It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Controversial Princess Diana film Banned in US & UK

page: 3
23
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 6 2012 @ 07:20 PM
link   

Last week Tomlinson said he was prepared to give evidence to the Diana inquest by video link.



I would have focussed on the time when I was at MI6 and I saw a secret document describing in detail how to make an assassination appear like a car accident. The document had a 'yellow mark' category which means it could only be seen at the highest level. The document specifically referred to an MI6 plan to assassinate Slobodan Milosevic, the former Serbian president, by blinding his driver with a bright flash in a tunnel. The plan was exactly the same one used to create the fatal crash of Diana and Dodi", Tomlinson said in his exclusive interview.



Tomlinson believes his evidence could be a "smoking gun" at the Diana inquest.


link




posted on Jul, 6 2012 @ 07:21 PM
link   
Damn that Cass Sunstein!!! He must be having a celebratory beverage over this being banned in the US. Sad to see anything banned... let the people decide! (I'm not saying he had direct involvement but if you know anything about Cass, you know this is right up his alley)


edit on 6-7-2012 by six67seven because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 6 2012 @ 08:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by MysticPearl
I didn't know about the documentary until it was banned, causing this thread to be made. Now I know the title, author and that I'm not supposed to see it. Now I think I'll see it.

Great job US Government. Efficient as always. Glad our tax dollars are well spent.



Originally posted by ludwigvonmises003
IT does prove one thing...British monarchy rules USA and UK and that the monarchy are power brokers not figure heads.


Do you people enjoy and seek to be horribly ignorant, or is it due to laziness?

MysticPearl, why are you talking about the US government? Or tax dollars? Neither one have anything at all to do with this thread. Your post is extremely off-topic. The government did not ban the film. This is just a misleading thread, and most of the participants in are too damn lazy or ignorant to actually figure out the truth, which is that the government did not ban the film.



posted on Jul, 6 2012 @ 08:36 PM
link   
reply to post by BABYBULL24
 


When did it come out ? I'm sure someone will post it on You Tube. We will eventually see this movie. There's something that we the people and our cousins across the pond have in common.

When we want something , we will eventually get it.



posted on Jul, 6 2012 @ 08:40 PM
link   
DEATH TO THE CROWN.
DEATH TO THE ILLUMINATI.
edit on 6-7-2012 by randyvs because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 6 2012 @ 08:53 PM
link   
Funny, the UK board responsible for classifying films do not list it as banned..
www.bbfc.co.uk...

care to show exactly where it is officially stated to be banned in the UK?

The death of Diana just shows you should always wear a seatbelt, and do not let a drunk driver drive you!



posted on Jul, 6 2012 @ 09:31 PM
link   
reply to post by EvilSadamClone
 


Thanks, smart guy.



posted on Jul, 6 2012 @ 09:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by spoor

The death of Diana just shows you should always wear a seatbelt, and do not let a drunk driver drive you!


That to me is one of the central issues of this particular case. If the driver was, as the official story would have us believe drunk, then how come the bodyguard allowed Di and Dodi to get in the car, let alone get in himself? The bodyguard was sitting right next to the driver and any amount of alcohol would have been obvious to him. Another interesting point is that the bodyguard was wearing a seatbelt which they're not supposed to do, yet the people he's responsible for were not. Very odd!



posted on Jul, 6 2012 @ 10:24 PM
link   
The movie is banned because it is too accurate, I assume. Short of shooting the messenger, the best alternative is to intercept the message. They didn't ban the film because it is a pack of lies easily refuted by a very lucrative libel suit.

If the movie were a pack of lies, it would provide the royal family with a golden opportunity to sue Mohammed al Fayad back to the stone age and be rid of him.



posted on Jul, 6 2012 @ 10:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by ipsedixit
The movie is banned


care to show some proof that it has been banned by the UK government?



posted on Jul, 6 2012 @ 10:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by spoor

Originally posted by ipsedixit
The movie is banned


care to show some proof that it has been banned by the UK government?


Care to show me where I said that it was?

It appears to have been "banned" by Fayad's lawyers. Maybe it is a pack of lies after all. Maybe Fayad is just suffering from legal fatigue.

The OP's use of the word banned is misleading and I was mislead.

edit on 6-7-2012 by ipsedixit because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 6 2012 @ 10:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by ipsedixit

Originally posted by spoor

Originally posted by ipsedixit
The movie is banned


care to show some proof that it has been banned by the UK government?


Care to show me where I said that it was?



right here www.abovetopsecret.com...
edit on 6-7-2012 by spoor because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 7 2012 @ 01:06 AM
link   
reply to post by spoor
 


Also funny, the toxicology reports said the driver didn't even have alcohol in his system.



posted on Jul, 7 2012 @ 02:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by VeritasAequitas
Also funny, the toxicology reports said the driver didn't even have alcohol in his system.


Oh dear, yet another made up story by you

www.public-interest.co.uk...


b. Alcohol Police lab analysis reported 1.87 g/l blood-alcohol; a private lab as a control reported 1.74 g/l.



10 September, an official communique from Stephan announced: a blood-alcohol level of 1.75 g/l test of eye fluid showed a level of 1.73 g/l



posted on Jul, 7 2012 @ 02:30 AM
link   
reply to post by spoor
 


Your source is UK based.Has it occurred to you that the govt can forge such fake reports? The Royal monarchy is responsible for a good part of the narco trade and the looting and genocide of several nations.



posted on Jul, 7 2012 @ 06:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by Astyanax
reply to post by Infi8nity
 


So how and WHY is it banned hear? We are not the U.K (EU) how can they tell us what we can watch unless.... You put the pieces together.

Rather than 'putting the pieces together' and coming up with some stupid, paranoid fantasy, you could just do a bit of googling, and find the film-maker's own account of why the film is banned in some jurisdictions.

Unlawful Killing – the film the British won't get to see by Keith Allen in The Guardian.


The internet is a global lavatory wall, a Rabelaisian mixture of truth, lies, insanity and humour. I felt its power and madness this week, when an excerpt from my new film, Unlawful Killing, was leaked on to YouTube and seized on by US conspiracy theorists, who immediately began claiming that the CIA had murdered Princess Diana...

You'll have to use your finger to read the rest.


ya thanks but I still think I'd like to (along with the majority of others) make up my own mind on the movie before "letting the government" decide what's the truth!
bottom line is you guys in america have something called freedom of speech and that translate into communicating whatever means of information you wish no matter how controversial it is, and clearly it looks like it's being violated for special interests, unsurprisingly
edit on 7-7-2012 by seenavv because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 7 2012 @ 06:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by aaaiii
reply to post by Suspiria
 

Yes, some are jealous of beauty and privilege.

Diana had class, something sadly lacking in the world today.

reply to post by Suspiria
 

Yes, jealous.
edit on 7/6/2012 by aaaiii because: (no reason given)


Agreed.I'm surprised Diana has haters, She really was on another level though so I don't blame them for being envious.
Not everyone has looks combined with intelligence, grace and charm all in one spot



posted on Jul, 7 2012 @ 06:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by JohnnyCanuck

Originally posted by Suspiria
Mohamed Al Fayed is a friggin nutjob. His son died because he was courting a media whore.

That was a fairly simplistic answer. How about poking around some instead?
Start here:


Better things to do with my time quite frankly.



posted on Jul, 7 2012 @ 06:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by HamrHeed

Originally posted by aaaiii
reply to post by Suspiria
 

Yes, some are jealous of beauty and privilege.

Diana had class, something sadly lacking in the world today.

reply to post by Suspiria
 

Yes, jealous.
edit on 7/6/2012 by aaaiii because: (no reason given)


Agreed.I'm surprised Diana has haters, She really was on another level though so I don't blame them for being envious.
Not everyone has looks combined with intelligence, grace and charm all in one spot


Of course, airing ones dirty washing on every media outlet known to man is all about intelligence and grace.
Thanks for reminding me.



posted on Jul, 7 2012 @ 07:05 AM
link   
If you want to point the finger at anyone offing Diana point it at the French. They had more reason to shut her up for exerting her power and influence over the world to eradicate landmines, landmines that for a great many many years were sold and provided by the French.

Was it then a coincidence she died in France? Is it strange that facts don't add up in light of this? Is it odd that things are amiss? And all the while people lie back and blame the British Monarchy, RESULT!

Why would they off someone they knew had such a hold over the little people of the worlds hearts? Why do something that would obviously backfire and bite them on the arse?







 
23
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join