Top lawyer says Princess Diana 'was killed after plan to frighten her went wrong'

[Peter Presland]

Here's an interesting take on the phone hacking saga that impinges heavily on this thread subject too.

I have no sympathy whatsoever with Murdoch and his toadies which is probably why I had never really considered this as a possibility before.

The Establishment is safe in judging that Murdoch and his bagmen (women) can be easily humbled over the phone hacking saga and has clearly set out to do just that. They are also spot on in identifying it as a very effective diversion - if diversion were needed - in much the same way as celebrity paedos are a very effective diversion from the numerous and far worse such offenders higher up the pecking order.

Yoichi Shimatsu is an interesting character with interesting theories about all manner of 'deep events'. Bearing in mind timing in the breaking of the phone-hacking saga, he may well be on to something with this. Here are the closing few paras of the article dated 23 July 2011:
http://www.4thmedia.org/2011/07/23/her-m...ochs-fall/

Six months ago, the discovery of News of the World's revival of the Diana story stumbled upon no doubt by the MI-5 "anti-terrorism" program of system-wide telephone eavesdropping triggered the royal plot to crush Rupert Murdoch and bring the NewsCorp media group under the heel of official censorship. The near-future scenario is for non-family members to dilute the board of directors. It can be assumed that some of those new directors will be agents of the Crown.

In a classic case of media misdirection, Prince Charles took the brunt of suspicion with a stiff upper lip. In an informal chat over a pint of ale, a British detective told me that the police discount the possibility of the husband's role in the Paris event. His openness about the other woman and her lack of royalist pretensions indicate the since-tarred Crown Prince was being used as straw man to protect the actual suspect, a personage of higher rank.

What prompted News of the World to relaunch the Diana probe? Perhaps Coulson, at his new position in the Cameron government, made contact with a deep insider source, or possibly NoW chief editor Rebekah Brooke had received a packet of transcripts "tossed over the transom". Both have been silenced and kept out of public sight. The New York Times' main informant, the freewheeling gossip reporter Sean Hoare, was found dead a day before the parliamentary inquiry. With blood spilled and mouths gagged, the Diana case takes yet another turn into darkness.

The Royals have temporarily dodged the humiliation of the Queen's abdication and relegation of the throne in to Madame Tussard's Wax Museum, along the same aisle as the murderess of Mary Stuart. Yet rumors still abound about a terse few commands for an unthinkable act to save the royal family's honor at high table over a dish of veal and peas. As folk tales inform us, mother-in-laws can be cold-hearted.
Perhaps a media expose of royal misconduct is simply too un-British for the British.. In their hearts, the English secretly long for the tragedy to unfold in the tradition of Shakespeare, an excruciating drama through a tortuous labyrinth of family betrayal. A ghost stalks the palace, the crime is be expatiated, and so the reign must end. The audience waits nervously: Will one of the heirs assume the role of Hamlet to avenge his fallen parent? The lads face the existential choice: To Be or Not to Be? That is the question.