Date Posted: 08-07-13

Tonight I watched a documentary "Princess Diana's Dresses .. The Auction" which gave fascinating insight to the lady
which I want to illustrate here. The programme stated a fact that Diana is the Greatest style icon the world has ever
known and the woman who gave the royals a human face being a new kind of royal; one close to the people and not
distanced from them.

Catherine and William the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge and Prince Harry are making sure this more relaxed
approach is upheld, hardly surprising William and Harry being Diana's boys! Catherine also being very much a trend
setter, outfits worn by her selling out the moment more or less she has been photographed in them but Diana
consistently changed her style of apparel according to what was happening in her life. Her clothes reflected her
moods, her situations, her emotions; they themselves told a story.

This documentary told that fashion was not something sloane ranger Lady Diana Spencer was worried about and she
certainly did not possess any glamorous gowns favouring sweaters and Laura Ashley print skirts before her official
engagement to H.R.H. Prince of Wales in February 1981. A friend who shared her apartment Colherne Court in
Kensington, London saying there was no rule book for Diana and her flatmates once it became known Diana was the
royal girlfriend so no guidance as to how she ought to dress; in fact no help given at all dealing with sudden press
intrusion into Diana's life as she became besieged by photographers daily. They were only advised to check under
their cars every morning to see that the I.R.A. had not planted bombs under them!

Diana chose a black evening gown from the Emmanuels who designed her
wedding gown for her first public appearance with her 32 year old fiance
since their engagement at Goldsmiths Hall and certainly made an unforgettable
entrance which the media loved but a major faux pas in the eyes of the
House of Windsor. Black being worn by them as the colour of mourning
at funerals and it was showing too much cleavage!

However Diana returned to the designer couple to create her wedding gown, one fit for a 19 year old marrying the
future King and thought then therefore to being his future Queen. The dress made an immediate statement as one
with a 25ft train, the longest in royal history, it said "I'm here!" It might look dated now but never the less it is a dress
which will be remembered throughout history!

Once married Diana sought out fashion advice from designers like Victor Edelstein  and fashion ediitors like Anna
Harvey from Vogue Magazine in London for advice though she herself had very clear ideas. Diana already knew her
popularity, she was living it and so knew that she needed to be seen in the crowds so told designers she needed to
wear bright colours as seen in the outfits worn by her on the first royal tour made by the couple since their wedding to
Australia and New Zealand in 1983 and Diana insistent on taking the then 9 month old baby William with them.

It became clear as early as this tour that of the two of them Diana was the crowd puller and initially this upset her as
she did not want to upstage her husband and he made it clear in cynical remarks made in public speeches disguised
as humour that he was not happy about this happening. Anna Harvey interviewed saying that at this stage the last
thing Diana wanted to do was to upset the royals in any way but as former private secretary P.D. Jephson pointed out
as time went on Diana realised that her husband was not going to support her and she could not do right in his eyes
and therefore decided that she was not going to subordinate her instincts and wishes for the fear of incurring his

Diana was a style icon and pretty much expected by the public to amaze them with what next outfit she appeared in. It
was said in the documentary that Diana would walk into a room of top fashion models and put them all in the shade
and not by the apparel she might be wearing but by her presence, her natural radiance. Diana being tall was an
amazing figure who made heads turn. The programme was concentrated on the few dresses that were sold at the
recent London auction which included her most famous the Victor Edelstein blue/black velvet evening gown worn by
her to the White House in September 1985 at a ball given by President and First Lady Nancy Reagan and where
Diana danced with John Travolta. The dress sold at the auction for $280, 000 this March 2013. Mr. Edelstein telling
how the dress was not one designed for Diana but was featured in his collection and she liked it and he was happy
she chose it!

The other dress which made as equal a headline for Diana was the black
Christina Stambolian dress worn by her to the Serpentine Gallery summer
party in June 1994, on the same night that a controversial television
programme aired detailing Prince Charles' adulterous relationship with
Camilla Parker-Bowles, now the Duchess of Cornwall. The figure-hugging
black silk dress, by Greek designer Christina Stambolian, featured a low-cut,
off-the-shoulder neckline and Diana  wore it with the pearl choker she is
remembered for wearing, black heels  and scarlet painted finger nails.
However the dress was one Diana had for three years in her D wardrobe
but unworn by her as she considered it too sexy and daring so the decision
to wear the dress was a last-minute one.

Diana had originally intended to wear a Valentino creation that evening,  but was put off when the fashion house sent
out an early press release saying so; that angered Diana! However dubbed "The Revenge Dress"  Diana looked
absolutely amazing and a personally challenging situation for her she transformed into being a personal triumph! The
next morning it was Diana who stole the headlines from her adulterous husband in every newspaper!

The documentary detailed how after the royal divorce Diana took to wearing heels which she had not been able to do
whilst married as she would have dwarfed her husband and she ventured out to using foreign designers like Versace
as well as a favourite London based designer Catherine Walker though she actually French. Diana buried in a black
dress created by her and bought by Diana weeks before she died in Paris. Diana's dresses became higher and much
more sexy, many figure hugging as Diana had an amazing figure having conquered her eating disorder problems.
Also though Diana was a woman to be taken seriously and her clothes reflected this so for talks about landmines,
H.I.V./ A.I.D.S. Diana would wear very smart chanel suits in pastel shades that any business woman in wall street
might well choose to wear and likewise in her last year of 1997 in Angola and Bosnia Diana wearing white shirts and
jeans as her focus was on her charity work and not making a fashion statement though her choice of apparel did so

Andrew Russell-Davis

Date Posted: 08-07-13

Hi to everyone!

       This is Andrew; Diana's channel, pleased to see there is so much renewed interest in the lady since the birth of
her first grandchild, articles about her in magazines and newspapers and of course memorable photographs of her.

        In her life Diana courted controversy sometimes deliberately and others accidentally but the lady never failed to
make the headlines and as her voice channel could I be expected to be someone who is afraid to speak out; not really
as what have I got to lose? My life perhaps but that's a chance I will take pretty much as Diana did and said of herself
when asked if she gambled? Only with life! Diana was a very astute, shrewd and wise woman who was misunderstood
often and most definitely underestimated.

        The lady knew she was powerful in her own right and she exercised that knowledge with her personal
involvements in causes that were frowned upon, feared and with the land mines hidden determined to bring global
attention and exposure to them.

          Isn't it incredible that Diana Speaks through me and is ignored and is it because I am some kind of nut living
out illusions of grandeur, having a shot at gaining my fifteen minutes of fame or is it more likely that it is something just
too sensitive to approach? Do I have reasons for saying this? Of course!

           The reality of it is not something I have hidden as what sense would be served in doing that? Alternatively
William and Harry have been made aware of the fact by me and, in fairness to them, both before this and the original
Diana Speaks sites were created. With my openly channeling Diana on the You Tube can it be imagined that they
have not been made aware of my existence; they'd have to be pretty ignorant to not be and neither of them are this
and my mother dead; id someone on the net was claiming to channel her I would sure want to know who they were
and check them out even discreetly.

            I have channeled Diana to two people who knew her personally in life very well; Penny Thornton her initial
astrologer and Andrew Morton; journalist and author of the world famous book that Diana herself was involved in
writing "Diana; Her True Story" which caused such scandal and both recognised her immediately. Of course, neither
being fools, tested out the authenticity of the channeling so asked things I could not have known about and Diana
herself spoke to them about things herself that had been privy between herself and them.

             Everyone of us is an individual and we have our own personal energy and signature in our manner of
speech and script and even impersonators never quite get that perfect as they will admit but the channelings given
have been felt and sensed because they are real; no trickery involved and similarly I personally wrote to William in
2000 advising him I channeled his mother and enclosed in my letter one channeled from her to him. Her son would
recognise his mother's style of writing and have easily detected an impostor and how callous an act that would have
been on my part to indulge in were it to have been the case...but instead who got a letter from his personal secretary
telling me how touched he was by the letters?  Really, would he have been had he for one moment thought someone
was impersonating his beloved mother given the amazingly close emotional and loving bond they shared! I think not

            I offered to channel Diana to Prediction Magazine in an effort to prove the reality of life after death which
Diana is intent on proving, a way shower in life, would it not be imagined she might like to be one in the After Life too;
that seems logical to me but this was refused after consideration by them for the fear of litigation which was telling in
itself wasn't it and not alternatively because they thought they might be entertaining a nutter and wanted no part of it. I
suppose I ought to be grateful for that.

             Diana was channeled in the film, shelved indefinitely, "Unlawful Killing" and the opening question to her being
was there anything she wanted to say about the accident in Paris and her answer succinct and straight to the point ..
"What accident?" The lady has not changed and so it is not surprising though it is disappointing for me as well as her
of course that "D Notices" and other such powerful deterrents successfully gag her and perhaps will do so until after
the death of the current Monarch but I have full confidence that ultimately it will become globally recognised that
Diana Speaks!

Andrew Russell - Davis  August 5th 2013

Another note:          William became Patron of Centrepoint in London which caters for youths homeless in the city and
a role his mother held until her death and said he was passionate about carrying on her work to help young people
facing life on the streets.

                       "My mother introduced this sort of area to me a long time ago. It was a real eye-opener and I am very
glad she did."

                        At the memorial service ten years after her death Harry paid tribute to "Quite simply the best mother in
the world" saying that he and William thought of her everyday. He saying she'd be remembered for her amazing public
work but behind the media glare telling how she encouraged them when they were nervous and unsure.

                      William also becoming Royal Patron of the Child Bereavement Charity four years ago and spoke
touching words of comfort to those facing bereavement as he and Harry have themselves in losing their mother
Diana, Princess of Wales saying "For those who have lost the one they love, rest assured they'll always be watching
over you". With such heartfelt sentiments expressed by both William and Harry, it is so abundantly clear they are
Diana's boys!

Date Posted:  08-07-13

      Many books have been written over the years illustrating one conspiracy theory or another regarding the incident
on August 31st 1997 in Paris, France which resulted in claiming the lives of Diana, Princess of Wales, Dodi Fayed her
boyfriend and their chauffeur for the evening Henri Paul.

      One book I have been reading with fascination and this being "Princess Diana, The Hidden Evidence" by Jon
King and John Beveridge and amongst its infomative and shocking pages came across this piece of evidence which is
incriminating but does not concern Diana directly but H.R.H. Duchess of Cornwall the current wife of The Prince of

      Prior to their marriage and for some years apparently she was the subject of an M.I.5. surveillance operation.
Now before people think as if .. remember Hewitt and Khan previous boyfriends of Diana have said they were being
scrutinised. It seems a loose plan to assassinate Diana had for some time been something debated about by British
and U.S. Intelligence agencies. Now it seems there was a similar plot to assassinate the then Mrs. Camilla Parker
Bowles. It seems something attempted and bungled!

      Even more shocking being that it had involved a "Car Accident". Why kill her? As a means of avoiding a
constitutional crisis caused by the marital and extramarital predicament involving Prince Charles. The authors source
of this information saying that the M.I.6. operation to assassinate Diana was supported by the C.I.A. because the
alternative measure failed! The C.I.A. in favour of involvement because as Diana has said herself; of her involvement
with the landmine campaign; reasons illustrated in a precis elsewhere on this site.The then President Clinton having
privately agreed to supporting Diana in the global banning of them upset congress as mega bucks was made out of
arms sold to warring factions in Angola and other African states as well as in Bosnia and the Balkans which included
anti-personnel landmines. Diana always someone to do her homework having documented many facts she's been
intent on exposing publicly and knew she'd be guaranteed an audience doing so!

        Road traffic accidents are used today by British and U.S. intelligence as the most easily deniable means of
assassination. Following Diana's interview of Panorama in 1995 when she was seen to publicly attack the House of
Windsor, author A.N. Wilson told the New York Times .." When it comes to fighting a war, the Establishment can get
very nasty indeed, for all her undoubted popularity, if she continues to rock the boat this way, the Establishment will
simply get rid of her" How interesting an obseravation!

       However even though before the controversial and candid interview Diana herself had been the subject of
massive and intrusive M.I.5. surveillance, it was determined too risky to get rid of Diana on home soil so instead why
not concentrate on Mrs. Camilla Parker Bowles; the royal mistress! Her death would put an end to the possibility of a
constitutional crisis and her sudden death not be of such enormous public interest but also her death might frighten
Diana into adpopting a less politically threatening stance in the world under the banner of being an humanitarian.
Diana was a clever lady and stubborn and determined so was consequently a problem refusing to tow the line!

       The constitutional mess feared was compounded when in the summer of 1996 Diana and Charles's divorce was
finalised. Charles a divorced man determined to marry divorcee Camilla and this fact took on more significance.
Camiila therefore  becoming his Queen but Diana still alive! A the time it being constitutionally acceptable for a a
monarch to entertain extramarital affairs but not to divorce and remarry as they become Head of the Church of
England which does not recognise divorce. Charles and Camilla married in a registry office unlike the splendour and
pageantry of the marriage of he and Diana in St. Paul's Cathedral!

       The spin doctors were very busy strategising new ways to re-educate the public opinion regarding their hostility
towards the then Mrs. Camilla Parker Bowles as prior to their marriage it was necessary she be better accepted which
today she is though she will never in the eyes and hearts of many replace the People's Princess! However back in
1996 by law Camilla could not become Charles royal consort whilst Diana the mother of his sons lived even divorced
from him. Diana dead solving the problem as it is stated by the church that in the event of the divorcee becoming a
widower or widow the rules governing a remarriage no longer applying, the constitutional crisis averted.

      It seems there was pressure from the British Establishment to Secret Intelligence to deal with the problem, find the
solution. Also with Diana out of the way President Clinton's promise to support Diana would no longer be viable and
relations with he and the arms traders improved so as well as M.I.5.and M.I.6. involvement so too assisted by the
C.I.A. Less than three weeks after Diana's death President Clinton opted out of supporting the world wide banning of
landmines and his wife Hilary attended Diana's funeral alone in London! Prior to her death though in the same year of
1997 Diana also entertained an emotional relationship with Dodi Fayed, heir to a dynasty remarried with the Ibn Saudi
Dynasty, in effect the Saudi Royal Family which was not something welcomed by the British Establishment. Diana as
reported to the Sunday Mirror told in no uncertain terms about the consequences should she continue with the
relationship. Illustrated elsewhere on  this site how Dodi's father Mohamed al Fayed was himself an enemy of the
British Establishment for political reasons and denied British Citizenship continuously; he and the Monarch's husband
openly sworn enemies!

   On June 11th 1997 two months prior to the incident in Paris happening M.I.5. set in motion the attempt to kill Mrs.
Camilla Parker Bowles. Camilla had been driving to Highgrove to visit Charles and was on a stretch of country road
about 8 miles from the house and travelling at some speed when her car, one belonging to Buckingham Palace
seemed to lose control and plough head on into an oncoming vehicle.driven by a Ms. Carolyn Melville-Smith. This
resulted in her car overturning in a ditch and she suffering chest injuries. Mrs. Parker Bowles unhurt and immediately
fleeing the scene of the incident. The incident gaining immediate media interest but details of the event changing daily
with Camiila saying she fled the scene in fear of her life! However conveniently there are no precise details of what
happened as there were no witnesses, in Paris one survivor bodyguard; Trevor Rees Jones who has no memory of
what took place at Pont de L' Alma on August 31st 1997.

   What is known is that following the Witshire countryside incident in between the villages of Norton and Easton Grey
that Prince Charles ordered that Mrs. Camilla Parker Bowles security was stepped up. It is an interesting fact that
Camiila fled the scene not checking on the injured party or even exchanging names and addresses for insurance
purposes and failing to report the incident being illegal. It is odd that Camilla had been allowed to drive alone in the
first place especially at night given her then known personal involvement with the Prince of Wales being vulnerable to
attacks like kidnapping or assassination.

 The official line being that Camilla had not evacuated the scene and had checked to see that Ms. Melville-Smith was
alive and then had returned to her own car to retrieve her mobile 'phone and alerted the emergency services and
then Prince Charles. However had she have done so would have seen Ms. Melville-Smith was alone and trapped in
her car, posed no threat and that there were no terrorists waiting to pounce and no other vehicles at the scene. Her
reaction to flee in terror seems to indicate there was an unknown party at the incident or in the vicinity sensed by her
causing her to react in this way.

   Apparently the Source giving this information saying that Camilla was well aware of the surveillance on her and that
her position as royal mistress was a precarious one and that she thought it was an M.I.5. job to kill her. However
Ms.Melville-Smith an innocent victim and in no way implicated in the seemingly bungled assassination attempt but
more than likely Camiila's vehicle had been tampered with causing her to lose control of it as the other car
approached. The incident was somewhat conveniently quickly closed by The Crown Prosecution Service as there
being insufficient evidence to prosecute but the fact remains it happened two months before the incident in Paris
happened and cynically it might be said that H.R.H. Duchess of Cornwall has reason to be grateful it might have
involved M.I.5. as had it have been M.I.6. and C.I.A. she might be dead and Diana, Princess of Wales alive!