Unlawful liquidation of Princess Diana and Dodi Al-Fayed

25. 09. 2022
6th international conference of exopolitics, history and spirituality

Three days ago, Rebel Site was disconnected from its hosting company under the 1998 Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Breakthrough: I have once again published a British documentary from the 2011 "Illegal Killing" created by Allied Star, a London-based company owned by Egyptian billionaire Mohamed Al-Fayed, father Dodi Al-Fayed. The document points, among other things, to the British royal family involved in the murder of this couple and its cover.

Youtube and Vimeo have already deleted this video a few weeks ago, making me host on the Rebel Site. Immediately after, the lawyers of the hosting company sent me two emails that unfortunately caught the spam filter.

These emails told me that they had received complaints from a law firm based in London who claimed that hosting this video was a violation of their client's copyright. Since I did not receive these emails, I could not clearly meet their request, which forced the company that 7,5 of the Year of Hosting gave me to turn off my site.

With brawling, I deleted this video as they wanted me to get this page back online again as soon as possible. However, I sent these lawyers a letter with the 10-day closure to provide me with written proof that the plaintiff law firm was acting on behalf of the owner of the Allied Star copyright. I also sent an email to Mohamed Al-Fayed asking me to publish this movie. His office's reply was prompt. She confirmed they had asked the London law firm to arrange the download of this video. The only reason for this was that the film was withdrawn from the market.

Watching this document clearly showed that Dodi's father loved his son deeply and was shaken by his death. Why would he spend millions on creating and promoting a document about the suspicious circumstances surrounding his death so that he shortly afterwards withdrew from the market without providing proper justification? The only explanation that makes sense is that he was exposed to terrible pressure to do so. Not only did he tyrannize him to pull it out of the market, but the extortionists forced him to make trouble with preventing others in his next publication.

I personally do not respond to tyranization well. I hate the tyrants and fight them with all the means at their disposal. Thank God, I'm not alone. In this case, cybernetic tyranny is not just a civil liability, it is also easy. But be careful! It would be illegal if you placed the "Illegal Killing" document on the BitTorrent site and distributed it to as many people as possible. It would also be illegal if you burned a CD and handed it to your friends. It would be illegal to upload the video to the hosting site, whether under your own name or altered. It would be illegal to create your own torrent on BitTorrent sites and share it with other people to download it. But it's not illegal to publish this article, share it, email it and re-expose it on your blog, and that's exactly what you, my readers, are asking you to do. Do it and infect the infectious world with it.

On the sign: My People is awakening. They know TRUTH.

A document that the Windsor do not want you to see

Let's go back to the document "Illegal Killing" and let's see why there is so much to say. The film starts by showing a hand written letter from Diana to his butler predicting his violent death. He writes: "My husband plans to" accident "my car. Failure of the brakes and a heavily broken head. "Not two years later, her forecast was filled.

The document further shows how many people say her death was a murder. Dodi's father, Mohamed Al-Fayed, went further. In this document, they portray him as saying that it was the mord, bloody racists' of the royal family. He thinks that the royal family gave his son to kill because they were too racist to accept a foreign, Muslim stepfather or a half-brother of the Muslim or a stepchild of a future king.

Even the creator of the film, Keith Allen, pointed out how Windsory was "frighteningly convicting" that the crash occurred just then. Mohamed Al-Fayed describes Diana's worry that an accident of the type just happened to her shortly after, when she spent a holiday with his sons in his house. It was as if she had been warned.

Investigation

The documentary focuses mainly on the enormous investigation of the Royal Court, which several speakers rejected in the film as sweeping under the carpet. They criticize that although Diana's letter pointed out to Charles that she was trying to kill her exactly the way she died she had not been told to appear as a witness. It was talked about how the Royal Court first tried to conduct an investigation without a jury, attempting to reverse it simply because of the pressure of the public. They questioned the impartiality of an investigation conducted by the Royal Court, led by a "forensic surgeon," who swore the loyalty of the queen when the members of the royal family were direct suspects. Then it was not surprising for the filmmaker that the coroner at that time apparently made his conclusion about the outcome of the investigation before it ever began.

The whole purpose of the investigation was to examine the suspicious circumstances surrounding the car crash. Was it just a coincidence that Diana had told many people that it had been warned from the palace's intimate sources that Prince Philip had plans for her intentional killing in a car crash just as she had died? Why did not the CCTV cameras record anything, that is, the 'crash' of this crash with the 7.7 attacks at the London Underground? Were the blood samples of the driver adjusted to make it look like he was a lot of underwhelm, though he was obviously sober? Why were Diana's phone calls spiked by the US NSA? Why was Diana's life belt stuck in the night with an accident, which prevented her from bracing - what she would normally do, and what would probably save her life? Why the police did not identify owners or drivers of five other vehicles involved in the crash. And why did the ambulance take 2 hours to bring Dian to the nearest hospital?

According to this film, the suspicious circumstances do not end. Even before the medical examination of his body, the French press had issued thumbnails, according to which the driver was "as drunk as a pig". Despite the fact that, according to his hotel account, he had only 2 Ricard, which is less than a quarter of the allowance the French authorities believe he drank. The police allowed road cleaning to clean up the accident site within hours of an accident. The film points to similarities with the case of Benazir Bhutto, a politician in Pakistan, where her police murdered the site almost immediately after the attack, because it is easier to say that it was an accident when the evidence flushes.

At the end of the investigation, the jury heard so much suspicious information that the coroner investigator could no longer take the risk. In her three-day briefing, the jury told her to ignore eyewitness statements and to forget to think about the possibility of murder. However, the jury ignored the coroner's instructions and spent a full week of careful review of the evidence itself.

Media

The film also explores the media's negative attitude towards this investigation, which it has obviously considered a waste of time. It was quite common for journalists to investigate to sleep or to do a nail manicure instead of watching witnesses. They were only interested in information confirming the "consensus received", which arose before the investigation, that it was controlling the harassment and harassment of the paparazzi who had caused the accident, and ignored all witness statements that contradicted it. Different views were considered "deviation" and "conspiracy theory". According to this film, the problem was also the fact that they were royal correspondents, not court case journalists who reported on this investigation, despite the fact that Diana had no royal status at the time of her death. You can not expect impersonalism from journalists like the BBC's royal correspondent, whose work is solely "subdue to the royal family" and depicting it in the most favorable possible light. But even if they wanted to, they could not understand the details of the evidence, or the manipulation made by the establishment behind the scene, and the evidence and how many were allowed to see. For example, they did not ask questions why the Royal Court censored the incredible letters Prince Philip wrote to Diana. The King's Court even went so far as to forbid Diana's close friends to investigate the enormously hostile letters of Prince Philip, who wrote Diana shortly before her death.

The accident itself

The film then describes the accident itself based on reports from several witnesses. Powerful Mercedes Benz quickly left the persecuted paparazzi behind. When they entered the tunnel, 4 was surrounded by motorcycles and the white Fiat Uno. Suddenly Diana's driver blinded a very bright glimpse, as a result of which he lost control and faced the concrete pillar. None of the other vehicles were identified. The French police verified that none of the vehicles had been taken by any of the paparazzi who had been in the service that night. They all were heard. But that did not stop the British media from stopping to misinterpret the verdict of the investigation - and in a massive worldwide disinformation campaign led by the BBC - they claimed they were persecuting the paparazzi who caused the accident. What the investigation actually made was the statement that it was Diana's car in the tunnel, what caused the accident.

Ambulance

The most bizarre circumstances of the accident were probably the behavior of the ambulance. Several outpatient clinics soon arrived at the accident scene. Due to the daytime, after midnight, the streets were almost empty. But she still took the ambulance that took Diana, 81 minutes before taking her to a nearby hospital without making a connection with the headquarters. At the top of all 37 minutes, the strangely-behaving doctor, Diane himself, helped Jean-Marc Martin to keep her in the consciousness from the undamaged stern of her car to the ambulance. If she had a quick hospital treatment, as Dillon's experts agreed, Diana would have survived.

MI6 role

The film catches the head of MI6's assertion that his agency has never killed anyone in the last 50 years. It shows the former agent of MI6 Richard Tomlinson, who testified in an investigation that wrote a book called "Big Punishment," which describes how MI6 planned the murder of a Serbian leader exactly the same way that Diana, Dodi and her driver were killed: causing a car crash in a narrow tunnel a glimpse of very bright light into the driver's eyes. Chief MI6 clearly lied, which is the opinion supported by another MI6 director in the movie, the baronette Daphne Park, who clearly stated she was involved in murders for MI6.

A campaign to ban land mines

According to the film, MI6 and other secret services had more reasons to want Diana's death than her plan to marry a Muslim: effective support for her global campaign to ban landmines. Her engagement has made enormous anger among the leaders of the West and the arms industry. It even caused British Defense Secretary Nicholas Saamese to call her and said, "Do not interfere with things you do not know about. There could be accidents. "

Diana's murder occurred only three weeks before the Oslo conference to ban landmines. When there was not Diana, the most prominent ambassador of this conference, most of the world's media was no longer bothered by attendance. The only leader of the government, who attended the conference and voted against the global ban on landmines, was Bill Clinton. If Diana was still alive, she would have to look Diana in her eyes. According to the film, many observers believe that the real reason why they killed her, but the coroner from the investigation, did not care about this guideline.

Results of Dodgy's autopsy

The pittance of a driver who was allegedly very impatient, even though he had only two Richard that night, and the CCTV hotel was totally sober when he left the hotel, was made by Professor Dominique Lecomte, a doctor ill-known for her involvement in the covert operations of the French government . In her autopsy, other medical experts were bumped into pieces as totally incompetent and burdened with several critical mistakes, and Dr. Lepin, the results of a blood sample taken by the driver were found to be most likely manipulated. Professor Lecomte and Dr. Lepin both refused to participate in the investigation after the French government ordered them to protect French state secrets and interests. When researchers later examined whether the DNA was in blood samples identical to the driver, the French government told them that these samples no longer exist.

Police corruption

Diana not only spoke of her ex-husband's family plans for her car accident killing, as she mentions in her letter to her butler, with many of her friends. She also wrote a letter to her lawyer who handed it to the police. In spite of being later killed exactly as described in her letter, the police chief kept this letter for three years in hiding, though he knew that by hiding this heavy-weight evidence is violating the law. The Queen rewarded him with a nice reward as she fanned "Lord".

Not only did the autopsy report point to a false allegation about the driver's alcohol level, it also suggested it was a difficult case of alcoholism. The English police tried to support this false claim by searching the driver's apartment twice for alcohol. When they first went there, they managed to find only a bottle of champagne and three empty Martini bottles. Dissatisfied with this result, they set off again, and this time they found enough alcohol to fill the bar.

Diana's embalming

Though Diana was no longer "royal high" at the time of her death, she was packed in hours after her death, as the film says to make it impossible for her to perform a pregnancy test. They not only removed and destroyed her organs, but they did so with samples of her blood they had taken on arrival at the Paris hospital. The film suggests that it was so as to avoid indicating that Muslim blood has entered the royal bloodline.

The Queen's Private Secretary

The supreme representative of the Windsor House, who appeared in the investigation, was Sir Robert Fellowes. Under the oath, he claimed to have been in the accident before and after the accident. But in Tony Blair's press secretary's journal, Alastair Campbell, it is clear that he and Fellows met several times during this period when he says he should be allowed. Diana had mentioned to her friends that he was one of the three people he was most afraid of. She believed that Mr. Fellows hated her hungrily and wanted to get her out of the royal family. The film suggests that Mr. Fellows had a leading role in arranging her death.

Fiat Uno

The direct suspect that caused the accident is the driver of the Fiat Uno, which the numerous witnesses saw. However, neither the English nor the French police seemed to be able to identify him, but one of the best-known paparazzi, James Andanson, with secret service connections, drove exactly that car. Andanson, who sold wealth to the British Royal Family and other celebrities, lived in France and was known to have watched Diana and Dodi during their last vacation before the accident. He was not part of the pack of paparazzi waiting outside the Ritz, which belonged to Dodi's father. When the French police asked him where he was, he said contradictory statements, as did his wife and son who served as his alibi. Despite these circumstances, the investigation was canceled and the search for Fiat Uno ended without any result. However, there was no attempt to find out who was driving the involved vehicle.

In 2000, Andasona found dead in his burning car on a field belonging to the Department of Defense at Montpellier. He had no car keys and the two firemen who found him saw two bullet holes in his skull. However, the French police decided to commit suicide. The filmmaker comments that you do not need to be conspiracy theorists to take it as hard to believe that the man would shoot twice in his head and then fire his car.

Royal Family

The last third of the film goes into direct attacks on Windsor. It is being poured into the tremendous costs of British taxpayers, their racism against the White, and their initial strong support for Hitler. She accuses the queen mother, her husband, as well as Prince Philip and his sisters, of strongly supporting Nazi Germany, at least initially. There are also questions about why the British people still tolerate the monarchy. He accuses the British agents of corruption because they were more loyal to the monarch than to the people, and it is more worthwhile to deserve knighthood than to obey the law. The film goes even so far as to claim the British royal family as mafia-style gangsters.

Later, Prince Philip is quoted as saying that if there was a rebirth, he would like to be born a lethal virus to do something with overcrowding. This quote is to be seen in the context of the fact that Prince Philip has the highest rank of Free Freemasons of the Scottish Rite, a secret society known for his "great breakthrough", in which humanity is reduced to a "sustainable level" of 500 million, 93%.

The most controversial part of the documentary is an interview with the leading British clinical psychologist Oliver James describing Prince Philip as someone lacking any inner sense of good and evil. According to James, Prince Philip is completely selfish and no one else is interested. According to his expert opinion, Prince Philip as well as notorious psychopathic mass murderers.

Summary

The main message of the film convincingly argues that - in the light of the long list of suspicious circumstances and cover - it would be too many special circumstances for Diana to be killed just at a time when Western secret services and gunmen were furious over her campaign against landmines and Windsor due to the prospect of Muslim fathers and Muslim relatives of the future British king.

My first reaction, when I heard of Diana's death, was that MI6 was doing it. like Mohamed al-Fayed and other people in the document, and I suspected that the British royal family was too bigoted to allow her to marry a Muslim man from the Middle East. What I did not know then was that Diana's mother was born Rothschild, which makes her and her children according to the Jewish laws of the Jews. I am now more inclined to think that Mossad's murder was done, not to stop her campaign against landmines, or to prevent the prospect of a Muslim father and Muslim relative of the future king, but to prevent Diana from converting to Islam, to marry a Muslim man. This would obviously impede endless Jewish praise by the fact that the future British King is a Jew.

 

Translation: Miroslav Pavlíček

Source: AC24.cz and prisonplanet.com

Similar articles