George Galloway interviewing Mohamed Al Fayed on TS 23/3

Mandy · Post by **Mandy** » Thu Mar 22, 2007 5:00 pm

George Galloway will be interviewing Mohamed Al Fayed, live, on his
talkSPORT radio programme tomorrow (Friday, March 23) from 10pm to
11pm.

Al Fayed, the owner of Harrods, believes that his son Dodi and
Princess Diana were murdered, rather than killed in the car crash in
Paris. He will be attempting to persuade George that this is the case.

Post by **faceless** » Thu Mar 22, 2007 5:09 pm

farrging 'ell - sounds good

Brown Sauce · Post by **Brown Sauce** » Thu Mar 22, 2007 6:29 pm

thx for the heads up gg fan

Karl · Post by **Karl** » Fri Mar 23, 2007 4:17 am

great news
i would love it for these two to become allies
love it

Comsatangel · Post by **Comsatangel** » Fri Mar 23, 2007 11:25 am

What the hell is this fugging idiot doing on a serious radio show? It was bad enough having to listen to the odious Michael Cole a few weeks back. Fayed is a bizarre fantasist who cannot face the fact that it was his own actions and security arrangements which led to the death of his son. Presumably we'll get the usual tedious conspiracy theory about white Fiats and CCTV. I hope George doesn't give him too easy a ride as I believe he himself considers it to have been an accident.

Mandy · Post by **Mandy** » Fri Mar 23, 2007 11:47 am

Comsatangel wrote:odious Michael Cole a few weeks back. Fayed is a bizarre fantasist

Surprised you didn't call him a conspiracy theorist and lumber him with all 911 deniers.

There is much to be explained about the deaths .. and having a government full of habitual liars doesn't make me inclinded to believe what they say. Trying to hand-pick the judge, and dismiss the jury also makes me inclined to believe they are hiding the truth.

Do see : https://worldpressnetwork.net/index.php/ ... Dodi_Fayed

Comsatangel · Post by **Comsatangel** » Fri Mar 23, 2007 4:48 pm

There may well be much to be explained about the deaths, and the subsequent investigations, but it's one heck of a leap of faith from a few contradictory pieces of evidence to the conclusion that they must have been murdered by the Royal Family with the collusion of the governments and security services of Britain and France. Sure, our Government are liars, but they are also utterly incompetent, and as they cannot even keep their extramarital affairs and dodgy business dealings out of the public eye, I doubt very much that they could pull off something like this. Sure, no doubt there are things that don't add up but this is the case with many accidents. People just need to get past the fact that even very wealthy, famous and successful people can die in something as mundane as a car crash.

nekokate · Post by **nekokate** » Fri Mar 23, 2007 5:02 pm

I have no idea what to believe about Fayed's claims. All I know is it's going to be very interesting to hear him clash with Galloway - I'm not sure who's the most outspoken of the pair.

Mandy · Post by **Mandy** » Fri Mar 23, 2007 5:03 pm

"Comsatangel" :

I don't suppose you bothered to address the specific points on the web site I mentioned
https://worldpressnetwork.net/index.php/ ... Dodi_Fayed

Who embalms people for god's sake in this day and age.

Post by **faceless** » Fri Mar 23, 2007 5:08 pm

GG_Fan wrote:Who embalms people for god's sake in this day and age.

quite a lot actually - especially if there's going to be a delay between the death and burial. Anna Nicole-Smith was recently embalmed as there was a court case, for example.

Mandy · Post by **Mandy** » Fri Mar 23, 2007 5:16 pm

faceless wrote:quite a lot actually - especially if there's going to be a delay between the death and burial. Anna Nicole-Smith was recently embalmed as there was a court case, for example.

She was embalmed on the same night in France. Within hours of her death. You would have thought they would wait for the forensic examination (e.g. for the parents to have consulted their lawyers as to what is proper).

People are kept in morgues for days.

Post by **faceless** » Fri Mar 23, 2007 5:35 pm

I didn't realise it was done so soon in her case - that does seem odd. Maybe there's some law in France about it?

Mandy · Post by **Mandy** » Fri Mar 23, 2007 5:44 pm

faceless wrote:I didn't realise it was done so soon in her case - that does seem odd. Maybe there's some law in France about it?

From memory, there is a law in France BANNING embalment when there are suspicious circumstances, i.e. until after a full coronor's examination. Let me see if I can find a reference to that.

i.e. it was illegal under French law.

Found it .. Extract from

https://worldpressnetwork.net/index.php/ ... Dodi_Fayed
[quoting HONG KONG SOUTH CHINA SUNDAY MORNING POST SUNDAY, AUGUST 28, 2005]

5. Why was Diana embalmed?

French law clearly says that no body should be embalmed if a postmortem is required.

So why did chief pathologist Dominique Lecomte embalm her immediately? Conspiracy theorists claim that it was in order to prevent a pregnancy test.

Their argument may be nonsense, but what makes their claim stronger was that someone at the hospital did announce that night Diana was six-weeks pregnant. This report was later withdrawn.

Was this embalming done in a moment of panic? Or was it at the request of the British ambassador, as some people believe? If so, who instructed him to make that request?

Comsatangel · Post by **Comsatangel** » Fri Mar 23, 2007 6:25 pm

Who knows? But again, doesn't mean there was a pregnancy, and even if there was, so what? Maybe it was hidden? So what? Still doesn't mean she was murdered.

Some of these arguments are pretty tired, like the one about the CCTV. All of the cameras in the underpass are privately owned, so are pointed towards businesses and residential properties, not the road. They are not there to record and monitor traffic. Only one camera is, and it wasn't pointed away from the road, it was switched off. Why? Because it only monitors peak hour traffic and is switched off at around eleven at night, every night. In fact, it would have been more suspiscious if it had been left on to record the accident.

I've an open mind, and I'll listen to the old fugger tonight. But HE was the man who changed the security arrangements at the last minute. HE tipped off the press as to where the couple would be. Fayed's long running battle with the British establishment is no secret and the thought of his son screwing the mother of the heir to the throne would have sent him into rapture. He would have no hesitation to milk it for all it was worth. HE is indirectly responsible for the circumstances which led to their deaths and he just simply cannot face up to that.

Mandy · Post by **Mandy** » Fri Mar 23, 2007 6:32 pm

Comsatangel wrote:Who knows? But again, doesn't mean there was a pregnancy, and even if there was, so what? Maybe it was hidden? So what? Still doesn't mean she was murdered.

So A LOT ... a smoking gun ? What else is a lie ? If they got caught out on this, then what else is untrue ?

p.s. If Diana was pregant, I think the grandparents of that child need to be considered .. being lied to. Being told they are lieing when they claim their son is going to marry Diana.

It would also be a MOTIVE .. to kill her BEFORE it became public knowledge. Think of the shame on the "royal" family ..