• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Ed Does anyone here believe that Princess Diana's car crash was suspicious?

Vixen said:
It is an example of the type of poor logic I was pointing out. The logically erroneous conclusion that because Henri Paul had X amount of alcohol in his bloodstream and thus, judged to be driving whilst substance-impaired, and that had Diana worn a seatbelt, she might have lived.

Think about these two sentences:

  1. "The driver was drunk and Diana was not wearing a seatbelt"
  2. "MI5 was behind it" (or other secret services)".

Accepting proposition no.1 does not logically follow ipso facto that proposition no.2 is cannot be true..
Click to expand...
Indeed. Proposition 2 is implausible irrespective of proposition 1.
 
MarkCorrigan said:
Would you disagree? Do you think MI5 works abroad?
Click to expand...


I am perfectly well aware of MI6. FYI my two half-siblings were British Army captains and served both in Iraq and Germany (one still lives there and speaks German like a German). Their speciality was electronics and telecommunications. I have no idea what they actually did but I am perfectly familiar with how British Intelligence is structured, or at least, enough not to take lectures on what is common knowledge to most.

I said MI5 because whilst Diana eschewed having protection officers, automatically assigned to the inner circle of Royals, nonetheless, she was probably still given discreet cover albeit from a distance. As she was only in France for a short break I assume these guys would be the same guys to follow her from England. When the paparazzi flocked outside the hotel where she was staying, they were probably amongst them. So when the Merc set off and the paps followed, of course the 'protection officers' followed, too.
 
Last edited:
Vixen said:
It is an example of the type of poor logic I was pointing out. The logically erroneous conclusion that because Henri Paul had X amount of alcohol in his bloodstream and thus, judged to be driving whilst substance-impaired, and that had Diana worn a seatbelt, she might have lived.

Think about these two sentences:

  1. "The driver was drunk and Diana was not wearing a seatbelt"
  2. "MI5 was behind it" (or other secret services)".

Accepting proposition no.1 does not logically follow ipso facto that proposition no.2 is cannot be true..
Click to expand...
I'm asking you to explain how the post quoted is an example of what you're claiming. You've still singularly failed to do so.

How do you get from that post that Darat thinks MI5/6/whatever were not following Diana. It's a simple question.
 
Jack by the hedge said:
We know what happens when a Merc like that runs straight into a concrete pillar like that at a speed like that, because that's what happened.

The problem is when you try to figure out how it would be possible for some agency to plan to cause that to happen.

Doesn't matter whether M15 secret agents were following their every move. The outcome does not look like that of any plausible assassination plot.

Unless of course you can think of a way to make it work.
Click to expand...

Look up the strange case of Lars Vilks. After the Copenhagen cartoon scandal a fatwa was put on his head. He was shot at by unknown gunmen at a conference and was given police protection. Whilst driving along a motorway with two police bodyguards, his car veered into a truck and he and two police protection officers were killed. It was deemed an accident but there was much speculation as to whether this was a hit job.

Diana did believe her brakes were being tampered with. Remember, you asked for examples of how it might happen.

What I am saying here is that it is possible, not that it did happen.
 
Last edited:
MarkCorrigan said:
I'm asking you to explain how the post quoted is an example of what you're claiming. You've still singularly failed to do so.

How do you get from that post that Darat thinks MI5/6/whatever were not following Diana. It's a simple question.
Click to expand...

That was an example of brushing it off. I was not picking on Darat specifically. I was highlighting the logic, or lack thereof, being used.
 
Vixen said:
I am perfectly well aware of MI6. FYI my two half-siblings were British Army captains and served both in Iraq and Germany (one still lives there and speaks German like a German). Their speciality was electronics and telecommunications. I have no idea what they actually did but I am perfectly familiar with how British Intelligence is structured, or at least, enough not to take lectures on what is common knowledge to most.
Click to expand...
Ahahahaha. No. No you aren't. You're grossly incompetent on the security services and what they do. Even if your half siblings were army captains that says nothing about the intelligence and security services, and even if it did that would not mean that YOU knew about it.


I said MI5 because whilst Diana eschewed having protection officers, automatically assigned to the inner circle of Royals, nonetheless, she was probably still given discreet cover albeit from a distance. As she was only in France for a short break I assume these guys would be the same guys to follow her from England. When the paparazzi flocked outside the hotel where she was staying, they were probably amongst them. So when the Merc set off and the paps followed, of course the 'protection officers' followed, too.
Click to expand...
Please provide any evidence that any of the "paps" were actually MI5 agents providing security for Diana "from a distance".
 
Vixen said:
That was an example of brushing it off. I was not picking on Darat specifically. I was highlighting the logic, or lack thereof, being used.
Click to expand...
No, it wasn't. Darat didn't brush off the idea that MI5 were watching Diana. He didn't mention it at all, let alone in the negative.

So once again, who was suggesting that because Diana wasn't wearing a seatbelt that meant MI5 were not watching her, which was your claim.
 
MarkCorrigan said:
Ahahahaha. No. No you aren't. You're grossly incompetent on the security services and what they do. Even if your half siblings were army captains that says nothing about the intelligence and security services, and even if it did that would not mean that YOU knew about it.



Please provide any evidence that any of the "paps" were actually MI5 agents providing security for Diana "from a distance".
Click to expand...


Do we really want to dredge up this tired old debate all over again?
 
MarkCorrigan said:
Ahahahaha. No. No you aren't. You're grossly incompetent on the security services and what they do. Even if your half siblings were army captains that says nothing about the intelligence and security services, and even if it did that would not mean that YOU knew about it.



Please provide any evidence that any of the "paps" were actually MI5 agents providing security for Diana "from a distance".
Click to expand...

As I recall - and it is a long time ago now - they were amongst the first on the scene [runs the theory].
 
Vixen said:
Look up the strange case of Lars Vilks. After the Copenhagen cartoon scandal a fatwa was put on his head. He was shot at by unknown gunmen at a conference and was given police protection. Whilst driving along a motorway with two police bodyguards, his car veered into a truck and he and two police protection officers were killed. It was deemed an accident but there was much speculation as to whether this was a hit job.

Diana did believe he brakes were being tampered with. Remember, you asked for examples of how it might happen.

What I am saying here is that it is possible, not that it did happen.
Click to expand...
Another case of seeing a motive for foul play but with no plausible way for foul play to be what actually happened.

So it probably was just an accident.
 
Vixen said:
I am perfectly well aware of MI6. FYI my two half-siblings were British Army captains and served both in Iraq and Germany (one still lives there and speaks German like a German). Their speciality was electronics and telecommunications. I have no idea what they actually did but I am perfectly familiar with how British Intelligence is structured, or at least, enough not to take lectures on what is common knowledge to most.

I said MI5 because whilst Diana eschewed having protection officers, automatically assigned to the inner circle of Royals, nonetheless, she was probably still given discreet cover albeit from a distance. As she was only in France for a short break I assume these guys would be the same guys to follow her from England. When the paparazzi flocked outside the hotel where she was staying, they were probably amongst them. So when the Merc set off and the paps followed, of course the 'protection officers' followed, too.
Click to expand...
What does being in the army have to do with MI5?

Protection officers are part of the Met.
 
Vixen said:
Look up the strange case of Lars Vilks. After the Copenhagen cartoon scandal a fatwa was put on his head. He was shot at by unknown gunmen at a conference and was given police protection. Whilst driving along a motorway with two police bodyguards, his car veered into a truck and he and two police protection officers were killed. It was deemed an accident but there was much speculation as to whether this was a hit job.

Diana did believe her brakes were being tampered with. Remember, you asked for examples of how it might happen.

What I am saying here is that it is possible, not that it did happen.
Click to expand...
A 'hit job'?

He hit himself?

That doesn't make any sense.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom