The Ritual Murder of Princess Diana

Despite what the establishment and the Elite controlled, compliant media would like you to believe, there is absolutely no doubt that Diana was ritually and brutally murdered in line with Royal orders.

On the 31st August 1997, Princess Diana, the estranged wife of Prince Charles, and her lover, Dodi Fayed were killed in a car crash in the Pont de l’Alma road tunnel in the centre of Paris. They were on their way to Dodi’s executive apartment just off the Champs Elysee after having had dinner together at the Ritz Hotel, owned by Dodi’s father, Mohammed Fayed. (I will refer to him and his late son as ‘Fayed’ rather than ‘Al Fayed’ as this is the name with which he was born. The ‘Al’ prefix is merely a later affectation). The other occupants of the car were Henri Paul, head of security at the Ritz, the nominated driver for the evening and Trevor Rees-Jones another security man and the only survivor of the ‘accident’.

We are, as is always the case, faced with the usual confusion and subterfuge surrounding the events of that night. Indeed there are so many conflicting versions of the story that it is extremely difficult for anyone to even come close to the actual truth without intensive, sustained research on the subject. However, what follows is substantially more than an educated guess about what actually happened that fateful night.

The story began in 1980, seventeen years earlier with a teenage girl from a privileged background, Lady Diana Spencer, meeting and falling in love with her Prince Charming (Charles) in a storybook romance that captured the imagination of almost the whole of our royalty-obsessed nation and most of the rest of the world too. The date was soon set for the wedding as the 29th July 1981 and little did poor Diana know that her troubles were only just about to begin.

She gave birth to William, the couple’s first child, through an induced birth on 21st June 1982 (significantly, the summer solstice – an important occult date) and he was shortly afterwards followed by his younger brother, Harry, the two boys being jokingly referred to as the ‘heir and the spare’. Once Diana had fulfilled her always-intended role as brood-mare (her term) for the future monarch and his ‘back-up’, all pretence of love was immediately dropped by Charles and he immediately resumed his long-term, ongoing affair with Camilla Parker-Bowles (if indeed it had ever ceased). Diana realised very quickly that the fairy-tale was over and she was basically shunned and treated as an interloper from that point onwards by the entire Royal family. Had she not been the strong character that she undoubtedly was, then she may not have even had the mental strength to assert herself where her boys were concerned. Ironically, that she did so, probably marked the beginning of the end for her. Anyone who crosses these people, for any reason at all had better beware.

The full force of the Royal propaganda machine was unleashed upon her as she had to endure all kinds of mental torture and accusations of unfaithfulness (most of her alleged indiscretions were probably more than understandable, but nevertheless true) whilst Charles’ blame for the rapid disintegration of the marriage was deflected in her direction and for a considerable time she acquired a reputation as a ‘mad woman’ struggling with bulimia and mental illness.

In 1988, Diana was having a secret affair with her security guard, the detective Barry Mannakee which obviously became known to the Royals. Shortly afterwards, Mannakee was killed in a road traffic ‘accident’ and Charles cruelly and sarcastically broke the news to Diana by saying to her with a smirk, before she even knew of his death, ‘Shame about poor Barry!’ David Icke, the geo-political researcher, spoke to Christine Fitzgerald, an alternative healer and Diana’s confidante at the time and she said to him..

“She was crying hysterically and I said ‘What’s the matter?’ ‘I can’t believe it’, she sobbed, ‘They killed him, they killed him’. I said ‘who did they kill’ and she told me that he [Barry] had been decapitated on his motorbike and how she thought at first it was a terrible accident. But now she knows the Royal family killed him because Prince Charles’ detective just told her that if she didn’t cool it with Hewitt, the same would happen to him. He told her that she should not think she was indispensible either.” [My emphasis – JH]

Diana in fact was absolutely convinced that she was going to be disposed of in a fake ‘accident’ scenario. She confided this fact to several friends and even wrote it in a letter.

1Letter

Diana’s letter to her butler, Paul Burrell

This was later confirmed by James Hewitt himself in a TV documentary, ‘Diana – secrets of the crash’ in 1998. He also said that he too had been warned to stop seeing Diana or ‘the consequences would not be pleasant’. He further said:

“The telephone calls were anonymous, but they left me in no doubt that they knew what the situation was. They were threatening. They said it was not conducive to my health to continue the relationship.”

He also said that he had other warnings from Diana’s personal protection unit, the Royal household itself and a specific ‘senior’ member of the Royal family whom he declined to identify. This person said:

“Your relationship is known about. It is not supported. We cannot be responsible for your safety and security and suggest that you curtail it forthwith.”

However the clearest threat to him came when he was told outright that if he did not desist from seeing Diana, the same fate as befell Barry Mannakee would also befall him.

This latter statement alone, I believe tells anyone who was formerly in any doubt about the capabilities of these monsters, exactly what they are about and belies the ‘cosy’ homely image they love to project of their thoroughly evil-to-the-core family. Every time I hear anyone say anything along the lines of ‘I am a staunch royalist’ or ‘I adore the Royal family’ (and there are millions of these sheeple) it makes me thoroughly sick to my stomach. The time to wake up is long overdue.

But, back to the story…

After the end of her affair with James Hewitt, which had been duly ‘curtailed’ after the threats, which Hewitt obviously and understandably took fairly seriously, Diana’s next ‘public’ amour was with Dodi Fayed and as we all know now, it was destined to be her last.

Mohammed Fayed, Dodi’s overbearing father was instrumental in bringing the couple together. He had ingratiated himself with Diana in the past and always made a point of greeting her personally when she visited Harrods for her ‘retail therapy’. They had built up quite a cosy relationship – she found him ‘charming and funny’ or so she said and when he invited her and the two teenage boys to join him and Dodi on his yacht Jonikal in the Mediterranean in the July of 1997, the relationship blossomed. At this point, it must be noted, Dodi was still engaged to his American fiancée, Kelly Fisher but father had spoken and Dodi had to obey.

Kelly was originally invited to be the guest on the yacht that summer but Dodi blanked her several times, would not answer her calls and she was told by the Fayed staff in no uncertain terms that they had been instructed not to connect her calls to either Fayed senior or Fayed junior. Eventually she did manage to speak with Dodi who cruelly cut her short and told her the engagement was off. They were never to speak again.

After a relaxing few days on the yacht, the boys were dispatched back home to Charles whilst Dodi and Diana flew to Paris to spend a couple more romantic nights together before the end of the holiday and their both going their separate ways again, albeit it was hoped, temporarily.

So, the 3oth August, the last full day either of them would ever see, as it turned out, dawned and after a pleasant day spent together in Paris, Dodi had planned a romantic meal for two in an exclusive restaurant close to the Ritz Hotel. However, their plans were about to be thwarted. A huge posse of ‘paparazzi’ reporters had gathered outside the main doors of the hotel, making it almost impossible for the couple to pass through on their way to the restaurant and so they had a change of plan. Instead of going to the restaurant, they decided to eat in the hotel restaurant before making their way across Paris to Dodi’s apartment in the Rue Arsene-Houssaye, where they intended to spend the night.

Just after midnight, they made their move. The paparazzi were still thronged outside the front door of the hotel in great numbers and would no doubt harass the couple all the way to the car and probably all the way to Dodi’s apartment too. So, a plan was hatched by Mohammed Fayed whereby a decoy car would arrive at the front door, purportedly to take the couple to their destination and meanwhile the couple would sneak out of the rear door and into another car waiting to whisk them away before the reporters knew what was afoot. So far so good and the Mercedes sped away from the Ritz driven by Henri Paul, with Rees-Jones in the front passenger seat and Diana and Dodi in the rear seats.

None of the two cars or motorcycle chasing the Mercedes at this point contained any paparazzi; they all appeared in the first couple of minutes after the crash. As the Mercedes approached the tunnel it was being chased by the two cars and one motorcycle and one of the vehicles (a white Fiat Uno) rammed the Mercedes just before the crash. As the Mercedes got nearer the tunnel, another motorcycle prevented one car from taking the approach road that lead to the tunnel.

A remote-controlled device was likely used, causing an explosion (as initially reported by CNN and then mysteriously omitted from subsequent reports) which was heard by witnesses and which disabled the driving controls and electronics of the Mercedes. A laser strobe light was also seen by witnesses, which was used to blind the driver in the final seconds before it entered the tunnel – which incidentally, some witnesses claim was completely dark as the lights had been turned-off minutes earlier. A laser beam was being flashed into the eyes of the chauffeur, Henri Paul, causing the Mercedes to crash inside the Pont d’Alma tunnel. Witnesses told British detectives they saw a motorcyclist point a laser into the eyes of Paul. One witness said he saw ‘an enormous radar-like flash of light.’

After hearing an explosion and then a bang, witnesses ran to the scene, only to be told to ‘get back’ by an unknown person who ran towards them out of the tunnel from the direction of the crashed car. A second person, whose identity is also still unknown, was seen in the Mercedes lifting the already dead driver’s head from the blaring car horn. Witnesses also report that a helicopter was seen above just before the crash, presumably monitoring or even directing events on the ground. Since the electricity had been cut-off in the tunnel, the traffic cameras did not work, thus ensuring that there was no video evidence of the Mercedes final approach to the tunnel or of what vehicles may have been leaving it. One witness, Gary Hunter, saw two vehicles race out of the tunnel and others also saw a motorcycle tearing away at high speed.

2Removingevidence

Removing the evidence

MI6 certainly had the means to kill Princess Diana by faking a car crash. In 1992, for example, former MI6 agent Richard Tomlinson says they planned to kill Serbian President Slobodan Milosevic by using a fake car crash in Geneva. In 1996, according to the former MI5 agent David Shayler, they failed in their attempt to kill the Libyan leader Colonel Muammar Gaddafi, but the car bomb they used killed scores of Libyan civilians (thus, Gaddafi, who had survived at least three attempts made on his life by western intelligence services, was also the only leader of a country to openly speculate that MI6 had killed Diana).

It was indeed MI6 who had developed an assassination technique by the name of ‘Boston brakes’ so-named after the MI6 location where it had been successfully developed in Boston, Lincolnshire in the English east midlands. This technique simply put, is a method by which the target car can be remotely controlled from another nearby vehicle and which would explain why, in the case of Diana’s car it was a fairly simple operation to smash it precisely into tunnel pillar 13 at very high speed. We will examine the significance of pillar 13 in more detail later.

French medics from the hospital where the princess died, claim she was pregnant at the time of the crash and this would tend to support the belief that Diana and her lover were killed to avoid the royal family’s embarrassment at her having a child by a Muslim. The intelligence services in France, Britain and the USA have ‘stonewalled’ on this though we know that intelligence services had Diana under surveillance on the fateful night in Paris. And, as is always the case, there has been a concerted campaign to discredit any attempts to get at the truth.

Every trick in the book and every tabloid technique known to man have been employed to fashion all the fiction that masquerades as the truth. Henri Paul was not drunk at all. Both Trevor Rees-Jones and Kez Wingfield (another Fayed security man) continue to insist that Paul gave no indication whatsoever of being drunk before he got behind the wheel. They had been with him for extended periods that evening and still maintain that there was nothing in his behaviour or general conduct to suggest that he had been drinking. If this is the case, how then do they account for the inquiry finding that, within three minutes of leaving the hotel, he was more than three times over the drink-drive limit? After three contradictory autopsies, Henri Paul was buried on the advice of his lawyers and not cremated, as they advised his body may have to be exhumed again. The Times published an article headlined ‘Spy agencies listened in on Diana’. In this article, ‘former intelligence officials’ confirmed to the newspaper that spy agencies in Britain and America ‘eavesdropped on Diana’. Given that Diana was mother to the future King and was often at odds with the Royal Family, it is frankly unbelievable that the security forces were taking no interest in her but the official line attempts to deny the obvious.

“… the late Princess of Wales had clearly been under some kind of surveillance, as evidenced by the 1,050 page dossier held by the US National Security Agency detailing private telephone conversations between Diana and American friends intercepted at MI6’s request.” From Stephen Dorril’s best-selling history of Britain’s overseas intelligence service, ‘MI6: Fifty Years of Special Operations’ (p788).

By sheer co-incidence, Stephen Dorril is actually a neighbour of mine, living in the same small, Pennine village in rural Yorkshire. My wife was in fact his secretary for six years..

The CIA and the National Security Agency (NSA) have confirmed that they hold 39 documents consisting of 1,056 pages of information relating to Diana and Dodi Fayed, but they refuse to reveal it on the grounds of ‘national security’.   Yeah, right.

3Lastphoto

Last photo of Diana – receiving oxygen

There have been many theories about why the Elite wanted rid of Diana. One of the more popular ones is that Britain’s establishment found her relationship with the Egyptian Muslim Dodi Fayed (and the possible pregnancy) utterly unacceptable and so conspired with the intelligence services to have them killed. Another theory has her death linked to Diana’s campaigning against the use of landmines whilst another opinion is based on Occam’s razor ie. the correct solution to a problem is usually the simplest one and that she was murdered to make way for Charles to marry the love of his life, Camilla Parker-Bowles plus possibly to remove her ‘bad influence’ from the two young princes. Maybe the truth is a blend of all these possible reasons.

It may or may not be true, but I have heard of a second-hand story from a friend of a friend (who incidentally absolutely swears it to be the truth) that she was in Paris on the night of the crash and got back to her hotel room after a late night out and switched on the TV in the room. The local 24-hour news channel was airing the first pictures to come-in of an appalling car accident in Paris and she was just in time to see images of a young blonde woman, obviously dazed and groggy, but who was nevertheless able to enter the ambulance on foot, albeit with assistance from paramedics on either side of her. She recognised this woman as Princess Diana and went to bed thinking that Diana had ‘had a lucky escape’. She was obviously shocked and mystified next day when she awoke to all the reports of the princess’s death in the car crash. Of course those images were never shown or referred-to ever again as is usual in these cases. As a footnote to this, I have recently seen confirmation that on that fateful night, the BBC newscaster Martyn Lewis in the BBC’s first ‘newsflash’ announced that Dodi had been killed outright, but that Diana had been seen ‘walking into an ambulance’.

Whatever the real truth regarding the above may be, this is certainly possible in my view. There was obviously no absolutely fool-proof way to ensure Diana’s death, even in a staged crash and so there would have had to be a contingency plan in place in the event of her survival against the odds. If Diana had indeed survived the impact of the crash, then drastic steps would have needed to be undertaken to ensure that she did not survive and maybe this explains why it took the ambulance almost two hours to travel the 4km to the Pitie Salpetriere Hospital. I have not yet heard another credible reason as to why that should have been the case. At one point in the ambulance’s journey it apparently parked at the kerb-side for over twenty minutes just 600 metres from the hospital. This has never been satisfactorily explained by those who control what we are meant to see, hear and believe.

Near the end of her life, Diana was increasingly becoming involved in politics and rattling more than a few cages on the way. She had criticised her own government and their policies and there were many in high places who resented her increasing involvement with politics combined with her extreme popularity – a dangerous mix in the eyes of the establishment. She was also viewed as a potential ‘loose cannon’ and was in a position, should she wish, to reveal some of the dark secrets of the Royal family.   All of this, along with her relationship with Dodi Fayed probably sealed her fate. The same forces behind the murder of so many others, from heads of state such as JFK, Indira Gandhi and Olof Palme, to an ordinary civilian who knew too much, like Dr. David Kelly, were behind the murder of Princess Diana. MI6, the NSA, the CIA, the Bilderbergers, Trilateral Commission, CFR, Bohemian Grove, and other related secret agencies and societies that control the politics and media of supposedly ‘free’ nations all fall under the same umbrella and employ the same tactics in order to benefit the Elite few. Despite the lies dressed-up as truth in the popular press, many people believe Diana was murdered but we will never hear the truth of what really happened to her in the mainstream media, any more than we will with regards to countless others who have been and continue to be disposed-of at the hands of these murderous criminals. In the end, it is up to the people to decide if they can accept the truth about what kind of people control their own governments and if they can accept the truth about what really happened to Diana and so many others like her.

At this point of the story I feel it is worthwhile to mention the involvement of Mohammed Fayed in all of this intrigue. It is certainly true that his has been the loudest and most prominent individual voice of protest, but as with many other aspects of this sorry tale, I believe the truth of this to be not what it appears on the surface. Ask yourself who was the person who was controlling the couple’s ‘agenda’ on that day? Who was the person who master-minded the logistical arrangements that evening? Who was the person who had slowly but surely ingratiated himself with Diana and acted as match-maker with his son those months previously? It was Fayed senior who indeed was pulling all the strings. Dodi was very much ‘under the thumb’ of his father and had no say in the events at all. Could Fayed’s subsequent ravings about the ‘murder’ of his son and girlfriend and about senior Royalty involvement in the plot, have more than a little to do with the fact that Dodi’s death had possibly not been part of the planned agenda and therefore the reason why Fayed’s anger was unleashed? I firmly believe so. Moreover, I believe that Fayed had been cast in the role of ‘Mr Fix-it’, the facilitator of the entire operation but unfortunately he was not expecting Dodi to constitute part of the casualty list and therefore his extreme anger has been overtly apparent since the event.

Significantly, Diana is the name of the moon goddess worshipped in Rome and Greece and by the bloodline Merovingian dynasty in Paris. Pont de l’Alma means bridge or passage of the moon goddess.

4Illuminatitorch

The Illuminati torch symbol over the Pont de l’Alma tunnel where Diana was murdered

The princess was killed in a ritualistic sacrifice in Pont de l’Alma, Paris. This site is extremely ancient, dating back to the time of the Merovingian kings (c. 500-751 AD) and before and as we have seen in previous chapters, ritual and symbolism is a disproportionate obsession with the Elite. Once the decision had been taken to carry out the murder then it would have been planned in accordance with that ritual and symbolism, notwithstanding its being disguised as an accident.

The location chosen to murder Diana was a sacred site and an ancient Temple of the Goddess Diana, a Temple that was used for human sacrifice and ritual murder!   In pre-Christian times, the Pont de l’Alma had been a pagan sacrificial site and in the time of the Merovingian kings, it was an underground chamber. So, was the choice of Pont de l’Alma as the site of her death deliberate? And if so, what message were her assassins sending and to whom were they sending it?

Did the men who murdered Diana know the occult history and significance of Pont de l’Alma? There is no doubt that the Mercedes was earlier stolen and rebuilt to respond to external radio controls. This is significant because the car crashed into the 13th pillar. Was the car responding to an outside radio signal as per MI6’s ‘Boston brakes’ method? Was crashing the car into the 13th pillar done to send a signal? The Elite often use dates, places and rituals from the past in the present as symbolism, so this would seem to be a distinct possibility. In occult lore, this adds the esoteric ‘power’ of past events to the present and is also a way of communicating with each other through ‘newspaper headlines.’

All of the royal families of Europe including also the Spencer ‘clan’ from which Diana emanated, can trace their lineage from the Merovingian kings (the so-called 13th bloodline). These kings are descended from Merovaeus the Young, king of the Franks of Yssel and Merovaeus was said to be born of ‘two fathers’, a Frankish king and a sea creature. According to tradition, Merovingian monarchs were occult adepts, initiates in arcane sciences, practitioners of esoteric art worthy of Merlin of Arthurian fame. Amazing is it not, that the mainstream sciences and media, controlled by these Elite groups, constantly tell us that all this information is ‘legend’ and ‘myth’ and not to be taken seriously, whilst the Elite themselves not only take it all extremely seriously, but they actually conduct their lives using these legends as a template for their very existences and a platform for their overall world-view?

Allegedly, by virtue of the miraculous property in their blood, they could heal by the laying on of hands and they were said to be capable of clairvoyant or telepathic communications with beasts and with the natural world around them.

They were regarded as the Priest-Kings, embodiments of the divine, in other words not unlike the ancient Egyptian pharaohs. They did not just simply rule by God’s grace, on the contrary, they were apparently deemed the living embodiment and incarnation of God’s grace, a status usually reserved exclusively for Jesus.

All Merovingians followed the Pagan cult of Diana, until Clovis (481-511). Badgered by his wife, Clotilde, Clovis converted to Christianity. In the Arthurian legends, Arthur was a Pagan who worshipped the Lady of the Lake and Princess Diana is now in a sense, also the Lady of the Lake because her tomb is symbolically placed on an island in the middle of a lake inhabited by specially imported black swans. Black swans are yet another occult / pagan symbol.

Also in the Arthurian legends, Arthur’s wife, Queen Guinevere was a Christian. Her name means ‘The white wave’ and Christianity was a ‘white wave’ that swept over the pagan religions and drowned them.

As previously stated, all the royal families of the European continent and the majority of America’s ruling class are descended from the Merovingians who believed that they could trace their lineage not only to Jesus and Mary Magdalene, but all the way back to King David, Noah and the ‘visitors’ from the star system of Sirius, the Annunaki. This belief not only confirms their superiority over other humans, it also gives them their belief in the ‘divine right of kings’ to rule over all other humans.

Why the Merovingian legend was created is unknown, but maybe it could be that it would have been easier to control people, when they believe that you are descended from Jesus and God. Merovingian legends also say that Pont de l’Alma was used by the Merovingian kings, to settle their blood feuds. If there was a dispute between two Merovingian kings, they would go to Pont de l’Alma to settle their differences. The winner of the battle would contrarily be the one who was killed.  He would go immediately to the throne of God, which they believed was in the star-system of Sirius. From there, he would become the true ruler of the Merovingians.

The survivor would rule the Earthly realms, subservient to the will of the one who ruled from Heaven. Supposedly, the survivor would be haunted and driven mad, until he acquiesced and followed the will of his slain rival.

Princess Diana was herself descended from a Merovingian king and if the legends are to be believed, then Princess Diana is now recognised by God, as the true ruler of the Merovingian bloodline. This bloodline includes not only her own sons, but Prince Charles, Prince Phillip, all the Hapsburgs, King Juan Carlos, King Constantine, King Michael, all the Esterhaszys of Hungary and every other European royal. If people with Merovingian blood believe the legend that they are descended from Jesus, then they must believe ALL Merovingian legends.

Diana Frances Spencer was born at Park House on the Royal Sandringham estate in Norfolk on the 1st July 1961, the third and youngest daughter of Viscount Althorp, later the 8th Earl Spencer and his first wife Frances Roche. Her parents separated when she was six which is significant considering the trauma that these blood-line families instil into a child up to the age of six as the heart chakra begins to activate in the natural growth of the human form. They eventually divorced in 1969. Diana’s mother then married the wallpaper magnate, Peter Shand-Kydd.

Diana had a younger brother, Charles, the present Earl Spencer and two sisters, Jane and Sarah. There was a son born before Diana, but he died in infancy, a fact which given the ‘rites’ of the Elite could well have meant his being sacrificed as the first-born son. Shocking stuff, yes, but this really does happen within these families. It is a part of their heritage of which they are fiercely proud. Diana had always believed that her parents wished she had been a boy to give them a son and heir.

This is classic installation of underdog, unwanted feelings pushed into the mind of a chosen child which creates the lowered vibration for access by the negative energies into the being of the child. Diana had always maintained her childhood was very unhappy; this leads to a craving for love and affection and indeed as we know, she continued to crave love until the end of her short life. Living at Sandringham, she knew the Queen from being a small child and often played with the Royal children.

She always remembered with less than affection, being sent over to the Queen’s residence during the holidays year after year to watch the film ‘Chitty Chitty Bang Bang’. The significance of this is that from being a very small child, the fear created by such a satanic film, which it is, absolutely unquestionably, would form the patterns of her subconscious fears that could be manipulated as she grew older. The screenplay for the film was written by the ‘former’ intelligence agent Ian Fleming, friend to Aleister Crowley, the well-known Satanist and also author of the James Bond stories. The film itself is blatant satanic symbolism. Briefly, it is a dark tale about a King and Queen who despise children and employ a child catcher to abduct them in a cage on wheels, take them to the castle and place them in a dungeon. Of course the final fate of these children, which is ultimately ritual sacrifice, is excluded from the film.

For what reason would the Windsors constantly show this film to a child who was a guest in their home? Diana told Andrew Morton, according to his book ‘Diana Her True Story’, “…the atmosphere was always very strange when we went there and I used to kick and fight anyone who tried to make us go”.

When Diana was thirteen years old, she moved from Norfolk to live at Althorp in Northamptonshire, the Spencer family’s ancestral home after her father married Raine, the daughter of the novelist Barbara Cartland. Diana had a deep loathing for Raine and was quoted as saying in the book ‘Diana: Her True Story’, that in September 1989 she had unleashed her years of frustration on Raine: “I told her what I thought about her and I’ve never known such anger in me. I remember really going for her gullet”.

I said “…if you only knew how much we all hated you for what you have done. You’ve ruined the house [Althorp], you spend all daddy’s money and for what?” This is a consequence of emotional distress and a result of the deep frustration she still felt from her childhood.

The Spencers are an Elite bloodline family. They are cousins of the Spencer-Churchills, related to the Marlborough family of Blenheim Palace in Oxfordshire, the birthplace of Winston Spencer-Churchill. Other forebears included the Duke of Marlborough and Sir Robert Walpole. The Spencer family inherited a considerable fortune from Sarah, Duchess of Marlborough and they also married into the Cavendish family, the Dukes of Devonshire at Chatsworth House in Derbyshire. This particular branch of the family became known as Spencer–Cavendish. Diana also shared common ancestors with Prince Charles through the third Duke of Devonshire and, most significantly, King James I, the first Stuart King of both England and Scotland and sponsor of Francis Bacon. Diana was also descended through several lines from the Stuart Kings, Charles II and James II, which connected her bloodline to the Carolingian bloodline in France, which regards itself as Merovingian.

Charles II had so many illegitimate children, that it is extremely difficult to guess how many ‘offshoots’ of the family exist today. However, one thing is for sure and that is that the Elite will know and monitor all of them. As Elite bloodlines go, the Spencer’s line is extremely important; Diana was related to countless aristocratic lines, including the Earls of Lucan. Moving further afield, the Spencers have blood-ties with many leading American families and are distantly related to the Rockefellers. The bloodline has a long history of serving the monarch and the tradition continued with Diana’s father. He was equerry to King George VI and to Queen Elizabeth II, herself. Diana’s sister, Jane, is married to Sir Robert Fellowes, the Queens private secretary at the time of Diana’s death. Both Diana’s grandmothers, the Countess Spencer and Ruth, Lady Fermoy, were inner circle members of the Queen Mothers Court, as were four of her great aunts.

The Spencers and the Queen Mother were extremely close and it was the Queen Mother and Lady Fermoy who manipulated Diana into her marriage with Prince Charles. The countdown to marriage began when Diana met Charles at Althorp whilst he was in a relationship with her sister Sarah, in 1977 and Diana was 16 and so it was not until three years later that the Windsors really made their move for her. Diana was invited to a party at Buckingham Palace to celebrate the 30th Birthday of Charles and then in July 1980, a friend of Charles, Philip de Pass, asked Diana to stay with them while the Prince was there. In Diana’s own words, “Charles was all over me and he leapt on me practically”.

He asked her to accompany him to Buckingham Palace the next day and an invitation followed to join the Windsors in the September at Balmoral, their residence in Scotland. Eventually Charles asked her to marry him and she accepted. “I love you so much” Diana said to him, “whatever love is” replied Charles and this reply speaks volumes about the mental state of the man who is destined to be king, but also says even more about the royal family and their coldness and calculatingly callous behaviour.

The Elite bloodlines have no real idea what love is, none of them ever receive it and thus cannot express it. Unfortunately, this is the sad reality for their children and certainly puts into perspective these people’s attitudes towards the rest of humanity.

During some of the interviews after the break-up of the marriage, Diana stated that on reflection, she could see that Charles had never been genuine in his affection towards her and even before the wedding she had realised she would also be having a relationship with his one true love Camilla Parker-Bowles the ‘third person in the marriage’, which of course became more apparent as time passed. During the marriage, Charles and Camilla communicated with the codenames ‘Gladys and Fred’. Camilla like the Windsors, is close to the Rothschilds and on the first anniversary of Diana’s death, she was on the Ionian island of Corfu enjoying the hospitality of Lord Jacob Rothschild, who just happened to have spent £16 million leasing and restoring the Spencer’s 18th century mansion overlooking Green Park in London close to Buckingham Palace.

A week after her engagement to Charles, Diana’s bulimia began in earnest. This is an eating disorder which results in vomiting every time food is eaten and Diana was suffering this three or four times a day and eventually became desperately thin. This condition could well be a direct result of the satanic upbringing experienced by Diana and in this case was triggered when Charles put his hand on her waist and said, “Oh, a bit chubby here, aren’t we?” she stated. This may also be construed as yet another character assassination of Diana to ensure that by the time of her murder, she was seen as ‘the crazy woman’, to totally discredit her. Bulimia is of course a disease of the emotions, as most diseases are and Diana had been an emotional wreck since the break-up of her father and mother’s marriage in-line with the standard upbringing of bloodline offspring. She described the attitude of Charles thus:

“He found the virgin, the sacrificial lamb and in a way he was obsessed with me. But it was hot and cold, hot and cold. You never knew what mood it was going to be, up and down, up and down… He was in awe of his mama, intimidated by his father and I was always the third person in the room.”

Just before the marriage to Charles, she met her sisters and told them she could not go through with the wedding, especially with Camilla still on the scene, but they said she had no choice because “your face is on the tea towels and you’re too late to chicken out”. Immediately before the wedding, Diana stayed at Clarence House, the London residence of the Queen Mother but when she arrived, no-one was there to welcome her. It was, she said, like going to a hotel. How typical.

And so, Diana and Charles were married in St Paul’s Cathedral on the 29th July 1981, the numbers here are very significant, but more importantly this just precedes the sacrificial ritual and feast of Lammas. That morning at Clarence House she said she felt calm, deathly calm: “I felt I was a sacrificial lamb to the slaughter. I knew it but I couldn’t do anything about it”. How prophetic these words would turn out to be.

They spent their first night of their honeymoon at the Mountbatten (Battenberg) family estate at Broadlands in Hampshire, before sailing around the Greek Islands in the Royal Yacht Britannia. The Bulimia got worse and she considered suicide, such was the scale of her unhappiness and this was just the start of the marriage. She said at one point… “My husband made me feel to inadequate in every possible way. Each time I came up for air he pushed me down again. I hated myself so much”.

One of Diana’s royal duties in 1982 was to represent the Queen at the funeral of Princess Grace of Monaco, herself a victim of murder by the Elite when the brakes on her car ‘failed’. Princess Grace, formerly the actress Grace Kelly, ran the Monaco branch of the secret society, the Order of the Solar Temple with Jean Louis Marsan, the close friend of her husband, Prince Rainier.

And so, the Windsors achieved their first objective upon the arrival of Prince William. Diana was informed that the birth had to be induced to fit in with Charles’ polo playing programme and William was duly born on the 21st June 1982, which just ‘happens’ to be the summer solstice. What kind of people, portrayed by the media as role models for us all, would induce a child’s birth to fit in with the father’s polo-playing programme? I think we know the answer to that question, well enough. Of course, in reality the inducement was to ensure the birth occurred on the solstice in accordance with occult ritual with which the Elite are so obsessed to the exclusion of all else, but the fact that they would regard birth inducement to fit-in with social activity as ‘normal’, speaks volumes about the mind-set of these people. The summer solstice esoterically represents the height of the sun’s power in the northern hemisphere whilst it is at its highest point in the solar year and it is even possible to predict what colour outfits the Queen will wear each day such is their obsession with esoteric and occult principles.

So, the new-born was ‘christened’ William, for the bloodline of William the Conqueror, Arthur, for the sun god symbol, King Arthur, Philip, for the Duke of Edinburgh and Louis, for Lord Louis Mountbatten, Prince Charles’ mentor. Two years later in 1984, Prince Harry was born and thus Diana’s royal role was concluded, as she related to Andrew Morton:

“Then suddenly as Harry was born it just went bang, our marriage, the whole thing went down the drain”.

Diana and Charles separated in 1992, divorced on the 28th August 1996 and then, just over one year later, she was dead. The cycle was complete.

The media onslaught against Diana commenced in earnest in 1992, shortly after the official separation. A tape of an intimate telephone conversation between Diana and the car dealer, James Gilbey, was released through the media at this time and in the tape Diana said that Charles was a real torturer. She told Gilbey:

“I’ll go out and conquer the world, do my bit in the way I know how and leave him behind”. The irony of her character assassination by the Windsor’s via the compliant press was that it actually worked in her favour and her popularity grew. Imagine the frustrations of the establishment as in their desperation they tried harder and harder to defame her and yet her star just seemed to continue rising.   Of course this is a pertinent demonstration of the fact that the Elite have no idea what love is, as Charles himself stated and the fact that they find it difficult to combat what they cannot understand. The heady combination of Diana’s enormous heart, her global public profile, her down-to-earth woman-of-the-people charisma and her intense desire to prove the Windsors to be the cold, heartless brutes they most certainly are, threatened the very survival of royalty in all its forms.

It is now, this gang of criminals and multi-generational genocidal murderers and their ancient practices and rituals, upon which we will focus. A necessary step, if we are to truly understand their motives and raisons d’etre.

Diana’s natural compassion and empathy with people thoroughly exposed the Windsors and their ilk as irrelevant in the eyes of the people. The shy and gullible child, whom the Windsors calculatingly enticed into their ‘world of pain’ to act as a ‘brood-mare’, became a woman of great mental strength who realised her true power and was not afraid to use it. This then was the beginning of her downfall. She brought the issue of landmines from obscurity into the open and thus to the minds of the masses and thus became a serious danger to the forces of evil and their profits. Diana also knew many intimate secrets within the establishment and was prepared to expose them to get what she wanted – her rights as a Princess and more importantly, a mother. Was there an element of vindictiveness behind it all? Probably, but who among us would blame her after the way she had been used and then discarded and had her life publicly devastated and torn apart?

In March 1997, a few months before she died, Diana made a phone call to someone who was amazed when she told him she was the Princess of Wales. Totally astounded, he first of all professed disbelief, especially when she told him she was calling from a ‘supermarket phone’ in England. Diana herself stated openly that she often made calls from public telephones, particularly from a certain department store in Kensington [Mohammed Fayed’s Harrods], when she wanted to be certain the conversation would not be taped.

Diana admired the man she had called, who shall remain nameless, for his wisdom and knowledge and she told him she had something to reveal that would shake the world and asked for his advice on how best to go about it. He has never revealed exactly what she told him, yet one researcher called the man and asked him if it was her awareness of the Windsor’s widespread connection to drug trafficking that was the issue. His reply was “Oh no, it was much worse than that”. So to lower initiates or outer-circle operatives, the fact that she was about to reveal something thoroughly incriminating, would be their understanding of why she was killed, but there is a yet more compelling reason for her untimely death – one which would have been planned long, long before.

Diana because of the ‘quality of her soul’ and into which bloodline she specifically chose to be born, was the reason she was chosen as the incubator and breeding partner for the House of Windsor to create a more acceptable genetic ‘cloak’. With these genes, this ancient, royal bloodline could continue to thrive, thus rejuvenating the tired, old genes which had been re-cycled for generations resulting in in-breeding on an industrial scale and the health problems inherent with that particular philosophy (see the section on ‘Jack the Ripper’ regarding Prince Eddy, for example).

To the higher initiates or fully illuminated operatives of the Elite, this ritual was the killing of the moon Goddess in the middle earth, Diana in her highest form. As with John F. Kennedy, to the unaware masses, the deed appeared to be done because of the policies he was pursuing, but to the highest initiates it was an ancient Merovingian ritual known as the ‘Killing of the King’.

The final sequence of events which led to her ritual murder involves as I state earlier in the chapter, at almost every turn, the man called Mohamed Fayed, the Egyptian former owner of Harrods. Many people in British high society see Fayed as an enemy of the establishment as proven by his long battle with the Lonrho tycoon and mass murderer in Africa, ‘Tiny’ Rowlands. This is a subtle ploy to ‘control the opposition’, a tactic used successfully in many covert Elite operations. The theory being that if you control both sides in a battle, you are bound to ‘win the war’. And as time passed, sure enough, Fayed was ultimately ‘defeated’ in his so-called quest for justice which symbolically and psychologically implants itself in the minds of the masses who eventually will begin to believe that he was wrong after all.

Fayed has also lied extensively about his background, claiming to be from a wealthy family, when he patently was not. He is also well-known to be a sexual ‘pervert’ and has escaped prosecution for a growing number of sexual assaults on female staff working at Harrods. One girl, Samantha-Jane Ramsey, said that when she complained to her supervisor that she had been groped by Fayed, the supervisor sighed, ‘not another one’. She was dismissed from her job for making the complaint which is the fate of all those who speak out about his molestation and ‘style’ of management. John Monks the general secretary of the Trades Union Congress, stated that; “…there was a regime of fear and terror at Harrods”.

When Samantha-Jane took her complaint to the local Marylebone Police Station, she said that the officer told her; “You are not the first to come to us. We have files inches high on Mr Fayed, but no proof.   It would be your word against his”.

This is utter nonsense and garbage. If Fayed was as anti-establishment as he is portrayed to be, then this would have been used as an excuse to ‘nail him’ and silence him forever. Had the accused been a Harrods employee, such as a mere departmental supervisor or manager then his name would have been on the sex-offenders register faster than you can say ‘police corruption’. This all sheds a completely different light on the man who was in total control of all security on the day and night of the 30th / 31st August 1997.

Fayed became close to the Spencer family through Diana’s father, Earl ‘Johnny’ Spencer, and her stepmother Raine. He helped Johnny through financial difficulties and said he considered the Earl to be a brother and he had given Raine, whom Diana despised, a place on the Harrods board. Fayed sponsored prestigious royal events like the Royal Windsor Horse Show and polo competitions and he made absolutely sure that he always supported the charities and causes of the Princess.

Bob Loftus, the head of security at Harrods between 1987 and 1996, told the Channel 4 programme, ‘Dispatches’, in June 1998, that he was ordered to tell Fayed immediately if Diana came into the store. Fayed would then go to the department where she was shopping and ‘accidentally’ meet her. Every Christmas a green Harrods van would call at Diana’s home, Kensington Palace, with gifts for her and the boys from ‘uncle Mohammed’.

When the evidence is examined thoroughly, it is plainly apparent that he made it his business to court the friendship of Diana in every way possible and at every opportunity. On the 3rd June 1997, he invited her to join him for a summer holiday at his beach-side villa in St. Tropez in the south of France and on the 11th June, he got the breakthrough for which he had worked so hard; she accepted. The following day he completed the purchase of a £15 million yacht, the Jonikal, through his (or rather the Sultan of Brunei’s) Bermudan company, Mohafa Shipping and this was the boat upon which Diana and Dodi’s relationship would blossom. On the 11th July Diana arrived in St. Tropez with her sons, William and Harry, to stay in the eight-bedroomed luxury apartment on the ten acre Fayed estate on the exclusive Le Parc development whilst Dodi at this time was still at his apartment in Paris with his fiancée Kelly Fisher, the American model.

Dodi was a ‘gofer’ for his father and lived on his father’s wealth, although he had enjoyed some success in the movie industry at one time as the producer of the British film Chariots of Fire, again thanks to his father’s money. He had a playboy reputation and was a very big spender, once running up a $100,000 bill in two months on his Amex card. He was dominated by his father and even in his film operation every decision had to be approved by his father – Dodi did whatever his father told him to do. He had been engaged to Kelly Fisher for eight months and she was expecting to spend her holiday on the Jonikal, but on the evening of the 14th July, Dodi took a phone call from his father who ordered him to go immediately to St. Tropez to be with Diana. Kelly Fisher described what happened next, in an interview with the Dispatches programme:

“Dodi said he was going to London and he’d be back and then we were going to St. Tropez. That evening he didn’t call me and I finally got him on his portable phone. I said Dodi where are you? And he said he was in London. I said ‘OK, I’ll call you right back at your apartment’. He said ‘No, no, don’t call me back’. So I said ‘Dodi where are you?’ and he admitted he was in the South of France. His father had asked him to come down and not bring me, I know why, now.”

Two days later Dodi sent a private plane to fly Kelly to St. Tropez. But while he stayed with Diana, Kelly was kept aboard another Al Fayed boat. “I’m sitting here stuck” she said. “So he had me in my little boat-cage and he was, I know now, seducing Diana.” On the 31st July, Diana returned to St. Tropez for a second holiday with Dodi, this time alone. Meanwhile, Kelly Fisher was back in Los Angeles preparing for her marriage to Dodi which she said was due to take place on the 9th August. But two days before that, the story broke in the world’s media of the romance between Diana and Dodi. Kelly heard from a friend who saw a picture in the paper and she recalls:

“I started calling him in London because at this time I was expecting his arrival in a day. I called his private line, but there was no answer, so then I called the secretary and asked to speak to him and she wouldn’t put me on. So Mohammed got on and in so many horrible words told me never to call back again. I said ‘he’s my fiancé, what are you talking about?’ He hung up on me and I called back and the secretary said don’t ever call here again, your calls are no longer to be put through. It was so horrible.”

At this stage Diana had Kensington Palace swept constantly for bugging devices set by the intelligence operations, this on the advice of her body guards and now ironically, she placed herself in the hands of a man obsessed with bugging and video recording of everyone around him. The Fayed villa in San Tropez was bugged, as were all properties and vehicles within the clutches of Fayed and his personal army of security. Everything Diana said while in the hands of this man was heard. Bob Loftus, the former head of security at Harrods said the bugging at Harrods was ‘a very extensive operation’ and was always under the direction of Fayed.

Henry Porter, the London editor of the magazine Vanity Fair, had spent two years investigating Fayed and he said they discovered his obsessive use of eavesdropping devices to record telephone calls, bug rooms and covertly film people. Through mutual friends, Porter warned Diana about Fayed’s background and activities “…because we thought this was quite dangerous for her for obvious reasons”. But Diana apparently felt she could handle it and although she knew Fayed could “sometimes be a rogue”, he was no threat to her, she thought. She apparently told friends, “I know he’s naughty, but that’s all.” The Dispatches programme said they had written evidence that Fayed bugged the Ritz hotel and given his background and the deals that are hatched at the Ritz, it would be staggering if he did not. Kelly Fisher said that the whole time she was in Fayed property; she just assumed everything was bugged. It was known, she said and Dodi had told her everywhere was bugged. She went on, “…as a matter of fact, when I confronted him about Diana, he said, ‘I can’t talk to you on the phone.’ He said, ‘I’ll talk to you in LA’. I knew what that meant”. Diana was under the ‘protection’ of the Fayed security machine and even her most private conversations were being monitored. Diana went with Dodi to Fayed’s Elizabethan-style mansion, Barrow Green Court at Oxted in Surrey, formerly owned by fellow Satanist Lord McAlpine.

On the 21st August, despite Henry Porter’s warning, Diana returned once again to St. Tropez for another holiday with Dodi. Fayed was milking the situation, briefing journalists and photographers and also enlisting the advice of the publicist Max Clifford.

After the announcement by ex-Metropolitan Police Commissioner Lord Stevens, on Thursday 14th December 2006, that the death of Diana was an accident, Fayed’s ‘front-man’ Max Clifford appeared on TV to add more obfuscation to the issue by re-iterating Fayed’s position.

The Fayed camp was constantly leaking the couple’s whereabouts to the press to ensure maximum publicity for their relationship, yet Fayed had the sheer effrontery to complain after the crash that the photographers and journalists would not leave Diana alone and that action, given the circumstances, beggar’s belief. Are we supposed to believe on the one hand that Fayed wanted to milk the publicity for all it was worth and yet when it suited him, to complain vehemently about the ‘stalking’ of Diana and Dodi by the paparazzi?

The Diana/Dodi romance by this time was in full-swing, with Fayed pressurising Dodi to intensify the relationship. What Fayed said, Dodi did and nothing at all was left to chance. Diana’s favourite music, the theme from the film The English Patient, was played constantly as the couple cruised on the Jonikal. Diana and Dodi had much In common. Both were born into wealthy families and their fathers were distant figures. Both had experienced the breakdown of their parents’ marriages as their mothers left home. They even attended finishing schools in close proximity to each other in Switzerland. Mind manipulation being used on both parties should not be ruled-out; indeed it is known to be a fairly simple task via mind-control techniques to cause two people to fall madly in love with each other.

The scientist Brian Desborough, states clearly that from his own research, the feeling of being in love is dependent upon the brain producing a chemical by the name of Phenylethylamine.   This is also a chemical which seriously diminishes the ability to discriminate effectively – hence the saying, ‘love is blind’. Production of this chemical is sustained by the release of endorphins, naturally occurring chemicals linked to memory, learning, pain suppression, sex drive and hormone regulation. If these chemicals can be stimulated in both parties simultaneously, they would instantly fall in love.

Personally, I believe that all the talk of engagements and rings was a blind to manipulate the masses into believing that this was the reason for the murder.   This would in effect, play upon the fact that a Muslim would become the step-father of the future king, being supposedly abhorrent and unacceptable to the ‘firm’.

Diana and Dodi left the South of France from Olbia airport at 1.30 pm on 30th August 1997 bound for Paris on Al Fayed’s personal Gulfstream jet. They apparently intended to stay one night at Dodi’s apartment, which overlooks the Arc de Triomphe, before going on to London where Diana was due to be reunited with her sons again. The plane touched down at Le Bourget airport in Paris at 3.20 pm and they were met by 20 or so paparazzi (the Italian word meaning buzzing insects). A Mercedes was waiting for the party and a green Range Rover was to follow on behind, this being normal security procedure and the very minimum one would expect to protect a Princess of the realm. Accompanying Diana and Dodi in the Mercedes was Dodi’s bodyguard, Trevor Rees-Jones, the 29 year old former member of the elite Parachute Regiment of the British Army. Along with the SAS the ‘Paras’ are the most highly-trained regiment in the British forces. In the Range Rover was the driver Henry Paul, Fayed’s acting head of security at the Ritz and another bodyguard, Kes Wingfield. They drove from the airport to the villa Windsor on the Bois de Boulogne, the former home of the Duke and Duchess of Windsor (formerly King Edward VIII). Fayed stated that he was to give this villa to the couple as a wedding gift and that they were at the Villa discussing décor, but the bodyguard Kes Wingfield stated they were at the Villa Windsor no more than ten minutes. The whole idea of engagement and wedding was the fabrication of Mohammed Fayed, who in my opinion was the facilitator-in-chief for the whole operation. From the villa they were driven to the Ritz hotel where they arrived at 4.20pm.

The Ritz Hotel is in the Place Vendome and all around that square at the first floor level are the Illuminati / Babylonian symbols of the Sun and the cross, used by the ancients to symbolise the ‘journey’ of the sun through the year.

This symbolism is highly significant and is important to the entire ritual that would end in the couples’ deaths. Exactly the same type of symbolism was present at the final journey of JFK, before his burial at Arlington under the esoteric symbol of the flaming torch. These symbols also relate to King Louis XIV, who was known as the Sun King. At his palace at Versailles in the 17th century he decorated rooms in honour of Apollo, the sun god, and Diana, the goddess of the moon. There was also a statue of the goddess Diana at Versailles.

In the centre of the Vendome Square is an immense pillar upon which stands a statue of Napoleon in effect mirroring the famous Nelson’s column in Trafalgar Square in London. Pillars of this type represent masculine energy and phallic symbolism.

Surprisingly Diana at this stage had only a similar level of security to that which she had at the airport. Usually security for VIPs is increased beyond the confines of airports with a request to the French High Protection Police Security Service (SPHP) being usual, but in this case it was not requested. One wonders why? This of course then meant that the entire security operation around Diana in Paris was under the complete control of Fayed and his subordinates from start to finish. Had the SPHP been requested, they would probably both still be alive as the SPHP operate with a car in front and behind, together with two motorcycle police outriders on each side of the vehicle which the VIP occupies. The cars are driven by professional drivers carrying armed security men.

According to reports immediately after the crash, which as we have seen in many other instances, always provide a more accurate account of events, usually from both eye witnesses and footage, the SPHP made three possibly four, offers to protect Diana, each one refused by Fayed. An officer of the SPHP actually told Dodi, “..if you will not use our car, we recommend that two police cars accompany you on your excursions around the city.”

This advice too was ignored and Diana and Dodi proceeded straight to the $6000 per night, 18th century Imperial Suite at the Ritz. The couple booked a table at the Chez Benoit restaurant for 8.45pm and they intended to spend the night at Dodi’s apartment. At 6.30 pm Dodi went across the Place Vendome to a jeweller, Repossi, to buy a diamond ring for Diana which was later delivered to the Ritz. A little after 7 pm, the couple were driven in the Mercedes along the Champs Elysees to Dodi’s apartment on Rue Arsene-Houssaye close to the Arc de Triomphe. Here they unpacked and prepared for dinner and again the back-up Range Rover was present as was another car carrying bodyguards for added protection. Why was this level of security thought necessary in the evening, but not in the early hours of the morning at the time of the crash?

Dodi’s apartment was known as the ‘Etoile flat’, after the Place de l’Etoile, the Sun or the Star circle road around the Arc de Triomphe. The route taken to the apartment was out of the Place Vendome onto the Rue de Rivoli and half-way around the Place de la Concorde they turned right into the Champs Elysees and drove straight along that famous avenue to Dodi’s apartment.

This is a straightforward journey; so why then in the early hours of the 31st August did they take the ludicrous detour to the Pont de l’Alma tunnel? If the idea, as has been suggested, was to avoid the paparazzi, surely the shortest and fastest route is the answer and not a journey that provided the paparazzi with a good, sporting chance of finding and catching-up to them?

This route is critically important. As the couple arrived at the apartment at 7.15 pm, bodyguards were seen to rush from their car to hold back six members of the paparazzi. Diana and Dodi became concerned about eating at the unprotected Chez Benoit restaurant and so took the decision to head back to the Ritz to eat. They took the same route back, down the Champs Elysees and around the Place de la Concorde. There is much more traffic in the early evening than in the early hours of the morning and so there were much better reasons to avoid this route at this point in time than in the early hours. The couple, along with bodyguards Wingfield and Rees-Jones, walked into the Ritz captured by the now famous video pictures, at 9.47pm and also at this time the paparazzi were gathering in large numbers outside, amid rumours of an engagement announcement.

We know for a fact that Fayed himself was manipulating the press all that day and evening and it is therefore obvious to me that the huge congregation of press was exactly what he wanted and had planned all along. Why? I believe it was to fabricate the story of impending marriage in order to enable the Elite to create a diversion from the truth. Did the Windsors actually believe that the nation loved them so much that it would seem reasonable to kill her to prevent a Muslim being ensconced in the heart of the establishment and therefore no big deal? This of course was before they were confronted with the huge outpouring of grief all over the world for Diana, after the event.

What a shock to their arrogant, pampered systems it must have been when they realised the truth in the days following the event. This more than anything else, terrified the Windsors and the Elite in general. The so-called ‘Crown’ represented by Queen Elizabeth at its head is without doubt the number one enemy of humankind.

The Ritz Hotel security video also identified a number of people who had been outside amongst the onlookers for most of the day and were still there on the edge of the crowd and here is where the plot seriously thickens. After speaking on the telephone with his father who was at home at his estate in Oxted, Surrey, Dodi Fayed announced a quite ludicrous plan. To avoid the paparazzi, ‘he’ decided that the Mercedes that had been transporting them all that day together with the back-up Range Rover were to be taken around the front of the hotel and used as a decoy in an attempt to deceive the paparazzi. At the same time another Mercedes would be brought around the back entrance of the hotel to whisk the couple away to the apartment on the Champs Elysees. Henry Paul, the 41 year old acting head of security at the Ritz, was called on his mobile phone by Dodi and told to report back to the hotel. Paul had gone off-duty at 7pm and by the time he returned it was 10pm yet no-one has established where he was in those missing three hours. Dodi said that his father, Mohamed Fayed, had personally authorised that Henri Paul should drive the Mercedes. There is little doubt that the whole of the new plan was passed-on to Dodi from his father and indeed those who know Fayed would be astonished if this was not the case. Dodi did not think or act for himself, ever – father was always the one in control. Now think upon this for a moment – Henry Paul was not a qualified chauffeur and had no authority to drive the hire car. Why would he be chosen to drive the Mercedes through such a ravening pack of wolves as the paparazzi had apparently become that night.

“No one has to direct an assassination – it happens. The active role is played secretly by permitting it to happen. This is the greatest single clue. Who has the power to call off or reduce the usual security precautions?” L. Fletcher Prouty.

If we apply Prouty’s ‘rule’ to the ritual killing of Diana and ask who had the power and moreover actively used that power, to reduce the usual security precautions for Diana that night, we have a rather unsurprising answer: Mohamed Fayed. Given these circumstances he must answer the obvious question:   Why was the security reduced?

When JFK was assassinated, there were no bodyguards standing on his car in contravention of the usual protocol, they were instead on the car immediately behind. There is a video in existence which clearly shows obviously mystified and protesting security agents being ordered to withdraw from the president’s car as it turned into Deeley Plaza, seconds before Kennedy was shot. When Martin Luther King was assassinated, the police officer In charge of security for King was sent home under protest, shortly before the shooting.

In addition, when Robert Kennedy was assassinated, the security arrangements were again tampered-with. He was actually scheduled to walk-off the stage and exit through the crowd, but one of his aides ushered him away via the kitchen where he was met by Sirhan Sirhan, who had been on a ‘Rosicrucian mind-expansion’ course in the weeks before the murder (probably a euphemism for a mind-control course in which he was the victim). Frank Mankiewicz, the aide who guided RFK into the kitchen was a former public relations man for the Mossad front in America, the Anti-Defamation League (ADL). Interestingly this same character became head of publicity for the Oliver Stone movie JFK, which was supposed to be an exposé of the assassination of John F. Kennedy but was in reality just more obfuscation of the truth.

So we can see in these three examples how a similar modus operandus (Prouty’s ‘rule’) was also used in Diana’s case.

Regarding the way Diana’s security was handled, there were last-minute changes to the arrangements, a change of cars and removal of the Range Rover with no back-up support whatever and then a change to the route, all on the orders of Mohamed Fayed, a man obsessed with security – at least for himself. Bob Loftus, the former head of security at Harrods, said “Compared with the protection that Al Fayed affords himself, which is very professional, of a very high standard; that which was afforded to the mother of the future King of England was a ‘Mickey Mouse’ operation.”

He added that “Fayed was absolutely paranoid about his personal protection.” Even whilst walking around his own store, there would be three or four plain-clothes members of his personal protection team who travelled with him all the time, plus another four uniformed security who would act as ‘outriders’ to create two rings of security around him and that is even in his own store! One could legitimately ask, is this paranoia or is it his involvement in the seedy cesspit of arms dealing and being part of the Elite in general, that prompts this security over-kill? Of course, Fayed’s own delusions of grandeur must also be considered as a contributory factor.

Fayed always recruits former members of the SAS and the Parachute Regiment for his close security, which makes good sense apart from the fact that their loyalties are always to the Crown, even after retiring from the armed forces. He uses the elite operation, Control Risks, to make recommendations on security issues. Tom Bower tells in his book about Fayed of how armed guards at the Oxted estate hide behind bushes wearing full combat uniform and blacked out faces.

Whenever Fayed travelled in his chauffeur-driven Mercedes there was always a back-up Range Rover carrying emergency medical equipment and security staff, yet he strangely and significantly withdrew that protection from Diana and his son. Even more significantly, a ‘new’ car was introduced for their final journey, another Mercedes which was dispatched to the rear entrance to the Ritz, supplied by a car-hire company by the name of Etoile Limousines. Etoile Limousines is based at the Ritz and depends for its entire income on contracts with the hotel and its guests. In other words, it is controlled entirely by Mohamed Fayed or rather the Sultan of Brunei, that great friend to the House of Windsor and the Bush family.

This new Mercedes was an S280 model, much less robust and lighter in weight than the S600 series that Fayed usually used and also minus the dark-tinted windows. Other cars were available, but this one was chosen instead, for what are now obvious reasons. A director of Etoile, Nils Siegel, told the inquiry into Diana’s death that he personally delivered the car to the rear entrance of the Ritz, but the Dispatches programme proved this to be a lie. It was delivered by a driver by the name of Frederic Lucard and he can be clearly seen in the act of doing so on the Hotel security video. Lucard said he found it was very strange that Etoile would allow Henry Paul, a man not qualified as a chauffeur, to drive one of their cars. So why did they do it? Brian Dodd, the former Head of Security for Fayed in the 1980s, gave his assessment of the situation to Dispatches:

“It’s a new car that has come into the system. They wouldn’t have had time to check that car out. It should have been checked out. There could have been a bomb on that car, for instance. It was a most stupid plan. It shouldn’t have even been considered. The back-up vehicle is there, not just to avert the paparazzi, but for instance, a motor-cyclist with a pillion rider to pull up and shoot, or put a magnetised bomb on top of the car. God only knows why. [I think we all know why – JH] I had probably six or eight men I would consider professional bodyguards who I would have had on that job and Trevor Rees-Jones and Kes Wingfield, after what I have seen happened, would not have been in Paris that night.”

The Mercedes S280 with Henry Paul at the wheel, sped-off from the rear entrance of the Ritz at 12.20 am with Paul telling the paparazzi not to bother following because they would never catch him. Diana and Dodi were in the back seat and in the front was Trevor Rees-Jones, who said he disagreed with the change of plan. He was not wearing a seat belt, which is normal practice in built-up areas because bodyguards need to be free to react quickly. The car was driven at speed along the Rue Cambon and turned right along the Rue de Rivoli into the Place de la Concorde where it stopped briefly at the traffic lights.

The paparazzi photographer, Romuald Rat, on the back of the motorcycle drew-up alongside them here, but he says that Henry Paul jumped the lights on red and headed onto the dual carriageway along-side the river Seine, the Cours la Reine. The car disappeared down one tunnel, came back to the surface and then almost immediately entered the short tunnel at the Pont de l’Alma. As the whole world knows, here it went out of control and struck the 13th of a whole sequence of concrete pillars in the centre of the tunnel which are completely unprotected by crash barriers. Henry Paul and Dodi Fayed died immediately.

According to the autopsy report, Diana was clinically dead within 20 minutes and this was long before she arrived at the hospital. Trevor Rees-Jones survived the crash because he was wearing his seat belt and Diana and Dodi were not. This could be highly significant. Rees-Jones was not wearing his seat belt when they left the Ritz in accordance with normal practice for bodyguards and when Romuald Rat took a photograph at the lights at the Place de la Concorde, Rees-Jones was still not wearing his seat belt. But a little more than a minute later when the car actually struck the pillar, he was wearing a seat belt. Why would this be? If he donned the belt because for some reason he sensed danger, why did he not scream at Diana and Dodi to put-on their seat belts too? After all it only takes a second to do so and the sole reason for his presence in the car, was to protect his two charges in the back seat. Rees-Jones should have had some serious questions to answer here but he has never been publicly quizzed about this and neither has he volunteered any information. He simply re-iterates that he did not know why he strapped himself in and that they were followed by two cars, one of them white and a motor cycle. These answers simply fit within the overall smokescreen.

Several independent people who watched the news reports just after the crash for the whole day, report that they definitely saw two people, a man and a woman who were together, state that the white car was parked in the tunnel and that from this car emanated a massive flash. These two people were shown on TV stating this fact several times and then suddenly this report was ceased and never shown again. I believe that this is the only reason that the white car was woven into the official story, yet slowly and subtly changed in its location in order to further the idea that it was the paparazzi to blame. After the crash, not even one single TV report nor one single newspaper report mentioned the detour from the route they had taken twice that day from the Ritz to Dodi’s flat and back again. This detour was completely omitted from the first reports and it was only after independent researchers brought this to the world’s attention that it was incorporated into the ‘official version’ of events. As already stated, the longer route would have given the paparazzi even more time to find the car and more time for them to arrive outside Dodi’s flat before the arrival of the Mercedes there.

The one and only ‘benefit’ of taking this alternative route is that it took them via the Pont de l’Alma tunnel, the relevance of which will become apparent shortly.

As with Lee Harvey Oswald (John Kennedy), Sirhan Sirhan (Robert Kennedy) and James Earl Ray (Martin Luther King), Henry Paul became the scapegoat. Once the paparazzi card had been played and focused media and public attention to the story in the days after the crash, it was repeated ad nauseum in the media, the purpose of this tactic being to instil into the minds of the public that this could not possibly be untrue. Exactly the same scenario occurs over and over where cover-ups are being facilitated, the mainstream media bombard us 24/7 with outright disinformation in order to confuse and obfuscate the real facts.

It was soon afterwards, announced that Henry Paul was three to four times over the blood-alcohol limit and that his blood contained traces of anti-depressant drugs, including Fluoxetine, the active ingredient of Prozac. “The cause of the crash was simple” so we are told again and again, “the driver was drunk”. Tampering with blood samples or incorporating alcohol in the blood is ridiculously easy to achieve, especially when everything is being carried out in the strictest secrecy and was probably achieved by the insertion of tiny balloons which release alcohol into the blood stream in stages. There was certainly no sign of inebriation as he drove away from the Ritz. According to his blood tests, he drank the equivalent of eight scotches on an empty stomach and yet a behavioural psychologist on the TV documentary, ‘Diana – Secrets of the Crash’, could find no evidence that he was drunk after studying the Ritz videos of him that night.

Only two days earlier, Paul had undergone a rigorous medical for the renewal of his pilot’s licence and there was no sign of the alcohol abuse the post-crash propaganda would have us all believe. One of Paul’s close friends has also publicly stated he was not an excessive drinker. There was also another strange anomaly revealed by the TV documentary in 1998. The haemoglobin in Henry Paul’s blood was found to contain 20.7% carbon monoxide and this would have been at a much higher level earlier because the carbon monoxide content halves every four to five hours once exposure to it has stopped. Haemoglobin carries the oxygen in the blood and Debbie Davis of the Carbon Monoxide Support Group said that at those levels, Paul would not have known his left hand from his right, because of the reduced oxygen reaching the brain and would have been unable to function at all let alone drive a car or even stand up. Dr Alistair Hay, an expert in carbon monoxide poisoning, agreed and could not explain why Paul showed no signs of the considerable symptoms that should have been evident.

“I find it difficult to rationalise everything. A blood-carbon monoxide level of 20% and a high blood-alcohol level suggests this would be someone with a much slower reaction time, certainly be someone who would be slowed up in the way he did things, would probably also be somebody who was in some pain, but none of those things appear to be evident from the pictures that we see of him. It’s a bit of an enigma.”

There is a lot more to know about Henry Paul. His best friend, Claude Garrec, told the ITV documentary that Paul had contacts with the French and foreign intelligence services and maintained them throughout his time at the Ritz. This is no surprise because the intelligence agencies recruit the security men for the top hotels and the Ritz, with its VIP clientele and reputation for espionage and arms dealing would have been a prime target. Paul certainly had unexplained sources of income. He earned only around £20-25,000 a year at the Ritz and yet he was a keen pilot with 605 hours of flying time at about £300 per hour. He had a string of bank accounts; there were two in a bank outside Paris and three further accounts, plus a safety-deposit box at the Banque Nationale de Paris near the Ritz. He had three accounts at the nearby branch of Barclays and one current and four deposit accounts at the Caisse d’Epargne de Paris. In the eight months before the crash, sums of £4000 were paid into an account here on five separate occasions. In total he had £122,000 deposited in his accounts (1.2 million Francs) and no one knows from whence it came. Then there is the question of where Paul was in the three hours between 7pm when he went off duty and 10pm when Dodi called him on his mobile phone and ordered him to return to the Ritz. His whereabouts in this period are a mystery, a very significant mystery at that.

To understand how the Elite operates requires detailed research over a vast array of interconnecting subjects, everything from ancient history, especially relating to satanic and occult symbolism and ritual. The Earth’s magnetic grid, the power of the sun, the banking system and mind control are all elements that influence their beliefs and thinking and this needs to be borne in mind before one can begin to understand the ritual sacrifice of Diana. All the mainstream journalists that have produced articles and documentaries about the crash are operating under a disadvantage because of their lack of knowledge of the occult and thus it renders the whole story a mystery because of course they are of necessity dealing with only half of the picture and only with information within their own ‘five sense’ reality. This is true of all major events throughout history. They can only possibly be viewed and analysed using the reality thought and believed to be true and in working within this restrictive ‘five-sense’ reality are unable to comprehend that there are organisations operating within organisations which provide a methodology by which one single force may control apparently unconnected agencies such as British and French intelligence, the Paris Police, judiciary and medical services and most importantly of all, the inquiry investigating the cause of the crash.

In Britain there was an ‘investigation’ into the death crash by John Stalker, the former deputy-chief constable of Greater Manchester Police in which he dismissed all notions that Diana was murdered. Ironically, Stalker claimed, quite rightly, that he was the victim of a conspiracy to remove him from the police force after he identified a policy by the Northern Ireland police, the RUC, to shoot people they believed to be terrorists and ask questions later. This was the so-called ‘shoot-to-kill’ policy.

Pushing aside every suggestion of conspiracy to kill Diana, Stalker asked; “Why would the French want to cover up the murder of an English woman?” The answer to that is as stated earlier and that is that all seemingly unconnected agencies are intrinsically connected at the top levels. Operatives at Stalker’s level do not understand anything bar the illusory outer-circle knowledge within Freemasonry, nor do they understand the true nature of the ‘Crown’. However, to be fair, Stalker did ask some very pertinent questions about the crash and its aftermath; “…why was the Fayed security around the princess reduced to one wholly inadequate man with no back up? Why did the police not appeal for help from the public? Why was there no post mortem-autopsy on Dodi Fayed’s body?” I would offer this answer to Mr. Stalker – simply because it is but a small part of an overall conspiracy of such magnitude that it absolutely and utterly dwarfs the conspiracy perpetrated against you when you were removed from office.

I have already broached the subject of mind control within this book, because understanding its widespread deployment is essential in order to understand the occult knowledge and the potential for it to be used in such operations by the subtle programming of its subjects’ minds.

In the three hours Henry Paul went ‘missing’, this programming could have been instilled within him without his knowledge and it is therefore probably no coincidence that Henry Paul drove into the 13th pillar in the Pont de l’Alma tunnel in Paris. The elite networks (in which Fayed played a major role) were working through many seemingly disassociated yet co-operating agencies to ensure that Diana was in Paris that night, because at its foundation, the plan was to perform a specific satanic ritual for which the timing and circumstances and the place of death had to be arranged in intricate detail. Diana was under Fayed’s security web for much of the time leading up to the crash and all of the time during the last few days.

All her conversations were heard and monitored throughout the Fayed bugging system, so if Fayed was, as he claims, himself a victim of the Elite, why does he not publish them? During those missing hours, Henry Paul, the asset of British and French intelligence would have had the final piece of his programming jigsaw inserted into place in addition to the programming already in place. Diana’s ritual death was arranged from the very top of the Illuminati, via the Royal connections but Fayed for all his wealth and apparent power and influence is nothing more than a lowly minion, carrying out his role as dictated by the Illuminati and was probably never aware of the full consequences of his role, save possibly through hindsight after the event.

The Mercedes delivered to the rear of the Ritz Hotel had itself been ‘stolen’ some weeks earlier – before the Diana Dodi relationship began, stolen from Etoile Limousines and when it was recovered from this alleged theft it underwent extensive repairs. It had supposedly been standing outside the exclusive Taillevent restaurant when the driver’s door was flung open and the chauffeur pulled out by three Arabic-speaking men with handguns. (Those awful Muslims again!) The vehicle was missing for two weeks and when it was found, the wheels were missing, the door ripped off and the electronic system and equipment controlling the braking system had gone. This car would have been written off by any insurance company, but of course this was the cover for the extensive Elite-controlled repairs which would install remote-control and much other electronic wizardry (Boston brakes technology?). Fayed controls the Etoile Limousine company which supplied the vehicle, is it surprising therefore that the French authorities refused the offer by experts at Mercedes to examine the car after the crash?

When Henry Paul reported back for duty that night, he seemed his normal self to most observers. The programming lies deep within the psyche until the arranged trigger is deployed which would have activated his excessively fast driving and route change. The ‘Boston brakes’ technology relating to remote control has already been described and it would certainly make sense that this was the real cause of the precision 13th pillar direct hit with the loss of brakes too. The white car, which was parked in the tunnel, and not travelling in the same direction through the tunnel, emitted a vivid white flash. This, I would strongly suggest is from where the remote control was being operated. The cover story for the white flash was simply that ‘the paparazzi did it’. It was deemed necessary for the car to hit the 13th pillar because this marks the centre of the ancient spot of worship to the dark aspect of the goddess, Hecate. Diana even had a strong aversion to the number 13; she would not allow a thirteenth lot in her dress auction at Christies in the June immediately before she died.

It is also vital to understand that whenever an assassination occurs in a public place, two things of significance happen almost immediately. The first thing is to name the ‘scapegoat’ or ‘patsy’. Then there are a multitude of diversions created, incorporating ‘eye-witness’ testimonies to back-up the version of events that has been pre-invented and made to seem like a reasonable story. Once the initial reports have aired they then have time to assess their impact and subsequently either remove the initial reports from the airwaves for good, or misuse true testimonies to create false leads for investigators, diverting them from the real truth.

In the first act of the play, they make an immediate arrest, or expose the person to blame, which cancels out further need for investigation, because now we all ‘know’ who is responsible.

The second act, diversion, ensures that those critical hours and days after the event are wasted as investigators and the lower ranks of the media chase a whole morass of false leads and stories.

The next stage is to wait for the ‘official’ investigation to begin. Once there has been enough time to incorporate all the information that was picked-up on, in the initial moments after the event and to add and merge it into the pre-planned version of events, the ‘official’ version is then propounded with vigour. This ‘official’ story is then played out across the full spectrum of the media as the evidence is manufactured and manipulated to match the official version. It is from that point onwards a relatively simple matter to control this process at editorial level and to filter-out all the evidence and facts that do not match the official version whilst strongly promoting those that do. .

In much the same way as the 9/11 debris and forensic evidence was cleared away with thoroughly indecent haste, this scene of a major accident involving arguably the most famous woman in the world, was destroyed in less time than it took to happen in the first place. Of course this makes perfect sense when we consider that, as with 9/11, the evidence has to disappear as quickly as possible to hide the truth and to prevent any real investigation into the incident. Indeed, everything relating to this murder is decidedly ‘fishy’, to say the least.

There were 17 security cameras on the route between the Ritz and the Pont de l’Alma tunnel, including those inside the tunnel itself. Do these perpetrators really expect anyone with an even semi-functioning brain to believe that on that particular night in only that particular part of Paris, the cameras were malfunctioning? On that single basis alone, anyone who declares themselves satisfied with the outcome of all the inquiries conducted so far and agrees with their findings, is either in league with them, or so incredibly stupid, as to beggar belief. However as most people are terminally ‘asleep’ these days, maybe the concept is not that badly thought-out.

The cameras are controlled by the police and are powered by an independent power supply, yet the Paris police refused categorically to explain why the cameras were out of action in that particular place and time on that particular night. Never before (or since) has this happened in Paris. In a letter to the UK Daily Mail, a correspondent said the cameras in the tunnel were pointing towards the wall on the morning after the crash. There is no doubt whatsoever that the police would not have failed to notice this situation.

Even more significantly, at exactly the same time as the fateful journey and subsequent crash, all the police communication frequencies in central Paris mysteriously went off-line. Simon Reagan in his book, Who Killed Diana, quotes a contact called Andre, who like many people enjoys listening-in to police radio messages. That night, Andre was sitting on a bench near the Eiffel Tower, a few minutes’ walk from the tunnel, on the night Diana died. As was his usual practice, he was using a short-wave receiver to monitor the police communications, but suddenly and inexplicably at 12.20am, all the lines went down. There was a total police radio blackout which lasted for around 20 minutes and then, Andre said, the signal returned as quickly as it had disappeared and there was a sudden explosion of radio traffic as all police personnel realised it was active again.

12.20am was the exact time that Diana and her party was leaving the Ritz. Just a co-incidence though, I’m sure. By the time communication was restored, Diana was lying in the tunnel under the complete control of the Emergency team and according to the autopsy report, within a few minutes of clinical death. However, according to the Stevens report, there was not a shred of evidence that there was a conspiracy surrounding the death of Diana.

As previously alluded-to, causing the accident is easy for the powers involved to arrange, but of course it is not possible to guarantee that the target will be killed immediately. It is therefore essential to also be in control of the medical team, because although the target is not yet dead, there is now a credible reason for them to die, after the event as it were.

In this case, the job of the medical team is to ensure the target does not survive, no matter what condition they are in after the incident. Even those poor dupes who dismiss the idea that Diana was murdered, question the astonishing delay in transporting her to hospital, when according to the ‘official’ medical reports, she was suffering from an injury that required urgent surgery. The doctors said that the pulmonary vein had been ruptured near the heart and that this was filling her lungs with blood in effect meaning that Diana was lying in the tunnel bleeding to death. If that is indeed correct, then the only way to save her life would be with immediate surgery, so why was it more than an hour and a half before she arrived at hospital?

Doctor Frederic Mailliez, with an American ‘friend’ by the name of Mark Butt, just so happened to drive into the tunnel from the opposite direction in the immediate aftermath of the crash. The impact happened at 12.25am and by 12.26, Doctor Mailliez said he had seen the crushed Mercedes, stopped his car, turned on warning lights, run across to the Mercedes to establish there were two people dead and two alive, and had also phoned the emergency services. He is one of 160 Parisian doctors who are on constant call for emergencies in hospitals and private homes as part of a French insurance system, SOS Medecins. He had treated accident victims many times when he was a member of SAMU the French emergency ambulance service and yet a doctor on constant call for emergencies says all he had in his car to help Diana was an ‘oxygen cylinder and mask’. Mailliez was in control of Diana and her condition for the crucial 15 to 20 minutes before his former employers, the SAMU emergency team arrived to take over.

He claimed initially that Diana did not say anything to him, contradicting his later comments to the UK Times newspaper, when he said she apparently repeatedly said that she ‘hurt’ as he put a resuscitation mask over her mouth. Trevor Rees-Jones, the bodyguard, also said that he has flashbacks of hearing a female voice calling out in the back of the car: “…first it’s a groan, then Dodi’s name was called…and that can only be Princess Diana’s voice”, he told the UK Daily Mirror.

What does seem to be clear is that Diana was conscious when Mailliez arrived. He told the CNN chat show host, Larry King, that, “…she looked pretty fine. But inside you know, the internal injury was already starting… its really funny. That’s the only part, where she was sitting, that’s the only part, which was still intact.” Eh?

Mailliez on the one hand told a French medical magazine that; “I thought her life could be saved”, and yet said on another occasion that “it was hopeless there was nothing we could do to save her.” This is the big problem with lying – it is so difficult to get the story correct and consistent on every occasion it is told. He also told King that although Diana is the most photographed lady in the world, and that the paparazzi were taking shots of her while he was with her in the tunnel; he had no idea that she was the Princess Diana until he saw the news reports the following morning. Err, yeah right. What kind of an idiot is this man? And more to the point, how stupid does he think we all are? When the emergency team arrived, Mailliez said he then left the scene because there was nothing more he could do.

The official explanation for the incredible delay in taking Diana to hospital is that she was trapped in the wreckage. This is complete and utter nonsense. One of the ambulance crew told the French newspaper, La Parisien that when he arrived, Diana was lying with most of her body out of the car with her legs resting on the rear seat. “She was agitated, semi knocked-out, but conscious… she was groaning and struggling feebly. She murmured ‘Oh my God’ several times.” The Scotsman newspaper, in an investigation published on the 11th September 1997, established that Diana was removed from the car shortly after the fire service arrived and the excuse of her being ‘trapped’ does not stand up to close scrutiny at all. Another excuse for the delay is that the emergency doctors had to give her a blood transfusion. This again is an utter lie. SAMU teams do not carry blood transfusion equipment because they would be unable to determine the victim’s blood type and also to carry stocks of all the many different, available blood-types would be impractical. When the ambulance eventually did leave the tunnel, the driver was ordered to go no faster than 25 miles per hour and some reports say it took as long as 40 minutes to cover the 3.7 miles to the La Pitie-Salpetriere Hospital whilst four other hospitals quite capable of treating Diana were closer to the scene and the ambulance stopped twice on the way for ‘delicate interventions’, once whilst actually within sight of the hospital.

Diana arrived at La Pitie-Salpetriere Hospital at about 2.10am, an hour and 45 minutes after the crash happened. By any medical criteria whatsoever this delay is completely ludicrous. Of course it is only ludicrous unless it was meant to happen this way because they were performing horrendous occult practices. It doesn’t take a genius to see why, despite such apparent incompetence, there has been NO inquiry into the medical response that night. According to Stevens report, they could not go at speed because of her injury but this is absolute nonsense. 1 hour and 45 minutes??

Waiting at the hospital was a surgical team headed by Professor Bruno Riou, the duty surgeon who we are told, first heard about the crash whilst on his routine rounds. Is that not a strange enough sentence in itself, a renowned, senior surgeon doing his rounds in the early hours of the morning? Waiting with him when Diana arrived was Professor Pierre Coriat, the head of anaesthetics, Professor Alain Pavie, a chest and heart specialist and Professor Pierre Benazet, another experienced surgeon. They had been in telephone communication with the emergency team in the tunnel throughout and we are told that they opened Diana’s chest cavity, repaired the artery, and battled to save her for an hour and a half before admitting defeat. This is remarkable because the autopsy report shows that Diana was clinically dead at 12.45am whilst still lying in the tunnel. She was therefore clinically dead for an hour and 25 minutes before she even arrived at the hospital and for three hours before the professors walked out of the operating theatre to announce that she had died. Having the body examined at a location under the control of the perpetrators is vital in such assassinations. This is indeed a very similar game to the one that was played with JFK.

So who was behind Diana’s assassination? Of course those who gave the order and those who actually carried out the deed would be rather different people. This is the spider’s web of the Elite networks and whilst the order will no doubt have come from the spider in the centre, it would certainly have been carried out by one of the many ‘flies’. It is highly unlikely that it would have been carried out by British intelligence directly, because of course that would be too obvious. Intelligence agencies subcontract the assassinations of their own citizens to distance themselves from the incident and allow them to plausibly deny that they were responsible. Not only that, the intelligence agency of the nationality of the victim is then ‘free’ to work on finding who was responsible.

For instance, there is considerable evidence to show that JFK was shot by members of an elite (small ‘e’) rifle team within the French intelligence called OAS, along with the Israeli Mossad. Olof Palme, the Bilderberger Prime Minister of Sweden, was murdered in Stockholm in 1986 on the orders of among others, George Bush senior. The killing itself was carried out by members of BOSS, the South African intelligence agency.

MI5 announced in 1998 that they do not assassinate people. No, instead they hire other branches of the intelligence family to do it. This rather weak denial was prompted by the revelations of the former MI5 agent, David Shayler, who stated that MI6 had organised a plot to assassinate Libya’s Colonel Gaddafi. This attempt failed because the bomb had been placed under the wrong car. Shayler was head of the ‘Libyan Desk’ at MI5 and was in the perfect position to know. Robin Cook, the then UK Foreign Secretary, stated that he had been assured that no such event took place and the Attorney General banned David Shayler from appearing on the ITV programme, Diana – Secrets of the Crash.

So which organisation is most likely to have been involved in the death of Diana at operational level? A secret group by the name of the ‘Pinay Circle’ or ‘Le Cercle’ which has amongst its ranks a number of British establishment figures is a strong contender. Le Cercle is an offshoot of the even more elite ‘Safari Club’, which was set up by Count Alexander de Maranches, the director during the 1970s of the French ‘Service for External Documentation and Espionage’. It was the Safari Club that arranged for the alliance between a French intelligence front-company called ‘Group Bull’ and the computer giant Honeywell which is, you may not be surprised to learn, the world’s largest manufacturer of landmines.

The Le Cercle membership has included Nicholas Elliot, a department head at MI6; William Colby, a former director of the CIA; Colonel Botta of Swiss Military Intelligence; Stefano Della Chiaie, leading member of the Italian Secret Service; Giullo Andreotti, the former Italian Prime Minister from the notorious P2 Freemasonry Lodge and the man who gave the Mafia ‘Official Protection’; Silva Munoz, a former Minister for the fascist, Franco, in Spain and a member of the Elite secret society, Opus Dei; Franz Josef Strauss, the German Defence Minister; and Monsignor Brunello an agent of the Vatican. In America, one of the Le Cercle fronts is the CIA–backed Heritage Foundation in Washington. The potential for such an organisation to be the co-ordinating force between countless different agencies and countries, all aiming to a common operation is easy to see. The Safari Club / Le Cercle network provides the Arab-British-French connection necessary to arrange for Diana to be in Paris at the right time, the security for her to be withdrawn, the assassination to be carried out and most importantly, those involved to get away with it. So re-visiting the statement of outer initiate John Stalker, and his comment “why would the French want to cover up the murder of an English woman?” the answer is quite simple, because of Elite-level interconnection via organisations such as the Safari Club and Le Cercle. Simon Regan in his book, ‘Who killed Diana?’, says that it was Le Cercle that destabilised the Gough Whitlam government in Australia in 1975 and as already stated, the Queen of England was involved in this too, via her control of her Governor of Australia, Philip Kerr, who used his executive power to remove Whitlam. If the Crown, through the Windsors and Le Cercle worked together to bring down an elected Australian government, it is more than a distinct possibility that they would work together to eliminate Diana – the people’s Princess?

Upon studying the history of assassinations, it becomes apparent that Paris is prominent as one of the major cities for this black art, going back many centuries. Amschel Rothschild from the English branch of the family was murdered there in 1996 in what many claim to have been part of another inter-Elite war, one of the many that litters the history of the this sect. For an organisation such as Le Cercle, or its many mirrors in London, it would have been very easy to place its people in the right places. Mohamed Fayed’s security operation is composed primarily of ex-British elite military and police units, who know the consequences of saying ‘no’. Remember that all these operatives belong to the Crown and certainly not to whichever individual company or organisation would be foolish enough to hire them. There will always be an odd exception, but for those who join the Field Lodges, the oath continues long after service terms are completed.

Fayed’s personal investigation into Diana and Dodi’s death was headed by Pierre Ottavoili, a former chief of the Criminal Brigade, the criminal investigation department of the French police. This is the same organisation that is also responsible for the ‘official Investigation’. Fayed’s chief lawyer in Paris is a former French Justice Minister and in overall charge in London at the time was John McNamara, his head of security and former Chief-Superintendent at the headquarters of London’s Metropolitan police, at Scotland Yard. In the spring of 1998, McNamara was part of a sting operation involving the FBI, CIA and possibly the Israeli (Rothschild) intelligence Agency Mossad, to arrest a former CIA agent Oswald le Winter, a 67 year old American born in Austria. Le Winter contacted Fayed claiming to have documents for sale, proving the involvement of MI6 and the CIA in the murder of Diana. He was asking $10 million and after meeting with McNamara he was given an advance of $15.000. A further meeting was arranged in Vienna, Austria, for the key documents and for the rest of the money to be handed-over. In the meantime however, Fayed called a friend in the FBI, who contacted the CIA. Le Winter was followed, spied upon and lured to the Ambassador Hotel in Vienna on Wednesday the 22nd April, where with support from the Austrian police a combination of FBI, CIA and Mossad agents apprehended him.

If Fayed was indeed the grieving, wronged father, why would he ensure the man who could provide the proof he required, was offered up to his enemies?   And if le Winter’s offer was a hoax, why would so many agencies spend so much money, time and effort, to prevent him leaking information that was, as they put it, ‘a lie’ especially when if this was the case it would prove that MI6 was not involved? The whole thing is clearly a psy-op, a set-up to confuse and obfuscate.

This story incidentally, would have remained a secret, but for Peter Grolig, an Austrian journalist on the Kurier newspaper. He reported what happened and established that when le Winter’s hotel room was searched, four documents, two of them in code were found and appeared to be genuine CIA documents. The CIA has since admitted tapping Diana’s phone calls in and to America and passing the contents to British Intelligence. Le Winter was arrested and held in custody and Grolig’s story forced Fayed to admit that it was true. Another intelligence insider also insists the crash was not an accident. Richard Tomlinson, a former agent of Britain’s MI6, gave evidence to the French enquiry into Diana’s death. In 1997 Tomlinson served a six month jail sentence under the official secrets act for trying to sell his memoirs and in 1998 he was arrested again, at gun point, in Paris at the request of the British government who were concerned at his association in that city with MI5 whistle-blower, David Shayler, (now a painted as a madman) who was also arrested and jailed in Paris. Tomlinson apparently told Herve Stephan, the judge in charge of the ‘inquiry’ that Diana was murdered and according to a report on the BBC’s teletext news service, Ceefax, on 29th August 1998, he told the judge that Henry Paul was an asset of British Intelligence as was one of the bodyguards who remained un-named. However, despite all this information being freely given to the inquiry, Herve Stephan an obvious Elite placeman concluded, ‘it was an accident’.

In the words of the Roman writer Seneca; “He who most benefits from the crime is the one most likely to have committed it”.

The Windsors as a family certainly benefitted the most. No longer is there an inside threat to their secrets and actions. No longer is Diana there to continue her inevitable destruction of the Monarchy as a credible force able to own and influence the path of this nation and most of the rest of the world.   No longer is she there to exert her own influence in the upbringing of her sons, William and Harry. The Windsors now have full and total control in the moulding of these two Princes, giving them the total ability to form them into their own sick image. Her death also cleared the way for Charles to marry Camilla.

Of course as we know, the House of Windsor is simply the public face of a much larger power structure, ‘The Crown Temple.’ which now no longer suffers from Diana publicly exposing its secret war against the populations of the world with landmines. She was almost certainly planning an escalation of that particular battle.

Susan Barrantes, the mother of Sarah ‘Fergie’ Ferguson, the Duchess of York and former wife of Prince Andrew, had been telling anyone who would listen that she thought Diana had been murdered. She however, was fatally injured herself in an extremely dubious car crash in Argentina on the 19th September 1998. Just a coincidence though, I’m sure. Confidential mail for Diana was delivered to Christine Fitzgerald and this included packages from a former member of the Elite-controlled SAS who was concerned for Diana’s safety. He was warning her of what was going on behind her back. “Half of MI6 were on Diana’s side too you know”, Christine said. One day, a client who had involvement with the security agencies, saw some of these packages being delivered. Christine described what followed:

“She said I’m really worried for you, you don’t know what you’re getting involved in here. Diana’s basically mad, she’ll drop you in it, she will hang you out to dry, you’ll end up dead, your kids will end up dead, your cats, and your business will be ruined. I couldn’t believe how she was carrying on. She was so full of hate. Diana came in the next day and I gave her the mail. I said not everyone who bows to you has your best interests at heart. I told her what had happened and she went purple with rage. When she died, everybody came in and said ’they bumped her off didn’t they’? But that client was the only one who was outraged at the suggestion. I was checked out by MI6, my phones were tapped, my house was burgled, the royal family kept a big check on me while I was dealing with Diana.”

Christine and her contacts have no doubt about what happened in Paris: “She was bumped off; she was left to die at the roadside. Those responsible were above the elite of the army”, she said. “It was not the secret squirrels (British intelligence) it was above that. Mohammed Fayed ‘in his tortured little sense’ wants to be part of the reptilian power because ‘he likes all that’.” Christine believes that Diana’s romance with Dodi was engineered. She further said:

“Diana fell in love quite easily and he’s a master of the smile. She was unfortunate in her love affairs because she rescued others in her own distress. So the men she went for were all emotional cripples because she was a healer, too. Most people who went with Diana used her and I think Dodi did also. He would have used her for his ego, the contacts and his dad. The Royal Family killed her for her light energy, especially when she was pregnant. I don’t believe she was as badly injured as they say. If they checked her body they would see that the scar the surgeons made starts at her pubis and goes right up to her throat. They’ve even taken her thymus gland, the way we make interstellar communication. I know from the best sources that she was pregnant and they took the baby. Pieces of that foetus will have been delivered everywhere. They can make babies from the cells. Parts of her body will have been used in their rituals as well. (Just to give insight, hope you are not eating! When children are sacrificed with their throat cut from left to right, the blood is drained and drank from their goblets, and specific body parts are eaten. The fat is scraped from the intestines and they rub it on their skin or scales. This is the mesa fat, or the anointing oil, this also is within the Jesus story the anointing of their Messiah. Sick aren’t they). Diana was always having Kensington Palace swept for bugs, but they had Dodi bugged and they knew exactly what was going on. This was not the first time she thought she was pregnant and this nearly happened before, but she was not pregnant. That was with Hewitt.”

Christine Fitzgerald shared the most intimate details of Diana’s life and knew her in ways and at levels that very few others did. The incredible revelations of the Windsor’s treatment of Diana over many years, the threats made to her by Prince Charles’ personal detective, the ritual sacrifices and the confirmation that they were responsible for the murder of Barry Mannakee, should not pass without note. There should be a campaign to press the Windsors to face these matters and for Al Fayed, Trevor Rees-Jones, Earl Spencer and the others I have named, to answer the questions that have to be addressed. Power must be stripped from the Windsors, their royal dynasty dismantled and their crimes against humanity publicly exposed. More than that, however, those in the political, security and medical professions, who are also involved, must be equally exposed. The Royal Family, Earl Spencer, and the Satanic, former British Prime Minister, Tony Blair, have all dismissed claims that Diana was murdered and called for such suggestions to cease ‘for the sake of the boys’. These questions must not be allowed to be ignored or another Elite assassination will have been promulgated whilst those responsible go free.

Earl Spencer even went to the extent of issuing a statement on behalf of the Spencer family in February 1998 in which he asked: “Is there any good in all this speculation? I ask that because there is clearly a lot of harm in it. All we, her family, ask is that Diana’s memory be respected and the sensational speculation be left out of the public arena, where it undermines our aims to come to terms with her loss”.

Had Diana been your sister would you not be determined to find out what happened? If you were Prime Minister when such a famous and loved Princess had been killed, would you not insist that the truth be established? So why don’t they? I think we all know the answer to that particular question,

Diana had a profound effect on millions of people as was apparent after her death and most people did not know the full extent of her suffering once the Windsors got hold of her. In many ways Diana was a mirror of Marilyn Monroe, used by the establishment and then cast aside and murdered when her usefulness was at an end. Marilyn had affairs with John Kennedy and also it seems, his brother, Bobby and when she became dangerous because of her inside knowledge she was killed because of what she knew. In another of those remarkable examples of synchronicity there are many ‘coincidences’ that connect her life and that of Diana’s. They were both born on the first of the month and died at the age of 36 in August. They both married on the 29th of the month to men twelve years older. Marilyn called herself the Queen of Diamonds and Diana the Queen of Hearts and both were subjects of the Elton John song, Candle in the Wind, which he sang at Diana’s funeral.

Since Christine Fitzgerald first spoke out about her relationship with Diana, the threat to destroy her business has been implemented. Suddenly the phone stopped ringing and she was seeing as many clients in a week as she had been in a day. This is unexplainable when you consider that she is one of Britain’s most gifted and effective healers working in the centre of London.   Unexplainable that is, unless one is aware of the story. But she is nevertheless determined that the truth shall be known, whatever the authorities seek to do to her: “I don’t want a war, I just want to end the bullshit”, as she puts it. Looking back on Diana’s life and their conversations together she reflects:

“Poor cow, she was in a house where no one gives a damn and it’s a terrible state of affairs. She was all alone in a nest of vipers. I used to just patch her up. She just found me and came to me. I made her wait a fortnight until I checked it out. They used to say that I was giving her anger therapy. I didn’t. I used to just listen to her, take it all in and think Jesus Christ! But I didn’t think they would kill her. I can’t believe that this information is so close to home and yet they are still managing to keep it at bay. My room is the truth room and it’s a real place of safety and I don’t judge anyone on their s**t and that’s why I haven’t spoken about any of this in the past. She was as screwed up as anyone you know and if you’re going to tell the truth, you have to tell the whole truth. She wasn’t crazy, she was mentally and physically abused, I feel, from a little girl. Her father was a nasty piece of work and her stepmother (Raine), too.

The Royal Family was very afraid. She would have taken the public away from them; she would have taken the world from them gradually. They recognised her worth and fed off her in a psychic vampire way for a long time. All she wanted was to get married and have children you know, bless her little heart. She wanted to live out what she had never had. The world would have come to rights with Diana because as f****d up as she was, she was a light being and wherever she went she manifested love. It was amazing. The sad thing was that she didn’t know she was doing that and she needed proof of her worth and she was looking in the wrong quarters for that. But when she tried to break away, we went out and did normal things. She did Kung Fu with my husband for five years. She wanted to be normal, to link arms and walk down the street. She knew where her heart lay. She really and truly did amazing things.”

Diana said she could not believe how cold the Windsors were and the public were shown a graphic example of this in the days after her death. They stayed out of sight in Balmoral in Scotland while the people mourned Diana in their tens of millions with an unprecedented explosion of grief. It was only the pressure from the public through the media that forced the Queen, kicking and screaming, to make a cold, emotionless and pathetic ‘tribute’ to Diana on TV the night before the funeral. Cold is a word constantly used about the Queen, Phillip and Charles and that’s the mental and emotional profile of the Brotherhood and its networks. William (Bill) Cooper said that the Initiates that he met in his work for US Naval Intelligence had “No conscience, no morals, no regrets, no feelings, and no emotion”. This is precisely the same psychopathic character profile as the Windsors and indeed most of the Elite that control our lives.

We have all been hoodwinked for thousands of years. Hoodwinked about our history, hoodwinked about whom we really are and the true nature of life. Hoodwinked about the true background and agenda of those we have allowed to rule us. How apt, therefore, that this word should also derive from Freemasonry. Dr. Albert MacKey, the 33rd degree Freemason and foremost Freemason historian of the 19th century, defined the term ‘hoodwinked’ in his Encyclopaedia of Freemasonry as: ‘A symbol of secrecy, silence and darkness, in which the mysteries of our art should be preserved from the unhallowed gaze of the profane’.

Diana’s tragic death is but one of a long, long line of others whose lives have been cut brutally short to serve the agenda of these monsters who rule us with an iron fist, encased in a velvet glove.