RE:

Diana – the saga goes on and on..…

Almost ten years after the fatal crash and the Diana industry still trundles along. In addition to her birthday concert(1) we are promised a slew of books(2)and a plethora of films and documentaries.(3) The main event, though, is sure to be the long-delayed but much anticipated inquest, now on to its third coroner.(4) Whether the comings and goings of various members of the legal establishment is a consequence of panic and dismay at the prospect of dealing not only with thousands of documents but also having to contend with a jury remains a matter of opinion.(5) The main inquest is due to open ‘on or about 1 October 2007’, but no-one is prepared to hazard a guess as to when the People’s Verdict is likely to be delivered.

Where does this leave Operation Paget’s findings?(6)Selectively leaked before its publication, Lord Steven’s Report aimed to dispel once and for all the ‘myths’ surrounding the crash.(7) Its overall conclusion was that Henri Paul was drunk and the ‘accident’ was indeed an accident.(8)

A couple of points should be made, however. Stevens high-lighted the fact that a number of new eyewitnesses had been traced and interviewed, but failed to mention that most of the original witnesses had not been interviewed.(9)He also revealed that his inquiry team had wanted to investigate the possible bugging of Diana’s telephones by US intelligence services but were denied access to the records.(10)This was not enough to prevent the media from hailing the report as a triumph of fact over fiction, with Mohamed al Fayed once again being pilloried as an incorrigible fantasist.(11)

For the time being the last word should perhaps be left to Lord Stevens: ‘There are things I know, certain secrets, that I could never tell anyone – not even my wife. They will go with me to the grave, and that is where some of them should stay.’(12)

Dr. David Kelly

Liberal Democrat MP, Norman Baker, gave an account of his investigations into the death of David Kelly at a public meeting in Lewes, East Sussex, on 11 April.(13) Stating that he was ‘…convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that [Kelly’s death] could not be suicide,’ Baker claimed that ‘…medical evidence does not support it and David Kelly’s state of mind and personality suggests otherwise.’ He questioned the cause of death (a haemorrhage caused by cuts to the ulnar artery in the wrist), pointing out that ‘….…such wounds were “matchstick thick” and hidden, difficult to get to, as well as rarely leading to death.’ The knife alleged to have been used was an old and blunt garden pruner – an unlikely and ineffective implement. The paramedics who found Kelly’s body were reported as saying that he had ‘…lost little blood and was “incredibly unlikely” to have died from the wound they saw.’ Of the 29 tablets of the painkiller Coproxamol that were said to be missing from Kelly’s home, only the equivalent of one fifth of a tablet was found in his stomach. Although not everybody was impressed or won over by Baker’s arguments,(14) he did receive ‘…a standing ovation and nearly two minutes of solid applause.’

BBC2’s Dr David Kelly: the conspiracy files(16) included an interview with Norman Baker. Also featured in the programme was outspoken barrister Michael Shrimpton, whose flamboyant behaviour may not have won over many converts to the ‘Kelly was murdered’ camp. An earlier outing on The Alex Jones Show,(17) however, had allowed him another opportunity to air his views. Shrimpton put forward the possibility that the ‘…tasking for [Kelly’s] assassination……was generated in the UK, went to Paris, was then OK’d in Paris…[The] operational agency for the assassination was DGSE …’. The DGSE, according to Shrimpton, ‘…in order to false-flag the assassination, should their team be discovered, used Iraqi intelligence assets from the Iraqi Mukhabarat agency that were available in Damascus after the fall of Baghdad.’ Not that any of them are likely to be around, as ‘…the standard French practice when they carry out assassinations is to take their own team out….it would be highly unusual for the French to permit anyone involved in the assassination to survive.’

Iraq update

Compiled by military historian Kimberly Kagan, The Iraq Report(19) is described as a ‘…periodic analysis of ongoing military operations in Iraq.’ Well researched and dispassionate though the Reports appear to be, one should be aware that Ms Kagan is the wife of Frederick Kagan, author of Choosing victory: a plan for success in Iraq,(20) a plan which helped inspire Bush’s recent ‘surge’.(21)Equally well researched and probably less prone to bias is The cost of Iraq, Afghanistan, and other global war on terror operations since 9/11, produced by Amy Belasco for the Congressional Research Service.(22)

UK media independence over the reporting of Iraq has been questioned following investigations by academics from Manchester, Liverpool and Leeds Universities.(23)Their research indicates that ‘…government accusations of BBC anti-war bias were unfounded: Channel 4 News was least likely to report coalition good news, with Sky News and ITV most likely. The BBC’s coverage fell in the middle ground.’(24)

For a first hand account of media manipulation as lucratively practised by the Lincoln Group(25)read former Oxford University student Willem Marx’s experiences: ‘An Army team inside…[one] of Saddam’s former residences, would send me news articles they had cobbled together from wire stories and their own reports from the field. It was my job to select the ones that seemed most like Iraqis had written them. I was then to pass these articles along to our Iraqi employees, who would translate the pieces into Arabic and place them in local newspapers. [I was told] that the US Army could hardly carry out this work in their military uniforms, so they hired [the] Lincoln Group, which could operate with far fewer restrictions. It was a bread-and-butter contract……that paid the company about $5 million annually.’(26)

The Lincoln Group has rubbished the article: ‘The former intern’s exaggerated and misleading account does not accurately depict the firm’s activities in the emerging markets and challenging environments.’

Now you see it…

More confusion over WTC 7. Not the fact that it collapsed, but more the fact that it was reported as having collapsed some twenty minutes before it actually did. Clips of BBC and CNN reporters announcing that the building had fallen have surfaced on the Web, with WTC 7 still clearly standing in the background.(28) BBC World’s head of news, Richard Porter, has strenuously denied being part of a conspiracy: ‘In the chaos and confusion of the day, I’m quite sure we said things which turned out to be untrue or inaccurate – but at the time were based on the best information we had.’ Asking the BBC reporter to glance out of the window before opening her mouth might have improved the quality of information in this instance. Perhaps more disturbing is Porter’s admission that, ‘…for reasons of cock-up, not conspiracy’, BBC World no longer has the original tapes of its 9/11 coverage.(29)

Senator John Kerry also entered the fray when he said that WTC 7 was brought down by a controlled demolition, although he qualified this by pointing out that it was to prevent a random collapse from damaging nearby buildings.(30) A reasonable course of action under the circumstances; but if this was the case why hasn’t the official investigation acknowledged this? Because it’s not true, you might think, especially if you read the Journal of Debunking 911 Conspiracy Theories.(31) However you might come away with a different perspective after examining Danish academic Niels Harrit’s arguments: ‘We are not talking about conspiracy theories, absolutely not. We are talking about elementary physics and chemical processes, Newton’s laws, gravity, the melting point of steel, and the like.’

Notes

  1. Concert for Diana <http://www.concertfordiana.com>
  2. Tina Brown’s portrayal of her as a ‘spiteful, manipulative, media-savvy neurotic’ who preyed on Charles and ‘…a series of other rich men for their status and wealth’ in her forthcoming The Diana Chronicles (London: Doubleday) looks set to be the least sycophantic. (Sharon Churcher, ‘The most savage attack on Diana EVER.’ Daily Mail, 24 April 2007; Jeffrey A. Trachtenberg, ‘The summer of Diana…’ The Wall Street Journal, 26 April 2007.)
  3. One of the forthcoming documentaries, ‘Diana and the ghosts of the Alma Tunnel’, focuses on the significance of Dodi and his family in the crash and will ‘…take the official version and pull it apart.’ Less contentious but probably weirder is ‘The curse of Diana’s dresses’, ‘…a look at the couture sold at auction soon after Diana’s death and the strange things that happened to their buyers.’ (Charles Masters, ‘Diana docus creating TV miniseason’, The Hollywood Reporter, 13 March 2007. <http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/search/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003557153>.)
  4. For the current state of play see the official website, Coroner’s Inquests into the Deaths of Diana, Princess of Wales and Mr Dodi Al Fayed <http://www.butler-sloss-inquests.gov.uk/>
  5. Frances Gibb, ‘Diana inquest judge quits, admitting she was the wrong person for the job’, The Times, 25 April 2007; Caroline Davies, ‘Butler-Sloss quits Diana inquest. Coroner admits she is not up to such a high-profile case after bruising arguments with Fayed’s counsel’, The Daily Telegraph, 25 April 2007.Baroness Butler-Sloss’s departure may have been influenced by the High Court overturning her decision not hold a jury inquest. A transcript of the judgment – R (on the application of Paul and others) v Deputy Coroner of the Queen’s Household and Assistant Deputy Coroner for Surrey; R (on the application of Al Fayed) v Deputy Coroner of the Queen’s Household and Assistant Deputy Coroner for Surrey. [2007] EWHC 408 (Admin) – can be found here: <http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2007/408.html>.
  6. Inelegantly titled The Operation Paget inquiry report into the allegation of conspiracy to murder Diana, Princess of Wales and Emad El-Din Mohamed Abdel Moneim Fayed, it was issued on 14 December 2006. All 800 pages of it can be found here: <http://www.met.police.uk/news/docs/OperationPagetReport.pdf>.
  7. On the Friday before Operation Paget’s findings were revealed, the BBC 10.00 News lead with revelations that Henri Paul’s DNA matched that of the disputed blood samples, thus proving his drunken state. Was this part of a softening up of the public to prepare them for what would be regarded by many as yet another whitewash? Nicholas Witchell felt obliged to comment that many viewers would see this report and the BBC as part of an establishment cover up. ‘Well, we’re not’, he said empathically, erring just on the right side of protesting too much. The news item was actually plugging ‘How Diana died: the conspiracy files’ which – after a last minute change to programme schedules – was broadcast on BBC2 the following Sunday. (A transcript of the programme is available here: <http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/programmes/if/transcripts/how_diana_died.txt >.)The press also played its part in predicting what Lord Stevens was going to reveal. See for example: Thair Shaikh, ‘DNA tests “prove” Diana’s chauffeur was drunk’, The Times, 9 December 2006; Andrew Pierce, ‘DNA tests prove Diana’s driver was drunk, says documentary’, The Daily Telegraph, 9 December 2006; Jonathan Calvert, ‘Double blow demolishes Diana theories’, The Sunday Times, 10 December 2006; Mark Townsend, David Smith and Peter Allen, ‘Diana: the moment of truth’ The Observer, 10 December 2006.
  8. It should be pointed out that the Report (pp.285-286) mentions ‘…a general lack of clarity about [the] sampling, labelling and documentation of Henri Paul’s blood samples. The fact that the ‘……exact site of sampling of the blood specimens..…must be in doubt…’ has, however, not deterred Stevens from concluding that Henri Paul was over the limit. Neither has the decision by the French director of public prosecutions to investigate ‘…serious inconsistencies and omissions in the scientific paper trail that led French police to conclude in 2002 that the crash was caused by Paul’s drink-driving.’ (David Leppard, ‘French reopen Diana inquiry’, The Sunday Times, 20 August 2006.)It should also be noted that at least one of the French pathologists responsible for taking the samples has declined to give evidence at the inquest. (Jeevan Vasagar, ‘Present some evidence, Fayed told’, The Guardian, 6 March 2007.)
  9. These include Tom Richardson and Joanna Luz, said to be amongst the first at the scene of the crash. They are not even mentioned in Operation Paget’s Report.
  10. See Francis Elliott and Sophie Goodchild, ‘Diana verdict: an accident. But did US bug her calls?’ The Independent, 10 December 2006; Byron York, ‘Did the Clinton administration spy on Princess Diana? No’, National Review Online, 14 December 2006.
  11. The Express predictably cried ‘foul’ (Mark Reynolds and John Chapman, ‘Diana: it’s a whitewash…’ The Express, 15 December 2006) but had some cautious support from elsewhere: Anon., ‘The awkward questions have not gone away’ The Independent, 15 December 2006; Janice Turner ‘The life and poignant death of Diana’s driver’, The Times, 16 December 2006.
  12. Jason Bennetto, ‘John Stevens: the guv’nor…’, The Independent, 9 December 2006.
  13. Investigations not helped by the ‘remote wiping’ of computer files in his Lewes constituency office. (Lucy Collins, ‘Kelly probe MP says computer files wiped.’ Press Association Newsfile, 13 July 2006.)
  14. Unconvinced is the anonymous blogger running Norman Baker Watch (<http://normanbakerwatch.blogspot.com/2007/04/blood-money.html >).
  15. Miles Godfrey and Katya Mira, ‘Murder theory that just won’t go away.’ The Argus, 13 April 2007 (<http://www.theargus.co.uk/search/display.var.1327811.0.murder_theory_that_just_wont_go_away.php>); Anon, ‘MP lectures on David Kelly’s death’, Sussex Express, 16 April 2007. An audio recording of the event, including the subsequent question and answer session, can be found here: <http://www.radio4all.net/proginfo.php?id=22684>. Further thoughts on Kelly’s demise can be found on Rowena Thursby’s blog <http://dr-david-kelly.blogspot.com/>.
  16. TX 25 February 2007. A transcript of the programme can be viewed here: <http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/programmes/if/transcripts/david_kelly.txt>. See also Maurice Chittenden, ‘BBC reopens Kelly case with new film,’ The Sunday Times, 12 November 2006.
  17. US radio show hosted by Alex Jones, described by Greg Palast as a ‘… national treasure, a light breaking through the electronic Berlin Wall of the US media establishment.’ (<http://infowars.com/alexjones.html>)
  18. For a full transcript see ‘Alex Jones interviews Michael Shrimpton: the murder of Dr. David Kelly’ <http://www.prisonplanet.com/022504shrimptontranscript.html>
  19. <http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/013/493fplgc.asp>
  20. <http://www.aei.org/publications/pubID.25396/pub_detail.asp>
  21. Andrew Sullivan, ‘Mrs Kagan reviews her own idea (and her husband’s)’ The Daily Dish, 4 March 2007. <http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2007/03/mrs_kagan_revie.html>; Sarah Baxter, ‘Neocon family calls the shots’, The Sunday Times, 14 January 2007.
  22. <http://fpc.state.gov/documents/organization/82502.pdf >
  23. ‘Media wars: news media performance and media management during the 2003 Iraq war’. Further details available here: <http://www.esrcsocietytoday.ac.uk/ESRCInfoCentre/Plain_English_Summaries/knowledge_communication_learning/index115.aspx?ComponentId=17295&SourcePageId=11748>
  24. Vicky Frost, ‘The press toe the line on the Iraq war…’, The Guardian, 13 November 2006; John Pilger, ‘Setting the limits of invasion journalism’, New Statesman, 135 (4822), 11 December 2006, p. 22.
  25. ‘[The] Lincoln Group’s strength lies in our thorough methodological approach to strategic communications and our proven ability to operate in the challenging and dynamic information environments of remote regions, emerging markets, and hostile and inhospitable environments.’ <http://www.lincolngroup.com/>.
  26. Willem Marx, ‘Misinformation intern: my summer as a military propagandist in Iraq.’ Harper’s Magazine, September 2006, pp.51-60. <http://harpers.org/archive/2006/09/0081195> There’s an interview with Marx at <http://mwcnews.net/content/view/8912/26/ >
  27. Walter Pincus, ‘US to gauge Iraqi support for operations; military plans to hire a contractor to conduct polls and set up focus groups.’ The Washington Post, 28 September 2006.

Accessibility Toolbar