Breaking: Diana Death: Police Passed New Information

reply to post by Angelic Resurrection


I'm pretty sure you can't go around using language like that!

Originally posted by Angelic Resurrection

Missed that! Can you repost.

reply to post by RP2SticksOfDynamite


What, you want to see the racism again? Why?

Originally posted by stumason
reply to post by RP2SticksOfDynamite

 

What, you want to see the racism again? Why?

I didnt know it was racist!!
Was every line offensive!

reply to post by RP2SticksOfDynamite


There was only the one line.....

You're not missing anything, best to move on..

Originally posted by stumason
reply to post by RP2SticksOfDynamite

 

There was only the one line.....

You're not missing anything, best to move on..

Still not accepting that H is JH's son!
Nevermind!

reply to post by RP2SticksOfDynamite


Nope, never will! Like I said before, I did use to think that, but as Harry has matured, he looks too much like Charles. As I said, the myth is also helped by the fact that Hewitt and Charles look similiar anyway! Maybe Diana had a type?

Originally posted by stumason
reply to post by RP2SticksOfDynamite

 

Nope, never will! Like I said before, I did use to think that, but as Harry has matured, he looks too much like Charles. As I said, the myth is also helped by the fact that Hewitt and Charles look similiar anyway! Maybe Diana had a type?

You are the first and only person I have come accross in the last 15 years who thinks so!
The pics are enough nevermind the history!
Nevermind

reply to post by RP2SticksOfDynamite


Likewise..

It doesn't mean much and does depend on the social circles you move in I suppose. It's not something we're ever going to agree on, it seems and the only way to prove it would be a paternity test.

One point to take away from this though is considering Harry is in line for the throne, the Government would insist on a paternity test (if they haven't already) otherwise he could be removed as illegitimate. If they were so keen to keep Harry out of the line of succession, as you attest, why have they not done this? Surely it would have been far easier than trying to get the Heads of Government for 15 Commonwealth realms to agree to the change in Succession law...

Originally posted by stumason
reply to post by RP2SticksOfDynamite

 

Likewise..

It doesn't mean much and does depend on the social circles you move in I suppose. It's not something we're ever going to agree on, it seems and the only way to prove it would be a paternity test.

One point to take away from this though is considering Harry is in line for the throne, the Government would insist on a paternity test (if they haven't already) otherwise he could be removed as illegitimate. If they were so keen to keep Harry out of the line of succession, as you attest, why have they not done this? Surely it would have been far easier than trying to get the Heads of Government for 15 Commonwealth realms to agree to the change in Succession law...

I dont think so! I mix in all social circles (top to bottom and internationally)!!!! And for the last 52 years!!
Why no Pat test, thats obvious! They dont want anymore scandal relating to C and D. Certainly not the fact that H is JH's boy. One of the reasons (of many) D was disposed of!!

Originally posted by RP2SticksOfDynamite
I dont think so! I mix in all social circles (top to bottom and internationally)!!!! And for the last 52 years!!

I didn't mean in any way that I was any better or mixed in better social circles, but you tend to gravitate towards people of similiar beliefs, that's all.

Originally posted by RP2SticksOfDynamite
Why no Pat test, thats obvious! They dont want anymore scandal relating to C and D. Certainly not the fact that H is JH's boy. One of the reasons (of many) D was disposed of!!

So, despite you attestation that they wanted Harry out of the line and also they wanted minimal "scandal", they elect instead of a simple pat test and removal of Harry, they decided to go for a highly risky assassination involving a car chase and totally reliant on Diana not wearing her belt, while keeping Harry in line for the throne?

Your logic is falling apart here, matey....

Originally posted by stumason

Originally posted by RP2SticksOfDynamite
I dont think so! I mix in all social circles (top to bottom and internationally)!!!! And for the last 52 years!!

I didn't mean in any way that I was any better or mixed in better social circles, but you tend to gravitate towards people of similiar beliefs, that's all.

Originally posted by RP2SticksOfDynamite
Why no Pat test, thats obvious! They dont want anymore scandal relating to C and D. Certainly not the fact that H is JH's boy. One of the reasons (of many) D was disposed of!!

So, despite you attestation that they wanted Harry out of the line and also they wanted minimal "scandal", they elect instead of a simple pat test and removal of Harry, they decided to go for a highly risky assassination involving a car chase and totally reliant on Diana not wearing her belt, while keeping Harry in line for the throne?

Your logic is falling apart here, matey....

edit on 24/8/13 by stumason because: (no reason given)

I said that they got rid of D for many reasons! The main one was C wanted his mistress at his side. Others include the land mines issue. Another D was engaged to a Muslim and so on!
She was wacked and H is JH's son and 90% of ATS would probably agree! I think!!

I do think that Harry was Diana's revenge on Charles for putting Camilly in her face and humiliating her at every turn. What his Mother, (the Queen) put up with, with the Duke of Edinburgh who I understand from my Father who was a reporter for the New York Times, was that the Duke had to be recalled to the UK because of his philandering and for those of us who can remember any of the Queen's flyby's in our towns, she rarely smiled and looked thoroughly miserable for a number of years. The UK papers were not allowed to print what the foreign press put about the Duke and his womanising and good times but my father heard a lot of it.

I don't see how they could have dealt with Harry ( despite his popping up with his father's red hair) and although I believe Diana was killed - that happened in a tunnel with virtually 'no witnesses', but I do think that they would have had trouble getting rid of Harry simply because not everyone would have cooperated over the killing of a kid.

Its clear that William loves Harry regardless of paternity etc and as he is the main hope of selling monarchy to us, I doubt they have been in a position to deal with Harry as per Diana, simply because their hope of a cushy life for future generations hinges completely on him. If he decided to expose them or cast doubt and walk away, that would be the end of the lot of them.

Originally posted by Shiloh7
I do think that Harry was Diana's revenge on Charles for putting Camilly in her face and humiliating her at every turn. What his Mother, (the Queen) put up with, with the Duke of Edinburgh who I understand from my Father who was a reporter for the New York Times, was that the Duke had to be recalled to the UK because of his philandering and for those of us who can remember any of the Queen's flyby's in our towns, she rarely smiled and looked thoroughly miserable for a number of years. The UK papers were not allowed to print what the foreign press put about the Duke and his womanising and good times but my father heard a lot of it.

I don't see how they could have dealt with Harry ( despite his popping up with his father's red hair) and although I believe Diana was killed - that happened in a tunnel with virtually 'no witnesses', but I do think that they would have had trouble getting rid of Harry simply because not everyone would have cooperated over the killing of a kid.

Its clear that William loves Harry regardless of paternity etc and as he is the main hope of selling monarchy to us, I doubt they have been in a position to deal with Harry as per Diana, simply because their hope of a cushy life for future generations hinges completely on him. If he decided to expose them or cast doubt and walk away, that would be the end of the lot of them.

Well put!! They keep H happy or its the end of the monarchy and H knows this as im sure he knows many things hence his taking up the land mine bit! He has a lot of power while he is alive but realises that he is not totally safe. Im sure he and his father have prepared for any eventuallities should something happen to H so that the Monarchy falls!!! Wouldnt you!!!

People were talking earlier on how the public see's this event.

I present to you the Daily Rag/Star. A horrible red top Rag.

www.dailystar.co.uk...

forget the actual article.

Look at the comment by our dear public and see how many people present facts why she wasn't murdered,
none, it's all half truths and things that were debunked 10 years ago.

I'd go as far to say as some of them comments are very shill like.

Whenever anyone says ''Move on nothing to see here'' Look closer.

Originally posted by Shiloh7

( despite his popping up with his father's red hair) .

Just a thought

...but have you ever seen his maternal uncles red hair?

Hewitt isn't the only ginge in this matter, but it is one that is often overlooked.

Monarchies, historically, are built upon tradition and privilege, marriage being essentially more of an arrangement for the purpose of heir making and up keeping tradition and connections more than it is historically for love. Hence the monarchs and heirs to thrones often seek their love outwith marriage. They are emotional beings and perhaps see their desire for true love something that shouldn't be denied despite the traditions which they are obligated to comply with.

From media reports, it appears Diana was possibly rather naive about such matters and perhaps innocently believed her marriage as one of a love bond, free from temptation.

It could be said that certain circles involved in the aspects of the compliance of traditions might have seen her public television interview exposing her husband's affair as overstepping the mark. This perceived crossing the line, and the reporting of her suspicions of impending hit man activity has naturally fueled suspicion of her cause of death.

it would be naive to discount all possibilities of Diana's death being other than a completely innocent random event caused by error and misadventure. Perhaps someday the truth will be known.

Regarding Harry's paternal parentage, it is not possible for people to say yay or nay either way unless privy to DNA analysis. He does resemble JH slightly though he resembles Charles more and plenty of kids are born ginger to blonde /dark combination parents, seeing as his hair colour is the main area of visual doubt. Additionally, if it was suspected that Diana was carrying a child that wasn't of Charles, palace officials might have found a way of discretely ensuring that child was in the public eye as a son of Charles, perhaps secreting him away to live with a relative, for example. I think Charles and his officials would be on the ball enough to check such details.

Originally posted by theabsolutetruth

Regarding Harry's paternal parentage, it is not possible for people to say yay or nay either way unless privy to DNA analysis. He does resemble JH slightly though he resembles Charles more and plenty of kids are born ginger to blonde /dark combination parents, seeing as his hair colour is the main area of visual doubt. Additionally, if it was suspected that Diana was carrying a child that wasn't of Charles, palace officials might have found a way of discretely ensuring that child was in the public eye as a son of Charles, perhaps secreting him away to live with a relative, for example. I think Charles and his officials would be on the ball enough to check such details.

edit on 25-8-2013 by theabsolutetruth because: (no reason given)

I agree with all of your earlier points which is why I cropped them out,
This piece I also agree with apart from his resemblances to Charles.
Not proof of anything of course but JH has been in the media a long time and it isn't just the hair colour that is similar that is just the more obvious clue.

If you take the William, he is very obviously the Son of Charles and the older he gets the more and more he looks like him and he also has many traits of his mother too.

Harry on the other hand does not look like his brother or his father or grandfather who are all a similar height and build.
Harry has the obvious Hair colour, similar height and facial features of JH.

Proof of nothing with out DNA tests we would never see but I'm just pointing out it goes beyond Hair colour.

The fact that the love affair did happen also adds credence.

As for Diana believing her marriage was based on love is probably untrue also as she publicly said she knew Charles always loved Camilla.

reply to post by Taggart


From media reports and interviews, it appears that perhaps Diana entered her marriage with a naive view that it was a love match, then was made aware of Camilla after some time, I believe it was first mentioned at a party, if I recall correctly.

Additionally, it is highly speculative and probably unlikely that Harry's paternal line is anything other than of Charles, hence an unlikely cause of Diana's hitman suspicions.

Harry has all the trademark lineage characteristics of his father Charles and grandfather Philip, he has the same small close set eyes, the same narrow nasal bridge, the same small set mouth with relatively thin lips, the same encroaching hairline at the temples and tall narrow forehead.

Hewitt has completely different characteristics, wide set eyes, low, wide forehead and brown eyes. This would give his offspring a high percentage possibility of having either green or brown eyes, a low wide forehead and wide set eyes, especially since Diana has these wide set features.

For an offspring of Diana to have narrow set features as described, the paternal line would have to have the same.

Comparison of pictures shows the similarities between Harry and his mother and Harry and Charles, it shows no facial feature similarities between Harry and Hewitt.

Both William and Harry are taller than Charles because of their mother also being taller than Charles.

Even Hewitt has publicly reneged any suggestions.
news.bbc.co.uk...