This succinct summation was found on the net:

Number one conspiracy theory- MI6 killed Diana...

The Two Main Theories
a) One or more rogue "cells" in the British secret service construct and carry out a plot to kill Diana.

b) An official campaign by MI6 to assasinate Diana, sanctioned by elements of the establishment.

The Possible Motives
a) The rogue elements in MI5 (National security) or MI6 (International security) decide that Di is a threat to the
throne, and therefore the stability of the state. They take her out.

b) With similar motives to the possible rogue elements, the official campaign is driven by a fear of Diana's possible
to conversion to Islam (Dodi being a Muslim) and the implication on the Church and State were the two Princes,
William and Harry, to follow their mother's lead.

The Evidence
Circumstantial it maybe, but put together is it capable of raising sufficient doubt that this was an accident?
Below are some of the questions and doubts that are raised by the investigation so far


- The rapid disposal of the bodies of Diana and Dodi. Diana had no post mortem prior to burial in Althorp. Victims
of sudden death require a post mortem by law in the UK.

- The missing white Fiat Uno: With such a large-scale investigation by French authorities could only secret agents
have evaded the police's net around Paris? We know the car hit the Mercedes used by Di and Dodi, thanks to
traceable paint marks on the Benz. Witnesses refer to the car lurching around the road at varying speeds as both
it and the Merc entered the tunnel of death.

- Henri Paul, driver of the Limo. The mis-information surrounding this key figure is enormous. First he was said to
be driving at up to 120 mph, recent reports by professional crash investigators suggest 60 mph, even less on
impact. Was he really drunk? It is accepted that he had two Ricard drinks at the Ritz, but no other evidence has
emerged to support this claim, beyond questionable results from a blood test from his corpse. Why questionable?
Because it is common for the alcohol level to rise in bodies after death regardless of consumption. The test also
showed a very high level of carbon monoxide (20 per cent) in his blood. Experts say this would have incapacitated
him before he set off on his fatal journey, and yet the hotel's video evidence shows him walking around and
talking normally. An alcoholic? Well , as a pilot, he passed a rigorous health check two days before the accident.
His liver showed no signs of abuse on post-mortem. Then there is the question of the multiple bank accounts Paul
held, with balances showing income far in excess of his 20 000 UKP salary as acting head of security at the Ritz.
Some friends have suggested he was a long term "sleeper" agent for a secret service agency, almost certainly
French intelligence.

- Trevor Rees Jones (Fayed bodyguard)- The only survivor. One time member of Her Majesty's armed forces,
rumours suggest he may have been a "sleeper" agent for MI5 or MI6, particularly as the establishment were keen
to keep tabs on Mohammed Al Fayed. Why was he the only person in the car to wear a safety-belt?

- Explosion, followed by Bang- Immediately after the crash news was broadcast, witnesses appeared on US TV
saying that they heard an explosion or bang before they heard the car crash. Was this a gunshot, or a bomb?

- White Light- Other witnesses describe an extremely bright white light, much stronger than a photographer's
flashbulb, illuminating the tunnel before the crash sounds. Powerful anti-personnel flash-guns are available to
private citizens for as little as 250 UKP. The security forces have access to much stronger tools. All of which are
capable of blinding a victim for several minutes - easily enough to cause a fatal crash. Crucially there would be no
physical evidence left for investigators.

- James Hewitt- Former lover of Diana claims he was warned on several occasions by elements of the security
forces and a member of the royal family to stop seeing the Princess or his health would suffer! Hewitt has been
exposed previously as being very willing to exploit a situation for his own ends, as in the publication of a sleazy
book about Diana to which he contributed.

- Paparazzi- Initially blamed for the crash, most witnesses seem to agree that the bikes were not close enough to
the Mercedes in the tunnel to have actually interfered with its progress.

NB: These are just a selection of matters which cause concern for investigators. Many other points are raised by
the "accident" but for reasons of space are not dealt with here.

Conclusions
There are many questions that arise out of this incident. The most plausible explanation still appears to be a
tragic accident - Paul who was driving to some degree under the influence of alcohol, tried to accelerate away
from the pursuing photographers, lost control going into the tunnel (after the slight curve in the road, and maybe
as the Uno impeded his progress) and crashed into the tunnel's thirteenth pillar.

This maybe the most plausible explanation, however, we feel that without dramatic new evidence , such as the
Uno and driver turning up, this will never be certain.

While there remains doubt as to whether it was an accident it is reasonable to question what the possible
alternatives are. The most plausible of these has to involve members of the UK establishment and secret service
as few others had anything to lose from Diana and Dodi's relationship. To keep such a plot secret we believe it
would have to be the work of a small, isolated cell working under its own auspices within the system.

Former agents have told of a plot to destabilise the then Labour Prime Minister Harold Wilson in the Seventies.
Wilson did indeed resign from office, shocking political commentators at the time. We know that our intelligence
service keeps records on Peace campaigners and Union officials for the "threat" of being radicals.

If the service really does operate as efficiently as James Bond films lead us to believe, which we doubt very
strongly, then there would be nothing to stop them orchestrating Diana's death AND making it appear to be an
accident.

************************************************************************************************************************************************

Additional comment made by Andrew upon the landing of Diana and Dodi in Paris.

Diana's site is one where fact not fiction is told and in this area of her site an imperative. Here are some details
therefore which need recording in case might have been missed or in fact not known.

It is known that upon landing at Le Bourget airport in Paris, Diana and Dodi were met by a group of French
paparazzi who had been tipped off from various sources ranging from other reporters working in Italy to even
someone working in the control tower at Olbia airport on the island of Sardinia where the couples jet took off from.

It was reported that there was severe harassment given by them on the journey from the French airport to the
Villa Windsor and this was the beginning of the paparazzi frenzy that initially would be solely blamed for causing
the incident ultimately claiming three lives !  So where are the paparazzi photographs that would have been taken
of this initial trip? The Papparazzi would hardly follow the couple and not take any, they'd have been worth a great
deal of money published then and particularly so now; the fact being no photographs if any were taken have ever
been published and they'd have been prepared for publishing instantly as headline material !

Later, having left the back entrance of the Ritz Hotel enroute to Dodi's Parisian apartment, it is reported that the
couples car whilst stopped at the traffic lights at Place de La Concorde was subjected to camera flashes, yet no
photographs have ever been published that appear to have been photographed at this location.

There is the question were these paparazzi photographers or part of the scenario of sinister intent vindicating
papparazzi involvement ? It is recorded that papparazzi members themselves witnessed the camera flashes; so
would they not have recognised fellow papparazzi members? These photographs would have been worth a lot of
money then and even more so now and once again have never been published. As mercenary as the media can
be the fact that Diana died would not be the reason for them having not been published, in fact quite the
opposite; all the more reason for publishing them, their being exclusives. Remember, as seen on her site, last
images of Diana with her back to the camera in the car were published as was even the controversial one of her
being personally attended to in the car following the incident itself happening. Where are the pictures taken at the
Place de La Concorde?

##########################################################################################


(Date Posted:12/08/2006 08:46:30)

Diana's constant and wholehearted support for numerous charitable endeavours worldwide, and her extraordinary
enthusiasm, energy and more recently direct political activism in so many causes which sought to improve the
lives and circumstances of great numbers of humanity was thoroughly commendable, and clearly came from the
heart. These definitely were not things she had to do. Diana seemed determined to use her position for the
greater good. The tremendous worldwide outpouring of sadness and grief on the part of the general populace
also came from the heart and was unprecedented, except perhaps for that following the Kennedy assassination.
The response was certainly an indication of Diana's formidable and widespread popularity. Perhaps Diana's
potential independent financial power by way of her boyfriend, a wealthy movie producer, was becoming a serious
political threat to the status quo. The senior Mr. al - Fayed had been quite influential in bringing about the
downfall of the Conservative government which held power for so long in England This fact would have hardly
endeared him (or his son) to certain major British power brokers; in fact they detest Mr. al - Fayed and many liked
Diana hardly a little more. Diana herself was becoming more and more overtly political in her campaign against
the use of land mines and in her visits to promote peace efforts in Bosnia, etc. This was a threat to the stated New
World Order objective of a destabilized Russia and a wary, edgy Western bloc (Europe, the U.S. and Allies).The
Royal Family is a major player in the high-stakes game of position within the New World Order, and international
arms sales including land mines provide a substantial portion of their necessary operating capital. Some
objectives of the removal of Diana as a significant influence in our world could be: to keep Diana from "interfering"
with the further development and education of her two boys, Princes William and Harry; to derail Diana's
ever-more-effective international peace efforts; to send a message to and set an example for other members of
Royalty, other world political figures and the entire human population; and to prevent a marriage to a member of
the Saudi royal family.

The fact that her companion Dodi Fayed was an Arab or Semitic in race is probably a one of the lesser reasons
for this assassination. The fact that Diana was of the House of Stewart, Britain's true and rightful royal family, and
not of the House of Windsor, the German (Hessian) royal family which usurped the British throne centuries ago
and still holds power, could be somewhat of a factor, as is the issue of who would exert the most influence over
the further upbringing of her two children, heirs to the British throne. The Royal Family is rid of someone they
unquestionably saw as a troublemaker and a source of significant embarrassment; a thorn in their side and a
monkey wrench in the(ir) works.

In addition, the mainly Conservative power structure in Britain despised her and her humanitarian and
peacemaking agenda and resented having to pay for her security. They and other governments may have had
concerns about her increasingly political activities in light of her great popularity, perhaps also concerns about
her knowledge of (and willingness to make public) certain information which could prove troublesome to the New
(One) World Order, or things of that nature. Dodi Fayed had in fact purchased an engagement present for Diana
the very day of their deaths, and a public announcement of an engagement would undoubtedly have been
imminent. It has been suggested by a U.K. correspondent that this provided a powerful incentive in terms of time
for British intelligence to "remove" Diana immediately.

Once the news of her engagement to Dodi was made public, any such "accident" would certainly be considered
much more suspicious. This jewelry was in fact initially reported missing from the wreckage (along with
approximately 30,000 francs). It reportedly later turned up and was given to the Spencer family. It may well have
been intentionally removed by operatives on the scene, and later replaced when it was realized that the existence
of the gift was already too widely known. Even a brief but thorough study into the forces which have a measurable
and significant impact upon the course of international policy and the political and social conditions in which the
human race exists, will disclose the continued importance of royalty as one of such forces and prompt realization
that its ability to influence the course of these events is (still) quite substantial.As a general example of such
influence, all contemporary national banks in existence today such as The U.S. Federal Reserve Bank are
modeled upon the Bank of England, founded by Britain's King William lll as a private, for-profit institution which
loans money at interest to the national government to pay government's operating costs, thus discreetly enforcing
tremendous economic control (at least!) over entire human populations.

The Royal Family is a unquestionably a key element of the George Bush's so-called New World Order, with a
considerable network of supporters firmly entrenched in the United States political system. Certainly both Ronald
Reagan and George Bush were unabashedly pro-Monarchy in great number of major foreign policy decisions
implemented during their terms. Most assuredly another ardent supporter is Bill Clinton, who was a Rhodes
scholar, meaning that he was hand-picked, groomed and educated at the expense of The Council of Rhodes to
one day take his place as a world leader dedicated to bringing about the fundamental objective of the Council -- a
one-world government. Mr. Clinton, indeed, seemed peculiarly upbeat when making his public statement about
Princess Diana's death; some reports had him "smirking" during his brief comments.

Clinton also didn't even bother to offer any valid reason at all for his refusal to attend Diana's funeral. Given that
Diana had recently focused considerable energy and attention on the continuing unjustifiable use of land mines
and was campaigning vigorously for their global abolishment, the Clinton administration's current vehement
opposition to the recent land mines treaty overwhelmingly approved by 89 nations and widely supported
internationally is certainly noteworthy and surprising, even if nothing more than coincidence and bad timing
politically for Clinton. The U.K.is one the world's leading exporters of land mines ! Their production and sale most
definitely fill the coffers of some of the British Royal Family's more ardent political supporters. The truth might
therefore prove to be not a tragic accident but a deliberately and methodically planned and executed political
murder! Numerous inconsistencies and highly troubling questions have been raised which the protective and
investigative agencies of both France and the U.K.? as well as the mainstream media have conveniently side -
stepped.

This very fact in itself quite suspicious! It is imperative that the events and circumstances of the tragedy be
thoroughly and completely investigated and examined for the slightest indication that it may have been more than
a shocking and virtually inexplicable accident!( Anonymous )