Why have a color code? Well I have a tendency to
Sunday, October 6, 2013
The Princess Di Murder
News Blog EUROPE
Holy Shroud of Turin
prayer to St. Michael the Archangel - video ~ link
AVE MARIA - by Helene Fischer - video ~ link
AVE MARIA by Perry Como - video ~ link
Links of importance:
Satellite Surface Current Forecast for North Atlantic - Loop Current - Gulf Stream ~ link
Current status of the Gulf Stream ~ link
book: Cash For Peerages - The Smoking Gun ~ link
True Believer Album by Jeff DeVillez (
iTunes) ~ link ~ also see this ~ link ~ Also see: Songs from Jeff DeVillez ~ link
War on Iran & Syria: What They Are NOT Telling Us ~ link
RevolutionRadio.org ~ link
Time is ~ link
Kuku Klok - Online
alarm clock ~ link
World Clock ~ link
Color code for this site:
Red lettering with turquoise highlights = Obama scandals, scandal
Red lettering with yellow highlight = Gun control, gun confiscation, Sandy Hook Massacre. Boston Marathon Bombing and others
Blue = Economics, European anti-austerity fascist events/Eurozone Crisis, Global
Green = Egypt Second Revolution; "Arab Spring"
Lime Green = High importance; with purple lettering it refers to Fukushima or nuclear issues.
Green with Gold lettering - fascism/police
Dark Blue background with white lettering = Scottish story
Lt. Blue with white lettering =
Yellow = Important
Yellow with Green = HAARP
Blue Purple with white = Royalty or Church
Red Purple with gray~BP Oil Disaster and climate effects, extreme weather, food shortages.
Pink with white = Big Pharma and Big
Agriculture, health, nutrition.
Pink with Black =
Swine Flu and other potential pandemics.
Black = Normal story.
Turquoise = Science, health, music, humor, or just something I like and
want to share.
Why have a color code? Well I have a tendency to
7 October 2013
The Princess Di Murder
I do not generally write articles about the British Royal Family and in general link very few articles on them (on my news blog), and avoid mentioning them when I am on national talk radio shows weekly. There are several reasons for this. Firstly, I have held various Scottish titles for approximately 30 years, from two feudal baronies to the Earldom of Stirling. As such, I feel a certain duty of loyalty to the Crown and to the Queen personally. Now this loyalty certainly does not exceed the loyalty that I own to God nor to my native country, America, the only nation that I have citizenship in. But still I take the position that I will not trivialize the Royal Family nor seek to profit from stories on them. I believe that they have an important historical role to fill, not only in Scotland, England, Wales and Northern Ireland but in Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and the other nations that the Queen is Sovereign of, as well as in the remaining Commonwealth states.
However, I should also state that in the long drive to reclaim the dormant Earldom of Stirling, I often was very frustrated with the Palace and I do not have a feeling that I 'owe' them silence on any matter.
For an American, hailing from the American Midwest (Evansville, Indiana), I had an interesting 'cat bird's seat' on the British Royals at the height of the news media feeding frenzy over the late Princess of Wales and the Duchess of York and assorted members of the Royal Family. I was Scottish Editor at the famous London publishing and genealogical firm, Burke's Peerage, its principal publication has long been known as the 'Bible of the Aristocracy'. I was also partners with the late and famous Harold Brooks-Baker, who was on every London newspaper's 'A List' for comments and stories on 'the Royals' during this time. Brookie (as Harold Brooks-Baker was called by his friends and enemies) was, at that time married to a very nice lady, who was a French Countess, sister to a Duke who was also a French Senator, and related to a great many royals in Europe, including some themselves related to Prince Philip/etc.
I use to get some very interesting inside stories on the Royal Family. Further, I was present at a number of press interviews with Brookie and others. Brookie was proud of the time he had a note delivered to the Queen on her breakfast tray and the really private information that he gleamed from mutual cousins of his wife and the Queen and her husband. For example, I knew that Prince Charles and Princess Di had stopped sleeping with one another months before the public had any inkling of trouble in the marriage.
While I found many stories to be interesting, I guess it was the American sense of fair play that eventually led me to feel sorry for the Royals. I saw that they were terribly exploited by the often ruthless newspapers in London, in what was/is the most competitive newspaper market on Earth. They were limited in their ability to 'hit back' at unfair or outright false stories, by the vague British Constitution (a collection of rights, documents, traditions, etc.) and its limits on the Royal Family. Further, I felt that the details that I was learning on the intimate aspects of this family that lived in "Buck House" was really over the top. Even royals should have some privacy.
I should also disclose here, that I had contacts with both the late Princess of Wales and the Duchess of York (and the late JFK, Jr.) about working as Anchors on a major global television news organization that I was putting together some years ago. Princess Di turned me down, but the Duchess was interested and JFK, Jr. was still up in the air when I canceled the project due to my wife's terminal ovarian cancer.
My talk radio (The Nutrimedical Report Show) listeners (our shows generally have five to six million listeners per show) and my news blog (EUROPE) readers know that I am not bashful when it comes to outing conspiracies, to say the least. However, lately I have been seeing a rash of stories that point to ... without proof of course ... a view that the British Establishment (especially the Royal Family) had the SAS kill the Princess of Wales.
I must tell you that I sincerely do not believe any of these stories. While I suspect that Princess Di was murdered, I simply do not believe that the Royals or the SAS had anything to do with it. There is a deeper story here.
The story has to do with the Middle East and the potential danger that Princess Diana would have been to Israel, had she married into the family of the Fayeds and the Khashoggis. The London newspapers, and for that matter the global news media, had spent years promoting the blond attractive Lady Diana Spencer, later Diana, Princess of Wales, as a super sex goddess, a beautiful princess that outshone any Hollywood actress, in order to sell newspapers. With the divorce, the media coverage only increased. Princess Di, as she was generally known, wanted to be the 'princess of people's hearts' and had begun to involve herself in visiting sick children, and various worthy causes such as the campaign to ban landmines from warfare.
The mother of Dodi Fayed, Samiar, was the sister of the famous Saudi arms merchant, Adnan Khashoggi who was worth some $40 billion in the 1980s. This jumping from the royal Windsors to the very well connected and wealthy Turkish/Syrian/Saudi Khashoggis by the Spencer princess, with all her almost unstoppable media draw was a potential PR 'gift' to the Muslims. She had the capacity to become a global spokeswoman for a very different view of the Islamic world than that painted by the Zionist dominated western news media. She could even have become a spokesperson for the Palestinians! It was this potential, plus the wealth and protection that the Fayeds and Khashoggis and their associates and friends could have offered her, that was the danger.
Central to the overall strategy of the modern State of Israel, and especially central to the strategy of the Likud extremists, is the creation and maintenance of a view of Islam as 'dangerous' and 'extremist' in nature, breeding terrorism against the West and its peoples. Diana had the potential, wither or not she was even aware if it, of throwing a major monkey wrench into that media strategy. That is why she was murdered. The SAS and the Royals were not involved; but the Mossad was most likely in it up to their eyeballs. The Royals had far too much to lose from such an action, and they think in very long terms, such as in generations. Besides, it really is not their style. They were prepared to weather whatever Diana threw at them. Those with the most to lose, in the broad strategic view of things, were the Israelis who had invested many years in the creation of the current Mideast 'script'. Too many years and too much to lose, to allow a popular blond in England to mess it up.
(Tim Alexander, Earl of Stirling)
Recent articles on the SAS involvement in the murder of the Princess of Wales:
Dying Diana finished off by the SAS ~ link
Princess Diana's secret sex diary led to her murder ~ link
Princess Diana's 'murder' author receives chilling death threats ~ link
Diana 'assassin' silenced in suicide mystery ~ link
SAS sniper photo raises new doubts in Princess Diana conspiracy ~ link
Ex-soldier who claimed Diana was murdered by the SAS and then fled to the
Middle East to be quizzed by police ~ link
SAS man who claims that Diana was murdered 'flees to Thailand in fear for his life ~ link
New twist in Diana SAS mystery ~ link
Special forces sniper ... 'has fled Britain' ~ link
Diana, that SAS ... tantalising new clues ~ link
Princess Diana was murdered by a former SAS prisoner ~ link
Princess Diana SAS sniper flies home from Middle East ~ link