, in a car when I am driving, or in a helicopter,” she is said to have told Mr Devorik. He also revealed how Diana disliked having bodyguards because she felt they spied on her. The article, in next month’s edition of US magazine Vanity Fair, reports how Diana voiced her suspicions on a trip to Rome with Argentinian Mr Devorik. He said the outburst was prompted when she saw a picture of Prince Philip on a wall. Date Posted: 05/05/12 At 6.30pm Dodi went across the Place Vendome to a jewellers, Repossi, to buy a diamond ring for Diana which was later delivered to the Ritz. A little after 7 pm, the couple were driven in the Mercedes along the Champs Elysees to Dodi’s apartment on Rue Arsene-Houssaye close to the Arc de Triomphe. Here they unpacked and prepared for dinner. Again the back up Range Rover was there and so was another car carrying bodyguards for added protection. Why was this level of security thought necessary in the early evening, but not in the early hours of the morning at the time of the crash? Dodi’s apartment is known as the ‘Etoile flat’ after the Place de L’Etoile, the ‘Sun or star circle’ road around the Arc de Triomphe. The route they took to the apartment was out of the Place Vendome onto the Rue de Rivoli, and half way around the Place de la Concorde they turned right onto the Champs Elysees and drove straight up that famous avenue to Dodi’s apartment. Remember that route, it is crucially important. As they arrived at the apartment at 7.1 5pm, bodyguards were seen to rush from their car to hold back six paparazzi. Diana and Dodi became concerned about eating at the unprotected Chez Benoit restaurant and decided to head back to the Ritz to eat. They took the same route back, down the Champs Elysees and around the Place de la Concorde. The couple, with bodyguards Wingfield and Rees-Jones, walked into the Ritz, captured by the now famous video pictures, at 9.47pm. As the paparazzi gather in numbers outside, amid rumours of an engagement announcement, Diana has already started the last three hours of her life. Who was feeding the rumours and the whereabouts of Diana during the day to create the paparazzi stampede that dominated Diana and Dodi’s movements and decisions that night? I think I can guess, somehow. Mohamed al - Fayed. Who were some of these ‘paparazzi’ making life uncomfortable for Diana, thus changing the plans for the evening? The Ritz security video also identified a number of people who had been outside among the onlookers for most of the day and were still there on the edge of the crowd. Now the plot seriously thickens. After speaking on the phone with his father at his estate in Oxted, Surrey, Dodi Fayed announced a quite ludicrous plan. To avoid the paparazzi, the Mercedes which had been transporting them all day together with the back up Range Rover were to be taken around the front of the hotel and used as a decoy for the paparazzi. At the same time another Mercedes would be brought around to the back entrance of the hotel to whisk the couple away to the apartment on the Champs Elysees. Henri Paul, the 41-year-old acting head of security at the Ritz, was called on his mobile phone by Dodi and told to report back to the hotel. He went off duty at 7pm and by the time he returned it was 10pm. No-one has established where Paul was in those three hours. Dodi said that his father, Mohamed Al Fayed, had personally authorized that Henri Paul should drive the Mercedes. For me, that is Dodi-speak for “My father told me this is how it is going to be”. Henri Paul was not a qualified chauffeur and had no hire car permit. L. Fletcher Prouty, a former colonel in the US Airforce who worked closely with the intelligence agencies, once said: “No-one has to direct an assassination -it happens. The active role is played secretly by permitting it to happen. This is the greatest single clue. Who has the power to call off or reduce the usual security precautions?” Absolutely right. If we apply Prouty’s rule to Diana and ask who had the power and used that power - to reduce the usual security precautions for her that night, we have a rather interesting answer: Mohamed al - Fayed. Given these circumstances he must answer the obvious question: Why was this security reduced? When President Kennedy was assassinated, there were no bodyguards standing on his car while four were standing on the one immediately behind. He was also in an open-topped car at a dangerous time in a dangerous city. When Martin Luther King was shot dead at the Lorraine Motel in Memphis, Tennessee, on April 4th, 1968, the black police officer in charge of security for King was sent home against his will hours before the shooting. The only two black firemen at the station next to the motel were sent to other stations just for that day. The scapegoat for this assassination was a guy called James Earl Ray. Not even King’s family believed he was responsible. So much so that they attended his funeral a few years ago. When Bobby Kennedy was murdered after making a speech at the Ambassadors Hotel in Los Angeles on June 4th 1968, again the security arrangements were tampered with. The plan was for Kennedy to walk off the stage and through the crowd to the exit. But immediately after the speech, Kennedy’s ‘aides’, especially Frank Mankiewicz, insisted that it was safer for him to go out through the hotel kitchen. When he walked into the kitchen he was met by the mind controlled Sirhan Sirhan with a gun in his hand. It is far more likely that Bobby Kennedy was actually shot by members of his ‘security’ team, particularly Thane Eugene Caesar, the ‘security guard’ who was employed at the last minute and had endless connections into far right groups and the intelligence community but with Sirhan Sirhan at the scene with a gun, they had a mind controlled scapegoat to take the rap and that was all they needed. Sirhan Sirhan had been on a ‘mind expansion’ course with the Rosicrucians in the weeks before he was implicated in Kennedy’s death. Frank Mankiewicz, who guided Kennedy to the kitchen, was a former public relations man for the Mossad-front in America, the Anti Defamation League. He turned up later as head of publicity for the Oliver Stone film, JFK, which claimed to be an expose of the assassination of President Kennedy. It wasn’t. When the Israeli Prime Minister, Zitzhak Rabin, was shot dead by an assassin in Tel Aviv in 1995, an extraordinary video taken by an onlooker showed how Rabin’s security detail stepped back in unison to leave the assassin alone and free to kill his target. You can see the pattern. And what happened in the crucial last minutes of Diana’s life? They withdrew her security on the orders of Mohamed Al Fayed via his son. That is a fact. All day she had travelled in the same Mercedes with the Range Rover as a back up vehicle. Now she would transfer to another Mercedes with no back up support whatsoever. This was an extraordinary decision for a man obsessed with his own security. Bob Loftus, the former Head of Security at Harrods, said: “Compared with the protection that Mohamed al - Fayed affords himself, which is very professional, of a very high standard, that which was afforded to the mother of the future King of England was a Mickey Mouse operation.” He added that Mohamed al - Fayed was absolutely paranoid about his personal protection”. Just for him to walk around his own store, there would be three or four plain clothes members of his personal protection team who travelled with him all the time, plus another four uniformed security who would act almost as ‘outriders’ to create two rings of security around him. That’s in his own store! Is it paranoia, or the knowledge of the seedy, cesspit, world of arms dealers and Brotherhood fixers of many kinds, in which Mohamed al - Fayed constantly operates? People who think nothing of the mass murder of children, let alone the assassination of a wealthy ‘yes’ man like him. Dodi Fayed was obsessed with his security for the same reason. A lot of this security was also inspired by the size of Mohamed al - Fayed’s ego, to be fair. Mostly he recruited his body guards from the SAS and the Parachute Regiment and used the Brotherhood operation, Control Risks, to make recommendations. Tom Bower tells in his book about Mohamed al - Fayed of how armed guards at the Oxted estate hide behind bushes wearing full combat uniform and blacked out faces. Whenever Mohamed al - Fayed travelled in his Mercedes there was always a back up Range Rover carrying emergency medical equipment and security staff, but now he withdrew that protection from Diana. More than that, a new car was introduced for her, another Mercedes was sent to the rear entrance of the Ritz, supplied by a car hire company called Etoile Limousines, the same name as Dodi’s flat. Etoile Limousines is based at the Ritz and depends for its entire income on contracts with the hotel and its guests. In other words, it is controlled completely by Mohamed al - Fayed and whoever controls him. The new Mercedes was an S-280, lighter in weight than the 600 series they had used all day and without the dark tinted windows. Other cars were available, but this one was chosen instead. A director of Etoile, Niels Siegel, told the inquiry into Diana’s death that he delivered the car to the rear entrance of the Ritz, but the Dispatches programme showed that this is a lie. It was delivered by a driver called Frederic Lucard and he can be seen doing so on the security video. Lucard said he found it very strange that Etoile would allow Henri Paul, a man not qualified as a chauffeur, to drive one of their cars. So why did they do it? Perhaps Mohamed al - Fayed told them to, that’s why. Brian Dodd, the former Head of Security for Mohamed al - Fayed in the 1980s, gave his assessment of the situation to Dispatches: “It’s a new car that’s come into the system. They wouldn’t have had time to check that car out. It should have been checked out. There could have been a bomb on the car, for instance. It was a most stupid plan. It shouldn’t even have been considered. The back up vehicle is there, not just to avert the paparazzi, but for instance, a motor cyclist with a pillion rider to pull up and shoot, or put a magnetised bomb on top of the car. That’s why the back up car is there - to stop any of that. Why they never had a back up car, God only knows. “I had probably six or eight men I would consider professional bodyguards who I would have had on that job and Trevor Rees-Jones and Kes Wingfield, after what I have seen happened, would not have been in Paris that night.” The Mercedes with Henry Paul at the wheel sped off from the rear entrance of the Ritz at 12.20am with Paul telling the paparazzi not to bother following because they would never catch him. Diana and Dodi were in the back seat and in the front was Trevor Rees-Jones, the former ‘Para’ with the reputation for being ‘fearless’. Rees-Jones says he disagreed with the change of plan. He was not wearing a seat belt which is normal practice because body guards need to be free to react quickly. The car was driven at speed down the Rue Cambon and turned right down the Rue de Rivoli into the Place de la Concorde where it stopped briefly at the lights. The paparazzi photographer, Romuald Rat, on the back of a motor cycle, drew up alongside them here, but he says that Henri Paul jumped the lights on red and headed onto the dual carriageway alongside the River Seine called the Cours la Reine. The car plunged down into one tunnel, came back to the surface, and almost immediately went down into the very short tunnel at the Pont de L' Alma. Here it went out of control and struck the 13th pillar in the centre of the tunnel which is lined with concrete pillars unprotected by crash barriers. Henri Paul and Dodi Fayed died immediately. According to the autopsy report Diana was clinically dead within 20 minutes and this was long before she arrived at hospital. Trevor Rees-Jones survived the crash because he was wearing a seat belt and Diana and Dodi were not. This could be highly significant. Rees-Jones was not wearing a belt when they left the Ritz in accordance with normal practice for body guards, and when Romuald Rat took a photograph at the lights at the Place de la Concorde, Rees-Jones still did not have a seat belt on. Yet little more than a minute later when the car struck the pillar, he was wearing a seat belt. Why? If he donned the belt because for some reason he sensed danger, why did he not scream at Diana and Dodi to put their seat belts on? After all it only takes a second and the whole reason he was in the car was to protect them. Rees-Jones has some serious questions to answer here and he is giving no answers. Some bodyguards do put a seat belt on when the car is on a fast road, but Rees-Jones is not saying this. He says he doesn’t know why he strapped himself in and if they were going to Dodi’s flat, they would have been on the fast road for about a minute. All he says is that he remembers they were followed by two cars, one of them white, and a motorcycle, which is in keeping with the smokescreen story. One simple fact about the crash has been missed by all the newspaper articles, magazine features, television documentaries and discussions I have seen, and by all but a few researchers. Everyone is agreed that the couple were being driven back to Dodi’s flat near the Arc de Triomphe when the crash happened. Well there is one glaring problem with that: The Pont de L’Alma tunnel is not on the way to Dodi’s flat. It takes you away from that area. I have been to Paris and walked the route the car took that night, in fact I have walked extensively around that whole area, and the route to Dodi’s apartment is the same as the one they took earlier that night. You go to the Place de la Concorde and, half way around, you turn right into the Champs Elysees and drive straight up to Dodi’s flat on the right near the Arc de Triomphe. At that time of night it would take only a few minutes but Henri Paul did not do that. He drove past the turning for the Champs Elysees, jumped the lights on red and sped down the duel carriageway to the Pont de L’Alma. This took them away from Dodi’s flat. I have heard it said that Henri Paul was going a long way round to avoid the photographers and traffic, but the photographers would have been waiting at the flat anyway by the time they got there. What is most important to stress here is that Henri Paul’s route was not the direct one to Dodi’ s apartment, but it did ensure that it took them through the Pont de L' Alma Tunnel, the significance of which is fantastic, as you will soon appreciate. Interestingly, it was after Henri Paul went past the turning to Les Champs Elysees and headed towards the Pont de L’ Alma that Rees-Jones put his seat belt on. He says he can’t remember why, but I can help him there. There can only be two reasons for this. Either he knew what was coming or he realised when Henri Paul screamed off from the lights that something was seriously wrong and he put the seat belt on to protect himself. But again if that is the case, why did he not tell Dodi and Diana to do the same? If Rees-Jones had realised a potential danger, why had Dodi and Diana not seen it and taken the appropriate action to protect themselves? I’m sorry if that upsets Rees-Jones’ family, but given the circumstances these are questions that need to be asked.
Henri Paul sped off in another direction away from their destination. It is said that he was taking the long way round to avoid the paparazzi, but what an amazing ‘coincidence’ that this took the car into the Pont de L ‘Alma tunnel, one of the Babylonian Brotherhood’s most sacred sites for the goddess Diana! Once the deed was done; the scapegoat was produced. The methods are so predictable, but they keep working so why change them? The Lee Harvey Oswald, Sirhan Sirhan and James Earl Ray of the Diana assassination was the driver, Henri Paul. Once the paparazzi card had been played and focused public and media attention in the days after the crash, it was announced that Paul was three to four times over the French drink driving limit and that his blood contained traces of antidepressant drugs, including Fluoxetine, the active ingredient of the infamous Prozac. “The cause of the crash was simple,” we were told. “The driver was drunk.” Tampering with blood samples or creating alcohol in the blood is child’s play and so is the insertion of tiny ‘balloons’ which release alcohol into the blood stream in stages. There was certainly no sign before he drove away from the Ritz that he was intoxicated to the extent, according to his blood tests, that he must have drunk the equivalent of eight Scotches on an empty stomach. A behavioural psychologist on the Independent Television documentary, Diana - Secrets Of The Crash, could find no evidence that he was drunk after studying the Ritz videos of him that night, but there could be an explanation for this which I will come to shortly. Only two days earlier, Henri Paul had undergone a rigorous medical for the renewal of his pilot’s licence and there was no sign of the alcohol abuse the post-crash propaganda claimed. Quite the opposite. And there was another strange anomaly revealed by the ITV documentary in 1998. The Haemoglobin in Henri Paul’s blood was found to contain 20.7% carbon monoxide and this would have been at a much higher level earlier because the carbon monoxide content halves every four to five hours once exposure to it has stopped. Haemoglobin carries the oxygen. Debbie Davis of the Carbon Monoxide Support Group said that with these levels in his blood, Henri Paul would not have known his left hand from his right, because of the reduced oxygen reaching the brain. Dr Alastair Hay, an expert on carbon monoxide poisoning, agreed and could not explain why Henri Paul showed no signs of the considerable symptoms that should have been evident:
suggests this would be someone with a much slower reaction time, certainly be someone who would be slowed up in the way he did things, would probably also be somebody who was in some pain, but none of those things appear to be evident from the pictures that we see of him. It is a bit of an enigma.” There is a lot more to know about Henri Paul. His best friend, Claude Garrec, told the ITV documentary that Henri Paul had contacts within the French and foreign intelligence services and maintained them throughout his time at the Ritz. This is no surprise because the intelligence agencies recruit the security men at the top hotels and the Ritz, with its VIP clientele and reputation for espionage and arms dealing, would have been a prime target. Henri Paul certainly had unexplained sources of income. He earned about £2025,000 a year at the Ritz and yet he was a keen pilot with 605 hours of flying time at about £300 an hour. He had a string of bank accounts. There were two in a bank outside Paris and three accounts, plus a safe deposit box, at the Banque Nationale de Paris near the Ritz. He had three accounts at the nearby branch of Barclays and one current and four deposit accounts at the Caisse D’Epargne de Paris. In the eight months before the crash, sums of £4,000 were paid into an account here on five separate occasions. In total he had £122,000 (1.2 million francs) and no-one knows where it came from. Then there is the question of where Henri Paul was in the three hours between 7pm when he went off duty and 10pm when Dodi called him on his mobile phone and told him to return to the Ritz. His whereabouts in this period are a mystery. A very significant one. To understand how the Brotherhood operates requires immensely detailed research over a vast array of interconnecting subjects. Everything from ancient history, to Satanic symbolism and ritual, the Earth’s magnetic grid, the power of the Sun, the banking system, and mind control. The journalists who have produced the articles and documentaries about the crash came to the subject cold and they can never uncover the truth because they don’t understand what they are dealing with. Their vision of possibility is limited by their indoctrinated view of reality. They can’t see, for instance, that there are organisations within organisations which means that one force can work through apparently unconnected agencies like British and French Intelligence, the Paris police and medical services, and the inquiry investigating the cause of the crash. I mean, you don’t have to search far for evidence of that. Look at the Kennedy assassination for one. It is this lack of research of the big picture that leads reporters like Martyn Gregory on the Dispatches programme to state categorically that “there is not a shred of credible evidence to support the conspiracy theory” and that the suggestion of Prince Philip’s involvement was “ludicrous”. I wonder after reading the evidence so far -and there is a great deal more to come - which you think is more ludicrous: the idea of a plot to kill Diana or Martyn Gregory’s statement? It was an unfortunate comment in a programme that produced some good information about Al Fayed. Then there was the ‘investigation’ into the crash by John Stalker, the former deputy chief constable of Greater Manchester, in the News Of The World newspaper, in which he dismissed all idea that Diana was murdered. Ironically, Stalker claimed, quite rightly, that he was the victim of a conspiracy to remove him from the police force after he identified a policy by the Northern Ireland police, the RUC, to shoot people they believed were terrorists and ask the questions later. This was the so-called shoot-to-kill policy. Pushing aside every suggestion of a conspiracy to kill Diana, Stalker asked: “Why would the French want to cover up the murder of an English woman?” The naivety of that statement is so breathtaking, I need a glass of water. At the same time, Stalker did ask some pertinent questions about the crash and its aftermath: “Why was the Fayed security around the princess reduced to one wholly inadequate man with no back up? Why did the police not appeal for help from the public? Why was there no post mortem-autopsy on Dodi Fayed’s body?” Answers: because of the very conspiracy you dismiss, Mr Stalker. One of the most important subjects to research if we are to understand how Diana was killed, is the power and potential of mind control. I’ll give some examples. In the 1980s the best part of 30 scientists working in top secret projects, mostly computer programmers, died in very strange and unexplained circumstances. Marconi was the major company involved, but there were others like Plessey and British Aerospace. In 1986, Vimal Dajibhai, who was working for Marconi Underwater Systems, drove from London to Bristol, a city with which he had no connection, and threw himself off the famous suspension bridge there. A few months before, Arshad Sharif, a computer programmer with Marconi Defence Systems, also drove from London to Bristol and hanged himself. Why Bristol? It is a former Knights Templar port and its name has evolved from Barati, the Phoenician goddess. It just so happens that an elite unit of British Intelligence called the Committee of 26 is based there and they use the runway at the British Aerospace complex to fly British and foreign agents in and out of the country. I was called once, from what sounded like a plane, by a guy claiming to represent the CIA. He said he was flying into the British Aerospace runway to sort me out. “The Company (CIA) are not happy,” he said. Oh, I thought, I am sorry, I do hope they cheer up soon. I drove over to meet him just to check it out, but he didn’t show. He was probably a guy who needed help, or perhaps they were seeing how I would react to threats. Either way, they got the airport right. In that period in the 1980s, not only in Bristol, there were strange deaths galore of people at the cutting edge of development in the ‘defence’ industries. What possesses a man to get into his car, drive more than two hours to the Bristol Suspension Bridge, and jump off? This may seem a long way from the Diana assassination, but it’s not. I’m talking about mind control. A CIA scientist told me that he was put through forms of mind control to stop him recalling his knowledge once a project was completed. I’ll give you an example of mind control in a situation very similar to the one in Paris. David Sands was a highly skilled scientist working in a very sensitive area of defence, but at 37 he was talking about leaving the industry and changing his lifestyle. He was happily married with two small children, a son aged six and a three year old daughter. Sands and his wife had just returned from an enjoyable holiday in Venice when he died in mysterious circumstances. Although they are not so mysterious if you understand mind control. He worked for Easams who, in turn, were operating contracts for the Ministry of Defence. It appears that while Sands and his wife were in Venice, the company was visited by members of the elite British police unit, the Special Branch. Then, on Saturday, March 28th 1987, David Sands told his wife he was going out to refuel the car, but he didn’t return for six hours. No-one has any idea where he was, but I think I do. His wife, Anna, called the police and constable John Hiscock was at the house when Sands returned at 10.2Opm. Asked the obvious question: “Where have you been?”, he said that he had been driving and thinking. His wife said that it was out of character for him to be away for so long and she didn’t think he realised how long he had been out. He seemed confused, but happy, she said. Two days later, on Monday, March 30th, he climbed into his excellently maintained Austin Maestro and began his regular journey from his home in Itchen Abbas, near Winchester, to Easams at Camberley in Surrey. His wife said there was nothing unusual about his demeanour or behaviour and driving conditions were good. About 30 minutes into the journey when David Sands was driving along the A33 at Popham, near Basingstoke, he suddenly did a U-turn across the duel carriageway and headed at high speed in the opposite direction to his destination. Turning onto a slip road at about 80 miles an hour, Sands then drove his car straight into a disused cafe building killing himself in an explosion of flame. There were no skid marks. He had not even tried to stop. It is so clear that during the time he was missing, his mind was being programmed and all it took was a trigger word, sign, sound or action, and the programming was activated. At that point he would have switched from his normal self to a man focused only on driving into the cafe building and blowing himself away. The subconscious programming overpowers the conscious mind and robot replaces human. That, I am convinced, is what also happened to Henri Paul in Paris. Sands went missing for six hours before he drove into the cafe. Henri Paul went missing for three hours before he drove into the 13th pillar in the Pont de L' Alma tunnel. This is what I suggest happened in Paris. The Brotherhood networks were working through many people and agencies to ensure that Diana was in Paris that night because, at its foundation, the plan was to perform a specific Satanic ritual and the timing, circumstances and the place of death had to be arranged in intricate detail. Diana was under Mohamed al - Fayed’s security web for much of the time leading up to the crash and all of the time in those last few days. Her conversations were heard and monitored throughout by the al - Fayed bugging system. During his missing hours, Henri Paul, the asset of French and British Intelligence, was being programmed for his role, or perhaps the final touches were being put to programming already installed. Diana’s ritual death was arranged from the very top of the Brotherhood and, by comparison, people like Mohamed al - Fayed are small and powerless nonentities, pawns in the game they probably do not fully understand. The Mercedes which was brought to the rear entrance of the Ritz had been stolen some weeks earlier - before the Diana-Dodi relationship began - and when it was recovered it underwent extensive repairs. It had been standing outside the exclusive Taillevent restaurant when the driver’s door was flung open and the chauffeur pulled out by three Arabic-speaking men with hand guns. The vehicle was missing for two weeks and when it was found the wheels were missing, the door ripped off, and the electronic system and equipment controlling the braking system had gone. Mohamed al - Fayed controlled the company, Etoile Limousines, which supplied the vehicle. No wonder the French authorities turned down the offer by experts from Mercedes to examine the car after the crash. When Henri Paul came back on duty that night he seemed his normal self to most observers. The programming was deep within his psyche still waiting to be activated. He may well have had a couple of alcoholic drinks in the Ritz bar, but his intake and demeanour did not correspond with the later medical report. Claims that he was an alcoholic also do not match with the examination of his liver. If however, as I suggest, Henri Paul was a mind controlled ‘multiple’ he could have been drunk in one compartment of his mind and not in another. I have heard from recovering ‘multiples’ who have experienced this. Someone close to Henri Paul that night, his handler, was switching his compartments. In this way he could have had a considerable level of alcohol in his blood while, in some compartments, he would have been unaffected by it. The same with the carbon monoxide. Just before or just after the Mercedes pulled away from the Ritz, Henri Paul was given the trigger which activated the programming. It could have been a sound, a sign, a colour or more likely a word or sentence. With Henri Paul’s subconscious programming now overwhelming his conscious mind, he sped away to the Place de la Concorde and down the dual carriageway to the Pont de L' Alma. Rees-Jones put his seat belt on, but apparently did not alert Diana and Dodi to the danger. Thus they stay unbelted. As Henri Paul entered the Pont d L’Alma tunnel at an estimated 80 miles an hour (some reports say slower), he braked fiercely, scraped the right hand wall of the tunnel, and then aimed the car at the 13th pillar. It is the 13th pillar that gives it away. The Brotherhood throughout history has had such an obsession with the number 13 that to believe this was a coincidence is taking chance to the level of fantasy. There must be 30 pillars in that tunnel and the car hit the 13th because it was meant to. Diana had an aversion to the number 13 and she would not allow a 13th lot in her dress auction at Christies the June before she died. If, as some witnesses have suggested, the crash was caused by the Mercedes hitting a white Fiat Uno or by a motorcyclist flashing a powerful light into Henri Paul’s eyes from a motor cycle, there is no way he could be sure of hitting the 13th pillar. A person with a deeply programmed subconscious would be able to put the car right on the button, even at speed. Mark Phillips is the man who helped to deprogramme Cathy O’Brien when she was a mind controlled slave of the CIA. He has worked in these fields for much of his adult life and after I reached my conclusions about the events in Paris, I rang him to ask if it would be possible to mind control Henri Paul to pick out that pillar at speed. Mark was in no doubt: “Yes, Yes” he said “More than yes, absolutely yes”. He pointed out that the subconscious worked much faster than the conscious mind and to the subconscious 80 miles an hour would actually be quite slow compared with its ability to think and react. If the speed was considerably slower as some reports suggest, it would have been even easier. “There are many techniques they could have used to programme his mind during those three hours he was missing”, Mark said. The number of ways they could have caused the crash, another vehicle, an explosive device, stun weapons, etc, etc, would fill a book and any of them is possible on the face of it. But not if they wanted to be sure of hitting the 13th pillar, which they did. To do that, they needed a driver with a programmed subconscious. I think the stories about the mysterious Fiat Uno and the motorcyclist with the flashing light are diversions to lead researchers away from the simple truth. So much time and effort has been wasted on the Fiat in particular, fueled by Al Fayed’s own investigation team. Whenever such assassinations are staged, there are always a stream of false ‘clues’ and ‘leads’ which divert attention. The Kennedy assassination was full of them. Another possibility for the cause of the crash is external control of the car. Randulph Fiennes, famous for his polar expeditions, was an officer in the Royal Scots Greys and attached to the elite SAS. He wrote a book about a secret group of assassins called the Clinic and how they murdered people while making it look like an accident. The death of Major Michael Marman is particularly relevant to what could have happened in Paris. He was driving a Citroen 2CV along the A303 near Stonehenge in November 1986 when a BMW coming the other way careered across the carriageway and killed him instantly. Fiennes says that the BMW had been tampered with and the braking system was operated by remote control which could override the normal system via compressed air from a tiny scuba diving cylinder hidden in the engine compartment. The remote control equipment was operated from a Volvo which followed the BMW, Fiennes reported. The BMW was driven by Sir Peter Horsley, a retired Air Marshall, who survived the crash. Fiennes says that the Clinic knew that Horsley would be travelling along that road at the same time as their target. In his autobiography, Sounds From Another Room, Horsley says that he was accelerating to about 60 miles an hour when the car began to react strangely. He saw a grey Volvo closing up quickly behind him and as he was about to wave it past, his BMW spun sharply to the left, the brakes screeching, and then sharply to the right and back again. This is remarkably similar to what happened to the Mercedes before it struck the 13th pillar. Horsley was by now desperately trying to maintain control and he went on:
developed a mind of its own as it swung broadside and skidded down the road. With a lurch it hit the central reservation, mounted the grass verge separating the two lanes of the highway and crossed over into the opposite carriageway. I had just time to see a small car approaching from the opposite direction. I hit it sideways on with tremendous force. In a split-second the driver’s horror-stricken face was visible and I heard his hoarse scream.”50 It is possible that Diana’s Mercedes was externally controlled in this way, because it is clear that the steering on Horsley’s BMW was also remotely controlled. Certainly a highly skilled operator could direct the Mercedes into the 13th pillar. Support for the contention that no other car was directly involved in Diana’s crash comes from Eric Petel who claims to have seen the crash. Petel says that he was riding his motorcycle towards the entrance to the tunnel when he was overtaken by the Mercedes. No other vehicle was nearby. He said:
though I was doing about 70 miles per hour. An instant later I heard a deafening noise and saw the accident. The car was spinning in the road... I stopped. There were no other cars or bikes around at all and I could see all the way through the tunnel. The roof of the Mercedes was totally smashed in. The right hand rear door was partly open and I looked in and saw a woman. She seemed to have been thrown forward from the back seat and had her head between the front seats.” Petel said blood was flowing from her right ear and as he brushed her hair from her face and placed her head on the arm rest, he realized it was Princess Diana. Her eyelashes were fluttering, but she had not opened her eyes at this stage, he said. Petel estimates he was at the scene for about a minute before climbing back on his bike to ring the police. He told them that Diana had been in an accident, but they laughed and told him to stop wasting their time. In despair at this, he rode to the police station in Avenue Mozart. His lawyer, Antoine Deguines, says that Petel was kept waiting for 25 minutes and taken into a backroom where he was handcuffed. For reporting an ‘accident’? When eventually freed, he was told to follow a police car to another police station where he gave a statement which he signed without reading. “I was outraged” he said “They didn’t seem to care about the crash.” He heard nothing from the authorities for months before he enlisted help from a lawyer to tell his story to the official inquiry. Whenever an assassination occurs in a public place, two things happen. The person named as responsible is a ‘patsy’ or ‘scapegoat’, most often these days under mind control, and diversions galore are created to lead investigators away from the truth of what happened. The first method allows you to make an immediate arrest, or expose the person to blame, and no further investigations are necessary because everyone knows who was responsible. We have seen this technique with Lee Harvey Oswald, Sirhan Sirhan, Timothy McVeigh, and now Henri Paul. It is endless. The second method, the diversion, ensures that the crucial hours and days after the event are wasted as people chase a mass of false stories and ‘leads’ .This was a technique used in Paris with the paparazzi, the flashing lights from motorcycles and later the Fiat Uno. Also when people are fed a constant barrage of conflicting reports and theories they become confused and a confused mind switches off and loses interest. So first they tell you the paparazzi were to blame, then they were not. Then they tell you the car speedometer was found stuck at 120 miles an hour, then they say it was found on zero. I thought it strange how many American witnesses to the crash were quickly located. The Pont and Place de L’Alma were not, before Diana’s death, a popular tourist area. There is nothing there except a restaurant or two, a tunnel, and a maze of crossing roads. Yet at 12.25 in the morning, several American tourists say they witnessed what happened. The number of witnesses in general was unusual anyway, given the late hour and the fact that Paris empties at that time of year as vast numbers of Parisians take their annual holiday to the French coastal resorts. I can understand that some people in the few cars travelling along the road at the time may have seen the crash and its immediate aftermath, but I know from visiting the spot myself, that the main pedestrian routes have virtually no view of the tunnel at all. The police failed to control the crash scene according to normal police procedure and so much evidence was lost immediately. They failed to question important witnesses and leaked some information while maintaining unshakable secrecy over other areas of the investigation.52 It all stinks. Today there is an added challenge for would-be assassins and assassination plots with the ‘traffic’ cameras that are located all over cities. Smile, you’re on TV. It would be impossible to keep secret the methods and personnel used to kill Diana if the whole thing was being videoed but when you are the Brotherhood with connections at the highest levels in politics, police and intelligence agencies, the traffic cameras present no such problem. You simply switch them off! There are 17 traffic cameras on the route between the Ritz and the Pont de L’Alma, including those inside the tunnel itself. If they had been working that night there would be no mystery, because you could play back the whole event on your television set. One camera looks down on the entrance to the tunnel and would have recorded any Fiat Uno or men on motorbikes with flashing lights. But that camera, like all the others, was switched off at the crucial moment. Never before in Paris had the whole system malfunctioned at the same time and the police refuse to explain what happened. The system runs on an independent power supply and it is controlled by the police and, ultimately, by the French Intelligence agencies, because the cameras are there to monitor far more than just traffic problems. At the same time as the camera system failed all the police communication frequencies in central Paris also went off. Simon Reagan in his excellent book, who Killed Diana?, quotes a contact called Andre’ who, like many people, loves to listen in to police radio messages. Andre’ was sitting on a bench near the Eiffel Tower, a few minutes walk from the Pont de L’Alma, on the night Diana died. He was, as usual, using a receiver to monitor the police communications. Suddenly, at 12.2Oam, all the lines went down. There was a radio blackout. It lasted for 20 minutes and then, Andre’ said, the signal came back and there was a mass of radio traffic as people all wanted to talk at once. “I have never... come across such chaotic radio traffic”, he said. “It was extraordinary.” When the lines went down Diana was leaving the Ritz on her last journey alive. By the time they came back she was lying in the tunnel under the complete control of the emergency team and according to the autopsy report within a few minutes of clinical death .. No there is not a shred of credible evidence for a conspiracy, is there, eh? My God, it’s in our face but within ten days of the crash, the French police had produced a 350 page preliminary report which assumed it was an accident and they did not consider any other possibility. Now, talking of that ‘emergency team’ brings me to another vital point. As a contact on the fringes of British Intelligence told me, causing the crash is easy for the powers involved, but you cannot be sure of killing your target. Therefore you have your people controlling the medical team because, although your target hasn’t died, there is now a credible reason for them to die. There has been a crash. The medical team’s job (or those in charge, anyway) is to make sure that the target does not survive, no matter what condition they may be in to start with. Even those who dismiss the idea that Diana was murdered have questioned the astonishing delay in getting her to hospital when, according to the official medical reports, she was suffering from an injury that required urgent surgery. The doctors say that the pulmonary vein had been ruptured near the heart and this was filling her lungs with blood. Diana was lying in the tunnel bleeding to death, if that is correct. The only way her life was going to be saved with such an injury was through immediate surgery. So why was it more than an hour and a half before she arrived at the hospital? Within a minute of impact, Doctor Frederic Mailliez with an American ‘friend’ Mark Butt, drove into the tunnel from the opposite direction. A private investigator I know has made extensive inquiries into Mailliez and Butt and, while these investigations continue, his findings strongly suggest there is more to both of them than we are being told. The crash happened at 12.25am and by 12.26, Doctor Mailliez said he had seen the crushed Mercedes, stopped his car, turned on warning lights, run across to the Mercedes to establish there were two people dead and two alive and had rung the emergency services. This man must be a seriously quick worker. He is one of 160 Parisian doctors who are on constant call for emergencies in hospitals and private homes as part of a French insurance system, SOS Medecins. He had treated accident victims many times when he was a member of SAMU, the French emergency ambulance service. And yet a doctor on constant call for emergencies says that all he had in his car to help Diana was an oxygen cylinder and mask! Mailliez was in control of Diana and her condition for the crucial 15 to 20 minutes before his former employers, the SAMU emergency team, arrived to take over. He claims that Diana did not say anything to him, but this contradicts his comment to the London Times that, “She kept saying how much she hurt as I put a resuscitation mask over her mouth”. Trevor Rees-Jones, the bodyguard, also says he had flashbacks of hearing a female voice calling out in the back of the car: “First it’s a groan. Then Dodi’s name was called... And that can only be Princess Diana’s voice” he told the Daily Mirror. How reliable that statement is, however, is open to debate. What does seem to be clear is that Diana was conscious or at least semi-conscious when Mailliez arrived. He told the CNN chat show host, Larry King, that:
know, the internal injury was already starting... It’s really funny. That’s the only part, where she was sitting, that’ s the only part which was still intact.” time that “It was hopeless. There was nothing we could do to save her.” He also told King that although Diana is the most photographed woman in the world, and the paparazzi were taking shots of her while he was with her in the tunnel, he had no idea that she was Princess Diana until he saw the news reports the following morning. Excuse me? The pigs are airborne again. When the emergency team arrived, Malliez says he left the scene because there was nothing more he could do. The official explanation for the incredible delay in taking Diana to hospital is that she was trapped in the wreckage. This is a lie, lie, lie. One of the ambulance crew told the French newspaper, La Parisien, that when he arrived Diana was lying with most of her body out of the car with her legs resting on the rear seat. “She was agitated, semi knocked out, but conscious... she was groaning and struggling feebly. She murmured ‘Oh my God’ several times.” The Scotsman newspaper, in an investigation published on September 11th 1997, established that Diana was removed from the car shortly after the fire brigade arrived and the excuse of her being ‘trapped’ does not stand up. Another official excuse for the delay is that the emergency doctors had to give her a blood transfusion. This is another lie, lie, lie. SAMU teams do not carry blood transfusion equipment because they would not know the victim’s blood type. When the ambulance did leave the tunnel, the driver was ordered to go no faster than 25 miles an hour and some reports say it took as long as 40 minutes to cover the 3.7 miles (6km) to the La Pitie-Salpetriere. Four other hospitals quite capable of treating Diana were closer to the scene and the ambulance stopped twice on the way for ‘delicate interventions’, one of them within sight of the hospital. Diana arrived at La Pitie-Salpetriere about 2.lOam, an hour and 45 minutes after the crash happened. By any medical criteria whatsoever this delay was utterly ludicrous, unless it was meant to happen. It doesn’t take a genius to see why, despite such apparent incompetence, there has been no inquiry into the medical response that night. Waiting at the hospital were a surgical team headed by Professor Bruno Riou, the duty surgeon who, we are told, first heard about the crash while doing his rounds. Is it only me that finds it strange that a renowned surgeon is ‘doing his rounds’ in the early hours of the morning? Waiting with him when Diana arrived were Professor Pierre Coriat, the head of anaesthetics, Professor Alain Pavie, a chest and heart specialist, and Professor Pierre Benazet, another experienced surgeon. They had been in telephone communication with the emergency team in the tunnel throughout. We are told they opened Diana’s chest cavity, repaired the vein, and ‘battled to save her’ for an hour and a half before admitting defeat. I find this remarkable, also, because the autopsy report apparently shows that Diana was clinically dead at 12.45 am while still lying in the tunnel. Diana would therefore have been clinically dead for an hour and 25 minutes before she even arrived at the hospital and for three hours before the professors walked out of the operating theatre to announce that she had died. Having the body examined at a location you control is vital in such assassinations. President Kennedy’s body was flown immediately out of Dallas to the Brotherhood-front, the Bethesda Naval Center near Washington DC, for the post mortem. Here the president’s brain went missing (or his look-alike’s did) and, as the US Assassination Records Review Board revealed, the autopsy notes and the first draft of the post mortem were burned. So who was behind Diana’s assassination? It is important to stress that those who gave the order and those who did the deed would be very different. We are looking at a Brotherhood here, a spider’s web, and while the order will have come from the spider or spiders in the centre, it will have been mostly carried out by the flies. It is highly unlikely that it would have been done directly by British Intelligence because that would be too obvious. Intelligence agencies subcontract the assassinations of their own citizens to put them at arms length from the incident and to allow them to ‘plausibly deny’ that they were responsible. For instance, there is considerable evidence that President Kennedy was shot by members of an elite rifle team within a renegade unit of French Intelligence called the OAS, or at least that they were involved in the plot. Olof Palme, the Bilderberger Prime Minister of Sweden, was murdered in Stockholm in 1986 on the orders of, among others, George Bush but the killing was carried out by members of BOSS, the South African Intelligence agency . The British Foreign Office has its own assassination squad called Group 13 (that number again) and British Intelligence has a long and sick history of political and economic assassinations. British Intelligence consists of MIS (Military Intelligence 5) which is responsible officially for domestic security, and M16 which deals with overseas matters. MIS announced in 1988 that they do not assassinate people. No, they get others to do it for them. This pathetic denial was prompted by the revelations of the former MIS agent, David Shayler, that M16 had organised a plot to assassinate Libya’s Colonel Gaddafi. The attempt had failed because the bomb was put under the wrong car. Shayler was head of the ‘Libyan Desk’ at MIS and was in the perfect position to know. Robin Cook, the Foreign Secretary, who is so far out of his depth he needs a frogman’s suit, said that he had been assured that no such event took place. Oh, that’s OK then. The attorney-general banned David Shayler from appearing on the ITV programme, Diana - Secrets of the Crash, and later Shayler was arrested and jailed in Paris awaiting extradition to London. Why do that if what he is saying is such nonsense? Because, of course, he’s right. By the way, the oath of allegiance by British Intelligence officers is not to the government, but to the monarch. It is the same with Members of Parliament and the military. Ultimately the Queen is their boss under the law, although, in truth, their boss is whoever controls the Queen because even she is not at the top of the pile. The type of organisation most likely to have been involved in Diana’s death, at the operational level is typified by the Pinay Circle or ‘Le Cercle’ which has a number of British establishment figures in its ranks. Le Cercle is an offshoot of the even more elite Safari Club, which was set up by Count Alexander de Maranches, the Director during the 1970s of the French Service for External Documentation and Espionage. It was the Safari Club which arranged for the alliance between a French Intelligence front-company called Group Bull and the computer giant Honeywell which is, you will be surprised to know, the world’s biggest manufacturer of landmines. This alliance supplied landmines to both sides in the Bosnian conflict. The Safari Club began as a consortium of the secret police of the Shah of Iran called SAVAK, Saddam Hussein in Iraq, Anwar Sadat of Egypt and Saudi Arabian Intelligence. It has been involved in countless coups in Africa to further its goals and is heavily involved in arms trading and supply. Out of the Safari Club came the Pinay Circle or Le Cercle, named after the French Prime Minister, Antoine Pinay, who attended the first Bilderberg Meeting in Oosterbeek, Holland, in May 1954. Others involved with Le Cercle included the Habsburg family. To give you an idea of its make up and range of influence, the Le Cercle membership has included Nicholas Elliot, a department head at M16; William Colby, a former director of the CIA; Colonel Botta of Swiss Military Intelligence; Stefano Della Chiaie, a leading member of the Italian Secret Service; Giullo Andreotti, the former Italian Prime Minister from the notorious P2 Freemasonry Lodge and the man who gave the Mafia official protection; Silva Munoz, a former minister for the fascist, Franco, in Spain and a member of the Elite secret society, Opus Dei; Franz Josef Strauss, the German defence minister; and Monsignor Brunello, an agent to the Vatican. In America, one of the Le Cercle fronts is the CIA-backed Heritage Foundation in Washington. Look at the potential for such an organisation to be the coordinating force between countless different agencies and countries all to achieve a common aim. The Safari Club-Le Cercle network provides the Arab-British-French connection necessary to arrange for Diana to be in Paris at the right time, the security for her to be withdrawn, the assassination to be carried out, and those involved to get away with it. What was that John Stalker said? “Why would the French want to cover up the murder of a British woman?” It is also interesting that Simon Regan in his book, Who Killed Diana?, says that it was Le Cercle which destabilized the Gough Whitlam government in Australia in 1975. The Queen was certainly involved in that, too. As I explained earlier, it was her Governor of Australia, John Kerr, who removed Whitlam in the end. If the Windsors and Le Cercle worked together to bring down an elected Australian Government, why could they not have worked together to eliminate Diana? Paris, with its immense Brotherhood associations going back centuries, has long been a favourite location for their murders and plots. Amschel Rothschild from the English branch of the family, was murdered there in his hotel room in 1996 in what some claim to have been part of one of the inter-Brotherhood wars which have littered their history. For an organization like Le Cercle, or its many mirrors in London, it would have been easy to place its people in the right places. Mohamed Al Fayed’s security operation is awash with former members of elite British military and police units who know the consequences of saying “No” to the Brotherhood, even if they don’t wish to be involved. In the same way, these spider structures ensure that their people control the inquiries into their assassinations, as they did most famously with Kennedy. Even Mohamed Al Fayed’s personal investigation into Diana’s death was headed by Pierre Ottavoili, a former chief of the Criminal Brigade, the criminal investigation department of French Police. This is the same organization which is also responsible for the official investigation. Mohamed al - Fayed’s chief lawyer in Paris is a former French Justice Minister, and in overall charge in London is John Macnamara, his head of security and a former Chief Superintendent at the headquarters of London’s Metropolitan Police, Scotland Yard. Anonymous |
