Forum » Gender Society Public Forums » Polly Ticks » Conspiracy theories

Conspiracy theories

Tags : None
  • In light of the very predictable verdict of the jury in the Inquest into the death of Princess Diana, it is worth briefly taking a look at this case and conspiracy theories in general. Firstly, it was wrong for Al-Fayed to suggest that Prince Philip had effectively arranged a hit on the Princess. The very notion of such a thing is absurd. But that doesn't mean she wasn't murdered. Instead he should have focused on the inconsistencies evident in the official version of events. The simple fact is that any chance of the heir to the throne having a half-brother who was a Muslim, and not any old Muslim, but the son of Mohamed Al-Fayed, for long the particular hate figure of the British establishment , could never have been countenanced. Others within the security services could well have decided to act to prevent this occurence in the interests, to their mind at least, of the Nation and the Monarchy. However, they would never have involved a member of the British Royal Family. Which could, had it emerged, caused the gravest constitutional crisis since the Interregnum and would have undermined the very fabric of British society. Let's also remember that originally it was proposed to hold the inquiry without a jury and behind closed doors. That the Judge was damning and less than impartial in his summing up, that many significant witnesses were not called to give evidence, and that the Judge decided jury at worse, could only consider an open verdict. Also, something that has not been much publicised is the fact that it was only a majority verdict. I won't go into all the details as to why, but I believe she was murdered, and I don't consider myself a mad, swivel-eyed conspiracy theorist. Although the reason why may become evident in what I have to say next.

    It is not that prominent people die ( happens to us all ) are murdered or assassinated, it is when that adds plausibility to conspiracy theories. To take a few famous examples: Martin Luther King was not killed at the height of the campaign for civil rights but when he began to speak out against the Vietnam War and moved away from important but marginal to many Americans campaign for Afro-American equality and, therefore, became a threat to the establishment. Malcolm X was assassinated when he started campaign on issues of poverty and not just black separatism. Robert Kennedy was murdered when it became apparent that he would actually win the Democratic nomination for President on the back of the votes of the dispossessed and most marginalised in American society. It is the convenience of the timing of these deaths that make one wonder as to the verisimilitude of the lone gunman. Likewise with Diana, who had many affairs and showed no reluctance to embarrass the Royal Family wherever possible. Perhaps, she went a step too far. Little wonder the Queen at first refused to fly the flag at half-mast. Inquiries are not designed to reveal the truth but instead cover-up inconvenient facts. History teaches teaches one to study cause and effect and not just events. You may not agree with me but it is the convenience factor that lends most conspiracy theories their credibility.
    Porscha
      April 8, 2008 1:00 PM BST
    0
  • Porscha.
    A well presented case for a possibility of a cover up.As we the public are never privy to all the facts even with a limited public enquiry,The verdict and for reasons you outlined, allows room for both an official plublic closure to the event and also allows conspiratist theories to continue.

    I for one will keep an open mind on the cause of the deaths of Diana and Dodi.
    I personaly am not a believer in coincedence as you say. It was very convenient the accident happening for "the establishment". I can never decide about such a thing when I do not have all the facts to allow me to draw my own conclusion.

    therefore in my eyes its an open verdict.
    flowering into the woman I always was.
      April 8, 2008 1:37 PM BST
    0
  • Since the public are never aware of the full facts of this level of investigation, we are usually drawn to our own conclusions, right or wrong. Conspiracy theories abound when the facts just don't add up, as in the case of Diana or JFK.

    Of course, it may have just been an accident after all, nothing more sinister, but as far as the royal family are concerned, it was probably a fortunate one.

    Personally, I believe there is more to this than we are being told but I'll keep my theories to myself.

    Nikki
    Every woman is beautiful, some show it with their faces, others show it with their hearts.
      April 8, 2008 2:39 PM BST
    0
  • 1195
    Porscha
    Don't think you're crazy.....join the club. When there appears to be more benefits to a public figure's death there stands to reason that the "lone gunman" had help. Here in the USA they used to just duel or shoot it out...ie Hamilton and Burr. Lincoln's assissination was cause for concern (even though previous attempts had been made) because he wanted to "go easy" on the rebelling states which wasn't the idea of his Republican Party. I like you could go on and on but keeping it short - Niki is correct - we're not given all the facts. In fact if there were juries they wouldn't be given all the facts either. Various govenment entities want "things" tiedied up quickly - ie JFK and MLK.
    hugs
    Gracie

    PS When are you going to become a Full Member?
    <p>If it isn't fun - don't do it.</p>
      April 8, 2008 4:30 PM BST
    0
  • 734
    Hey!

    Well, as the average mutt on the street, I'm left feeling uncertain about the whole thing. It took a lot of time, cost a lot of money, told us nothing new. A few idea's were scotched, a few more were skirted over. A fine serving of good old British fudge, I suspect.

    I don't feel we had all the answers and I still remain unclear as to whether she was pushed or if she fell.

    Henri Paul was drunk, apparently, but we'll never know for certain due to the botched handling of blood samples. With a reported £170k in the bank, clearly he did'nt spend all his money on booze. And if the explanation for his cash stash - 'he got a lot of tips' - is accurate, I know where my next c.v. is headed...

    And I missed the explanation as to why her body was embalmed so swiftly, perhaps I nodded off that day.

    I think Mr Al Fayed is, well, a little on the eccentric side - but we do love our eccentrics! I for one would have no objection to him being made a British Citizen and think its rather scandalous that his work for this country remains largely unrecognised. [I appreciate he may not necessarily have done a great job on positive self-promotion].

    Just my tuppen'th

    Much love

    Rae xx

    [Maryanne, thankyou so much for the Phillip quip, still chuckling]

    www.raekelcou.com
      April 9, 2008 1:15 AM BST
    0
  • Was Phil the Greek Jimmy the Greek's lesser known brother?
      April 9, 2008 1:23 AM BST
    0