Di: Paul, Henri, History, 60 Page Autopsy, Etc.
Aleeta
--
~ A J's Fun Photos ~
http://picture.com
http://members.delphi.com/ALEETA
http://www.familytreemaker.com/users/j/o/h/ALEETA-E-Johnson
"GODSBRAIN" <gods...@aol.com> wrote in message news:20000416220330...@ng-cg1.aol.com...>Date: 17 Apr 2000 00:14:32 GMT
>>http://www.nando.net/newsroom/nt/913driver.html
>>Copyright © 1997 Nando.net
>>Copyright © 1997 Times of London
>drunken state,
>>Paul kept the Range Rover close behind the Mercedes, thus blocking the
>>path of the
>>chasing photographers. Kes Wingfield, another member of the 40-strong
>>al Fayed
>>security team, was with him. At this point, Wingfield said, Paul was
>>focused and very
>>sober, in stark contrast to his condition eight hours later when he
>>lost his life.
I suspect there is a fraud in the above
sentence. While Wingfield might have
said the first part of the sentence I suspect
that the comma prior to "in stark contrast"
should be a period and what follows is
not Wingfield's words.
No proof as yet. Just does not sound
reasonably prudent. Can anybody
testify on that point?
>Where is good evidence referenced
>regarding the "contrast" eight hours
>later?
>Paul had begun his day with a tennis match against Claude Garrec, an
>old school friend,
>at their club in Issy-Les-Moulineaux, in the southwestern suburbs of
>Paris
>Claude Garrec
>He asked Paul if he would come over as usual that Saturday night for a
>>seafood dinner.
>>Paul told Garrec not to expect him. He had important work to do and he
>>wasn't sure
>>when he would be finished.
> 50 officers have interviewed dozens of
>>friends and colleagues
>>in an effort to reconstruct his last movements.
>>For the British tabloids, it was an open-and-shut case: Diana was
>>driven to her death by
>>an irresponsible drunkard.
>>Three separate tests showed he had at least
>>173 milligrams
>>of alcohol per 100 milliliters of blood -- three times the legal
>>limit.
>>Paul was born on July 8, 1956
>> in Lorient, a coastal resort and naval
>>base in southern
>>Brittany.
>>He went to L'Ecole St Louis, a well-regarded private Roman
>>Catholic school.
>>There, he won prizes for piano and violin playing.
>Former school
>>friends say he was
>>intelligent, quick-witted and could have shone academically.
>He took his pilot's licence at the
>>age of 17
> In 1977, aged 21, Paul moved
>>to Paris, where
>>he earned a living giving lessons to aspiring pilots.
>He took a small
>>studio apartment at
>>5 Rue des Petits Champs, a 10-minute walk from the Ritz.
>>
>>Paul served his compulsory one year's military service in the French
>>air force.
>>He spent his
>>service days in charge of security at the airbase at Rochefort, on the
>>Atlantic coast near
>>La Rochelle
>>On his return to Paris, aged 24, he began a six-year stint working for
>>Emeraude Marine,
>>a specialist sailing store.
>>in 1986, a friend told him of a
>>vacancy in the Ritz hotel's
>>security team. Paul was originally employed by the Ritz on a freelance
>>contract. But he
>>worked his way up to a position as acting head of security. With a
>>salary of more than
>>$35,000 a year, he had 20 Ritz employees under his command. He was
>>hard working
>>and respected.
>>Some who had known Paul for a long time recalled him drinking heavily
>>10 or so years
>>ago
>After a May Day celebration in the staff canteen this year he was
>>seen giggling and
>>clearly drunk as he poked fun at a security man in the hotel lobby in
>>front of staff and
>>guests.
>>The 60-page report of his autopsy, however, showed no liver
>>damage of the
>>kind associated with long-term alcoholism.
>>Paul was a creature of routine.
>>Each Wednesday he dined with friends
>>at Le Grand
>>Colbert, a local restaurant. Joel Fleury, the owner, recalled: "He was
>>a straightforward
>>guy. He appreciated good French cuisine and enjoyed a drink. But I
>>have never seen
>>him drunk. When he came with his girlfriend she would have a glass of
>>champagne. He
>>would just sip Perrier water."
>>A woman giving her name as Laurence P. contacted "Le Figaro," the
>>French
>>newspaper, to say that she had been Paul's lover for five years, and
>>had never known
>>him to take any medicines, nor seen him drink alone. "I'll remember
>>someone who lived
>>life to the full," she was quoted as saying. "His self-control was
>>very impressive -- he
>>loved to be in charge of the situation and had great plans. His
>>professional
>>conscientiousness was irreproachable."
>On the Thursday before his
>>death, Paul, a
>>cigar-smoker, had walked into the Center Radiologique Palais Royal, a
>>private clinic in
>>central Paris. Staff say he had not been referred there by a doctor
>>and do not know why
>>he had wanted the X-ray, which showed that his worries were
>>groundless: his lungs were
>>healthy.
>>On the same day he had also been to see his local GP, Diane Beaulieu
>>D'Ivernois, for a
>>routine medical for his pilot's license. She would not discuss her
>>patien
>>Insight has examined his medical record back to 1976.
>>He had undergone
>>regular tests
>>on his urine, reflexes, coordination and emotional state, and had
>>passed them all.
>>Paul was again judged physically and mentally fit to fly following his
>>last examination.
>>D'Ivernois entered one qualification: Paul must wear glasses when
>>flying.
>>On the Mini's back seat lay a crumpled-up poster -- a promotional
>>advertisement for
>>Cutty Sark whisky. It carried a standard warning: "The abuse of
>>alcohol is dangerous to
>>health. Drink in moderation."
>>At 7:05 p.m. on Aug. 30, Paul came off duty and drove off from the
>>Ritz.
>
>>At 9:52 p.m. the couple returned to the Ritz, looking harassed.
>> Paul received a call
>> shortly after 10 p.m.
>> on his mobile telephone
To use the words "shortly after"
rather than "at" I would guess
would require at least one minute.
So, I guess, the earliest he would
have received the call was one
minute after.
It says he, "received a call" not that
he made a call.
>> and returned to the
>>hotel at 10:08 p.m.
It has been said that when he
left the hotel at 7:05 p.m. he
thought he was off for the
night.
If that, then, from the time he
"received" an (unexpected?)
call, how long would the call
have lasted? One minute?
More? Two minutes?
It we use the 10:08 as possible
seconds before 10:09 and we
subtract two minutes for the
call. . . . Is it supposed that
some negotiation process occurred
such that subsequently a decision
was reached, as oppossed to a
course of action already having
been planned in advance?
That would leave 7x60 = 420 seconds
for him to get to his car, drive to the
Ritz, park the car. get out of the
car and walk to enter the Ritz.
I suspect that there are people
who could not get off the toilet
and back to the bar in 420 seconds.
That does not seem like a long time
for an unexpected call that conveys
information from which an unplanned
decision must be made and then
the remainder of the events necessary
to get him back physically to the
hotel. Seven minutes MAXIMUM.
>>What he had done during the three hours in between is still not known.
>>Several friends
>>said he was at home when he received the call to return to the hotel
Well, if one drew a circle around the
hotel at a reasonable time/distance
that he could have driven back that
would be an interesting map.
I guess one could assume that
he might have been in his car
and driving in the vicinity of the
hotel at the time he received the
call.
>>-- but this remains
>>unconfirmed.
>>Some time between 10:30 p.m. and midnight Paul wandered out of the
>>front entrance
>>and started chatting to Romuald Rat, a paparazzo.
>>Paul said he had just bought a new camera and wanted advice on which
>>flash to buy.
>>Rat had met Paul many times before. That night, he said, Paul seemed
>>"very relaxed."
>>Over the next hour Paul came out repeatedly to talk to the
>>photographers. "They'll be out
>>soon, you can go home after 10 minutes," he teased them
> Most of the
>>photographers
>>were still at the front of the hotel when Paul drove the Mercedes
>>carrying Dodi, Diana
>>and Rees-Jones from the rear at 12:20 a.m.
>>Serge Benamou, a freelance photographer, was one of at least two
>>paparazzi who had
>>been waiting at the back.
>Benamou says he snapped a couple of pictures
>>of the
>>Mercedes as it drove off.
> He then jumped on his scooter and followed
>>it to the Place de
>>la Concorde.
If he finished taking his pictures as it
drove off and then jumped on his scooter
and followed it to the Place de Concorde
it was not traveling fast during that time.
>>the Place de
>>la Concorde.
>There, he says, Paul shot a red traffic light and
>>accelerated at high speed
>>towards the the Alma tunnel on the north bank of the Seine.
>>Two days after the
>>accident, Michael Cole, al Fayed's chief spokesman, alleged
>>photographers had fired
>>flashguns through the car's windscreen after it had left the Ritz.
>>"Henri Paul was dazzled by a flash, while Trevor Rees-Jones was
>>lowering the sun-visor
>>to protect himself from the photographers and Princess Diana was
>>hiding her face in her
>>arms," he said.
>>
<a href="http://members.home.com/godsbrain/index.htm">G.O.D.S.B.R.A.I.N.</a>
<br>
GODS...@home.com
On Sun, 16 Apr 2000 21:10:11 -0700, "Aleeta" <ajoh...@psesd.org>
wrote:
>NNTP-Posting-Host: 206.125.81.21
>Message-ID: <38fa9...@huge.aa.net>
>X-Trace: 16 Apr 2000 21:19:42 -0600, 206.125.81.21
>Organization: Alternate Access Inc. Affordable, Reliable Access to the InterNet
>X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: 204.157.220.254
>Path: news1.frmt1.sfba.home.com!newshub1.home.com!news.home.com!newsfeed.direct.ca!nntp.primenet.com!nntp.gctr.net!nntp-cust.primenet.com!huge.aa.net!206.125.81.21
>Xref: newshub1.home.com alt.conspiracy.princess-diana:30030882
>
>Does anyone know for sure if Henri Paul was actually wearing his glasses while he was driving?
>
>Aleeta
I have never considered the issue prior to your here post. So, as far
as I know, the issue has never been discussed.
<a href="http://members.home.com/godsbrain">G.O.D.S.B.R.A.I.N.</a><br>
Aleeta
--
~ A J's Fun Photos ~
http://picture.com
http://members.delphi.com/ALEETA
http://www.familytreemaker.com/users/j/o/h/ALEETA-E-Johnson
<GODS...@HOME.COM> wrote in message
news:8n1mfss0cu2ou4qhe...@4ax.com...
> </html>
>
> On Sun, 16 Apr 2000 21:10:11 -0700, "Aleeta" <ajoh...@psesd.org>
> wrote:
>
> >NNTP-Posting-Host: 206.125.81.21
> >Message-ID: <38fa9...@huge.aa.net>
> >X-Trace: 16 Apr 2000 21:19:42 -0600, 206.125.81.21
> >Organization: Alternate Access Inc. Affordable, Reliable Access to the
InterNet
> >X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: 204.157.220.254
> >Path:
news1.frmt1.sfba.home.com!newshub1.home.com!news.home.com!newsfeed.direct.ca
!nntp.primenet.com!nntp.gctr.net!nntp-cust.primenet.com!huge.aa.net!206.125.
81.21
> >Xref: newshub1.home.com alt.conspiracy.princess-diana:30030882
> >
> >Does anyone know for sure if Henri Paul was actually wearing his glasses
while he was driving?
> >
> >Aleeta
>
> I have never considered the issue prior to your here post. So, as far
> as I know, the issue has never been discussed.
~~~~I don't think it has either and sometimes the simplest things get left
out and they could actually be very important. It stated in that article
posted that he needed to wear his glasses when in flight and also he had
poor vision in his youth and my radar went off and running.:o))
Aleeta
GODS...@home.com
Clinton's suppose to be on a live webcaste in seconds at:
http://corp.aol.com/cgi/newmarket/video-high.html
On Mon, 17 Apr 2000 07:45:14 -0700, "Aleeta" <ajoh...@psesd.org>
wrote:
GODS...@home.com
I guess somebody could ask Kes Wingfield if he had
been wearing them that afternoon on the way in from
the airport.
On Mon, 17 Apr 2000 07:45:14 -0700, "Aleeta" <ajoh...@psesd.org>
wrote:
>~~~~I don't think it has either and sometimes the simplest things get left
ron
27/7/98 Olivier Lafaye, the usual driver of the Mercedes, tells
an examining magistrate that the car's brakes were defective.
18/11/98 An expert says Henri Paul may have made a driving error
by putting the car in neutral while attempting to change down
into a lower gear to reduce speed.
This may have been a normal reaction on the spur of
the moment.
But ties in with some witness accounts of hearing a
whinning noise before the crash.
Haven't seen much posted about the car.
Here is a list of its safety features, energy-absorbing front
and rear sections(crumple zones, anti-lock brakes and electronic
traction control. the S280 also has a sophisticated electronic-
sensing system called ESP, or Electronic Stability Program,
which monitors wheel speed and senses what direction the driver
wants to steer and the speed at which the car will round a
corner successfully. If the driver is losing control the ESP
will apply the brakes to individual wheels to stabilize the
vehicle, it even can automatically adjust the throttle to keep
the car on course. If the model was after 1996 side airbags are
also fitted.
I seem to remember somewhere the year of the car is reported and
recall it was 1996ish. A state of the art as this car is I would
fathom a guess would be best served by mantaintance from a
Mercedes trained mechanic or electrical engineer. Apparently Mr.
Musa was an ex employee of the Ritz who had gone private. I
wonder if he was into a full maintance programme with his fleet.
But then he may have been legally obliged to run a well
maintained fleet by law.
But I wonder if any of these systems would have been activated
in entering the tunnel or in the left, right and left motions
which HP is reported to have made. Whether in the usual
operation of the ESP system whether that would be activated.
There is also the other question whether or not this system
could be activated remotely without the driver being able to
over-ride it.
Aleeta has brought up the question of HP's eyesight and his
wearing specks. I rather think he was wearing specks(he is seen
wearing specks coming through the swing doors of the Ritz on his
return) which may have had expensive presciption type lenses and
may also be suitable for night driving. His job required him to
have keen eyesight. My own have a special coating to reduce
glare but I am still troubled by on coming headlights
particularly at pedestrian crossings that are lit and at which I
slow down even if no one is waiting to cross. Depending on the
lighting in that tunnel I would have thought that coming off
the main road into the tunnel proper there was likely to be a
change in visibility. Have no idea of the wattage or is it
ampere of pap quality camera flashlights or the extent of their
flashes but its probably likely that HP' vision would have been
effected, but would that have caused a drastic turn of the
steering wheel? A left and right and left again motion would
seem to me to be caused more by a motorcycle than a car since
there would be more area to head for in order to pass it than
there would be if it was another car, a Fiat Uno for instance.
I would have had more confidence in the findings of the french
inspection of the car if after their inspection they allowed
the Mercedes representatives to look it over. The only normal
excuse for their refusal would be a matter of pride in that
French experts are just as capable as German to check over a
car. However, I cannot see any loss in pride if they genuinely
found nothing untoward and gave the Mercedes a chance to affirm
that position.
Hey, there's a posting from our resident sleuth and one from me
which I hope will give everyone a lift.
I'am 51 knocking on 52 and still await a line from Banana before
it is too late. Hey, what does one have to do to get a bit of
attention round here?
Ron Winn
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
GODS...@home.com
On Tue, 18 Apr 2000 18:46:30 -0700, ron
<ron_winn...@lineone.net.invalid> wrote:
> Hey, what does one have to do to get a bit of
>attention round here?
>Ron Winn
A bit is one thing, the probability goes down
as the hoped for bits go up.
You ask a lot of interesting questions
that have piece at a time been possibly
mentioned before but not much more
known than you aparently do.
Some of the people are using deja
news where they can seach back
through post to the group over most
of the time since the crash.
I don't use it almost at all so I am not
the one to quickly tell you how.
I am interested in some of the same
questions but in a sense you do not
add much. I have written almost all
I am going to write today.
Over time I will try to help you and
I and others develope some data
base of answers and questions
related.
There was that new URL yesterday
that I haven't had much time to explore.
There is a Kevin Warren page, a Senderburl
page, some stuff off of my page that
ought to keep you busy for a while.
There was a Winn Insurance agency in
my home town of Gilroy Californa when
I was a kid, say about 1950 but I don't
know what happended to it. You have
a family background in auto insurance?
GODS...@home.com
On Wed, 19 Apr 2000 02:55:19 GMT, GODS...@HOME.COM wrote:
>On Tue, 18 Apr 2000 18:46:30 -0700, ron
><ron_winn...@lineone.net.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Hey, what does one have to do to get a bit of
>>attention round here?
>>Ron Winn
>
>There was a Winn Insurance agency in
>my home town of Gilroy Californa when
>I was a kid, say about 1950 but I don't
>know what happended to it. You have
>a family background in auto insurance?
In case you do I need a complete set of
auto accident insurance report forms
both in english and in french.
Aleeta
"ron" <ron_winn...@lineone.net.invalid> wrote in message news:025220ee...@usw-ex0104-033.remarq.com...
Sorce unknown but for whats its worth...
27/7/98 Olivier Lafaye, the usual driver of the Mercedes, tells
an examining magistrate that the car's brakes were defective.
18/11/98 An expert says Henri Paul may have made a driving error
by putting the car in neutral while attempting to change down
into a lower gear to reduce speed.
This may have been a normal reaction on the spur of
the moment.
But ties in with some witness accounts of hearing a
whinning noise before the crash.
Haven't seen much posted about the car.
Here is a list of its safety features, energy-absorbing front
and rear sections(crumple zones, anti-lock brakes and electronic
traction control. the S280 also has a sophisticated electronic-
sensing system called ESP, or Electronic Stability Program,
which monitors wheel speed and senses what direction the driver
wants to steer and the speed at which the car will round a
corner successfully. If the driver is losing control the ESP
will apply the brakes to individual wheels to stabilize the
vehicle, it even can automatically adjust the throttle to keep
the car on course. If the model was after 1996 side airbags are
also fitted.
~~~~In the past there was plenty posted about the car. I'd have to look intomy own archives for some of the information. I'd say a good year and ahalf ago there would plenty in the Deja archives. The vehicle had actually been stolen prior to the usage of it and the repairs I believe, going on memory came to $26,000. There had been complaints on the brakes I recall but they passed an inspection.
~~~~We may have seen him with his glasses on prior to driving but that isn'tenough to prove he was wearing them at the time of the accident. He was required to wear them while flying. I don't recall his glasses being on the list of items in the vehicle.
I would have had more confidence in the findings of the french
inspection of the car if after their inspection they allowed
the Mercedes representatives to look it over. The only normal
excuse for their refusal would be a matter of pride in that
French experts are just as capable as German to check over a
car. However, I cannot see any loss in pride if they genuinely
found nothing untoward and gave the Mercedes a chance to affirm
that position.
Hey, there's a posting from our resident sleuth and one from me
which I hope will give everyone a lift.
I'am 51 knocking on 52 and still await a line from Banana before
it is too late. Hey, what does one have to do to get a bit of
attention round here?~~~~Make a post in his name.:o)) Don't feel bad, it took him well over a year before he ever spoke to me and I used to ask him questions and they were ignored and at that time I was on the conspiracy side. As soon as I gathered enough material and started noticing how MAF told so many lies and no one conspiracist agreed on any one thing, I made complaints about MAF and then he started talking to me and hasn't quit.:o)) Do something unique.<VBG>Aleeta
GODS...@home.com
On Wed, 19 Apr 2000 01:10:20 -0700, "Aleeta" <ajoh...@psesd.org>
wrote:
> ~~~~We may have seen him with his glasses on prior to driving but that isn't
> enough to prove he was wearing them at the time of the accident.
> He was required to wear them while flying.
> I don't recall his glasses being on the list of items in the vehicle.
Neither do I.
If the french investigators have never released a true report of the
investigation then what makes who think that the alleged list of
items supposedly found in the car is anywhere near true and correct?
Can we go back and see if we can find where that reported list
came from? Who was the probable author? When, and from where,
was it first reported to the public? Do we have sufficient expertise
to make some decision as to estimating a confidence factor for its
veracity?
GODSBRAIN
>From: "Aleeta" ajoh...@psesd.org
>Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2000 01:10:20 -0700
> "ron" <ron_winn...@lineone.net.invalid> wrote in message =
>news:025220ee...@usw-ex0104-033.remarq.com...
>
> I'am 51 knocking on 52 and still await a line from Banana before
> it is too late. Hey, what does one have to do to get a bit of
> attention round here?
>
>
> ~~~~Make a post in his name.:o)) Don't feel bad, it took him well =
>over a year before he ever spoke to me and I used to ask him questions =
>and they were ignored and at that time I was on the conspiracy side. As =
>soon as I gathered enough material and started noticing how MAF told so =
>many lies and no one conspiracist agreed on any one thing, I made =
>complaints about MAF and then he started talking to me and hasn't =
>quit.:o)) Do something unique.<VBG>
>
> Aleeta
> Ron Winn
>
>
>
<a href="http://members.home.com/godsbrain/index.htm">G.O.D.S.B.R.A.I.N.</a>
<br>
fay
occasions......
GODSBRAIN <gods...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20000419080308...@ng-md1.aol.com...
> >Subject: Re: Di: Paul, Henri, History, 60 Page Autopsy, Etc.
> >From: "Aleeta" ajoh...@psesd.org
>
> >Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2000 01:10:20 -0700
>
> > "ron" <ron_winn...@lineone.net.invalid> wrote in message =
> >news:025220ee...@usw-ex0104-033.remarq.com...
> >
>
> > I'am 51 knocking on 52 and still await a line from Banana before
> > it is too late. Hey, what does one have to do to get a bit of
> > attention round here?
> >
>
> >
> > ~~~~Make a post in his name.:o)) Don't feel bad, it took him well =
> >over a year before he ever spoke to me and I used to ask him questions =
> >and they were ignored and at that time I was on the conspiracy side. As
=
> >soon as I gathered enough material and started noticing how MAF told so =
> >many lies and no one conspiracist agreed on any one thing, I made =
> >complaints about MAF and then he started talking to me and hasn't =
> >quit.:o)) Do something unique.<VBG>
> >
> > Aleeta
> > Ron Winn
> >
> >
> >
>
Trevjon
fay <f...@thedeep.screaming.net> wrote in message
news:38fd...@news.server.worldonline.co.uk...
> guess i must be honoured then Banana has replied to me on a couple of
> occasions......
>
I sometimes get fed-up of him replying to me, as it just usually political
clap-trap.
Steve Reed
Oro...@lineone.net.invalid> writes
>Sorce unknown but for whats its worth...
>27/7/98 Olivier Lafaye, the usual driver of the Mercedes, tells
>an examining magistrate that the car's brakes were defective.
And that Musa knew this...
>18/11/98 An expert says Henri Paul may have made a driving error
>by putting the car in neutral while attempting to change down
>into a lower gear to reduce speed.
Yes what was his name? But this is slanted! It seems that the car was
knocked out of gear - but why should we assume that Henri Paul did it?
It may have been with a view to doing this that Trevor Rees-Jones
INSISTED on joining the party!
He agreed to the car-switch, the change of driver, leaving behind the
escort vehicle, and Wingfield, and an exit from the rear of the hotel -
because, so he said, he was just an employee following orders - so why
did he insist on going along?
And what could he have hoped to achieve by knocking the car out of
gear?
I think TRJ was not aware of the method which would be used to crash the
car. I think his job - so he thought - was to slow the car down so that
shots could be fired through the clear windows of the S-280. Hence the
early, unguarded report that he was not wearing a seat-belt, even at
high speed (BG's eschew seat-belts in order to dodge bullets) and hence
the later, revised report that he WAS wearing one (avoiding the awkward
assumption that, even at speeds of up to 114mph, TRJ was still afraid of
gunfire)
In fact, his job, although he didn't know it, was to conceal the
complicity of the BG's in the plot to crash the car, BY BEING ON BOARD
WHEN IT HAPPENED! Not being clever enough to withstand cross-
examination on this issue - or, indeed, very willing to cover up for
the people who betrayed him - he has to pretend to have lost his memory.
>
> This may have been a normal reaction on the spur of
>the moment.
> But ties in with some witness accounts of hearing a
>whinning noise before the crash.
>
Well, of course it does - because the expert, what's-his-name, formed
his opinion entirely on the basis of those ear-witness reports!
>Haven't seen much posted about the car.
>Here is a list of its safety features, energy-absorbing front
>and rear sections(crumple zones, anti-lock brakes and electronic
>traction control. the S280 also has a sophisticated electronic-
>sensing system called ESP, or Electronic Stability Program,
>which monitors wheel speed and senses what direction the driver
>wants to steer and the speed at which the car will round a
>corner successfully. If the driver is losing control the ESP
>will apply the brakes to individual wheels to stabilize the
>vehicle, it even can automatically adjust the throttle to keep
>the car on course. If the model was after 1996 side airbags are
>also fitted.
>
>I seem to remember somewhere the year of the car is reported and
>recall it was 1996ish. A state of the art as this car is I would
>fathom a guess would be best served by mantaintance from a
>Mercedes trained mechanic or electrical engineer. Apparently Mr.
>Musa was an ex employee of the Ritz who had gone private. I
>wonder if he was into a full maintance programme with his fleet.
>But then he may have been legally obliged to run a well
>maintained fleet by law.
>
>But I wonder if any of these systems would have been activated
>in entering the tunnel or in the left, right and left motions
>which HP is reported to have made. Whether in the usual
>operation of the ESP system whether that would be activated.
>There is also the other question whether or not this system
>could be activated remotely without the driver being able to
>over-ride it.
>
You have the crucial facts already: Lafaye said that the brakes were
unreliable at speed and that he had told Musa this more than once. Musa
KNEW that the brakes would behave unpredictably if Henri Paul could be
induced to drive fast and then suddenly slow down! Musa offered this
car as the only car available.
>Aleeta has brought up the question of HP's eyesight and his
>wearing specks. I rather think he was wearing specks(he is seen
>wearing specks coming through the swing doors of the Ritz on his
>return) which may have had expensive presciption type lenses and
>may also be suitable for night driving. His job required him to
>have keen eyesight. My own have a special coating to reduce
>glare but I am still troubled by on coming headlights
>particularly at pedestrian crossings that are lit and at which I
>slow down even if no one is waiting to cross. Depending on the
>lighting in that tunnel I would have thought that coming off
>the main road into the tunnel proper there was likely to be a
>change in visibility.
Not at night.
> Have no idea of the wattage or is it
>ampere of pap quality camera flashlights or the extent of their
>flashes but its probably likely that HP' vision would have been
>effected,
Are you implying that the close pursuers were paps - or posing as paps?
There is some evidence that there were bright flashes of light, in the
tunnel, just before the crash, and, if there were, we may assume that
they might have been used to blind the driver. Alternatively, or in
addition, we might surmise that, since TRJ's airbag was still inflated
long after the crash, that it was fixed to stay inflated, and that Henri
Paul's was fixed to inflate and deflate rapidly during the minor
collision with the obstructing vehicle. This would have had the effect
of depriving HP of airbag-protection at final impact, but also perhaps
of blinding him during the crucial second or two after he scraped past
the obstructing vehicle.
> but would that have caused a drastic turn of the
>steering wheel? A left and right and left again motion would
>seem to me to be caused more by a motorcycle than a car since
>there would be more area to head for in order to pass it than
>there would be if it was another car, a Fiat Uno for instance.
>
The presence of the obstructing vehicle is well attested - the numbers
and descriptions of the close pursuers less so; but that there were a
number of other vehicles present at the crash, and which subsequently
fled the scene, is beyond question. How fascinating then, that the
alleged translated extracts from the Stephan report (ATER) hardly
mention them at all!
>I would have had more confidence in the findings of the french
>inspection of the car if after their inspection they allowed
>the Mercedes representatives to look it over. The only normal
>excuse for their refusal would be a matter of pride in that
>French experts are just as capable as German to check over a
>car. However, I cannot see any loss in pride if they genuinely
>found nothing untoward and gave the Mercedes a chance to affirm
>that position.
>
Yup
>Hey, there's a posting from our resident sleuth and one from me
>which I hope will give everyone a lift.
>
>I'am 51 knocking on 52 and still await a line from Banana before
>it is too late. Hey, what does one have to do to get a bit of
>attention round here?
>Ron Winn
>
>
>
>* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
>The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
>
--
Steve Reed
ron
Read up on the posting of Wingfield's interview by Van Sustren
and how he got to hear about the passengers physical states from
Musa / Philippe who we are told were at the scene and from whom
Kez learns that they were all dead and tells MAF of that fact
after meeting MAF from his plane. The most puzzling being that
Musa was able to report Di had hurt her legs but reported TRJ
was dead. Wingfield says Musa/Philippe got there 5 minutes after
the crash. Clearly Wingfield must have heard more from Musa
about their conditions to then report Diana had died. Apart from
the obvious that Diana was not dead in the full meaning of the
word until her arrival at the Hospital which Musa was in no
position to report, he did not report to Wingfield that TRJ was
not dead.
We are lead to believe that Wingfield was in the dark as to what
had happened to the Limo until Musa who left him back at the
apartment without telling him where he was going, contacted him
from the scene.
View this puzzling story by itself as you will, but if your
theory is correct then Wingfield has to play dumb. He cannot be
seen to have noticed anything untoward and has to remain, so to
speak, in the background. His story means that he is not a
material witness.
Unless Wingfield was so pissed off with Dodi and smelly Henri
and the plan that he simply gave up his body guard duties, he
should have shown far more concern. It was afterall a lone car
and 1 bd which was not following proper proceedures. I think
that maybe Wingfield followed the Limo (he surely must have done
when he left his position outside the Ritz towards midnight and
followed the 280 until reaching a stage where perhaps he saw
what happened in the tunnel and took off lest he become too
much of a witness. The Mercedes 600 might have been the car that
Hunter from his hotel window saw speeding from the scene.It was
a white Mercedes. Was the Mercedes 600 white by any chance? I'm
going to be shot down in flames here I know it. If this is too
far-fetched then Kez left his mate TRJ to fend for himself. If
two bd's were not enough then 1 was simply outrageous.
Your point of the airbags. First we had witness evidence that
the passenger side airbag was inflated giving the impression
HP's was not. Then a poster telling as having pictures showing
both airbags inflated. We've had the seat belt myth but what
about the airbag myth. In proper operation what should airbags
do. Inflate after a certain impact pressure - but stay inflated
or automatically deflate after a certain time.
It is reported that HP had the steering wheel impact his chest.
His airbag did not protect him whereas TRJ's did. I reckon it is
quite simple to "adjust" the time when an airbag blows either
before it is intended to or after it is intended and such is the
mechanism any tampering would, I would sugget not be discovered,
at least prior to its use.
The flashes seen by many witnesses. Laser gun or camera flashes?
Now, if we only knew the answer to that one.
For Godsbrain... Hi.
My aim is really to test the facts. If I seem to cheat a little
in fishing expeditions, my only excuse, indeed genuine excuse
is income (or the lack of it) and visiting old URL's or new
one's is too costly. The wife is complaining even now.
That's spooky. I have found myself, late in my working career
forced (because of age), into Insurance, Marine/cargo not Motor
but I did try at first to get into Motor insurance. I'am
surprised that this has been an ongoing NG and that a conclusion
has not been reached yet. Some accident!
For Aleeta... Hi again.
US$ 26,000? It should have been declared a total loss and sold
as salvage.Thats about half the cost of a new one.
I'am not so sure I want a line from Banana now (is that unique
enough)
Unless MAF's attacks on TRJ are because of frustration and
grief I do not see why Trev deserves it. He is the only one who
could say what happened and perhaps MAF is pissed off with his
loss of memory. Question - did Trev fear MAF's anger or even
dismissal if MAF had discovered Dodi had left without any bd.
Dodi confirmed MAF had OK'd it. Two bd's out front could have
effectively pulled off the ruse of the decoy. Dodi would not go
anywhere without his shadow or SAS colleague.
It might even have caused those paps out front to warn those at
the rear that the couple where about to come out. Come to think
of it, Dodi's plan was to leave the bd's behind it was only
Trev's intervention, in the event that made it look pathetic. Is
this what truelly angers MAF?
Now, concerning bd's ringing London to confirm this plan.
Wingfield was ready enough to ring London for information of the
whereabouts of the Limo.(which we are told he eventually found
out from Musa at the crash scene) Effectively he was saying to
London that he'd lost Dodi, the person that he was paid to
protect. If he was ready then, why was Wingfield afraid to ring
London to confirm the plan. Surely it was the most natural thing
to do which any decent father or boss would have appreciated. A
conscientious employee and surely a professional thing to do if
you are a body guard.
It was not Dodi who paid their salaries it was MAF. It seems
that MAF had not laid down any ground rules for the bd's to
follow. Who they were to report / answer to. It seems odd that
there was this ops room in London and MAF was very much a hands
on boss and yet neither wanted to ring London. It was
effectively saying we do not believe Dodi but what the hell
there were 30 odd paps outside and what did Dodi know about it,
he had his mind on matters of love. I'am satisfied I acted
professionally and we don't really respect Dodi anyway. So its
best if we ring London.
Just before I go, I just spotted Cromwell saying that no one
would be licensed to ride Arsov's bike other than his self. I'm
not an authority on this but surely a police patrolman
or anyone with government authority could have done so.
ron
There is perhaps some wheat here, maybe some chaff. Chaff is
just as important in my view cos it still tells a story.
Extract from dianaconspiracy.homepage.com/time.html
(spot the quotes they ain't mine)
10:00 pm
Ritz Imperial Suite
Dodi & Diana dine in the hotel restaurant, L'Espadon. Due to
stares of other patrons at their casual dress, the left after 10
minutes and dined in the Imperial Suite
......Thats snobbery for you.Wasn't because they were who they
were,eh
10:08 pm
Ritz
Henri Paul arrives in his Austin Cooper
23:00
Ritz Imperial Suite
Dodi answers his mobile phone. He is asked to hurry the meal and
appeared angry
......If true, who could have got him to rush his meal and why?
Conspiracy.
Ritz Imperial Suite
"With dinner over, the decision is made to use Fayed's Mercedes
600 and a Range Rover, the two cars Diana and Fayed had been
using all day, as decoy vehicles. . . " With most paparazzi
stationed near the Range Rover at the hotel's Place Vendome
entrance, fewer lurk near the anonymous service entrance off the
10-foot-wide Rue Cambon
There were several motorbikes there in the evening,' says
MARIANNE CHEVRIE, who lives nearby and walked home along the Rue
Cambon, passing the entrance around 11:00 p.m.
31 August
00:19
HP briefs Dodi and Diana
"Diana and Rees-Jones appear at the small door to meet Paul, who
has pulled the black Mercedes within a foot of the curb. The
photographers are waiting."
..........Now I thought the 600 was delivered and HP came out
with Di and Trev
Conspiracy.
00:20
Rees-Jones escorts Diana to the car. She sits on the rear
passenger side. Fayed joins her on the rear driver's side. "Paul
has the engine running. Some say he was giddy with the
photographers. Others claim he openly boasted, 'Tonight you
won't catch us.'"
'He was laughing a lot. Many said he wasn't his usual self,'
says Jacques Langevin of the Sygma agency, one of the
photographers under investigation for involuntary manslaughter."
No conspiracy. HP drugged and drunk. Accident.
"In an interview, [photographer Jacques Langevin] recalled
seeing Paul...emerge from the Ritz after a decoy van drove off."
He was laughing a lot. A lot of photographers said he wasn't his
usual self,' Langevin said." 'The car took off very fast. My car
was up the road. There was no way mine could keep up, so I knew
it was finished for me,' Langevin said."
No conspiracy. HP speeding. Accident.
Car was too far away or too slow for JL to catch up.
Benamou followed on his scooter.
(In Alain Guizard's first statement (ATER.. D1057-D003)
he had seen JL' Golf
in the group hehind the Limo at Place de la Concorde
lights. But later did not confirm this
statement)
"...And the Times of London reports today that (HP) taunted
photographers by saying, 'Catch me if you can,' before speeding
away ..."
No conspiracy. Accident.
00:21
Place de la Concorde
Mohammed Rabouille, cab driver:" 'There was a limousine, a
Mercedes with several motorcycles behind and near it. I thought
it was an escort, but there were too many (motorcycles) for one
car.' He did not count the number. "Nor did it seems to
Rabouille that the Mercedes was speeding. 'It was the last
Saturday before the end of the summer holidays, so the traffic
was pretty thin.' "
5 - 3 BMW's, a Honda and a Yamaha.
Conspiracy or Involuntary Manslaughter.
00:22
Tunnel Alexandre III
THIERRY H. had been driving in the right lane of the express
road near the Alexander III Bridge, approximately 800 meters
before the Alma tunnel. He was "passed by a vehicle moving at a
very high speed. I estimated its speed at about 75 mph to 80
mph. It was a powerful black car, I think a Mercedes... This car
was clearly being pursued by several motorcycles, I would say
four to six of them. Some were mounted by two riders. These
motorcycles were tailing the vehicle and some tried to pull up
alongside it."
00:23-00:25
"BENOIT B., as he is identified in the [police] dossier, was in
a car driving on the other side of the tunnel. 'I heard the
squeal of tires and then the sound of a minor impact,' Benoit
says. 'I saw two vehicles, the first car was dark . . . I think
the Mercedes was going so quickly it hit the other car and then
lost control.' "
Note "dark"
"HUNTER said: 'I was watching television when I heard the crash
at exactly 12:25 a.m. There was an almighty crash followed by
the sound of skidding, then another crash. My initial thought
was that there had been a head-on collision. I went to the
window and saw people running towards the tunnel.' "Seconds
later, Hunter said, he saw a car turning from the area by the
tunnel exit and roaring down the Rue Jean Goujon, the street
below. 'I heard a screeching of tires. I saw a small dark car
turning the corner at the top of the road. I would say it was
racing at 60-70 mph.'" 'My own feeling is that these were people
in a hurry not to be there. I am confident that car was getting
off the scene. It was obvious they were getting away from
something and that they were in a hurry. It looked quite
sinister. I can't recall the type of car, but it was a small
dark vehicle. It could have been a Fiat Uno or a
Renault.' "Hunter said the car was being shadowed by another
vehicle, a white Mercedes. He has given a detailed account of
the crash to lawyers for Mohamed al-Fayed. He said he had been
told his evidence had been passed to French police.
Note "dark"
What do you think of evidence provided by Georges & Sabine D
about seeing this Fiat
back-firing, swerving all over the place with a big dog in the
rear, a driver looking awefully suspicious. Either they are a
very nice old couple - my sister has a rug in the back of her
Fiat so I looked in the back of this one a saw a dog or the
whole thing was a set-up to lead the police to someone they had
in mind. Wasn't this investigation to look for a white Uno
taking off as fast as someone wanted so the police was given a
hard push.
OK I know the strength of the debris found at the scene but who
saw a white Uno?
Ron
Aleeta
--
~ A J's Fun Photos ~
http://picture.com
http://members.delphi.com/ALEETA
http://www.familytreemaker.com/users/j/o/h/ALEETA-E-Johnson
"ron" <ron_winn...@lineone.net.invalid> wrote in message
news:03cfeca4...@usw-ex0105-038.remarq.com...
~~~~Hello Ron,
I could be off a bit but I know it was at least $20,000 and or better, I was
going on memory, but
I was shocked as yourself over the price of repairs. I wish I didn't have
my books packed away
because their was much to speak about this portion of the story with the
vehicle being stolen and stripped of some of it's parts. Much of it may
have been electronic. Hopefully someone else still
has their notes or references that will speak some more on this issue. I
don't know how long it will take for me to get back online once I leave the
state here as of Wednesday of next week. I was once told that Diana's
brother had the vehicle and paid plenty to have it stripped and searched for
any devices and or bugs. Don't really know for sure of the truth of that
story, but nontheless nothing showed up.
> Unless MAF's attacks on TRJ are because of frustration and
> grief I do not see why Trev deserves it. He is the only one who
> could say what happened and perhaps MAF is pissed off with his
> loss of memory. Question - did Trev fear MAF's anger or even
> dismissal if MAF had discovered Dodi had left without any bd.
> Dodi confirmed MAF had OK'd it. Two bd's out front could have
> effectively pulled off the ruse of the decoy. Dodi would not go
> anywhere without his shadow or SAS colleague.
> It might even have caused those paps out front to warn those at
> the rear that the couple where about to come out. Come to think
> of it, Dodi's plan was to leave the bd's behind it was only
> Trev's intervention, in the event that made it look pathetic. Is
> this what truelly angers MAF?
~~~~I can certainly understand his grief but the man just simply isn't an
honest man
and as far as I'm concerned he has ruined the fabric of the entire chain of
events. It
took me awhile but eventually this is what I personally found to be true and
I simply could
not continue to follow such a dishonest person. It turned my head around.
One has to really wonder why he would lie so much over the importance of his
own son's death. If it were my son, I certainly wouldn't be telling
stories, it rather destroys much. I felt that MAF, was more concerned about
his own hide and I pondered on what it might be that he himself was trying
to cover up. It's a good thought to have while investigating the entire
matter. The man is like a yo-yo and lets face it he has been dishonest in
the past and some people just live their lives being liars and sometimes
they might be telling the truth but they make themselves unbelievable at all
times. He could even be a little bit senile who knows but I can no longer
believe him. In my mind he is a wolf in sheeps clothing and blowing w
whistle that quit working long ago. You must study and discover these on
your own and decide from all points of view and see what in reality
outweighs the other.
I just purchased the Body Guard book and I will be reading it on my trip.
It should prove to be interesting.
Aleeta
GODS...@home.com
Hi Ron,
A very nice post. Thx.
I'm here going to give a quick run through of
sort of first or second(of the day) reading to
start discussion.
I surfed to the page you referenced and
read there for an hour or so.
On Sat, 22 Apr 2000 06:46:36 -0700, ron
<ron_winn...@lineone.net.invalid> wrote:
>Path: news1.frmt1.sfba.home.com!newshub2.rdc1.sfba.home.com!newshub1.home.com!news.home.com!news-peer.gip.net!news.gsl.net!gip.net!newsfeed.berkeley.edu!sn-xit-01!supernews.com!sn-inject-01!WReNclone!WReNphoon3.POSTED!WReN!not-for-mail
>X-Originating-Host: 212.140.41.68
>Organization: http://www.remarq.com: The World's Usenet/Discussions Start Here
>Subject: Re: Di: Paul, Henri, History, 60 Page Autopsy, Etc.
>Lines: 161
>From: ron <ron_winn...@lineone.net.invalid>
>Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.princess-diana
>Message-ID: <22b25f8f...@usw-ex0105-040.remarq.com>
>References: <20000416201432...@ng-cg1.aol.com>
> <20000416220330...@ng-cg1.aol.com> <38fa9...@huge.aa.net>
> <8n1mfss0cu2ou4qhe...@4ax.com>
> <025220ee...@usw-ex0104-033.remarq.com> <VHL8$AAWpz$4I...@lastings.softnet.co.uk>
>Bytes: 6499
>X-Wren-Trace: eCQBKSgxdjx3dj8iHnMsIzgXOCgvJWs8JGYlIjlwbzV5bDVxeiple2ZzeA==
>Date: Sat, 22 Apr 2000 06:46:36 -0700
>NNTP-Posting-Host: 10.0.2.40
>X-Complaints-To: wren...@remarq.com
>X-Trace: WReNphoon3 956411811 10.0.2.40 (Sat, 22 Apr 2000 06:56:51 PDT)
>NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 22 Apr 2000 06:56:51 PDT
>Xref: newshub1.home.com alt.conspiracy.princess-diana:30031036
>
>The truth is out there.
>There is perhaps some wheat here, maybe some chaff. Chaff is
>just as important in my view cos it still tells a story.
>
>Extract from dianaconspiracy.homepage.com/time.html
>(spot the quotes they ain't mine)
>
>10:00 pm
>Ritz Imperial Suite
>Dodi & Diana dine in the hotel restaurant, L'Espadon. Due to
>stares of other patrons at their casual dress, the left after 10
>minutes and dined in the Imperial Suite
I'd like to hear more discussion of what was the basis for
similar statements. In one sense the "Due to stares of other
patrons at their casual dress." I suspect, or at least question
whether, there might have been other motivations for the
move that someones or many might be shading the motivations
for the change of dining place.
>
>......Thats snobbery for you.Wasn't because they were who they
>were,eh
>
>10:08 pm
>Ritz
>Henri Paul arrives in his Austin Cooper
An Austin Cooper does not to me suggest
a symbol that one would choose to
demonstrate their macho as a vehicle
driver.
>
>23:00
>Ritz Imperial Suite
>Dodi answers his mobile phone. He is asked to hurry the meal and
>appeared angry
I would be quite interested to hear discussion as to WHO might have
called.
>
>......If true, who could have got him to rush his meal and why?
> Conspiracy.
Even an analysis of people in Dodi's life who could have even
possibly called him at that time and who's influence could have
caused him to have some emotional, maybe motivational, reaction.
>
>Ritz Imperial Suite
>"With dinner over, the decision is made to use Fayed's Mercedes
I think we could spend a few months just discussing the evolution
of what some have referred to as "Dodi's Plan."
I especially would like to see work up of what presuppositions would
have to, or probably would have had to, been in Dodi's mind before
such a train of thought would have been reasonable.
Like: What type of cars would be available, what choices of
available drivers, etc.
>600 and a Range Rover, the two cars Diana and Fayed had been
>using all day, as decoy vehicles. . . " With most paparazzi
>stationed near the Range Rover at the hotel's Place Vendome
>entrance, fewer lurk near the anonymous service entrance off the
>10-foot-wide Rue Cambon
I've always been a little reversed in understanding the directions.
This is my particular problem because my view of my monitor is towards
the south while the practice of maps is to have the top represent
North. My study is so encumbered that a quick reorientation of my
view is not an immediate possibility. It seems to me a reasonable
possibility that some significant portion of other readers/viewers
could have a similar slowing factor in quick visualization so I feel
it may be worth mentioning now before we get to a phase of the
investigation where a rapid use of on line maps and drawings
are crucial to following the public case presentation, especially
if it every comes to the point of a live trial, somewhat similar
to the OJ trial in California a few years back, but where TV
and the web have had even more time to develope communications
techniques.
>
>There were several motorbikes there in the evening,' says
>MARIANNE CHEVRIE, who lives nearby and walked home along the Rue
>Cambon, passing the entrance around 11:00 p.m.
>
>31 August
>00:19
I like the chronological format of your
post. Especially, to my mind, that it lends
itself to entering other items on a second
to second or even finer time frame and where
pictures and graphic illustrations could also
be accomodated.
>HP briefs Dodi and Diana
>"Diana and Rees-Jones appear at the small door to meet Paul, who
>has pulled the black Mercedes within a foot of the curb. The
>photographers are waiting."
Will somebody quickly say what was the geographic
axis of the ">10-foot-wide Rue Cambon"? In a rough
estimate was it SouthEast/NorthWest, or like the old
mariner's compass directions something like
EastSouthEastbyEast and its opposite. That is just
a made up example of how from many years ago
I saw a means of citing nautical chart compass directions.
Even better, but maybe as an adjunct to rather than a
substitute for, the actual degrees off North = 0 taken
plus, clockwise, or minus, counterclockwise.
It seemed to me that a year or more ago there was
some confusion as to who was one what side of the
car. I suspected that because many of the discussants
were familiar with England and driving on the left side
of the road with a vehicle constructed with the driver's
side on the right a varitety of confusion entered.
I somewhat assume that in France the driving is more
similar to the United States where driving is on the
right and the driver's side of the vehicle is on the
left viewed from the back seat looking forward.
Quite some lengthy discussion over time might
help many of the readership understand
differences in descriptions based on a cultural
point of view from France, the UK or the US and
etc. How does Australia drive, for instance?
>
>..........Now I thought the 600 was delivered and HP came out
>with Di and Trev
> Conspiracy.
That type question had occurred to me. Somewhere there
was mentioned that the vehicle was brought up from a
garage by a Ritz valet. So did He park it from where
they boarded or did HP actually get in and move it
to the boarding position. I would assume that the
passenger side where Di some discussion has indicated
sat would have been on the curb side but my poor
sense of direction does not leave me quickly able
to deal with word descriptions of that. Which way
was the car headed? What direction was the
initial drive off? Etc.
>00:20
>Rees-Jones escorts Diana to the car. She sits on the rear
>passenger side.
I thought, possibly mistakenly, that long ago someone said
that she had walked around the back of the car to enter
and that has never made sense to me.
>Fayed joins her on the rear driver's side. "Paul
>has the engine running.
This upcomming piece is at least certainly out of
chronical order. Unless one would assume, which
I do not, that a group of photographers were
interviewing Henri Paul as he sat in the vehicle with
the engine running and while Di and Dodi where
boarding.
>Some say he was giddy with the
>photographers. Others claim he openly boasted, 'Tonight you
>won't catch us.'"
You can see that somebody has mangled the chronology.
Ron, did you do that or who?
>'He was laughing a lot. Many said he wasn't his usual self,'
Enter the names of "many"
1.
2.
3.
4.
One would be "1.", two would be "2. ",
several would be "3 - 6" and "many" would
be like six or more in my guess. Does some
body hereabouts want to enter a more
studied cultural description of what numbers
would be associated. And if readers just
want to contribute what their impression
of the numbers ranges that would be thought
of on hearing such terms that is welcome.
>says Jacques Langevin of the Sygma agency, one of the
>photographers under investigation for involuntary manslaughter."
>
Well, if I were under investigation for "involuntary manslaughter"
I would say "many" too.
> No conspiracy. HP drugged and drunk. Accident.
>
>"In an interview, [photographer Jacques Langevin] recalled
>seeing Paul...emerge from the Ritz after a decoy van drove off."
>He was laughing a lot. A lot of photographers said he wasn't his
A lot of photographers said.
A lot of photographers in order of certainty:
Photographer Number 1.
Photographer Number 2.
Photographer Number 3.
Photographer Number 4.
How many are a lot?
>usual self,' Langevin said." 'The car took off very fast.
Wasn't there just a post saying that one of the photographers
took pictures as the car pulled off and then he got on his
scooter and followed to the P de C and I had commented
in a responding post that then by that account I don't see
how one could consider that the Merc left "very fast" if
the photographer was able to take the departing photos,
then get on his scooter, follow and be up with the Merc
quite a ways down the road.
>My car
>was up the road. There was no way mine could keep up, so I knew
>it was finished for me,' Langevin said."
So where is this possibly dreamed up saying that before what duration
of observation did he make the conclusion that his car could
not "keep up?"
>
> No conspiracy. HP speeding. Accident.
Bullshit, lies, falsification.
>
>
> Car was too far away or too slow for JL to catch up.
> Benamou followed on his scooter.
> (In Alain Guizard's first statement (ATER.. D1057-D003)
>he had seen JL' Golf
> in the group hehind the Limo at Place de la Concorde
>lights. But later did not confirm this
>statement)
>
>"...And the Times of London reports today that (HP) taunted
>photographers by saying, 'Catch me if you can,' before speeding
>away ..."
>
I think we have close by here heard two different versions of what
HP has been reported to have said. So we could get a closer
time estimate, like down to the second, when and to whom what
was said and how many witnesses have confirmed that they
heard that, in their testimony to Juge Stéphan.
> No conspiracy. Accident.
>
>00:21
>Place de la Concorde
>Mohammed Rabouille, cab driver:" 'There was a limousine, a
>Mercedes with several motorcycles behind and near it. I thought
>it was an escort, but there were too many (motorcycles) for one
>car.' He did not count the number. "Nor did it seems to
>Rabouille that the Mercedes was speeding. 'It was the last
>Saturday before the end of the summer holidays, so the traffic
>was pretty thin.' "
>
> 5 - 3 BMW's, a Honda and a Yamaha.
> Conspiracy or Involuntary Manslaughter.
>
I have been requesting on the acpd a source to
obtain engineering drawings of the road in fine
detail so we can consider exactly where on the road
these vehicles were said to have been. Like to
distances within one or two metres.
>00:22
>Tunnel Alexandre III
>THIERRY H. had been driving in the right lane of the express
>road near the Alexander III Bridge, approximately 800 meters
>before the Alma tunnel. He was "passed by a vehicle moving at a
>very high speed. I estimated its speed at about 75 mph to 80
I don't understand how 75 to 80 would be considered "very high
speed." There has been other testimony that such a speed
would not have been unusual for that area at that time of night
considering road and traffic conditions.
Therefore I suspect that somebody has been troweling on
a few layers of bullshit to shift estimation towards their side
of a possible range of speed estimates.
>mph. It was a powerful black car, I think a Mercedes... This car
>was clearly being pursued by several motorcycles, I would say
>four to six of them. Some were mounted by two riders. These
>motorcycles were tailing the vehicle and some tried to pull up
>alongside it."
Again, I would like to see engineering diagrams that would
attempt to place these vehicles within 1 or 2 metres.
>
>00:23-00:25
> "BENOIT B., as he is identified in the [police] dossier, was in
>a car driving on the other side of the tunnel. 'I heard the
>squeal of tires and then the sound of a minor impact,' Benoit
>says. 'I saw two vehicles, the first car was dark . . . I think
>the Mercedes was going so quickly it hit the other car and then
>lost control.' "
A time animation would be informative at this point to estimate
both the observers, and the observed's, speed and what
would have been the time window of opportunity of the
observation. There have been estimates variously that the
point of impact between two vehicles was prior to the
tunnel entrance from the Merc's side and then up until some
distance inside the tunnel
Was this person inside the tunnel? How far? When and if
they actually observed a collision?"
>
> Note "dark"
>
>"HUNTER said: 'I was watching television when I heard the crash
>at exactly 12:25 a.m. There was an almighty crash followed by
>the sound of skidding, then another crash. My initial thought
>was that there had been a head-on collision. I went to the
>window and saw people running towards the tunnel.'
From my little knowledge I understand/guess that the
road upon which the Merc was was running almost
to the West, possibly a little SouthWest. That then
Hunter would have been in a hotel window looking out to
the Southish. The exit of the tunnel would have been
to his right hand side. The vehicle(s) exiting would then
have made a sharp right, almost "U" turn and passed
under his window going East, slightly more accurately
EastNorthEast. Is that anywhere near a close guess?
>"Seconds
>later, Hunter said, he saw a car turning from the area by the
>tunnel exit and roaring down the Rue Jean Goujon, the street
>below. 'I heard a screeching of tires. I saw a small dark car
>turning the corner at the top of the road. I would say it was
>racing at 60-70 mph.'" 'My own feeling is that these were people
>in a hurry not to be there. I am confident that car was getting
>off the scene. It was obvious they were getting away from
>something and that they were in a hurry. It looked quite
>sinister. I can't recall the type of car, but it was a small
>dark vehicle. It could have been a Fiat Uno or a
>Renault.' "Hunter said the car was being shadowed by another
>vehicle, a white Mercedes. He has given a detailed account of
>the crash to lawyers for Mohamed al-Fayed. He said he had been
>told his evidence had been passed to French police.
>
> Note "dark"
>
>What do you think of evidence provided by Georges & Sabine D
>about seeing this Fiat
>back-firing, swerving all over the place with a big dog in the
Where is this in relation to Hunter's citation of the tunnel exit.
Is this supposed to have occurred in the tunnel or at some
distance after exit from the West end of the tunnel?
>rear, a driver looking awefully suspicious. Either they are a
>very nice old couple - my sister has a rug in the back of her
>Fiat so I looked in the back of this one a saw a dog or the
>whole thing was a set-up to lead the police to someone they had
>in mind.
If one went off on a conspiracy train of thought for a time one might
consider that there could have been other vehicles deliberately
in the area for some ulterior related purpose.
>Wasn't this investigation to look for a white Uno
>taking off as fast as someone wanted so the police was given a
>hard push.
>
>OK I know the strength of the debris found at the scene but who
>saw a white Uno?
>
>Ron
>
Thanks for a nice post
I saw your post mentioning your work with marine
insurance.
I found some words:
D I C T I O N N A I R E D E M A R I N E
Anglais-Francais-Allemand-Espagnol-Italien
Capt PAASCH
From Keel to Truck
DE LA QUILLE A LA POMME DU MAT - VOM KIEL ZUM FLAGGENKNOPF
DE QUILLA A PERILLA - DALLA CHIGLIA AL POMO DELL'ALBERO
DICTIONNAIRE DE MARINE
Anglais-Francais-Allemand-Espagnol-Italien
QUATRIEME EDITION
revisee et completee
pour les parties anglaise et frangaise,
PAR L E C A P I T A I N E Pierre CHALLAMEL
pour la langue allemande, par
LE CAPITAINE F.-E. MATTHIESEN
DIRECTEUR DE L'ECOLE DU MARIN DE HAMBOURG
& LE CAPITAINE August BUDDE
PROFESSEUR A L'ECOLE DE NAVIGATION DE HAMBOURG
Traduction Espagnole
Par l'Amiral P. MONTOJO
DE LA MARINE ROYALE ESPAGNOLE
EX-COMMANDANT EN CHEF DE L'ESCADRE DES ILES PHILIPPINES
Traduction ltalienne
Par Giuseppe ROMAIRONE
TRADUCTEUR JURY
PRES LE TRIBUNAL CIVIL DE GENES
PARIS
AUGUSTIN CHALLAMEL, EDITEUR
Rue JACOB, 17
LIBRAIRIE MARITIME ET COLONIALE
1908
PUBLISHED FEBRUARY 10th 1908
PRIVILEGE OF COPYRIGHT IN THE UNITED STATES RESERVED
UNDER THE ACT APPROVED MARCH 3rd 1905
By AUGUSTIN CHALLAMEL
AUGUSTIN CHALLAMEL, EDITEUR-PROPRIETAIRE A PARIS
Tous droits de reproduction it de traduction reserves pour tous pays.
Preface de la Quatrie'me edition.
II nest plus besoin de faire l'eloge du DICTIONNARE du
captaine PAASCH Trois editions epuisees
10.000 exemplaires
repandus dans le public maritime anglais francais et allemand prouvent
assez l'utilite de la
publication et la valeur de l'oeuvre.
Le capitaine Paasch a consacre a ce travail la plus grand
partie de son existence, ne cessant
de le corriger et de le
perfectionner il avait accumule de nombreuses notes pour mettre au
courant cette nouvelle
edition, lorsque la mort le surprit
Notre fils, le capitaine Pierre CHALLAMEL, s'est charge de
mettre en ordre les notes du
capitaine Paasch, de les completer
et de reviser l'ouvrage en anglais et en francais.
Les capitaines MATTHIESEN et Aug. BUDDE, de l'Ecole de marine
de Hambourg, ont bien voulu. nous
aider de leur science et
de leur experience, et mettre au point la traduction allemande; nous
leur exprimons ici toute
notre reconnaissance.
Au moment ou paraissait l'edition precedente, M. l'amiral
MONTOJO estimant que cette
publication etait de nature a rendre
de grands services a la marine de son pays, avait spontanement offert
au capitaine Paasch
d'ajouter a son ouvrage une
traduction espagnole. Une collaboration aussi precieuse que celle de
l'illustre Amiral etait
une bonne fortune inesperee; nous
avons ete tres heureux, dans notre nouvelle edition, d'accueillir son
offre et de donner suite
a son projet.
A la mime epoque M. G. ROMAIRONE, traducteur assermente pres
le Tribunal et la Chambre de
Commerce de Genes, avait
fait semblable proposition pour la langue italienne; ses fonctions
mimes et le milieu maritime
dans lequel il vit assuraient au travail
dont il a bien voulu se charger une valeur incontestable; nous le
remercions de son concours
devoue.
Ces collaborations nous donnent la certitude de voir l'oeuvre
du capitaine Paasch se repandre
dans les pays de langue
latine; elles doublent aussi pour les pays du Nord la valeur de
l'ouvrage en facilitant les
relations internationales de toutes les
marines du monde.
A. CHALLAMEL, EDITEUR.
Extrait de la Preface de la troisieme edition
La conviction intime d'avoir produit une oeuvre d'un interet
incontestable, voir le public
competent apprecier les efforts faits pour atteindre ce resultat et y
donner son approbation
unanime, c'est ce qui constitue pour l'auteur, desireux de se rendre
utile, une satisfaction que
rien ne saurait egaler. L'accueil favorable dont les duex editions
precedentes de cet ouvrage
ont ete l'objet a demontre, de toute evidence, qu'il est venu remplir,
parmi les traites de la
science maritime et de ses ramifications multiples, une lacune qu'il
importait de faire
disparaitre.
Lors de l'apparition de la premiere edition a cinq mille
exemplaires de ce dic-
tionnaire, il y a de
cela seize ans, un libraire maritime bien connu de Londres m'ecrivit :
Le livre est bon, je le
sais, mais je serais au regret si vous aviez fait des frais pour sa
publication, car vous
perdriez
votre argent. Sa prediction ne se realisa point. J'envoyai un certain
nombre d'exemplaires a
des personnes compe- non seulement en Angleterre et en d'autres pays
d'Europe, mais aussi
en Amerique,.en Afrique, en Chine, au Japon, aux Indes; bref, je le
fis connaitre dans tons les
centres maritimes du globe. L'ouvrage attira I'attention du monde
special auquel il s'adressait
particulierement, et s'epuisa rapidement.
En 1894, la seconde edition completement remaniee, formant en
realite une oeuvre
nouvelle, fit son apparition. Que la seconde edition, epuisee depuis
longtemps, fut un
ouvrage de quelque valeur, j'en eus la preuve par les demandes
multiples qui me furent
adressees.
Wine avant que cette troisieme edition ne fut sous presse, le
commerce de librairie
maritime d'Angleterre, de France et d'Allemagne m'en commandait mille
exemplaires. D'autre
part, 1'ouvrage, ecrit en trois langues, avait ete approuve, non
seulement par des personnes
faisant autorite dans les pays auxquels il etait destine, mais aussi
par des hommes de renom
d'Espagne, d'Italie, de Suede, etc., qui juge- que l'utilite de
1'ouvrage etait telle, qu'ils
m'exprimerent le desir d'en voir paraitre une traduction dans leur
langue respective. L'Amiral
espagnol Montojo me fit savoir que dans le cas ou je serais dispose a
ajouter l'espagnol, il
aurait fait apport aux travaux de traduction de toute son attention et
de ses soins les plus
minutieux. De son cote, M. Giuseppe Romairone, traducteur assermente
pres le Tribunal et
la Chambre de Commerce de Genes, m'ecrivait: « Je n'ai, de ma vie, vu
un ensemble aussi
etonnant et aussi complet de termes techniques concernant la
navigation, et je vous serais
bien oblige si vous vouliez m'accorder la faveur de me permettre la
traduction (avec
1'assistance de plusieurs specialistes) de votre ouvrage en italien. »
Il agoutait qu'en se
proposant de faire ce travail, il ne poursuivait pas un but de lucre,
son unique intention Rant
d'en mettre le contenu precieux a la portee de ses compatriotes, dans
leur langue.
Qu'il me soit permis de repeter ici ce que j'eus deja
)'occasion de dire dans la preface de
men Illustrated Marine Encyclopedia : « L'ouvrage est ecrit sans la
pretention d'instruire qui
que ce soit dans la profession qu'il exerce, c'est-a-dire que la
partie de 1'ouvrage qui traite
de
la construction des navires n'y figure pas a l'in-
tention des descriptions et les dessins de machines n'y sont pas
donnes pour en remontrer aux mecaniciens, de meme que les dessins et
les descriptions se
rapportant au greement ou aux autres sujets faisant partie de la
science du marin n'y ont pas
ete inseres pour fournir des renseignements aux capitaines de navires;
mais considerant
qu'un constructeur de navires n'est pas marin, qu'un marin n'est pas
mecanicien et
reciproquement, l'objet que j'ai eu en vue a ete uni- celui de fournir
A ceux qui s'occupent de
choses de navigation, des informations qui, par leur nature meme, sont
en dehors des
connaissances indispensables a leurs professions respectives. »
Ne sur les rives de la mer, a quinze ans j'entrai dang la
carriere maritime propre- dite et,
apres avoir servi dans les marines militaires allemande et danoise ,
je naviguai a bord de
navires marchands allemands, hollandais, americains et russes et
commandai pendant huit
ans un navire de cette derniere nationalite faisant la navigation au
long cours ; apres quoi je
me fixai a Anvers en 1870. Etabli en ce pays depuis trente ans, j'ai
expertise environ 4000
navires et j'ai ete constamment appele a m'occuper de choses se
rapportant a la construction
de navires, a leur reparation, a des affaires d'avaries, d'arbitrage,
etc. J'eus l'occasion
d'acquerir la connaissance, non seulement'des diverses branches dont
traite 1'ouvrage, mais
aussi des langues dans lesquelles il a ete ecrit, des termes
techniques et de leurs acceptions,
bien diffe- parfois, dans les diverses langues dans lesquelles ils
sont presentes.
Il existe un grand nombre de termes anglais pour lesquels il
n'y a d'equivalent ni en
francais ni en allemand; d'autre part, il y a dans ces duex dernieres
langues une foule de
termes pour lesquels l'anglais ne possede absolument aucune expression
correspondante.
Certains termes anglais ont plus de trois significations diffe- en
francais et en allemand, et
reciproquement quelques termes francais ont plusieurs significations
en anglais et en
allemand. Prenons par exemple le mot anglais " Stay ", qui traduit le
franizais " Etai " (d'un
mat j, " Draille " (dune voile), " Entretoise " ou " Tirant (d'une
chaudiere), " Jambe de force"
(d'un pa- ), " Traverse " (d'un gouvernail), " Sejour " (dans un
port), etc., ce qui prouve
suffisamment qu'un dictionnaire technique ordinaire, ne donnant que
les termes sans
descriptions et illustrations explicatives, ne saurait que faire le
desespoir du profane ou de
1'homme du metier qui y a recours.
Malgre tons les soins apportes a l'ouvrage, je n'ose nullement
pretendre qu'il soit
complet, ni qu'il soit exempt de toute erreur, car en ce monde rien
n'est parfait, tout est
perfectible; je me permets toutefois de dire que fort pen de personnes
pos- en une suele
langue, la somme de connaissances techniques donnee ici en trois, et,
encourage par cette
conviction, je soumets le travail, ainsi que je I'ai fait lors des
editions precedentes, au
monde
competent, plein de confiance dans l'accueil favorable qu'il saura lui
faire.
Capt H. PAASCH,
Inspecteur du Lloyd's Register, a Anvers.
May 1901
>* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
>The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
<a href="http://members.home.com/godsbrain">G.O.D.S.B.R.A.I.N.</a><br>
ron
interesting
Sorry its in a mess but following story down to first ++++++ is
the full text.
The Last Day in Paris
Diana, Princess of Wales, and Dodi Fayed arrived at Le Bourget
airport, north of Paris, at 3.20pm on Saturday, 30th August,
1997. They had flown from Olbia in Sardinia after a
Mediterranean holiday aboard Mohamed's yacht, 'Jonikal'.
The purpose of their visit to Paris was two fold. First, to
collect the ring they had chosen together a week earlier in
Monte Carlo and secondly, to look over the Villa Windsor. Before
leaving 'Jonikal' Dodi spoke on the phone to Frank Klein,
President of the Ritz Hotel in Paris, and told him - "We want to
move into the villa because we want to get married in October or
November…my friend doesn't want to stay in England."
The couple, accompanied by bodyguards Trevor Rees Jones and Kes
Wingfield, were met on the tarmac by Henri Paul, deputy head of
security at the Ritz and Philippe Dourneau, Dodi's regular
chauffeur in Paris. Also awaiting them were about 15 paparazzi.
Dodi had seen them through the windows of his jet as the Gulf
Stream IV taxied to the Transair terminal used by VIPs going to
the Ritz. He asked Transair staff if they could help them avoid
the cameras as Diana could only spend one night in Paris and he
didn't want the occasion spoiled. But there was little they
could do.
.......Conflicts with other evidence where French
authorities were offering all sorts of protection but alegidly
turned down
Dourneau, with Trevor Rees Jones, drove Diana and Dodi in a
black Mercedes 600. Henri Paul was at the wheel of the back up
vehicle - a black Range Rover. Next to Paul sat Kes Wingfield
who later paid tribute to Paul's driving skills and knowledge
which much impressed him. The paparazzi picked up the two car
convoy as it joined the A1 motorway to Paris. Dourneau drove in
the centre lane at a steady 75-80mph. As he later told police,
at one point he was almost blinded by electronic flashes as the
paparazzi motorcycles pulled alongside to take photographs.
Wingfield, in the back up vehicle, saw a black Peugeot pull in
front of the Mercedes and brake suddenly to slow it down.
Wingfield said the behaviour on the road of some of the
paparazzi was dangerous. Diana told him she feared someone might
be killed as a result of the motorcyclists' reckless driving.
While Henri Paul delivered the couple's luggage to the Ritz,
Diana and Dodi were driven to the Villa Windsor for a tour of
their future residence lasting about half an hour. At 4.35 they
arrived at the Ritz where they were occupying the first floor
Imperial Suite. Up to 20 paparazzi were waiting for them at the
main entrance in Place Vendome, so they used the rear entrance ,
in Rue Cambon.
From the Imperial Suite Diana rang her friend, Richard Kay, a
Daily Mail columnist. "She told me she had decided to radically
change her life," he wrote in the Daily Mail on 1st
September. "She was going to complete her obligations to her
charities and to the anti-personnel landmines cause and then,
around November, would completely withdraw from her formal
public life." Kay believed the relationship with Dodi was "a
significant factor" behind her decision. "I cannot say for
certain that they would have married but, in my view, it was
likely.
At 6.30, while Diana was getting her hair done in the hotel's
salon de coiffure Dodi drove the one hundred yards across the
Place Vendome to collect the Dis Moi Oui (Tell Me Yes) ring from
Albert Repossi's boutique. He also took another ring which had
caught his eye but this second ring was returned a little later.
Diana clearly preferred her original choice.
At 7.00pm the couple left from the rear of the Ritz in the
Mercedes 600 driven by Dourneau - their destination Dodi's
apartment at Rue Arsene Houssaye just off the Arc de Triomphe.
The back up Range Rover was now being driven by Jean-Francois
Musa, the manager of the Etoile Limousine company. Henri Paul
saw them off and then, at 7.05pm left the hotel at the end of
his working day. Ten minutes later, according to Wingfield, as
Dodi and Diana's car entered Rue Arsene Houssaye, "the paparazzi
literally mobbed the couple." He said "that really disturbed and
frightened the Princess, even though she was used to paparazzi.
These paparazzi were shouting, which made them even more
frightening. I had to push them back physically." One
photographer, Romuald Rat protested loudly about having his lens
thrust to one side. By this time, Wingfield says, "Dodi was very
angry over the behaviour of the paparazzi."
At the apartment Dodi told his butler to have champagne on ice
and whispered - "I am going to propose to her tonight." At
9.30pm Dodi and Diana left for dinner at Chez Benoit near the
Pompidou Centre. But the paparazzi were crowding so closely
around the car that Dodi told Dourneau to cancel the reservation
and let the Ritz know they would dine there instead. They
arrived back at the hotel at 9.51.
Once again they were confronted at the main entrance by a wall
of paparazzi and curious passers by. The crowd of more than 100
was so dense that, at first, the couple were unable to even open
the car door. Dodi was furious and Diana got out first.
Wingfield says "I had to protect her physically from the
paparazzi, who were coming really too close to her. Their
cameras were right next to her face…once inside, she sat on a
chair looking rather demoralised, as if she were about to cry."
Diana and Dodi made for the hotel's famous L'Espadon restaurant
where they ordered dinner. Because of the attention they were
attracting they retired almost immediately to enjoy their meal
in the privacy of the Imperial Suite. By this time Henri Paul
had been rung and informed of the paparazzi swarming outside the
hotel and of the couple's enforced change of plan. There is now
good evidence that during his three hour absence from the Ritz,
Paul was meeting a member of the DGSE - the French secret
service- who paid him the equivalent of £1,250 in French francs -
money he had on him at the time of the crash. Within five
minutes of receiving the call Paul was back at the hotel. The
security videotape shows him driving up to the entrance of the
Ritz and parking his mini car quite normally at 10.08. He
displayed no sign of being drunk.
Both Trevor Rees Jones and Kes Wingfield insist that Paul
seemed "perfectly normal" to them all evening. Neither man smelt
alcohol on his breath. "If he had seemed the slightest bit
drunk," Wingfield says, "Trevor and I would have refused to let
him drive the couple. It would have been inconceivable. Dodi
would have noticed his drunkenness and fired him on the spot."
In fact, Paul did consume two Ricards - a popular brand of
pastis - in the next couple of hours while waiting with the
bodyguards in the hotel's Vendome bar, but this was not enough
alcohol to even reach the French drink drive limit, let alone
exceed it by a factor of three.
At 10.20 Rocher was outside the Imperial Suite where he had been
summoned by Dodi to account for the problems with the paparazzi
in front of the hotel. On learning that Paul was back in the
hotel Dodi asked Rocher to let Paul know that there should a
third car in Rue Cambon because he and Diana would be leaving by
the rear exit. Dodi told him the information was to remain
confidential and that only Paul was to be informed. There were
no other instructions and no mention of a decoy plan. Rocher
passed on Dodi's message to Paul at 10.24.
Kes Wingfield's account of how he came to learn of the plan is
confusing. In one statement he claims that at 11.15 Dodi opened
the door of the Imperial Suite and asked him how many paparazzi
were still outside. Wingfield replied that there were about 30,
plus a hundred or so hangers on, and claims that Dodi then
informed him of the decoy plan. He and Diana would leave from
the rear entrance to the Ritz using another chauffeur and
Mercedes while the two regular vehicles departed from the front.
Wingfield has, however, also stated that the first time he heard
of the decoy plan was from Henri Paul who indicated that it had
been approved by Dodi's father. The plan had not been approved
by Mohamed Al Fayed and a simple phone call to London would have
confirmed as much.
However the bodyguards came to learn of the decoy plan, it is
clear that at no time did either of them raise any real
objections, despite the fact that the scheme broke all the
professional rules and went against their training and
everything they had ever been taught. It was Wingfield and Rees
Jones who were responsible for the couple's security that night.
They were in direct contact with, and were directly answerable
to, the Head of Personal Protection at the Park Lane control
centre in London. Security planning was nothing to with Dodi or
Henri Paul. If either bodyguard was uneasy about being separated
or the absence of a back up vehicle, it was their duty to
consult London. They were in contact with Park Lane control
throughout the evening reporting travel movements as a matter of
routine but there is no record of either man ever referring to
the decoy plan.
It was in fact Kes Wingfield who first revealed the plan to the
drivers Francois Musa and Philippe Dourneau. He informed them at
12.10 and told Paul at the same time that he was to drive the
Mercedes from the Rue Cambon. The countdown to tragedy had
begun.
++++++++++++++
E-mails sent to MAF's sight:-
I was looking at a "reportage" on your son's car crash and I was
eye catched by something I foud quite strange: one of the
witnesses who spoke during this reportage was a american doctor
who arrived on the scene just after the crash and who said to
have tried to help Diana who was still alive. I often wondered
if this man could have been part of the setup, if setup there
was. Maybe worthwile looking into this.
++++++++++++++
You say you would "never tell an untruth about anybody or
anything". That statement itself is a lie. In the Sunday
Telegraph on 30' August 1998, under the headline, "Fayed offers
£I2M to prove Diana Murder" - you reported an attempt to extort
money from me as my offering a reward! What you wrote could not
have been more diametrically opposed to the truth. Your Sunday
Telegraph article of the same date headlined "Who's to blame'?"
was riddled with lies.
It was a lie to state that "Dodi's scheme to leave the Ritz by
the rear exit with Henri Paul at the wheel, with no back up cars
or bodyguards" had been "personally approved" by me.
It was a lie to state that "Fayed's security HQ in London
refused the bodyguards' subsequent request for security back up
in Paris".
It was a lie to state that "Fayed's publicity machine... had
been working overtime to attract media interest in Dodi's affair
with the Princess."
Michael Cole and Max Clifford have both categorically denied
that they primed the paparazzi "to capture crucial moments of
the romance in France". Only last month claims by the
magazine 'Voici" that press coverage had been "orchestrated"
and 'manipulated". by me, were confirmed as defamatory by the
French Appeal Court and I was awarded substantial damages.
Analysis of the second and third set of extracts published in
The Daily Mail.
Martyn Gregory and the Daily Mail, 28.6.99.
"Diana - Lies and Delusions" - the second instalment of Martyn
Gregory's book again presents a partial and highly selective
account of the relationship between the late Princess and Dodi
Fayed. Far from exposing lies and delusions as claimed, Gregory
again contrives to gloss over or conveniently ignore awkward
facts that don't fit his theory. None of the principal claims in
today's excerpts stands up to examination.
First the claim that the Princess's best friend and doctor prove
that she was not carrying Dodi's baby.
Mohamed Al Fayed has never claimed that Diana was carrying
Dodi's baby but Gregory is clearly out to rubbish any
possibility of pregnancy because it could seriously undermine
his theory that the crash was solely due to a drunk driving too
fast. As Thomas Sancton and Scott MacLeod state in their book
Death of a Princess - the most authoritative study of the crash
yet published -"the question of whether or not she was pregnant
is potentially one of the most explosive elements in the
investigation, because a pregnancy would give greater credence
to the assassination plot theories….".
At the moment we simply don't know the truth about whether the
Princess was pregnant or not because that knowledge has not been
made public. But there seems little doubt that there is a
definite answer one way or the other. Blood tests and sonograms
would have been carried out on Diana in hospital as a matter of
routine and would have revealed whether or not there was a
pregnancy. Sancton and MacLeod conclude - "one thing is
virtually certain. The evidence does exist to prove or disprove
a pregnancy." The opinions of Rosa Monckton and Dr. Lily Hua Yu
may fit Gregory's theory but they are not necessarily, nor
indisputably, correct.
Rosa Monckton is married to Dominic Lawson, editor of the Sunday
Telegraph, who has been named in the House of Commons as an
agent for MI6. Her brother has also been named as an MI6 agent.
Clearly Ms Monckton has an interest in discounting any
possibility of pregnancy as it might have provided a motive for
the security forces to take action against Diana.
Gregory then claims that the hospital in Paris has exposed
Mohamed Fayed's "last words" claim as "an invention".
Mohamed Al Fayed knows what he was told at the hospital and has
never changed his version of events. Diana's last words were
conveyed to him by someone who attended the Princess in her
final hours. A good and trusted friend of Mr Al Fayed introduced
him to the individual in question. The precise words uttered by
Diana were only ever communicated to Diana's sister. Whether or
not on reflection she believed them is a matter for her but the
message was conveyed in good faith. At the time Lady Sarah was
most grateful and appreciative. There is firm evidence that the
Princess was, at times, conscious and capable of speech at the
scene of the crash. Bodyguard Trevor Rees Jones recalls that
immediately after the crash Diana called out for Dodi. Rees
Jones told Piers Morgan, editor of the Daily Mirror - "I have
had incredibly lucid flashbacks of Princess Diana's voice
calling out in the back. First it's a groaning sound, someone in
pain. And then I hear Princess Diana calling Dodi's name out. I
do remember very clearly her voice calling out Dodi's
name, 'Where's Dodi, where's Dodi?' " Eric Petel, the first
motorcyclist on the scene recognised the Princess and tried, in
English, to reassure her that help was on the way, an effort he
would hardly have made had she been unconscious or
uncomprehending. Romuald Rat, who was next to arrive told Diana
in English to "be cool, a doctor will arrive." He said that when
he touched her she began to stir. At that time Diana was clearly
drifting in and out of consciousness. By the time the Princess
reached hospital she may well have been incapable of speech but
there was a period of one hour and 43 minutes before then. The
person who heard the last words was almost certainly involved
with the Princess during the time before she reached the Pitie
Salpetriere hospital. Mr Al Fayed did not see Diana's body in
the hospital mortuary. He did say at the time that his son's
body looked "serene and beautiful."
ERIC PETAL...the first motorcyclist on the
scene WHAT!!!!!!
Thirdly, the claim that Diana probably never even saw the so-
called "engagement" ring Dodi bought.
It is ludicrous to assert that Diana never even saw the ring -
the Princess helped choose it on the evening of August 22 in
Monte Carlo at the boutique of Alberto Repossi in the Hermitage
Hotel.
She selected a ring from Repossi's new line of engagement rings
called "Dis- Mois Oui" (Tell Me Yes). Repossi himself says "we
tried to show them other rings but they had decided on this
ring." It was a band of yellow and white gold, with triangles of
diamond clusters surrounding an emerald-cut diamond and cost
$200,000. Repossi himself agreed to bring the ring to Paris on
30 August for collection from his shop in the Place Vendome.
Around 6.30 pm on 30 August Dodi arrived to collect the ring and
also took away another which had caught his eye. He took both to
see which Diana would prefer. The second ring was later returned
to the shop. The original Tell Me Yes ring was Diana's clear
choice.
Gregory claims "the ring provides no evidence that the couple
were engaged when they met their deaths." Mohamed Al Fayed has
never said that Dodi and Diana were already engaged. What made
their deaths so tragic was the overwhelming evidence that Dodi
was going to propose to Diana that very evening. He had confided
as much in numerous relatives and friends the previous day and
confirmed it to his father very shortly before the crash.
It is claimed that video film of the couple at Paris Villa helps
to disprove plans they were going to set up home together.
The video film of the couple's visit to the Villa Windsor proves
nothing beyond the fact that they were there for 28 minutes on
Saturday August 30. There was no attempt to conceal the duration
of the visit. As Gregory himself reports, Michael Cole told the
Press before Diana's funeral that the couple had visited the
Villa for 35 minutes on their last day - quite long enough to
see round what is effectively a four bedroomed house.
Martyn Gregory and the Daily Mail, 29.6.99.
Part three of the serialisation of Martyn Gregory's book
purports to address the security arrangements for Princess Diana
and Dodi Fayed on their last night. Once again his heavily
slanted narrative betrays both a genuine and contrived ignorance
of the facts. This is clearly demonstrated by an analysis of his
various claims.
Gregory asserts that "the only reason Henri Paul was driving in
the hired Mercedes that night was because Dodi had insisted on
it, as part of his fatally flawed plan for Diana and himself to
escape the mob of paparazzi besieging the Ritz hotel."
There is no independent evidence that Dodi had come up with the
plan and insisted on it being carried out. Gregory's only
source - the bodyguards themselves - is inevitably suspect.
Bodyguard Kes Wingfield was interviewed on the day of the crash
by John Macnamara, Mohamed Al Fayed's Director of Security, and
made absolutely no reference to any last minute change of plan
by Dodi. The following day, however, Mr Wingfield was asked
about the decoy plan by Paul Handley-Greaves, Head of Mr Al
Fayed's Personal Protection team. Mr Wingfield said that as far
as he had been aware, the plan had been Dodi's idea. Kes
Wingfield acknowledged that neither he nor Trevor Rees-Jones had
referred the plan to the 24-hour operational control centre at
Park Lane. He explained that they had understood from Henri Paul
that Dodi had cleared the plan with his father. When Mr Handley-
Greaves pointed out that it was entirely contrary to the
established procedures to change plans without referring to the
control centre and that the plan in question would never have
sanctioned anyway, Mr Wingfield accepted that this was the case.
The subsequent statements made by the two men, many months after
the crash, seem clearly designed to deflect any blame from
themselves.
"…on every detail the bodyguards were overruled, and had their
professional objections crushed, by Dodi Fayed who had hatched
the reckless scheme."
Crucial to an understanding of the security arrangements that
night is the bodyguards' well established chain of command.
Trevor Rees Jones and Kes Wingfield were members of Mr Al
Fayed's personal protection team. They worked for him and no one
else. That night in Paris they were in charge and they were
responsible for couple's safety. They did not take their orders
from the Ritz, Henri Paul or even Dodi Fayed. Dodi never made
his own security arrangements - these were always left to the
professional bodyguards. If they had ever been asked to do
anything they thought might compromise safety they were duty-
bound to contact the Head of the Personal Protection or Mohamed
himself. They can contact the London control room 24 hours a day
from anywhere in the world. Kes Wingfield and Trevor Rees-Jones
were in touch with the control centre throughout the evening to
report movements, but made no mention whatsoever of the decoy
plan. Dodi spoke to his father shortly before leaving the Ritz
but made no mention of the plan. It was the bodyguards who
allowed Henri Paul to drive - indeed, according to the evidence
of Thierry Rocher, the night manager of the Ritz Hotel, they
instructed him to drive. Both Rees Jones and Wingfield agreed
that "Paul appeared to be fine and not drunk before departure."
It was they who accepted the absence of a back up vehicle and
failed to make sure the couple were wearing the seat belts
which, experts believe, could have saved them.
Gregory claims that Wingfield and Dodi had "a whispered argument
at the door of the Ritz's Imperial Suite." Proof of an argument
would clearly enable Wingfield to plead duress and mitigate his
responsibility for what happened but in fact there is not a
shred of evidence. His conversation with Dodi was captured on
CCTV which was perfectly normal with no suggestion of any
argument.
Gregory's view that the bodyguards were blameless because they
were overruled by Dodi is at odds with Kes Wingfield's account
of his first meeting with Trevor Rees Jones after the crash -
"Trevor got very upset, and burst into tears as he said he was
to blame for everything. It was heartbreaking to see him cry
because he was so racked with guilt."
Gregory's account of the couple's final journey is riddled with
inaccuracies, distortions and glaring omissions. A few examples:
He claims there were photographers at the rear of the Ritz -
CCTV pictures prove there were none.
He omits to mention that Henri Paul's exit was blocked by one or
two motorcyclists which forced him to take the Alma tunnel.
He omits to mention that Henri Paul's exit was blocked by one or
two motorcyclists which forced him to take the Alma tunnel.
He reports the speed of the car as being 74 - 97mph but omits
the fact that the car was travelling at 62mph on impact.
He states that the Police have not found a single picture of the
couple taken by the paparazzi during the chase but that, of
course, does not mean there are none in existence. He completely
omits the report by the French Police on the Fiat Uno they
located whose paint exactly matched that on the Mercedes.
He omits to mention the extraordinary absence of any CCTV
footage from cameras along the route.
He omits to mention that numerous independent experts have said
it is simply not possible to explain the excessive levels of
carbon monoxide in Henri Paul's blood by the fact that he
smoked. If Henri Paul was as drunk and drugged as Gregory claims
why did neither of the bodyguards who were with him for 2 hours
before the crash notice anything was wrong?
Why did it take one hour and 43 minutes to get Diana to
hospital'?
Mohamed Al Fayed knows what he was told at the hospital and has
never changed his version of events. Diana's last words were
conveyed to him by someone who attended the Princess in her
final hours. A good and trusted friend of Mr Al Fayed introduced
him to the individual in question. The precise words uttered by
Diana were only ever communicated to Diana's sister. Whether or
not on reflection she believed them is a matter for her but the
message was conveyed in good faith. At the time Lady Sarah was
most grateful and appreciative. There is firm evidence that the
Princess was, at times, conscious and capable of speech at the
scene of the crash. Bodyguard Trevor Rees Jones recalls that
immediately after the crash Diana called out for Dodi. Rees
Jones told Piers Morgan, editor of the Daily Mirror - "I have
had incredibly lucid flashbacks of Princess Diana's voice
calling out in the back. First it's a groaning sound, someone in
pain. And then I hear Princess Diana calling Dodi's name out. I
do remember very clearly her voice calling out Dodi's
name, 'Where's Dodi, where's Dodi?' " Eric Petel, the first
motorcyclist on the scene recognised the Princess and tried, in
English, to reassure her that help was on the way, an effort he
would hardly have made had she been unconscious or
uncomprehending. Romuald Rat, who was next to arrive told Diana
in English to "be cool, a doctor will arrive." He said that when
he touched her she began to stir. At that time Diana was clearly
drifting in and out of consciousness. By the time the Princess
reached hospital she may well have been incapable of speech but
there was a period of one hour and 43 minutes before then. The
person who heard the last words was almost certainly involved
with the Princess during the time before she reached the Pitie
Salpetriere hospital. Mr Al Fayed did not see Diana's body in
the hospital mortuary. He did say at the time that his son's
body looked "serene and beautiful."
Thirdly, the claim that Diana probably never even saw the so-
called "engagement" ring Dodi bought.
It is ludicrous to assert that Diana never even saw the ring -
the Princess helped choose it on the evening of August 22 in
Monte Carlo at the boutique of Alberto Repossi in the Hermitage
Hotel.
She selected a ring from Repossi's new line of engagement rings
called "Dis- Mois Oui" (Tell Me Yes). Repossi himself says "we
tried to show them other rings but they had decided on this
ring." It was a band of yellow and white gold, with triangles of
diamond clusters surrounding an emerald-cut diamond and cost
$200,000. Repossi himself agreed to bring the ring to Paris on
30 August for collection from his shop in the Place Vendome.
Around 6.30 pm on 30 August Dodi arrived to collect the ring and
also took away another which had caught his eye. He took both to
see which Diana would prefer. The second ring was later returned
to the shop. The original Tell Me Yes ring was Diana's clear
choice.
Gregory asserts that "the only reason Henri Paul was driving in
the hired Mercedes that night was because Dodi had insisted on
it, as part of his fatally flawed plan for Diana and himself to
escape the mob of paparazzi besieging the Ritz hotel."
There is no independent evidence that Dodi had come up with the
plan and insisted on it being carried out. Gregory's only
source - the bodyguards themselves - is inevitably suspect.
Bodyguard Kes Wingfield was interviewed on the day of the crash
by John Macnamara, Mohamed Al Fayed's Director of Security, and
made absolutely no reference to any last minute change of plan
by Dodi. The following day, however, Mr Wingfield was asked
about the decoy plan by Paul Handley-Greaves, Head of Mr Al
Fayed's Personal Protection team. Mr Wingfield said that as far
as he had been aware, the plan had been Dodi's idea. Kes
Wingfield acknowledged that neither he nor Trevor Rees-Jones had
referred the plan to the 24-hour operational control centre at
Park Lane. He explained that they had understood from Henri Paul
that Dodi had cleared the plan with his father. When Mr Handley-
Greaves pointed out that it was entirely contrary to the
established procedures to change plans without referring to the
control centre and that the plan in question would never have
sanctioned anyway, Mr Wingfield accepted that this was the case.
The subsequent statements made by the two men, many months after
the crash, seem clearly designed to deflect any blame from
themselves.
"…on every detail the bodyguards were overruled, and had their
professional objections crushed, by Dodi Fayed who had hatched
the reckless scheme."
Crucial to an understanding of the security arrangements that
night is the bodyguards' well established chain of command.
Trevor Rees Jones and Kes Wingfield were members of Mr Al
Fayed's personal protection team. They worked for him and no one
else. That night in Paris they were in charge and they were
responsible for couple's safety. They did not take their orders
from the Ritz, Henri Paul or even Dodi Fayed. Dodi never made
his own security arrangements - these were always left to the
professional bodyguards. If they had ever been asked to do
anything they thought might compromise safety they were duty-
bound to contact the Head of the Personal Protection or Mohamed
himself. They can contact the London control room 24 hours a day
from anywhere in the world. Kes Wingfield and Trevor Rees-Jones
were in touch with the control centre throughout the evening to
report movements, but made no mention whatsoever of the decoy
plan. Dodi spoke to his father shortly before leaving the Ritz
but made no mention of the plan. It was the bodyguards who
allowed Henri Paul to drive - indeed, according to the evidence
of Thierry Rocher, the night manager of the Ritz Hotel, they
instructed him to drive. Both Rees Jones and Wingfield agreed
that "Paul appeared to be fine and not drunk before departure."
It was they who accepted the absence of a back up vehicle and
failed to make sure the couple were wearing the seat belts
which, experts believe, could have saved them.
Gregory claims that Wingfield and Dodi had "a whispered argument
at the door of the Ritz's Imperial Suite." Proof of an argument
would clearly enable Wingfield to plead duress and mitigate his
responsibility for what happened but in fact there is not a
shred of evidence. His conversation with Dodi was captured on
CCTV which was perfectly normal with no suggestion of any
argument.
Gregory's view that the bodyguards were blameless because they
were overruled by Dodi is at odds with Kes Wingfield's account
of his first meeting with Trevor Rees Jones after the crash -
"Trevor got very upset, and burst into tears as he said he was
to blame for everything. It was heartbreaking to see him cry
because he was so racked with guilt."
Why did it take one hour and 40 minutes to get the princess to
hospital ? Why did the doctor who initially attended her for 15
minutes say he did not know it was the princess until he heard
it on CNN eight hours later ? Why did he not go with her in the
ambulance to the hospital ? Why have some of the photographers
failed to give up some of the pictures they shot ? Why was there
a break-in that night at the London home of a photographer who
handles paparazzi pictures ? Why have some of the paparazzi lied
about their role in the chase ? They were much closer that they
have claimed and two motorcycles at the scene left at speed. Why
have all the closed-circuit television cameras in that part of
Paris produced not one frame of videotape ? Why were the speed
cameras on the route out of film and the traffic cameras not
switched on ? Why was the scene of the crash not preserved but
reopened to traffic after a few hours ?
Who was the person in the press group outside the hotel who was
equipped like a news photographer ? Nobody recognised him and,
when asked, he said he was working for "The Mirror." Who were
the two unidentified men mingling in the crowd who later sat in
the hotel bar ? They ordered in English, watching and listening
in a marked manner.
Who was the person in the press group outside the hotel who was
equipped like a news photographer ? Nobody recognised him and,
when asked, he said he was working for "The Mirror." Who were
the two unidentified men mingling in the crowd who later sat in
the hotel bar ? They ordered in English, watching and listening
in a marked manner.
++++++++++++++++
Few E-mails to MAF's site
Whatever else may have been wrong with your chauffeur, he was
not drunk. He was poisonned with OXALIC ACID or something
similar. Oxalic acid does not have a strong taste, it is
somewhat sharp, but easily disguised by a sharp wine.
When Oxalic acid is exposed to hydrochloric acid (in the
stomach), it breaks down into Carbon Monoxide and water. Oxalic
acid is the only feasible explanation for the high levels of CO
found in the driver's blood. If he had been exposed to a high
enough level of gasious CO to cause such a blood level, he would
have seemed obviously impaired.
My best wishes to you, and deep commiserations. I hope you can
pin This on the murderous swines that did this. I'm sure your
suspicions are correct.
Best regards,
Dave Smith.
According to Tomlinson the officer in charge of
planning Baltic ops. was
a Dr. Nicolas Bernard Frank Fishwick.
Mr. Fayed said that MI6 caused the deaths of his son and Diana
by using a laser to blind the driver, Henri Paul. Incidentally,
the US military developed a laser weapon, that, when fired upon
advancing troops it caused instant (and permanant) blindness. It
was subsequently banned from ever being used.................but
maybe.........
regards
Stuatr
Was HP's eye's checked for any signs of damage?
++++++++++++++
What have you got on PAUL CARRIL the first to ring emergency
No.18.
Steve Reed
In article <03cfeca4...@usw-ex0105-038.remarq.com>, ron <ron_winnN
Oro...@lineone.net.invalid> writes
>Musa pops up again.
>Read up on the posting of Wingfield's interview by Van Sustren
>and how he got to hear about the passengers physical states from
>Musa / Philippe who we are told were at the scene and from whom
>Kez learns that they were all dead and tells MAF of that fact
>after meeting MAF from his plane. The most puzzling being that
>Musa was able to report Di had hurt her legs but reported TRJ
>was dead. Wingfield says Musa/Philippe got there 5 minutes after
>the crash.
The time taken, after the crash, for Musa and Dournot to reach the scene
of the crash, and examine it, would have been longer than five minutes,
I think.
Don't forget that the "escort" followed the S-280, by a different route,
to the tunnel (by which time the crash had already occurred) but that
the "escort" then WENT TO DODI'S FLAT, before returning to investigate.
I would make this at least ten minutes, possibly fifteen. The
following events ALL had to occur within this period, which is the time
taken
(a) to reach the tunnel, INITIALLY, following the crash
(b) to divert up Avenue Marceau (having seen that there had been a crash
in the tunnel and having NOT stopped to investigate)
(c) to (allegedly) receive a message, from Dodi's butler, on Dournot's
phone [NB Dournot was driving the S-600]
(d) to transfer this message to Wingfield (riding with Musa in the
Range Rover) who then called TRJ's pager
(e) to arrive at Dodi's flat (rue Arsene)
(f) to speak to a paparazzo, who was waiting there - and who had already
received a phone call regarding the crash in the tunnel - and to hear
from him about the crash
(g) to arrange among themselves regarding who was going to return to the
tunnel to check out the situation
(h) to transfer Musa to the S-600 or Dournot to the Range Rover
(whichever car was used)
(i) to return to the tunnel, park, leave the vehicle and walk into the
tunnel as far as the wreck.
Five minutes?? Maybe!
> Clearly Wingfield must have heard more from Musa
>about their conditions to then report Diana had died. Apart from
>the obvious that Diana was not dead in the full meaning of the
>word until her arrival at the Hospital which Musa was in no
>position to report, he did not report to Wingfield that TRJ was
>not dead.
>
>We are lead to believe that Wingfield was in the dark as to what
>had happened to the Limo until Musa who left him back at the
>apartment without telling him where he was going, contacted him
>from the scene.
>
What! Musa nipped off the tunnel without telling Wingfield where he was
going? Are you sure? And what about Dournot? Did he also slip away to
visit the scene without notifying Wingfield? Did Musa and Dournot sneak
off together - or independently?
>View this puzzling story by itself as you will, but if your
>theory is correct then Wingfield has to play dumb. He cannot be
>seen to have noticed anything untoward and has to remain, so to
>speak, in the background. His story means that he is not a
>material witness.
>
This goes for all of them! Firstly, why did they disobey Dodi's orders
and follow him to the Place de la Concorde? (Only Hugo Nhart tells us
this - in his book "Lady Diana, Hypothese Attentat" - but it is
essential to the plot, so perhaps that's WHY it is hushed up
everywhere else!)
Secondly, since they WERE following, why did they not continue to
follow DIRECTLY, after Henri Paul jumped the lights and drove off at
speed? Why did they take a different route which "just happened" to
bring them out at the tunnel?
Thirdly, why, having seen that there had been a crash in the tunnel, did
they not stop to investigate AT THAT POINT?
Fourthly, what would have been the purpose of Wingfield's paging TRJ
(following the butler's alleged message to Dournot, concerning "time to
walk the dogs before D+D got back") about the butler's message, if
Wingfield thought - as he pretends - that D+D were only a minute or two
away from rue Arsene?
Fifthly, after arriving back at rue Arsene and (allegedly) hearing of
the crash from a paparazzo, why did Wingfield not go himself (as the
bodyguard on the spot) to see what had happened? Why was it the two
chauffeurs who went back? Why did Wingfield go straight into the flat
and start making phone-calls (on an untraceable landline, be it noted)
AT THAT POINT?
Sixthly - and this is new to me - how can it be that Wingfield did NOT
arrange with Musa and Dournot to send them back to the tunnel to
investigate? Is he really claiming that he made NO ATTEMPT WHATEVER to
obtain first-hand information concerning the crash?
These, I suggest, are questions which should be asked IN COURT!
>Unless Wingfield was so pissed off with Dodi and smelly Henri
>and the plan that he simply gave up his body guard duties, he
>should have shown far more concern. It was afterall a lone car
>and 1 bd which was not following proper proceedures. I think
>that maybe Wingfield followed the Limo (he surely must have done
>when he left his position outside the Ritz towards midnight and
>followed the 280 until reaching a stage where perhaps he saw
>what happened in the tunnel and took off lest he become too
>much of a witness. The Mercedes 600 might have been the car that
>Hunter from his hotel window saw speeding from the scene.It was
>a white Mercedes. Was the Mercedes 600 white by any chance?
Interesting idea - worth checking.
> I'm
>going to be shot down in flames here I know it. If this is too
>far-fetched then Kez left his mate TRJ to fend for himself. If
>two bd's were not enough then 1 was simply outrageous.
>
>Your point of the airbags. First we had witness evidence that
>the passenger side airbag was inflated giving the impression
>HP's was not. Then a poster telling as having pictures showing
>both airbags inflated. We've had the seat belt myth but what
>about the airbag myth. In proper operation what should airbags
>do. Inflate after a certain impact pressure - but stay inflated
>or automatically deflate after a certain time.
>
They should deflate almost instantaneously. BOTH airbags still
inflated, you say? Fascinating! But I have not heard this, and it
seems odd that anyone would report ONE airbag still inflated when they
could so easily have said BOTH. This is an important point, because
analysis of the car-sabotage strategy - and thus the crash-engineering
strategy - depends upon it. Any chance of further details?
>It is reported that HP had the steering wheel impact his chest.
>His airbag did not protect him whereas TRJ's did. I reckon it is
>quite simple to "adjust" the time when an airbag blows either
>before it is intended to or after it is intended and such is the
>mechanism any tampering would, I would sugget not be discovered,
>at least prior to its use.
>
Indeed, tampering with the brakes and the airbags would have been simple
and undetectable - no need for complex installations which some
unauthorised policeman might notice. The problem with HP's injuries is
that Dodi fell on him, thus compounding them and making the effect of
the airbag (whether inflated or deflated) hard to discern.
>The flashes seen by many witnesses. Laser gun or camera flashes?
>Now, if we only knew the answer to that one.
>
The flashes are well-attested and have three possible sources - because
we must include the speed-camera mounted over the entrance to the tunnel
(and before anyone asks, we are told that this camera was "out of
film"!) But, given airbag-tampering, such that HP's bag would blow on
minor impact and then deflate normally - or fairly normally - a strategy
for blinding the driver is already provided, is it not, and the
dramatic, and rather noticeable, use of "light guns" is not required?
>For Godsbrain... Hi.
>My aim is really to test the facts. If I seem to cheat a little
>in fishing expeditions, my only excuse, indeed genuine excuse
>is income (or the lack of it) and visiting old URL's or new
>one's is too costly. The wife is complaining even now.
>That's spooky. I have found myself, late in my working career
>forced (because of age), into Insurance, Marine/cargo not Motor
>but I did try at first to get into Motor insurance. I'am
>surprised that this has been an ongoing NG and that a conclusion
>has not been reached yet. Some accident!
>
>For Aleeta... Hi again.
>US$ 26,000? It should have been declared a total loss and sold
>as salvage.Thats about half the cost of a new one.
>I'am not so sure I want a line from Banana now (is that unique
>enough)
>Unless MAF's attacks on TRJ are because of frustration and
>grief I do not see why Trev deserves it. He is the only one who
>could say what happened and perhaps MAF is pissed off with his
>loss of memory.
Now you're assuming things! The classic "limited hangout" is to accuse
the bodyguards - who carried out the assassination - not of murder, but
of incompetence! This is happening in the case of the Rabin-
assassination at the moment!
> Question - did Trev fear MAF's anger or even
>dismissal if MAF had discovered Dodi had left without any bd.
I think it was MAF's plan to send TRJ with D+D - but that Dodi did not
know this! That is why TRJ accepted the rest of the plan but INSISTED on
riding in the 280.
>Dodi confirmed MAF had OK'd it.
Leaving ALL of the "escort" behind, that is - but STILL TRJ insisted on
riding in the 280!
> Two bd's out front could have
>effectively pulled off the ruse of the decoy.
Dodi's "decoy" plan was a ruse to get rid of the "escort". If he had
really wanted to give the paps the slip, he would have boarded the
substitute car in the underground car-park. Instead, he walked out of
the back-door in full view of a crowd of onlookers, including paps, some
of whom had mobile-phones, and some of whom took pictures as the party
boarded the S-280 (see cover of "Who Killed Diana?"!)
Not only that, however. The "escort's" failure (by leaving at the same
moment as the 280 and following it to the Place de la Concorde) to
implement Dodi's decoy-plan, suggests that they KNEW it was a ruse and
had been TOLD not to implement it (just as TRJ had been TOLD not to
concur with Dodi's express, and, according to him, MAF-authorised,
desire to leave TRJ behind) Imagine Dodi's surprise, therefore, when
the "escort" pulled up behind him at the lights in the Place de la
Concorde!
Thus, what Dodi thought was a ruse to ditch the escort (about whose ill-
intent, presumably, he had been warned) was actually a ruse to get him
into the sabotaged car and then give him the fright of seeing the
"escort" on his tail! Hence his "gesture" (see Hugo Nhart) to HP and
HP's sudden departure and (initial) excessive speed!
Obviously, whoever "warned" Dodi about the intentions of the "escort"
and suggested the "decoy"-plan, also tipped off the "escort" not to
implement the "decoy"-plan in full. This person or persons also briefed
HP about which route to take, how to proceed at any sign of danger and
what (i.e. the sudden re-appearance of the escort) WOULD constitute such
a sign!
Furthermore, the route HP was told to take was known also to the
pursuers and the driver of the obstructing vehicle, who were waiting on,
or near, the cour Albert Premier.
HP, of course, trusted the person who told him which route to take etc.
Dodi trusted the person who told him to order the "decoy"-plan; and the
escort trusted the person who told them not to implement the
"decoy"-plan in full.
That just leaves two elements: (a) the sabotaging of the 280 and
ensuring that Musa offered it to Dodi as the only car available, and (b)
getting D+D out of the flat at rue Arsene and over to make a (to them)
unexpected return visit to the Ritz.
(a) is self-explanatory: Musa and, his partner, Siegel (under prior
orders from our person or persons) prepared the car in advance and
stationed it at the Ritz.
(b) involves the Chez Benoit cancellation. It was important that Dodi
receive his ominous message (warning him of the "escort's" ill-intent
and suggesting the "decoy"-plan) when he was out of the flat, on his way
somewhere else, and closer to the Ritz than to the rue Arsene. The Chez
Benoit business-dinner, I presume, was set up for this purpose.
HP would have known nothing of all this until shortly before the party
left the Ritz - and even then, only that his part was to drive fast
along a certain route, in order, as far as he knew, to escape from a
murderous "escort".
> Dodi would not go
>anywhere without his shadow or SAS colleague.
"Could not", do you mean? Well, he obviously TRIED TO that night!
>It might even have caused those paps out front to warn those at
>the rear that the couple where about to come out. Come to think
>of it, Dodi's plan was to leave the bd's behind it was only
>Trev's intervention, in the event that made it look pathetic. Is
>this what truelly angers MAF?
You have spotted another flaw, which did not occur to me, in the
"decoy"-plan, which further supports the contention that it was not a
serious attempt to decoy the paps and that the "escort" knew this.
>Now, concerning bd's ringing London to confirm this plan.
>Wingfield was ready enough to ring London for information of the
>whereabouts of the Limo.(which we are told he eventually found
>out from Musa at the crash scene) Effectively he was saying to
>London that he'd lost Dodi, the person that he was paid to
>protect. If he was ready then, why was Wingfield afraid to ring
>London to confirm the plan. Surely it was the most natural thing
>to do which any decent father or boss would have appreciated. A
>conscientious employee and surely a professional thing to do if
>you are a body guard.
Ah-hah! On the button again! Of course, Wingfield WAS in touch with
his superiors! They (or he) told Wingfield (a) not to implement the
"decoy"-plan in full (b) to put TRJ in the 280 (c) to startle Dodi and
HP in the Place de la Concorde and then (d) to check on the tunnel (that
a crash had occurred but not to investigate closely) (e) page the 280 to
see if anyone answered and then (f) get back to rue Arsene and report!
>It was not Dodi who paid their salaries it was MAF. It seems
>that MAF had not laid down any ground rules for the bd's to
>follow. Who they were to report / answer to. It seems odd that
>there was this ops room in London and MAF was very much a hands
>on boss and yet neither wanted to ring London. It was
>effectively saying we do not believe Dodi but what the hell
>there were 30 odd paps outside and what did Dodi know about it,
>he had his mind on matters of love. I'am satisfied I acted
>professionally and we don't really respect Dodi anyway. So its
>best if we ring London.
>
Of course they did!
>Just before I go, I just spotted Cromwell saying that no one
>would be licensed to ride Arsov's bike other than his self. I'm
>not an authority on this but surely a police patrolman
>or anyone with government authority could have done so.
>
>Ron Winn
>
>
Seems likely to me. Geoff?
>
>
The real problem with the scenario I have described (which seems to me
to be the only logical explanation for the strange events preceding the
crash) is that MAF himself must, almost certainly, have been involved
and must, therefore, have known that he was exposing his own son to some
danger. That's the first point.
Secondly, if MAF did NOT know that this arrangement was intended to kill
everyone in the 280 (which I think it was) what did he think it was
intended to achieve?
Is there anyone else who could have fooled Dodi and HP, in this way, and
ordered the BG's and chauffeurs to do what they did? And could this
person or persons have organised all this without MAF's knowledge?
These are really the only questions I am still asking about the crash
itself.
--
Steve Reed
roy andrew crabtree
> ...
> Of course they did!
>
> >Just before I go, I just spotted Cromwell saying that no one
> >would be licensed to ride Arsov's bike other than his self. I'm
> >not an authority on this but surely a police patrolman
> >or anyone with government authority could have done so.
> >
> >Ron Winn
> >
> >
> Seems likely to me. Geoff?
> >
> >
> The real problem with the scenario I have described (which seems to me
> to be the only logical explanation for the strange events preceding the
> crash) is that MAF himself must, almost certainly, have been involved
or, someone in MAF's chain; has anyone looked at the idea of shills
being planted in MAF's organization? For a more nefarious reason:
to attempt to point the finger at MAF himself (I raised this as a possible point
as well early on in ACPD, on the basis of the rather bad history DAF
had of paying his business bills; which made a BAD reputation in the
Royal establishment, about the time MAF was trying to become vested ...
Please note: I do not know if the reputation is deserved, only that this
reputation was given full bad press in Time Magazine BEFORE the
crash ..
>
> and must, therefore, have known that he was exposing his own son to some
> danger. That's the first point.
>
> Secondly, if MAF did NOT know that this arrangement was intended to kill
> everyone in the 280 (which I think it was) what did he think it was
> intended to achieve?
If a shill was in the control chain, then perchance instructions were deliberately
messed with; all it would take is a Lieutenant bumbling a translation slightly to
an inferior at exactly the wrong time ... to cause MAF to suspect something 180 degrees
out of context, and to trip the backdoor plan ... leading to the incident ...
I reiterate a previous question: In the context of the FREQUENT trips Di and DAF
(and other entourage combinations) made to the Hotel, has anyone checked out
OTHER nights to see if the circumstances MAY have been partially present in previous
circumstances or scenes EARLIER?
I note with some trepidation that in all of the accident investigation NO ONE HAS
MENTIONED CHECKING THE RITZ SECURITY VIDEOS FOR THE PREVIOUS
TRIPS THERE. And with the exception of some discussion about Di&Dodi running
away from parties unidentified while in Monaco earlier that day (or an earlier day?),
I have seen NO ONE attempt a correlation of other incidents at other locations; for
example a common face analysis among all photo/video evidence from all sources,
from the time of the divorce forward ...
the software for this is trivial; the collimation of the evidence, and the CPU runtime
power are what is difficult ... the data would HAVE to be analyzed for alteration;
and unclipped sources are best ...
> Is there anyone else who could have fooled Dodi and HP, in this way, and
> ordered the BG's and chauffeurs to do what they did? And could this
> person or persons have organised all this without MAF's knowledge?
Yes; if the stooging was done early enough.
HAs anyone done a personnel analysis (changeover) against Di's, Dodi's
MAF"s and Ritz staff from the divorce to the accident?
> These are really the only questions I am still asking about the crash
> itself.
Wheels within wheels. It would be nice to have a publicly accessible
collimation of raw data (fat chance!).
> --
> Steve Reed
--
Roy A. Crabtree
3212-7 Stone's Throw Lane
Durham, NC USA 27713-5215
919-696-1805 voicemail/cell/textpage
roy_cr...@hotmail.com Primary Email
rcra...@nc.rr.com Secondary Email
roy.cr...@unc.edu Tertiary Email
http://home.nc.rr.com/rcrabtree Primary web page
http://skyscraper.fortunecity.com/activex/720 Seondary web page
http://www.unc.edu/~royc Tertiary web page
ICQ royc 17243474
Steve Reed
>Steve Reed wrote:
>> >
SNIP
>> The real problem with the scenario I have described (which seems to me
>> to be the only logical explanation for the strange events preceding the
>> crash) is that MAF himself must, almost certainly, have been involved
>
> or, someone in MAF's chain; has anyone looked at the idea of shills
>being planted in MAF's organization?
Klein, Roulet, MacNamara? I don't know. But, if it was one of MAF's
underlings - and MAF didn't know about it - that underling's goose would
have been cooked by now. No. I see no way round it. MAF set it up at
the behest of globalist forces who wanted Diana out of the way and
suspicion cast on the Windsors.
> For a more nefarious reason:
>to attempt to point the finger at MAF himself (I raised this as a possible point
>as well early on in ACPD, on the basis of the rather bad history DAF
>had of paying his business bills; which made a BAD reputation in the
>Royal establishment, about the time MAF was trying to become vested ...
>
The Royals set it up partly to discredit MAF? But how could THEY have
manipulated Dodi, HP and the "escort" so exactly? No - it has to be MAF
himself.
SNIP
>> and must, therefore, have known that he was exposing his own son to some
>> danger. That's the first point.
>>
>> Secondly, if MAF did NOT know that this arrangement was intended to kill
>> everyone in the 280 (which I think it was) what did he think it was
>> intended to achieve?
>
> If a shill was in the control chain, then perchance instructions were
>deliberately
>messed with; all it would take is a Lieutenant bumbling a translation slightly
>to
>an inferior at exactly the wrong time ... to cause MAF to suspect something 180
>degrees
>out of context, and to trip the backdoor plan ... leading to the incident ...
>
The plan was too exact to have been the result of an error: it was put
into operation days, even weeks, before (car sabotage) and depended upon
(a) D+D+HP and (b) the "escort" doing precisely what they were
(separately) told.
>I reiterate a previous question: In the context of the FREQUENT trips Di and
>DAF
>(and other entourage combinations) made to the Hotel, has anyone checked out
>OTHER nights to see if the circumstances MAY have been partially present in
>previous
>circumstances or scenes EARLIER?
>
HP had practised getaway-driving along the tunnel route - it was
probably a standard, stand-by contingency known to him, MAF and probably
no-one else (until MAF agreed to set up D+D for the pursuit)
> I note with some trepidation that in all of the accident investigation NO
>ONE HAS
>MENTIONED CHECKING THE RITZ SECURITY VIDEOS FOR THE PREVIOUS
>TRIPS THERE. And with the exception of some discussion about Di&Dodi running
>away from parties unidentified while in Monaco earlier that day (or an earlier
>day?),
>I have seen NO ONE attempt a correlation of other incidents at other locations;
>for
>example a common face analysis among all photo/video evidence from all sources,
>from the time of the divorce forward ...
>
Looking for a previous attempt? Or a trial run? Quite a lot of
candidates for the latter.
> the software for this is trivial; the collimation of the evidence, and the
>CPU runtime
> power are what is difficult ... the data would HAVE to be analyzed for
>alteration;
> and unclipped sources are best ...
>
>> Is there anyone else who could have fooled Dodi and HP, in this way, and
>> ordered the BG's and chauffeurs to do what they did? And could this
>> person or persons have organised all this without MAF's knowledge?
>
> Yes; if the stooging was done early enough.
>
But could they have got away with it? After the crash, Wingfield, TRJ
and Musa would have said to MAF - "hey, what's-his-name told us that
those were YOUR orders!" - and the cat would have been out of the bag,
wouldn't it?
> HAs anyone done a personnel analysis (changeover) against Di's, Dodi's
> MAF"s and Ritz staff from the divorce to the accident?
>
The substitution of action-man, Henri Paul, for the wily and well-
connected Chief Security Offiver at the Ritz, Jean Hocquet, a couple of
months before, could well have been part of the plan. Hocquet might
have rumbled the plot - and he was not a getaway-driver.
>> These are really the only questions I am still asking about the crash
>> itself.
>
> Wheels within wheels. It would be nice to have a publicly accessible
> collimation of raw data (fat chance!).
The big question remains - if MAF wasn't planning to kill D+D, what did
he think he was doing?
--
Steve Reed
roy andrew crabtree
(intendedly) of his son's death; though it takes a tremendous impetus for such to be
the desire of a father toward his son. Does anyone have a plausible reason for this
as a scenario? (If so, this should again be examined for the possibility of a shill sequence;
remember that 'parleys' [multiple level inside political maneuvers] are usually at second or third
remove; very seldom even in direct assassination will you find a principle hand's on;
it is rare even to determine a causal agent in an initiating sequence. For example, who ordered
the removal of Army backups in Dallas in Nov. 63? they were specifically told to
stand down. Who ordered the change in Kennedy's route? There is a name associated with
this from time to time, BUT I have seen no interview with that individual substantiating
that.)
Please note that several individuals associated with the sequences surrounding D+D dead
HAVE resigned or been removed, some without explanation.
When a sequence is being planned for such an extreme event, the conspirators would have known
if the need to hide such a thing, and, as such, would have done what you could call a 'reverse
analysis' of the events for the purposes of maintaining a cover-up; this would include planting
a number of false trails, planning and implementing for months in advance, etc.
This is where analysis of which investigative trails WERE followed by authorities (and as
opposed to those followed by MAF) would be indicative, if any areas were left unchecked
or were not fully evidenced. (Many have been raised within this group).
I agree that MAF would sack (worse, actually) anyone who DID _obviously_ muff an
order, but usually, a trigger event is NOT done that way; it would usually be done by feeding
carefully selected information to a BONA FIDE member of MAF's party (at 2nd/3rd remove,
and both plausible or verifiable). This in turn is based on KNOWN weaknesses in a security
or defense scenario. {A question I have not seen asked: why would security at that level NOT
have a full second secure team nd route ALWAYS planned from the Ritz. And IF it did,
would it not in turn provide a weakness that could be exploited, by shutting down the primary
one (out the front door)? All that would be needed would be to provide a constant stream of rumors to the paparazzi that something was going to occur that would be newsworthy. Were
the numbers surrounding the couple increased, the same, or reduced for tat time frame? Do you
see how hard it is to ascertain such shifts?)
One scenario: A warning occurs, made warrantable by PREVIOUS incidents being partially
verified as active risks by undetermined agencies (and as such not really the type that would
cause a cancellation of events). A known weakness is present in the security flow of one
or more physical arenas (Monaco, the Ritz; are there others?). Set up two or more scenes
which have major bifurcation points in their physical flow (change of a route or personnel,
a change of plans at a late stage). Trigger the incident by a SUGGESTION from a bona fide,
who is provided with another bona fide, who got information on good basis (and, as such, MA
would KNOW that his team had been had, after the fact, BUT WOULD HAVE NO ONE
TO POINT AT). All it would take is a street informant who had been worthy in the past to be fed
the wrong line for that one scene; and the triggering would be in place for the following event:
A) Driver change (HP is fed the contexts; so is MAF and/or Dodi; now dead and little
detail passes hands in a 30 second exchange that CAUSES the route to be altered; perhaps
names and places are omitted; maybe only a security code word is passed that causes the change)
Were there any changes or examination of the surrounds of the PRIMARY route
that would possibly have been temporary or actually falsehoods, that could have
caused Dodi or MAF or HP or the security chief to trigger a comment to cause a
change? (MAF _might_ put these detail in his pleadings to Stephan; probably he
would not, long discussion as to why).
B) Back door alternate plan (2nd or 3rd level fallback, possibly only verbally discussed;
but if so, then not necessarily flushed out in full; the point being (i) someone could overhear
this as a plan earlier on (months ago) and could see flaws that could be exploited IF
the primary and secondary could be forced to be abandoned WITHOUT triggering
a "full scale alert" form a secure position (in the Ritz).
C) Run scenarios designed to trigger these weaknesses and get them (at LOW alert) to become
accustomed or potential (or not; the analysis varies with the scenarios)
D) Wait over several repetitions (how many times were they or members of MAF's
entourage at the Ritz using the same security mechanisms?); all that would need to be present
would be the same team (at most 4-6 individuals). Not more than 1-3 trials would
be needed to engage a 'trip' of a weakness within a security flow.
E) Once the fallback plan (alternate route out the back) is engaged, 'trip' the weakness:
Do you see that the point in which the tunnel was chosen or taken is the ONLY
possible route which does NOT engage the automobile to OPEN traffic flow
and OPEN points of cover, and MULTIPLE points in which side street traffic
could attack the vehicle?
F) "Trip" the desired event: all it would take would be to allow HP or TRJ to have
seen a face or person that would have the chance, if seen in a nearby vehicle to
trip the correct (wrong, flawed, lethal) route choice at the correct point
Please note that those injured in an accident will often lose all of their recent
memory (or most of it) if the event is severe (!!!)
G) Kill.
Did MAF know or participate in this? I do not know; he does.
Could someone have shilled him into the sequence? Yes.
Steve Reed wrote:
> >Steve Reed wrote:
> >> >
> SNIP
>
> >> The real problem with the scenario I have described (which seems to me
> >> to be the only logical explanation for the strange events preceding the
> >> crash) is that MAF himself must, almost certainly, have been involved
> >
> > or, someone in MAF's chain; has anyone looked at the idea of shills
> >being planted in MAF's organization?
>
> Klein, Roulet, MacNamara? I don't know. But, if it was one of MAF's
> underlings - and MAF didn't know about it - that underling's goose would
> have been cooked by now. No. I see no way round it. MAF set it up at
> the behest of globalist forces who wanted Diana out of the way and
> suspicion cast on the Windsors.
>
> > For a more nefarious reason:
> >to attempt to point the finger at MAF himself (I raised this as a possible point
> >as well early on in ACPD, on the basis of the rather bad history DAF
> >had of paying his business bills; which made a BAD reputation in the
> >Royal establishment, about the time MAF was trying to become vested ...
> >
> The Royals set it up partly to discredit MAF? But how could THEY have
> manipulated Dodi, HP and the "escort" so exactly? No - it has to be MAF
> himself.
>
> SNIP
> >> and must, therefore, have known that he was exposing his own son to some
> >> danger. That's the first point.
> >>
> >> Secondly, if MAF did NOT know that this arrangement was intended to kill
> >> everyone in the 280 (which I think it was) what did he think it was
> >> intended to achieve?
> >
> >> Is there anyone else who could have fooled Dodi and HP, in this way, and
> >> ordered the BG's and chauffeurs to do what they did? And could this
> >> person or persons have organised all this without MAF's knowledge?
> >
> > Yes; if the stooging was done early enough.
> >
> But could they have got away with it? After the crash, Wingfield, TRJ
> and Musa would have said to MAF - "hey, what's-his-name told us that
> those were YOUR orders!" - and the cat would have been out of the bag,
> wouldn't it?
>
> > HAs anyone done a personnel analysis (changeover) against Di's, Dodi's
> > MAF"s and Ritz staff from the divorce to the accident?
> >
> The substitution of action-man, Henri Paul, for the wily and well-
> connected Chief Security Offiver at the Ritz, Jean Hocquet, a couple of
> months before, could well have been part of the plan. Hocquet might
> have rumbled the plot - and he was not a getaway-driver.
>
> >> These are really the only questions I am still asking about the crash
> >> itself.
> >
> > Wheels within wheels. It would be nice to have a publicly accessible
> > collimation of raw data (fat chance!).
>
> The big question remains - if MAF wasn't planning to kill D+D, what did
> he think he was doing?
>
> --
> Steve Reed
--
makt
Diana? What would he benefit from it? If he was part of the
plot, that means he was working along with the Windsors, and the
Establishment, and other organizations! It just seem so
extreme!
ron
where he was going? Are you sure? And what about Dournot? Did he
also slip away to visit the scene without notifying Wingfield?
Did Musa and Dournot sneak off together - or independently?"
Go along to posting 22/3 herodotusknew7843 - TRJ Larry King
Interview pt 2
and see my posting with extract of Sustren interview.
Am I sure?
You betcher.
Wingfield was acting stand-in butler pouring the champagne
getting ready for the couple's (late) arrival and the two
chauffeors were acting as bodyguards outside with the paps. He
was doing such a good job they didn't want to disturb him. My
joke, but that's about how Wingfield tells it.
As you know, I'am a newbie. Would you send me an e-mail. I would
like to ask your advice about NG's generally.
Steve Reed
<RCRA...@nc.rr.com> writes
>In earlier discussion on the group I raised the possibility of MAF being the
>agent
>(intendedly) of his son's death; though it takes a tremendous impetus for
> such
>to be
>the desire of a father toward his son. Does anyone have a plausible reason for
>this
>as a scenario? (If so, this should again be examined for the possibility of a
>shill sequence;
>remember that 'parleys' [multiple level inside political maneuvers]
> are usually
>at second or third
>remove; very seldom even in direct assassination will you find a principle
>hand's on;
I don't think MAF is a principle - not by a long shot
>it is rare even to determine a causal agent in an initiating sequence. For
>example, who ordered
>the removal of Army backups in Dallas in Nov. 63? they were specifically
> told
>to
>stand down. Who ordered the change in Kennedy's route? There is a name
>associated with
>this from time to time, BUT I have seen no interview with that individual
>substantiating
>that.)
>
And yet MAF plays a dual role: (a) as organiser of the crash and (b) as
instrument for focusing suspicion on Buckingham Palace. Risky that.
They had a route planned sure enough! And a second team was formed by
transferring TRJ and drafting in HP
> And IF it
>did,
>would it not in turn provide a weakness that could be exploited, by shutting
>down the primary
>one (out the front door)? All that would be needed would be to provide a
>constant stream of rumors to the paparazzi that something was going to occur
>that would be newsworthy. Were
>the numbers surrounding the couple increased, the same, or reduced for
> tat time
>frame? Do you
>see how hard it is to ascertain such shifts?)
>
I think that the pap-pressure was upped considerably for the Paris
visit. The engagement-rumour was used to achieve this, together with
more concerted action, by the Mirror, for example, to offer unusually
large sums for photographs (to Laurent Sola of LS-Presse, for example,
employer of Chassery and Oderkerken) The purpose of this was to provide
credibility (a) for the "decoy"-plan, both in Dodi's mind (when he
presented it as a ruse to get rid of the "escort") and in the mind of
the public, and (b) to distract attention from the pursuers and the
obstructing vehicle, by providing a pack of paps for Stephan to
"investigate".
>One scenario: A warning occurs, made warrantable by PREVIOUS incidents being
>partially
>verified as active risks by undetermined agencies (and as such not really the
>type that would
>cause a cancellation of events). A known weakness is present in the security
>flow of one
>or more physical arenas (Monaco, the Ritz; are there others?). Set up two or
>more scenes
>which have major bifurcation points in their physical flow (change of a route or
>personnel,
>a change of plans at a late stage). Trigger the incident by a SUGGESTION from a
>bona fide,
I don't think so.. The instructions must have been precise and intended
to be carried out to the last detail. They would have been transmitted
(to Dodi and HP, at any rate) as "suggestions", but containing the
implicit warning (about the ill-intent of the escort) that failure to
comply would be very dangerous.
>who is provided with another bona fide, who got information on good basis (and,
>as such,
It had to be someone they all trusted and were accustomed to obey -
there could have been no intermediary unless that intermediary could
state categorically that his information was correct and that MAF
approved of the action "suggested"!
> MA
>would KNOW that his team had been had, after the fact, BUT WOULD HAVE NO ONE
>TO POINT AT). All it would take is a street informant who had been worthy in
>the past to be fed
>the wrong line for that one scene; and the triggering would be in place for the
>following event:
>
>A) Driver change (HP is fed the contexts; so is MAF and/or Dodi; now dead and
>little
>detail passes hands in a 30 second exchange that CAUSES the route to be altered;
>perhaps
>names and places are omitted; maybe only a security code word is passed that
>causes the change)
>
> Were there any changes or examination of the surrounds of the PRIMARY
>route
> that would possibly have been temporary or actually falsehoods, that
>could have
> caused Dodi or MAF or HP or the security chief to trigger a comment to
>cause a
> change? (MAF _might_ put these detail in his pleadings to Stephan;
>probably he
> would not, long discussion as to why).
>
I wonder if Stephan asked MAF about the route - and whether it was pre-
arranged for emergencies - and what emergency, in that case, HP might
have been responding to - or whether the absurd and irrelevant
investigation of the paps (as outlined in the unverified, press-reported
"Translated Extracts") is really all the Stephan-report consists of.
>[ A MIME text / x-vcard part was included here. ]
>
--
Steve Reed
GODS...@home.com
On Tue, 25 Apr 2000 17:36:45 +0100, Steve Reed
<asr...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> wrote:
>I think that the pap-pressure was upped considerably for the Paris
>visit. The engagement-rumour was used to achieve this, together with
>more concerted action, by the Mirror, for example, to offer unusually
>large sums for photographs (to Laurent Sola of LS-Presse, for example,
>employer of Chassery and Oderkerken) The purpose of this was to provide
>credibility (a) for the "decoy"-plan, both in Dodi's mind (when he
>presented it as a ruse to get rid of the "escort") and in the mind of
>the public, and (b) to distract attention from the pursuers and the
>obstructing vehicle, by providing a pack of paps for Stephan to
>"investigate".
Well, we should remember that there was no "Stephan" at that
point, but I think the word "camoflage" might be applicable.
<a href"http://members.home.com/godsbrain">G.O.D.S.B.R.A.I.N.</a><br>
ron
"They should deflate almost instantaneously. BOTH airbags still
inflated, you say? Fascinating! But I have not heard this, and
it seems odd that anyone would report ONE airbag still inflated
when they could so easily have said BOTH. This is an important
point, because analysis of the car-sabotage strategy - and thus
the crash-engineering strategy - depends upon it. Any chance of
further details?"
+++++++++
Serge Arnal took 16 pics. in tunnel 8 featured Merc. alone.
(D226) was first taken after the crash, smoke is seen coming
from car, the lights were on and the DRIVERS AIR BAG WAS STILL
INFLATED.
But as I say, a witness reported the passenger side airbag was
inflated as if the other had'nt.
The lights were on - front head lights? OH! Hadn't the Limo
right headlight had an impact with left taillight of the Uno.
Couldn't have been much. The element in the bulb was still in
tact. This must have been the evidence for Herve Stephan report
that the Uno's role was a passive one.
+++++++++++
Anyone seen my posting of small piece from MAF website:-
" Eric Petel, the first motorcyclist on the scene recognised the
Princess and tried, in English, to reassure her that help was on
the way, an effort he would hardly have made had she been
unconscious or uncomprehending. Romuald Rat, who was next to
arrive told Diana in English to "be cool, a doctor will arrive."
He said that when he touched her she began to stir. At that time
Diana was clearly drifting in and out of consciousness."
++++++++++++
According to the ATER Romuald Rat had opened the back right door
of the Limo. Of his 19 pics he took in the tunnel, 3 were of the
Limo alone. RR "was everywhere around the car" So how did Eric
Petel sneak in, for that matter WHO is Eric Petal.
Although in RR 19 there were 2 of a non-identified individual.
++++++++++++
Hey Steve. A trail run?. What about the trip from the airport.
The black Peugot whipping in front and the motorcycle(s) antics
which caused Diana to show concern for their safety? From memory
I remember that Dourneau somewhere said that the bikes had
stayed behind the Range Rover.
ron
· The ATER describes the position of the Limo in the Concorde-
Boulogne Lane so is it true to say that neither lane was
slow/fast lane, both lanes had speed limit of 30 mph .
· In the body Guard Story, it says "he skids to the left for 19
metres, one wheel off the ground and just as he passes the Fiat
and turns to the right to get ahead of his nemesis, his path is
blocked etc. Why did he turn to the right?
· If HP had intended to take the right exit and not the tunnel
could he still have made it safely doing 73 - 96 mph?
· First code18 call was made 12.26am. by Paul Carril. First two
teams of fire brigade vehicles, 94 and 100 arrive 12.32am. There
is no time recorded for Dr. Mailliez arrival but he did a swift
mental triage and raced back to his car to make some calls
to "18, to order ambulances and to order a mobile can opener".
His call to 18 is stated to have been received at12.26am and was
the first call. Who made the first call Dr. Mailliez or Paul
Carril? His timing is impeccable here. Who could ask for more
than a off duty doctor to be on the scene in seconds? No
question yet just puzzles for you. Now here is the question. Dr
Mailliez gives first aid and places an oxygen mask over Diana's
face and upon seeing the first ambulances arrive, this Good
Samaritan leaves. Did he take the oxygen mask with him or leave
it in place? He is now working for the private sector but was
there no professional hand over to the first SAMU doctor to
arrive? The phrase "this Good Samaritan left" comes from The
Body Guards Story. There are many errors in this book including
the unforgivable error, dioxide instead of monoxide and one I
spotted "Mercedes rebounds from impact, it rotates clockwise at
high speed and crashes against the tunnel wall to the right"
That should of course be "anticlockwise" but am I being too
finicky that a professional hand over should be something that
would be news worthy or that it would be made reference to by a
SAMU doctor, anonymously or otherwise.
I am no doctor but in a crash such as this a doctor should be
able to predict a casualties injuries but he seems to have
judged her condition on a "best shape" criteria. In comparison
with the other passengers she probable was in good shape.
However conversely their poor state should have indicated to him
what her injuries were likely to be if not externally,
internally It cannot possibly be true that he did not know Lady
Diana when he saw her. Paparazzi were everywhere. She was no
ordinary young lady. I would have expected him as the first
doctor on the scene to have stayed with her until she was
comfortably in hospital. But reports of his diagnosis do not
appear to be that clear nor his actions professional
But perhaps I’ve seen too many episodes of Quincy.
You know why I raise this main point now don’t you.
Ron.
ron
+++++++++++++
Not guilty, that's the order the webmaster put it.
Keep them on the move. Don't let them settle down for the night.
Its time to go. Where can we get some peace away from all this?
Was there no rooms at the Ritz? Could they not have sent a
trusted member of the Ritz staff to collect their things from
the apartment? Was Dodi not able to issue commands to the Ritz
staff? A simple call to the butler at the apartment would have
revealed that the paps were awaiting their arrival there. So was
the apartment a better choice to spend the night than to stay
were they were? Why for heaven's sake.
Ron
Gary Stone
ron <ron_winn...@lineone.net.invalid> wrote in message
> Godsbrain wrote:-
>
> Not guilty, that's the order the webmaster put it.
>
> Keep them on the move. Don't let them settle down for the night.
> Its time to go. Where can we get some peace away from all this?
> Was there no rooms at the Ritz? Could they not have sent a
> trusted member of the Ritz staff to collect their things from
> the apartment? Was Dodi not able to issue commands to the Ritz
> staff? A simple call to the butler at the apartment would have
> revealed that the paps were awaiting their arrival there. So was
> the apartment a better choice to spend the night than to stay
> were they were? Why for heaven's sake.
> Ron
>
Ron,
Where do you get this ATER from, I asked in another thread but maybe you
didnt see it.
Gethryn
ron
following but it could be a possibility (there might be flawes,
for instance the white Mercedes seen by Hunter leaving the scene
but what do you say to my main posting (not the opening one
where I'm trying to help with your theory.
Here goes:
Here’s just some more info for you.
This is Musa.
"VAN SUSTEREN: How did he know? I mean, where was he that he
learned about this...
WINGFIELD: He had come to the crash site. And I could hear him
talking. I mean, I speak a little French, but it was too quick
for me too -- he left the phone to his ear when he was shouting
across to the emergency services. And I -- it was too quick for
me to pick it up, but he said, no, I'm here at the crash site
and Dodi's dead.
VAN SUSTEREN: Did he say anything about Princess Diana or
Trevor? WINGFIELD: No. I immediately asked and he just said the
princess has hurt her legs. And so straight away I got back to
my superiors in London.
VAN SUSTEREN: And told them what?
WINGFIELD: Well, there has been an RTA, a road traffic accident,
and Dodi's dead.
VAN SUSTEREN: And what about Trevor? I mean, when did you learn
that Trevor had survived the crash?
WINGFIELD: I learned when I'd arranged the reception for Mr.
Fayed at 5 o'clock at that morning in Le Bourget and we'd driven
to the hospital and we stayed on the steps outside the hospital.
And at that time we understood everyone to be dead"
..........So London knew Dodi was dead.
From MAF' site...
"I was fast asleep in my house at Oxted in Surrey when the phone
rang at 1 am, thirty minutes after the tragedy. It was Paul
Handley-Greaves, the head of my close protection team. "There's
been an accident involving your son and the Princess," he
said. "We're not sure of the extent and have no details of the
injuries at this point." My mind was already racing but I
remained outwardly calm. The situation was still unclear.
Minutes later as I was preparing to leave for Paris there was
another call. It was my head of security at the Ritz who broke
the dreadful news: Dodi was dead. The impact of those few words
was utterly devastating. I felt as though someone had shot both
my legs away. I now know that part of me died that day. A year
later the pain is scarcely more bearable"
· London didn't tell MAF Dodi was dead. Was Kes hesitant about
the certainty of this fact or was London playing it safe not
being so sure of the original source of this news ? (Musa?)
Although if Dodi was put in a body bag at the scene it was a
clear enough.
· Who was the head of security at this time?. Poor chap to have
to be the one to relay this bad news?
A coincidence that two calls were made within this space of time
when one should have done.
Relating to the above and also a comment on the fact that there
appears to be coincidentally off duty firemen and a doctor
traveling by at the very moment to be the first on the scene:-
From the ATER
"Two young people had left a car travelling in the opposite
direction to
go to the vehicle involved in the accident: Damien DALBY, a
voluntary
fireman, and his brother Sébastien PENNEQUIN."
"Sébastien PENNEQUIN stated that he had helped a man to describe
the state
of the injured, as this man had the firemen on line, thanks to a
mobile
phone."
The first Paris fire brigade crew arrived at the scene at
00.32hrs. Only 9 -10mins after the accident
"(D2367)
This man was James HUTH, who was in a flat in Cours Albert 1er
and who
explained that he went into the tunnel as soon as he heard the
crash.
On photo D470, Sébastien PENNEQUIN appears in a black jacket and
black
jeans."
This sort of relaying of news bears a striking similarity to how
Kes got to hear from the scene. If James Huth call to the fire
service was within the first 10 minutes then he was acting as a
Good Samaritan although it seems odd that he was not relaying
the state of the car since it would be the car fireman would be
more concerned with but why didn’t James Huth simply not hand
over the mobile to Pennequin? What could a French man tell an
English man (maybe) to relay to the main control room of the
fire service?
I’m not suggesting James Huth was not a Good Samaritan because
if he had Kes on the line why would he want Pennequin to assist
him?
+++++++++++++++
Something more tangible:-
From the Dimbleby interview:
"W: How involved in Dodi’s security was his father? KW: In all
of the security, in all aspects, Mr. Fayed had a hand in it. He
is a very hands on boss he wants to know exactly what’s going on
W: Of course his father says he did talk to Dodi 15 minutes
before you all left the Ritz.
TRJ: Exactly, exactly.
W: He insists that he told Dodi to go out the front door into
those other two cars.
TRJ: And that’s a distinct possibility that, that’s what went
on, that Dodi if you like used his father’s own name to get his
own way. W: But Trevor did get one concession from Dodi, the
concession that almost killed him.
TRJ: I said, ‘I’m coming with you,’ and he said OK, then you can
come with us.
W: And the Ritz security camera shows Diana and Dodi at the
hotel’s back entrance, waiting
for their car. What was their mood?
TRJ: I think they were quite happy, I think they were quite
jovial at that stage, there were no problems whatsoever.
W: So Henri Paul is in the drivers seat, you are sitting beside
him, and Dodi and Diana in the back seat. What do you remember
from there on?
TRJ: I remember getting into the vehicle, and then looking back
at the car and a couple of motorbikes of paparazzi that were
waiting there, pulling away from the pavement, and that the last
clear memory I’ve got until I woke up in the hospital.
W: There are people who deal with this kind of memory loss, I
mean medical people, who say this is a common occurrence.
TRJ: Yeah, yeah. I’ve seen a psychiatrist, and he informed me
that a certain amount of memory will be lost"
How did TRJ know "the car" was paparazzi. ( and why "the"
instead of "a" car) JL and FC was the only two (associated with
cars) at the rear, so we hear. Even if JL was in his own car
that would not have caught TRJ attention and certainly could not
be called "the car" of paparazzi. What if the car had two
photographers or 4, could 4 be better described - the car of
paparazzi and then have caught TRJ attention. Could that car
have belonged to FC (Peugeot 205) and the one the police queried
as to why it was parked in front of the Mercedes at the scene.
Was Alain Guizard in that car or on a motorcycle
After the crash did 2 motorcycles (those unaccounted for) take
LJ and DO back to collect their cars allowing them to then
return later or did Serge Arnal in his black Fait Uno (perhaps
seen by Hunter) take either or both to collect their cars
perhaps leaving Christian Martinez behind who passed his film to
Serge Arnal on his return as an alibi.
Could someone post the extract from TRJ 60 minutes or any other
interview in the U.S which covers TRJ observations outside the
rear of the Ritz as to who and what was in the vicinity just
before his memory failed him.
Ron
Steve Reed
Oro...@lineone.net.invalid> writes
>Steve, can I ask you or other members a few questions:-
>
>· The ATER describes the position of the Limo in the Concorde-
>Boulogne Lane so is it true to say that neither lane was
>slow/fast lane, both lanes had speed limit of 30 mph .
I think you'll find that the speed limit was 50 km/h which, admittedly
is not quite 32 mph; but speed-limits are as stupid - at certain times
of day - in France, as they are here, and are not observed.
According to Francois Levistre, he was doing "entre 110 et 120 km/h"
(between 68 and 75mph) on the (westbound) approach to the Alma Tunnel,
when he saw vehicles coming up fast behind.
"The speed-trap which picked up the Mercedes doing 196 km/h (122 mph)
was situated on the straight stretch of the cour Albert Premier about
400 metres before the tunnel" (France Dimanche, No 2667, 10/97)
The Mercedes 280 and its attendant pursuers had already passed Brenda
Wells and Thierry H (by taking the left-hand lane) and were closing on
Levistre, as he and his wife, entered the tunnel - keeping to the right
in readiness to be overtaken. As Levistre remembers it, looking back
from a point about half-way through the tunnel, there was "a white car",
in the middle of the road, behind him. Behind that, he says, there was
"another car" (presumably the Mercedes S- 280) and behind that, a large
motor-bike.
Note that there is no vehicle present, in Levistre's story, which could
be the car of the witnesses Souad M. and Mohammed M. If we believe
Levistre, they weren't there! On the other hand, if we believe THEM,
the Mercedes crashed without any help from anyone - a very convenient
version of events, for the authorities, and completely contrary to the
testimony of ALL the other witnesses.
The sequence of events, as Levistre recounts it, is very interesting,
because he seems to be saying that the "white car" stayed ahead of the
Mercedes and the motor-bike. At least, he describes the "white car"
passing him, and disappearing westwards, before he begins to describe
the motor-bike overtaking the Mercedes and cutting-in in front of it.
The impression given (that the "white car" was a long way ahead of the
Mercedes and the motorbike) is probably an illusion created by the
difficulty involved in describing the situation; but there is no
escaping the conclusion that the Mercedes did not completely squeeze
past the white car, but came alongside it, on its left, in a sliding
collision, which impelled the white car forwards, towards Levistre and
out of harm's way; whereupon the motorbike overtook the slowed Mercedes
and (also according to Levistre) cut-in in front of it and produced "a
searing burst of light, much brighter than a photo-flash".
At this point, Levistre, braked and came to a halt near the western end
of the tunnel. The Mercedes had crashed, and the bikers (like Brenda
Wells, Levistre affirms that there were two of them) had stopped by the
wreck. One of them got off, momentarily, to look into the Mercedes,
jumped back on again, and the bike sped off, passing Levistre as it did
so. Levistre describes the bike as "black" and the two men as "dressed
in black with black helmets". The whole thing took just a few seconds.
Considerable efforts have been made to discredit Levistre. It has been
said, for example, that his attitude to the press was "hostile" and that
he was trying to "gain attention"; but there could be another reason for
these attacks on his character - he witnessed a murder! There is no
other interpretation you can put on his testimony.
Yes, indeed (to answer your question) the lanes were used as a slow-lane
and an overtaking lane - ludicrous speed-limit signs notwithstanding!
Other answers in another post
--
Steve Reed
ron
from a TRJ US interview.
This is the extract from the Dimbleby interview:-:
"JD: There is no doubt in your mind that this man could drive.
TRJ: I can categorically say that as far as I was concerned he
was stone cold sober.
JD: You get into the car, what happens next.
TRJ: The last thing I remember, we got into the vehicle, we
pulled off and a couple of paparazzi vehicles that were at the
back of the hotel started to follow us."
This can only be speculation but were these a charcoal grey
Peogoet 205 and a black Fait Uno?
Did Fabrice Chassery who left the scene leave his Peogoet
behind, if so why
or did Alain Guizard leave his grey-blue Peugeot 205 at the
scene, if so why?
Was anyone wearing seat belts that night?
Steve wrote:-
"I wonder if Stephan asked MAF about the route - and whether it
was pre- arranged for emergencies - and what emergency, in that
case, HP might have been responding to - or whether the absurd
and irrelevant investigation of the paps (as outlined in the
unverified, press-reported "Translated Extracts") is really all
the Stephan-report consists of."
Which newspaper(s) reported this Steve?
It was I believe on MAF's site until it was removed, is that
correct?
Have you got the press article(s) on disk or do you have the
URL?
Ron
GODS...@home.com
On Mon, 1 May 2000 17:53:44 +0100, Steve Reed
<asr...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> wrote:
>In article <022cd178...@usw-ex0105-037.remarq.com>, ron <ron_winnN
>Oro...@lineone.net.invalid> writes
>>Steve, can I ask you or other members a few questions:-
>>
>>· The ATER describes the position of the Limo in the Concorde-
>>Boulogne Lane so is it true to say that neither lane was
>>slow/fast lane, both lanes had speed limit of 30 mph .
>
>I think you'll find that the speed limit was 50 km/h which, admittedly
>is not quite 32 mph; but speed-limits are as stupid - at certain times
>of day - in France, as they are here, and are not observed.
>
>According to Francois Levistre, he was doing "entre 110 et 120 km/h"
>(between 68 and 75mph) on the (westbound) approach to the Alma Tunnel,
>when he saw vehicles coming up fast behind.
>
>"The speed-trap which picked up the Mercedes doing 196 km/h (122 mph)
>was situated on the straight stretch of the cour Albert Premier about
>400 metres before the tunnel" (France Dimanche, No 2667, 10/97)
Upcomming is a recapitulation of an old suppositional hypothesis that
has appeared hazily in the cloud of multitudes of variations on
retelling and hypothesizing on the event.
The hypothetical story is going to get XXX rated so it is time for
youth, females in Sunday school class, and others not wanting
to read XXX rated materials to quit reading at this point.
I have been reading alt.conspiracy.princess-diana since very
close to its inception a day or so after the crash. I had
actually chanced across an alt.current-events.princess-diana
news group a couple of days before the crash. Because
my granddad came from Wales a hundred and thirty years ago
it was enough intesting to come back a day or two. Like the
second day was the news of the crash, the movement to
b.anana's creation of the acpd and not long thereafter the
cessation of the ac-e.p-d.
Over the years quite a variety of suppositions and conflicting
stories have been mentioned on acpd. I am low income and
don't get around much and do not buy books, or magazines
or newspapers. Of course I go to a grocery store or few and
to the local flea market so occassionally I see a book, or
magazine cover. I am in San Jose California USA.
In trying to guess how human nature might have influenced
physical events I have arrived at a mental sketch of how
things might have happened. Not based on only what is
reported to have happened because those reports are
conflicting.
So I guess my best guess of words to describe this is
as a "SUPPOSITIONAL HYPOTHESIS." Some people
might use the words "THEORY" or "POSSIBLE THEORY."
A Big Blow For Mankind In The Tunnel Of Love.
>
>The Mercedes 280 and its attendant pursuers had already passed Brenda
>Wells and Thierry H (by taking the left-hand lane)
How many metres was the entrance of the slip road from the face of
the tunnel?
*********************
Here I am inserting a copy from above, a repeat:
>
>I think you'll find that the speed limit was 50 km/h which, admittedly
>is not quite 32 mph; but speed-limits are as stupid - at certain times
>of day - in France, as they are here, and are not observed.
>
>According to Francois Levistre, he was doing "entre 110 et 120 km/h"
>(between 68 and 75mph) on the (westbound) approach to the Alma Tunnel,
>when he saw vehicles coming up fast behind.
>
>"The speed-trap which picked up the Mercedes doing 196 km/h (122 mph)
>was situated on the straight stretch of the cour Albert Premier about
>400 metres before the tunnel" (France Dimanche, No 2667, 10/97)
End of copy repeat.
===============
Will, can, somebody post a copy of this referenced article?
*France Dimanche, No 2667, 10/97?
Now upcomming we have this report of Livistre
"(between 68 and 75mph) on the (westbound) approach to the Alma
Tunnel," so if he was only driving home on Saturday night/Sunday
Morning he would not be traveling at all possible speed. On the
other hand we have what looks like very high deliberate speed
by the Merc.
>and were closing on
>Levistre, as he and his wife, entered the tunnel - keeping to the right
>in readiness to be overtaken. As Levistre remembers it, looking back
>from a point about half-way through the tunnel,
I am just "free handing" this from memory. If and when we get enough
knowledgeable people in a discussion I'll try to find some of my
earlier notes.
So how many meters in is approximately half way through the tunnel?
It seems that I remembered some estimation of the tunnel's length
to be close to "666" metres. Not quite so maybe 660 metres.
Opinions to the contrary? Closer accuracy?
Speak now or hold your peace until the next opportunity.
I would like to see Walt Disney Studio's animation get inspired to
create an animation frame by frame. Adult rated. So not in
character, have we any good animation moon-lighters hereabouts?
Who is doing PORN animation? Road Traffic Accident reconstructions?
>there was "a white car",
>in the middle of the road, behind him.
So Livestre lied. The white car was not in the middle
of the road, the Mercedes was in the middle of the
road. Why did Livestre lie?
>Behind that, he says, there was
>"another car" (presumably the Mercedes S- 280) and behind that, a large
>motor-bike.
Livestre lies again. He clearly saw and may have been a part
of a conspiracy to cover up. So in my supposition he saw it
and he lied about it. Now if we go off on a train of thought to
explore a hypothesis that Livestre was deliberately lying then
I'll have to think about that some more. I have not until the
present considered the possibility that he was deliberately
lying.
If he were deliberately lying and saw the three vehicles
abreast, the photo flashes, the motorcycle accelerate,
the car on the right bump the Merc into the central
pilars, that the first photoflashing motorcycle sped off
past him and out of the tunnel as well as the vehicle that
had bumped the Merc. and then reported that in essence
a followup motorcycle stopped to view into the Merc
and it then resumed to exit the tunnel, etc.
I would like to see the animation sequences down to the 1 meter
resolution. I think the main constant that we can use is the
physical distance on the road as being traversed by the Merc.
So the animation reference frames could be identified by reference
to the tunnel face as metres + "plus" or - "minus" the tunnel face.
>
>Note that there is no vehicle present, in Levistre's story, which could
>be the car of the witnesses Souad M. and Mohammed M. If we believe
>Levistre, they weren't there! On the other hand, if we believe THEM,
>the Mercedes crashed without any help from anyone - a very convenient
>version of events, for the authorities, and completely contrary to the
>testimony of ALL the other witnesses.
Hummnn
>
>The sequence of events, as Levistre recounts it, is very interesting,
>because he seems to be saying that the "white car" stayed ahead of the
>Mercedes and the motor-bike.
Well, in my SH one possibility that I want to consider is that both
the white car on the Merc's right hand side and the motorcycle on
the Merc's left hand side came to a synchronized position along side
the Merc such as to be able to take symultaneous flash photographs
into the Merc from both sides at the same time. If one is in a very
heavy law suit one needs at least TWO corroberating withnesses.
The same scene photographed by two separate photographers at
exactly the same instant would be IDEAL.
>At least, he describes the "white car"
>passing him, and disappearing westwards, before he begins to describe
>the motor-bike overtaking the Mercedes and cutting-in in front of it.
So this gets the locations screwed up and out of sync.
>
> The impression given (that the "white car" was a long way ahead of the
>Mercedes and the motorbike) is probably an illusion created by the
>difficulty involved in describing the situation;
Also, a witness in a high speed drive has their own road to watch as
well as looking in the rear view mirror. So one might have a strobe
light effect of only seeing a flash of an instant when they happened
to have the opportunity to look in the mirror.
>but there is no
>escaping the conclusion that the Mercedes did not completely squeeze
>past the white car, but came alongside it, on its left, in a sliding
>collision,
My suggestion would be to consider that the Merc was the
vehicle in the middle of the road, that the white vehicle would
have been on its right and the motorcycle on its left, three
abreast.
And that point photoflashes were fired and then the white
car accelerated
>which impelled the white car forwards, towards Levistre and
>out of harm's way;
And the motorcycle accelerated
>whereupon the motorbike
accelerated and swerved in front of
the Mercedes.
No. That is even wrong. In my SH.
Let's try it another way. More to the
"DELIBERATE BUMP OFF" conspiracy
supposition.
In that, the motorcycle would have fired
a series of quick flashes as it accelerated
in front of the Mercedes. The first flash
would have been into the back seat but
a second would have been directly into
the eyes of Henri Paul. Having blinded
him, it would then accelerate and as soon
as it was clear the vehicle on the right would
bump the Mercedes' front into the center
pilars.
>overtook the slowed Mercedes
>and (also according to Levistre) cut-in in front of it and produced "a
>searing burst of light, much brighter than a photo-flash".
>
>At this point, Levistre, braked and came to a halt near the western end
>of the tunnel.
More correctly, NOT "At this point" but at "A POINT" near the
western end of the tunnel.
>The Mercedes had crashed, and the bikers (like Brenda
>Wells, Levistre affirms that there were two of them) had stopped by the
>wreck.
That does not sound possible to me. It may depend upon speed.
Assuming that the whole action was taking place at some
above average speed then if at least the bike on the left had
accelerated ahead of the Merc it could not have stopped. If it
did not stop then it may have passed Livestre and exited the
tunnel. Whether a second bike stopped might be considerable.
>One of them got off, momentarily, to look into the Mercedes,
>jumped back on again, and the bike sped off, passing Levistre as it did
>so. Levistre describes the bike as "black" and the two men as "dressed
>in black with black helmets". The whole thing took just a few seconds.
>
>Considerable efforts have been made to discredit Levistre. It has been
>said, for example, that his attitude to the press was "hostile" and that
>he was trying to "gain attention"; but there could be another reason for
>these attacks on his character - he witnessed a murder! There is no
>other interpretation you can put on his testimony.
>
>Yes, indeed (to answer your question) the lanes were used as a slow-lane
>and an overtaking lane - ludicrous speed-limit signs notwithstanding!
>
>Other answers in another post
<a href="http://members.home.com/godsbrain">G.O.D.S.B.R.A.I.N.</a><br>
Steve Reed
Oro...@lineone.net.invalid> writes
>Steve, can I ask you or other members a few questions:-
>
>· The ATER describes the position of the Limo in the Concorde-
>Boulogne Lane so is it true to say that neither lane was
>slow/fast lane, both lanes had speed limit of 30 mph .
No - except in the rush hour (see previous post)
>· In the body Guard Story, it says "he skids to the left for 19
>metres, one wheel off the ground and just as he passes the Fiat
>and turns to the right to get ahead of his nemesis, his path is
>blocked etc. Why did he turn to the right?
One wheel off the ground? Skidding to the left? The 19m (first) set of
skid marks was straight. They represent the rapid deceleration caused
by Paul's braking as he squeezed up alongside, and to the left of, the
obstructing vehicle. These skid marks converge, at a narrow angle, with
the central reservation (and the line of pillars) It appears that the
left-front wheel of the Mercedes actually mounted the kerb slightly at
the limit of this line of travel, which, if extended just a few more
inches, would have caused the Mercedes to collide with the first pillar;
but Henri must have taken his foot off the brake, recovered front-wheel
traction, bounced the left front-wheel off the kerb, steered towards the
right and forced the "white car" over.
He drove magnificently, I think.
I had always assumed that the Mercedes passed the obstructing vehicle (I
suppose we can safely call it "the white car") at this point, but re-
reading Levistre (see previous post) I am inclined to think that this
did not happen. For one thing, the white car (unless it veered very
sharply to the left) would have been in the way as the motorcyclists
moved to overtake the Mercedes; for another, the Mercedes and the
motorcyclists would have been in the way, as the white car went to make
its escape. The paps were only fifteen to twenty seconds behind. If the
white car had to wait for the motorcyclists to get out of the way, the
paps would have been on them. No. Levistre's story fits much better.
In this scenario the sliding collision impels the white car forward,
ahead (once again) of the Mercedes, and on its way past Levistre and out
of the tunnel. Just as the white car moves ahead, and a gap opens
between it and the Mercedes, the bikers overtake, cut in, and let off
their "flash of light". But then what? The bikers are ahead of the
Mercedes, at that point. They must have slowed and dropped back while a
blinded Henri Paul stamped on his anchors once again and - this time -
lost control of the vehicle. Then comes the second set of skid marks
(the sinuous skid-marks) and the collision with the 13th pillar. The
crash took place while the Mercedes was travelling at less - perhaps
quite a lot less - than 60 mph. There is no reason why we should not
surmise that the bikers braked to a controlled halt almost as soon as
they had administered the flash, moved forward to examine the wreck and
then took off, before the paps arrived, just as Levistre describes it.
Notice that ATER (whatever it really is) avoids discussing any of this.
>· If HP had intended to take the right exit and not the tunnel
>could he still have made it safely doing 73 - 96 mph?
I don't see why not - except that he would have had to slow down before
he reached the Place de L'Alma and he didn't wish to slow down. So
whether he wished to turn off or not, at that point, he would have been
prevented from doing so by the same factor which was causing him to
speed in the first place - fear of being overtaken by the pursuers.
>· First code18 call was made 12.26am. by Paul Carril. First two
>teams of fire brigade vehicles, 94 and 100 arrive 12.32am. There
>is no time recorded for Dr. Mailliez arrival but he did a swift
>mental triage and raced back to his car to make some calls
>to "18, to order ambulances and to order a mobile can opener".
>His call to 18 is stated to have been received at12.26am and was
>the first call. Who made the first call Dr. Mailliez or Paul
>Carril? His timing is impeccable here. Who could ask for more
>than a off duty doctor to be on the scene in seconds? No
>question yet just puzzles for you. Now here is the question. Dr
>Mailliez gives first aid and places an oxygen mask over Diana's
>face and upon seeing the first ambulances arrive, this Good
>Samaritan leaves. Did he take the oxygen mask with him or leave
>it in place? He is now working for the private sector but was
>there no professional hand over to the first SAMU doctor to
>arrive? The phrase "this Good Samaritan left" comes from The
>Body Guards Story. There are many errors in this book including
>the unforgivable error, dioxide instead of monoxide and one I
>spotted "Mercedes rebounds from impact, it rotates clockwise at
>high speed and crashes against the tunnel wall to the right"
>That should of course be "anticlockwise" but am I being too
>finicky that a professional hand over should be something that
>would be news worthy or that it would be made reference to by a
>SAMU doctor, anonymously or otherwise.
>
We have to be content with examining the odds against THREE emergency
rescue personnel being "just passing", at half-past midnight, and
getting to the injured Princess first. Stranger things have happened.
But the conduct of the SAMU crew in failing to recognise massive
internal bleeding and not making an immediate run for surgery - on top
of that - strains credulity to breaking point. Even more suspicious is
the French authorities' defensive attitude with regard to this glaring
incompetence - some might say that they are afraid of being sued (they
should be) but it looks more like a comprehensive cover-up to me.
>I am no doctor but in a crash such as this a doctor should be
>able to predict a casualties injuries but he seems to have
>judged her condition on a "best shape" criteria. In comparison
>with the other passengers she probable was in good shape.
>However conversely their poor state should have indicated to him
>what her injuries were likely to be if not externally,
>internally It cannot possibly be true that he did not know Lady
>Diana when he saw her. Paparazzi were everywhere. She was no
>ordinary young lady. I would have expected him as the first
>doctor on the scene to have stayed with her until she was
>comfortably in hospital. But reports of his diagnosis do not
>appear to be that clear nor his actions professional
>But perhaps I’ve seen too many episodes of Quincy.
>
You've got a point there. There were two badly injured. You'd think
Maillez could have made himself useful, wouldn't you? Perhaps he made
himself scarce so as not to be implicated in any negligence charge
against SAMU. Such a charge certainly OUGHT to be brought, IMO, and the
fact that it hasn't is another suspicious circumstance which taints not
only the French authorities, but the relatives of Diana and whoever may
be putting pressure on them to refrain from complaining.
>You know why I raise this main point now don’t you.
>
>Ron.
>
I don't follow you.
>
>* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
>The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
>
--
Steve Reed
Trevjon
ron <ron_winn...@lineone.net.invalid> wrote in message
news:0430eced...@usw-ex0106-045.remarq.com...
> Keep them on the move. Don't let them settle down for the night.
> Its time to go. Where can we get some peace away from all this?
> Was there no rooms at the Ritz? Could they not have sent a
> trusted member of the Ritz staff to collect their things from
> the apartment? Was Dodi not able to issue commands to the Ritz
> staff? A simple call to the butler at the apartment would have
> revealed that the paps were awaiting their arrival there. So was
> the apartment a better choice to spend the night than to stay
> were they were? Why for heaven's sake.
> Ron
>
I think people may be looking at all this from the wrong angle. The paps
had always managed to stay one step ahead of Di and Dodi and were a severe
threat to their privacy in paris that night. It was to be Di and Dodi's
last night of their holiday together. How were the paps seemingly finding
out all this info about their arrival and subsequent appointments. Dodi
obviously thought that someone was tipping them off from inside his own
organisation, either from the Paris end, or the London end. Dodi was not
necessarily worried about the paps that evening, but what was really
worrying him was what the paps would do the following morning, either if
they stayed at the Ritz, or retired to Dodi's paris apartment. The paps
would have a field day, and would beseige either location (and maybe climb a
few trees or lamposts) trying to get a shot of the couple in some
compromising position. Dodi and Di would have to leave the location at some
stage, and would have to "run the gauntlet" of the (by then) vastly
increased army of paps waiting to snap them together. Imagine the
headlines, " A tired looking Diana and a happy looking Dodi leave their
paris lovenest", and that would be just the broad-sheets, just think how low
the tabloids would sink. Dodi had to avoid this at all costs, as how could
he and Diana settle down to romantic night together, knowing what they had
to go through in the morning. I don't think they would leave any of them in
the best frame of mind, and , as Diana was returning to London the following
day, and it may be some time before they would see each other again, this
was probably their last chance to be alone together. A chance Dodi wanted
to take, at all costs (well, he was only human, and she was possibly the
most sought after and desirable Lady in the world at the time).
To this end he hatched his by now infamous "decoy plan", which I beleive
consisted of the following parts.
1. Try and lose the body guards (KW and TRJ) either as part of the decoy, or
because he thought one of them might be the "mole" (This part of the plan, I
beleive , was only partially successful).
2. Take the "ordinary " mercedes, and not the bigger one ( also armoured
with tinted windows model). The reason for this is so, once they had
initially lost the paps, they could "blend in " a little better in the
general traffic. Nothing stands out more in traffic than a big limousine
with tinted windows.
3. Send KW to the Paris apartment (as part of the decoy plan)-and (and this
part is crucial) make sure that KW (and TRJ, come to that) BELIEVE
THEMSELVES THAT THIS WAS TO BE THE DESTINATION.
4. Call HP back from his night off to be the driver for the night. This
could just be because he trusted HP, or, more to the point, trusted him more
than the designated driver for the night.
5. Leave the hotel from the back entrance (with KW et al performing the
"decoy" manouevre), and then proceed as normal, as if they were going to the
paris apartment.
6.At a certain point in the journey the mercedes was to put on a sudden
burst of speed, and take the "wrong route" and enter the alma tunnel.
Remember that they only need a window of (say) 15-20 seconds to exit the
sight line of the paps, and then "lose themselves" amongst the paris
backstreets, until the "safe house" was reached. The Alma tunnel would be an
ideal place to perform this manouevre. Part of this plan may also have been
for Di and Dodi to squat down out of sight, so, to a casual observer, it
would seem that there were only a driver and a passenger in the merc.
7. Once at the "safe house" Di and Dodi would be free to spend the night as
they wished, and TRJ and HP would be unable to 'phone anyone, as this would
immediately expose either one of them as the "mole".
The plan seemed to be working up until item 6.
Adoption of this plan may also throw some light onto why the appointment at
the resaurant was seemingly aborted (the paps had got to know of this from
the mole), why they didn't stay in the Ritz, why they took the smaller merc,
and , possibly, why TRJ did not have his mobile phone on him (Dodi could
easily have arranged to "borrow" this phone, and then conveniently forgot to
return it to him).
So, maybe Dodi's decoy plan was not as stupid as it would first seem,
because not only was he trying to "decoy" the paps, but also a member (or
members) of his own staff.
GODS...@home.com
On Mon, 1 May 2000 23:46:20 +0100, "Trevjon" <tre...@btinternet.com>
wrote:
>
>ron <ron_winn...@lineone.net.invalid> wrote in message
>news:0430eced...@usw-ex0106-045.remarq.com...
>
>
>> Keep them on the move. Don't let them settle down for the night.
>> Its time to go. Where can we get some peace away from all this?
>> Was there no rooms at the Ritz? Could they not have sent a
>> trusted member of the Ritz staff to collect their things from
>> the apartment? Was Dodi not able to issue commands to the Ritz
>> staff? A simple call to the butler at the apartment would have
>> revealed that the paps were awaiting their arrival there. So was
>> the apartment a better choice to spend the night than to stay
>> were they were? Why for heaven's sake.
>> Ron
>>
>
>I think people may be looking at all this from the wrong angle. The paps
>had always managed to stay one step ahead of Di and Dodi and were a severe
>threat to their privacy in paris that night.
Well, for a somewhat new line of thinking that seems like a possible
area for consideration.
>It was to be Di and Dodi's
>last night of their holiday together. How were the paps seemingly finding
>out all this info about their arrival and subsequent appointments.
OK. Someone could discuss that some more.
> Dodi
>obviously thought that someone was tipping them off from inside his own
>organisation, either from the Paris end, or the London end.
Well, I don't know that it is exactly "obviious" to me but I will
follow along with your line of thought if it seems obvious to
you.
>Dodi was not
>necessarily worried about the paps that evening, but what was really
>worrying him was what the paps would do the following morning, either if
>they stayed at the Ritz, or retired to Dodi's paris apartment.
At first glance it seemed as if your "take" on it might be somewhat
of a revelation. On second thought, of course, they had been
on the yatch, etc. but maybe not quite the number and voraciousness
of the pap's at sea.
>The paps
>would have a field day, and would beseige either location (and maybe climb a
>few trees or lamposts) trying to get a shot of the couple in some
>compromising position. Dodi and Di would have to leave the location at some
>stage, and would have to "run the gauntlet" of the (by then) vastly
>increased army of paps waiting to snap them together. Imagine the
>headlines, " A tired looking Diana and a happy looking Dodi leave their
>paris lovenest", and that would be just the broad-sheets, just think how low
>the tabloids would sink.
I guess we don't have as many celebrities over my side of the
planet. I guess our version of the National Enquirer is about
as far out as our grocery store magazine racks manage.
>Dodi had to avoid this at all costs, as how could
>he and Diana settle down to romantic night together, knowing what they had
>to go through in the morning.
Is that were some old saying like "comes with the territory" gets in?
But I really don't have much "feel" for how fast Dodi got in to quite
unfamiliar territory. I guess life can throw us at least a few of
those from time to time.
>I don't think they would leave any of them in
>the best frame of mind, and , as Diana was returning to London the following
>day, and it may be some time before they would see each other again, this
>was probably their last chance to be alone together.
Well, I guess if I was hoping to be somewhere "alone together" with
someone what they were experiencing is not exactly what I would
hope would be the situation.
>A chance Dodi wanted
>to take, at all costs (well, he was only human, and she was possibly the
>most sought after and desirable Lady in the world at the time).
Maybe if one is going fishing and one unexpectedly hooks a whale it
might be prudent to have a way to cut the line, else, who caught who?
>
>To this end he hatched his by now infamous "decoy plan", which I beleive
>consisted of the following parts.
I would still like to hear a very long and detailed discussion of how
such a plan might have come in to being. All the assumpitions of
what needed to be in place before the gestalt would work. I just
haven't been able to guesstimate how such could have come about
on very short planning.
>
>1. Try and lose the body guards (KW and TRJ) either as part of the decoy, or
>because he thought one of them might be the "mole" (This part of the plan, I
>beleive , was only partially successful).
Well, we have not heard on acpd much consideration of "moles." On the
other hand, MAF having a "security" organization and having been
reportedly involved with a long history of life experience that could
have concievably have brought him into a conciousness of some such
possibilities might give one to think that he might have tried to pass
a little of that along to his son.
>
>2. Take the "ordinary " mercedes, and not the bigger one ( also armoured
>with tinted windows model). The reason for this is so, once they had
>initially lost the paps, they could "blend in " a little better in the
>general traffic. Nothing stands out more in traffic than a big limousine
>with tinted windows.
OK. I can follow that as a possibility.
>
>3. Send KW to the Paris apartment (as part of the decoy plan)-and (and this
>part is crucial) make sure that KW (and TRJ, come to that) BELIEVE
>THEMSELVES THAT THIS WAS TO BE THE DESTINATION.
>
>4. Call HP back from his night off to be the driver for the night. This
>could just be because he trusted HP, or, more to the point, trusted him more
>than the designated driver for the night.
There is a big question in my mind as to what the possibilities were
that HP in essence, high probability, knew that he was comming
back. But I have not really thought in depth as to the ramifications
an hypothesis along that line would lead to, or how to look for it.
>
>5. Leave the hotel from the back entrance (with KW et al performing the
>"decoy" manouevre), and then proceed as normal, as if they were going to the
>paris apartment.
>
>6.At a certain point in the journey the mercedes was to put on a sudden
>burst of speed, and take the "wrong route" and enter the alma tunnel.
>Remember that they only need a window of (say) 15-20 seconds to exit the
>sight line of the paps, and then "lose themselves" amongst the paris
>backstreets,
Well, I'll hold my breath for a few minutes to see if there is now an
outpouring of evidence that some such "safe house" was in the
works and how come we have not heard the slightest bit of speculation
about some such up until now?
>until the "safe house" was reached. The Alma tunnel would be an
>ideal place to perform this manouevre. Part of this plan may also have been
>for Di and Dodi to squat down out of sight, so, to a casual observer, it
>would seem that there were only a driver and a passenger in the merc.
While I think you might be stretching it a little, I do remember that
some such trickery was mentioned as being in the arsenal of Di
and getting someone back to her place.
>
>7. Once at the "safe house" Di and Dodi would be free to spend the night as
>they wished, and TRJ and HP would be unable to 'phone anyone, as this would
>immediately expose either one of them as the "mole".
Did the butler really need to put some champagne on ice to finesse off
the ruse?
>
>The plan seemed to be working up until item 6.
>
>Adoption of this plan may also throw some light onto why the appointment at
>the resaurant was seemingly aborted (the paps had got to know of this from
>the mole), why they didn't stay in the Ritz, why they took the smaller merc,
>and , possibly, why TRJ did not have his mobile phone on him (Dodi could
>easily have arranged to "borrow" this phone, and then conveniently forgot to
>return it to him).
I would consider a line of thinking to explore how there might have
come to be what seems like a dirth of cellular phones in the car.
>
>So, maybe Dodi's decoy plan was not as stupid as it would first seem,
>because not only was he trying to "decoy" the paps, but also a member (or
>members) of his own staff.
Well, back to how long it might have taken to think up some such plan.
I don't at first thought think that some such complex plan could be
thought up on the spur of the moment. What did I hear someone over
here say in a completely different context? Like, "you can't plant
corn and romance women at the same time." Didn't Dodi have his mind
full enough as it was to not have a lot of room left for thinking up
complex plans?
GODS...@home.com
On Tue, 02 May 2000 01:46:46 GMT, GODS...@HOME.COM wrote:
Trevjon had said,
>>3. Send KW to the Paris apartment (as part of the decoy plan)-and (and this
>>part is crucial) make sure that KW (and TRJ, come to that) BELIEVE
>>THEMSELVES THAT THIS WAS TO BE THE DESTINATION.
>>
>>4. Call HP back from his night off to be the driver for the night. This
>>could just be because he trusted HP, or, more to the point, trusted him more
>>than the designated driver for the night.
I have a thought that I haven't as yet mentioned. That concerns what
seemed to be reported in the Body Guard's Story as read here on
acpd that TRJ was kind of saying HE WAS DODI's chauffeur for almost
a year. If that then how did HP figure in? And still have TRJ in the
car? It seems that if Dodi actually got some idea that TRJ was a high
possibility for an information leak in Dodi's mind that he would have
been more adamant that he was not taking TRJ along.
Considering the elaborateness of the plan you, Trevjon,
seem to be proferring for consideration.
And reading the SR ATER today seemed to also conclude that
Dodi was in authority, although I did see something a few days
ago where MAF was saying that Dodi did NOT have authority
to make major changes to security procedures on the fly.
Trevjon
Steve Reed <asr...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:6J9XcRA8...@lastings.softnet.co.uk...
> In article <022cd178...@usw-ex0105-037.remarq.com>, ron <ron_winnN
> Oro...@lineone.net.invalid> writes
>
>
effort. Now please remember to take your medication like a good chap, and
return to planet earth, if only breifly.
Steve Reed
GODS...@HOME.COM writes
>>there was "a white car",
>>in the middle of the road, behind him.
>
>So Livestre lied. The white car was not in the middle
>of the road, the Mercedes was in the middle of the
>road. Why did Livestre lie?
Levistre is not contradicting himself. He saw the white car "au milieu
de la chaussee" and was overtaken by it ("elle me double") "Then", he
says ("puis j'observe [retroviseur] une autre auto toujours au milieu de
la route") "I saw [rear-view mirror] another car, also in the middle of
the road" ("et soudain une grosse moto sur sa gauche qui lui fait une
queue de poisson") "and, all of a sudden, a large motor-bike, to the
left of it, cutting-in in front of it".
(another ambiguity is created by the expression "sur sa gauche", which
could be translated "to ITS left" [to the right of it, from where
Levistre says he was] or "to the left of it" [as seen from Levistre's
alleged position] and, since Levistre claims that the Mercedes "was in
the middle of the road" at that point, it could be either)
"At the same instant, for a fraction of a second, there was a tremendous
flash of light, but nothing like the flash of a camera" ("Au meme
moment, en une fraction de seconde, un enorme eclair jaillit, mais rien
a voir avec le flash d'un appareil-photo")
My point is that the order of events is not completely clear. It could
be that the bike cut-in in front of the Mercedes just before the white
car passed Levistre - either that, or the bike was further behind the
Mercedes, as both vehicles entered the tunnel, than Clifford, Olivier
and Thierry imply. I suppose the bike could have braked, just before the
tunnel (to avoid running into a Mercedes/white-car pile-up) and that
Levistre might not have been as far along the tunnel as he thought he
was. Thus, the Mercedes hit the white car, side-to-side, and impelled it
forwards, towards Levistre, and was FOLLOWING it, as it passed
Levistre's position, and as the bike overtook the Mercedes.
Does that clear things up?
>
>>Behind that, he says, there was
>>"another car" (presumably the Mercedes S- 280) and behind that, a large
>>motor-bike.
>
>Livestre lies again.
What do you mean? What evidence is there that Levistre is "lying"?
> He clearly saw and may have been a part
>of a conspiracy to cover up. So in my supposition he saw it
>and he lied about it. Now if we go off on a train of thought to
>explore a hypothesis that Livestre was deliberately lying then
>I'll have to think about that some more. I have not until the
>present considered the possibility that he was deliberately
>lying.
>
I have - he could be in the pay of Al-Fayed (or his high-level masters)
That's always a possibility; but why should we single him out? What
about any (or ALL) of the other witnesses? I am inclined to go with the
majority (who saw closely pursuing vehicles) and focus suspicion on
Mohammed and Souad who - alone - say they did not.
>If he were deliberately lying and saw the three vehicles
>abreast,
He says he saw them one behind the other - until the bike overtook the
Mercedes. Then the bike and the Mercedes were "abreast", but the white
car - so he implies - had already overtaken him by then! But why should
you suspect this to be a lie?
> the photo flashes, the motorcycle accelerate,
>the car on the right bump the Merc into the central
>pilars,
You want to hypothesize that the bike-overtake/flash occurred BEFORE the
sliding collision? What on earth for?
> that the first photoflashing motorcycle sped off
>past him and out of the tunnel as well as the vehicle that
>had bumped the Merc. and then reported that in essence
>a followup motorcycle stopped to view into the Merc
>and it then resumed to exit the tunnel, etc.
>
You mean Levistre is concealing the existence of a second motorcycle?
True, Thierry H. says he saw "several" motorcycles pursuing the
Mercedes, closely, towards the tunnel (he had a view along the cour
Albert Premier from the carriageway itself) but Clifford G. and Olivier
P (who were positioned to the right [north] of the road and could see no
more than the tunnel-entrance) report only " a car in front of the
Mercedes and a [one!] powerful motor-cycle, 30 - 40 metres behind.
Why should we not assume that the other bikes left the cour Albert
Premier, at the exit slip-road, leaving the pair on the bike, which
Clifford, Olivier and Levistre saw, to proceed into the tunnel for the
kill!?
>I would like to see the animation sequences down to the 1 meter
>resolution. I think the main constant that we can use is the
>physical distance on the road as being traversed by the Merc.
>So the animation reference frames could be identified by reference
>to the tunnel face as metres + "plus" or - "minus" the tunnel face.
>>
We would all (those of us who really wish to have it explained in
detail, that is) like to see sophisticated event-reconstruction
techniques brought to bear, together with an account of exactly what
data was employed and how it was used. Fat chance of that, however -
unless you happen to have an event-reconstruction team on hand and you
can afford to cock a snoot at the politico-media complex.
>>Note that there is no vehicle present, in Levistre's story, which could
>>be the car of the witnesses Souad M. and Mohammed M. If we believe
>>Levistre, they weren't there! On the other hand, if we believe THEM,
>>the Mercedes crashed without any help from anyone - a very convenient
>>version of events, for the authorities, and completely contrary to the
>>testimony of ALL the other witnesses.
>
>Hummnn
>>
>>The sequence of events, as Levistre recounts it, is very interesting,
>>because he seems to be saying that the "white car" stayed ahead of the
>>Mercedes and the motor-bike.
>
>Well, in my SH one possibility that I want to consider is that both
>the white car on the Merc's right hand side and the motorcycle on
>the Merc's left hand side came to a synchronized position along side
>the Merc such as to be able to take symultaneous flash photographs
>into the Merc from both sides at the same time. If one is in a very
>heavy law suit one needs at least TWO corroberating withnesses.
>
This seems to me to be fanciful in the extreme. On what grounds do you
suggest it?
>The same scene photographed by two separate photographers at
>exactly the same instant would be IDEAL.
>
"Ideal" for what? Come on Al! What are these simultaneous, two-angle
flash-photos supposed to be for? Okay - you've said before that you
think they would have been compromising photos, and that MAF set up the
car-switch and the pursuit in order to obtain them. This is an
interesting idea, because, although it seems most likely to me that MAF
DID make these arrangements, I cannot decide precisely what it was that
he thought was going to happen.
Let us say that Diana and Dodi were not sleeping together, she was not
pregnant by him and they were not going to get engaged - or some
combination of these negatives - such that, in order to (what?) gain
influence over Diana or disgrace her or force her to marry Dodi? - the
Al-Fayeds conceived the scheme of obtaining compromising photographs. A
clever ruse is employed to get rid of some of the escort (but why not
all?) the remaining escort follows from the Hotel, against orders, thus
giving the impression that they are up to no good. Henri has been
briefed to flee them - he flees. An ambush of pursuers has been arranged
on the cour la Reine - to keep Henri in flight and to give Dodi an
excuse for grabbing Diana (as though protectively) - a car is stationed
at the tunnel-entrance to stop the Mercedes (a very risky proceeding,
from a father's point of view, don't you think?) the Mercedes is slowed,
the pursuers catch up, the photographs are taken.
Photographs of what? A terrified Diana in Dodi's arms? Diana being
raped by Dodi? - is that what you're working up to saying? My dear chap!
Diana crouched down on the floor behind Henri's seat, and Dodi remained
upright - probably viewing the pursuit with anxiety - possibly grappling
with TRJ to prevent him interfering with the driving. What sign is
there - apart from the fact that neither Diana nor Dodi were wearing
seat-belts - that Dodi was attempting to grapple with Diana?
Again, I say, "photographs of what?" - precisely - and what were they
for? - according to your theory.
Why could these photographs not have been taken with spy-cameras at one
of the Fayed residences at which Diana stayed? How could it have been
hoped that photographs of an especially compromising nature could have
been obtained at high speed in the Alma Tunnel, rather than on the
Jonikal, at the Ritz or at the rue Arsene? What on earth is the point?
One glimmer of a suggestion of a possibility does occur to me, as a
result of examining this idea, however. What if Dodi was having
difficulty getting physical with Diana? Did Dad devise an elaborate
ruse to throw them together? Or rather, was he advised to do so by
those who wanted Diana dead - so that he would implement the scheme
without knowing what it was really for? Something of the sort must have
happened, I think - and it's not so incredible if you consider that
MAF's masters may have been pretending to attempt to pull off a Fayed-
Spencer match (with big bucks in it for MAF) for some time - so that
the Machiavellian complexity of engineering the car-switch, the
disposition of the escort, the arrangements for the route and the
programming of Henri Paul, might not have aroused MAF's suspicions.
Other factors, such as sabotaging the S-280's brakes and air-bags,
briefing the escort to monitor the crash but not get involved, etc,
could have been achieved by MAF's backers, over MAF's head, such that
Siegel and Musa (Etoile Limousines) and Wingfield and Dournot were not
only working for MAF, but for his masters, DIRECTLY.
Indeed, assuming that MAF did not know that the fatal crash was
intended, those of MAF's employees who MUST have known that a fatal
crash was intended, MUST have been working directly for those who
intentionally engineered it.
--
Steve Reed
Steve Reed
<tre...@btinternet.com> writes
>
>ron <ron_winn...@lineone.net.invalid> wrote in message
>news:0430eced...@usw-ex0106-045.remarq.com...
>
>
>> Keep them on the move. Don't let them settle down for the night.
>> Its time to go. Where can we get some peace away from all this?
>> Was there no rooms at the Ritz? Could they not have sent a
>> trusted member of the Ritz staff to collect their things from
>> the apartment? Was Dodi not able to issue commands to the Ritz
>> staff? A simple call to the butler at the apartment would have
>> revealed that the paps were awaiting their arrival there. So was
>> the apartment a better choice to spend the night than to stay
>> were they were? Why for heaven's sake.
>> Ron
>>
>
>I think people may be looking at all this from the wrong angle. The paps
>had always managed to stay one step ahead of Di and Dodi and were a severe
>threat to their privacy in paris that night. It was to be Di and Dodi's
>last night of their holiday together. How were the paps seemingly finding
>out all this info about their arrival and subsequent appointments.
It was important, for the arrangements which were subsequently made,
that there should be a perception (both in Dodi's mind, and in the mind
of the public) of fierce paparazzo-pressure: in Dodi's mind, so that he
could use it as a credible excuse for dropping the escort (in a "decoy"
manoeuver) and, in the public mind, so that the events leading up to the
crash could be explained (as indeed Trevjon is explaining them here)
entirely as a response to this "paparazzo-pressure", and so that
scapegoats could be provided to take the blame, initially, for the
crash.
To this end, close contact was maintained between the escort and the
paps. We know, for example, that the ubiquitous Chassery and
Oderkerken, of LS-Presse, were in touch, several times, with Siegel,
Musa's partner at Etoile Limousines, that afternoon and evening. Taken
together with the apparent prescience of the paps (Chassery and
Oderkerken even managed to position themselves outside the REAR entrance
to the Ritz just as D+D emerged from it) the co-ordination of this "pap-
pressure", by the escort - i.e the presence, in Trevjon's terms, of
"moles" - is hard to deny.
> Dodi
>obviously thought that someone was tipping them off from inside his own
>organisation, either from the Paris end, or the London end. Dodi was not
>necessarily worried about the paps that evening, but what was really
>worrying him was what the paps would do the following morning, either if
>they stayed at the Ritz, or retired to Dodi's paris apartment. The paps
>would have a field day, and would beseige either location (and maybe climb a
>few trees or lamposts) trying to get a shot of the couple in some
>compromising position.
(Do we have any idea, BTW, how intimate they were really?)
> Dodi and Di would have to leave the location at some
>stage, and would have to "run the gauntlet" of the (by then) vastly
>increased army of paps waiting to snap them together. Imagine the
>headlines, " A tired looking Diana and a happy looking Dodi leave their
>paris lovenest", and that would be just the broad-sheets, just think how low
>the tabloids would sink. Dodi had to avoid this at all costs, as how could
>he and Diana settle down to romantic night together, knowing what they had
>to go through in the morning. I don't think they would leave any of them in
>the best frame of mind, and , as Diana was returning to London the following
>day, and it may be some time before they would see each other again, this
>was probably their last chance to be alone together. A chance Dodi wanted
>to take, at all costs (well, he was only human, and she was possibly the
>most sought after and desirable Lady in the world at the time).
>
Dodi and Di seek to flee paps to some private love-nest? Okay - assuming
they were having intimate relations (help, please!) why did they not
part at some romantic and sequestered location on - or off - Sardinia?
They must have known that the "engagement" story was breaking and that
Paris would be a hornets' (not a love-) nest. Why did they come to
Paris, at all? To look over the Windsor Villa, as a prospective home?
To meet the "unnamed businessmen" at Chez Benoit? What else did they do
- or try to do - while they were there? I suspect that the relationship
was not that warm. Was not the visit to the Windsor Villa too short to
have been a serious house-hunt by a prospective married couple? Is not
the "engagement-ring" story in serious doubt? But whether their
relationship was carnal or not, unless they thought of the Windsor Villa
as a future home (which seems unlikely) there was no reason for them to
be in Paris at all - running the gauntlet of the inevitable paps -
except for the Chez Benoit business-dinner. Its last-minute
cancellation, therefore, takes a lot of explaining; and the idea that
the events of that evening were entirely a ruse, by Dodi, to get Diana
alone, seems to me to be quite inadequate to explain what happened.
Trevjon's schema seems to be working until we get to item 6! That Dodi
was attempting to drop the escort seems undeniable. That TRJ prevailed
upon Dodi to take him along - despite Dodi's obvious desire to leave ALL
of the escort behind - ought to tell us something more, however: it
suggests to me, firstly, that TRJ knew, despite being told that MAF had
agreed to "Dodi's plan", that he would have MAF's backing for refusing
to agree to it. Secondly, it seems that Dodi was reluctant to insist on
his plan being implemented fully - that he had some reason for not
wishing to appear too eager to implement it in full - as though, in
fact, he wished to conceal his real reasons for implementing it - that
is, as though he did not wish to alert the escort to his suspicions
regarding them.
And if his suspicions regarding them were, as Trevjon asserts, no more
than the idea that they were betraying his movements to the press, why
did he not tell TRJ to go to the escort-vehicles with the others, while
he Diana and Henri got clear of the hotel, and to keep his objections to
himself!? He might have enjoyed telling him that, under the pretence,
which was transparent to them all (and has become transparent even to
Trevjon) of creating a "paparazzo-decoy" - knowing (if what Trevjon says
were true) that there would be bugger-all they could do about it!
But he didn't do it! Why not? TRJ could not have revealed a specific
counter-authorisation from MAF without revealing that he (TRJ) knew
about "Dodi's plan", before Dodi even presented it - without revealing,
in fact, that he knew MAF knew about it too, before Dodi even presented
it :-) No! TRJ had to press to be included in the party using only the
force of his personality, and Dodi must have buckled under this, less
than mighty, pressure because he did not dare to admit that he believed
the escort to be involved in something a lot more sinister than tipping
off the press!
And then we come to item 6! In his book, "Lady Diana, Hypothese
Attentat" (Raymond Castells Editions, Paris 1998) - a book, by the way,
which has been refused an English translation, despite OSTENSIBLE
backing from MAF - Hugo Nhart, a journalist and campaigner for the
physically handicapped, presents the results of a year's research into
the background of Henri Paul and the circumstances of the crash. He
tells us what no source in English has told: that the escort left the
Ritz AT THE SAME TIME as the principal party AND TAILED THE PRINCIPAL
PARTY TO THE PLACE DE LA CONCORDE!
Nhart quotes sources among his journalist colleagues who were THERE, at
the lights, at the rue Royale junction, in the Place de la Concorde, as
the Mercedes S-280 stopped at the red light, and they (the paparazzi)
and the Mercedes S-600 (driven by Dournot) and the Range Rover (driven
by Musa, with Wingfield as passenger) drew up behind.
According to his account, when this happened, Dodi gestured to Henri
Paul, and HP drove forward, through the red light ("il a grille les
feux") and shot away round the Place de la Concorde, towards the
embankment freeway, like a bat out of hell ("et lance le moteur en
surregime")
"Le Procureur de la Republique Francaise" has affirmed, in his report on
the paparazzi (often called here, the "ATER", or "alleged translated
extracts from the Stephan Report" - the Stephan Report itself is SECRET)
- he has affirmed that, in his opinion, all of the paparazzi, who were
at the lights in the Place de la Concorde, were left behind, at that
point, and that none of them were near the S-280 when it crashed.
According to witnesses Brenda W, Thierry H, Olivier P, Clifford G and
Francois L, however, the Mercedes S-280 was pursued closely, by other
vehicles, including - in every account - at least one large motorbike,
from the Place du Canada onwards.
Three witnesses (Olivier, Clifford and Francois) furthermore, attest to
the presence of a slow-moving car entering the tunnel just before the S-
280 arrived.
That the S-280 collided with this slow-moving car is generally accepted.
Ear-witnesses heard it, scratches along the right side of the Mercedes
attest to it and the Procureur's report says as much. It is obvious, is
it not, that if the S-280 was closely pursued to the tunnel, and
collided with another vehicle there, that the close-pursuers MUST have
been involved, in some way, in the crash which followed? And yet, all of
these vehicles, including the slow-moving car, fled the scene and have
never been traced.
It appears that the S-280 was ambushed, close to the Place du Canada, by
agents who were waiting in the vicinity for that purpose. There may be
argument about the motives for this ambush - that, for example, it was
mounted by paparazzi who are not mentioned in the Procureur's report,
and are now lying low - but to pretend that it did not happen, as the
politico-media complex is pretending - only helps to support the view
that the politico-media complex has something to hide!
>Adoption of this plan may also throw some light onto why the appointment at
>the resaurant was seemingly aborted (the paps had got to know of this from
>the mole),
If D+D were not in Paris to survey a possible marital home, then the
Chez Benoit business-dinner is the foremost candidate for their reason
for being in Paris at all. Its cancellation - when they were actually
on the way there! - is one of the odd circumstances which suggest a link
between what happened before the Place de la Concorde and WHAT HAPPENED
AFTER (i.e. the ambush and the cover-up)! The other oddities, being, of
course, the unscheduled return to the Ritz, the car-switch and "jumping
the lights" in the P de C.
You are right, in my opinion, to ascribe the Chez Benoit cancellation
and the car-switch to suspicion about the escort, but I think you should
add "jumping the lights" to this also, and I think the grounds for
suspicion, which you attribute to Dodi, are insufficient to explain the
actions which he, the escort and Henri Paul subsequently took.
> why they didn't stay in the Ritz, why they took the smaller merc,
The latter explains the former, I think: Dodi went back, unscheduled,
to the Ritz, ONLY in order to make the car-switch. Whether he intended
to return to the rue Arsene ("but Moo-Moo, all our things are there", he
is reported as saying to MAF on the phone over dinner) or whether he
intended to make a run for it to a "safe house" (as you suggest - banana
has suggested the Brazilian Embassy, BTW, which is very close to the
Pont de l'Alma) he seems to have had NO REASON for wanting to stay at
the hotel, and every reason to return to rue Arsene - unless his view of
his situation was even more desperate than I think it was - and very
much more desperate than you seem to think!
>and , possibly, why TRJ did not have his mobile phone on him (Dodi could
>easily have arranged to "borrow" this phone, and then conveniently forgot to
>return it to him).
>
The "disappearance" of TRJ's phone - its not being found in the wreck
(officially, that is) - would bring us into the realm of oddities which
occurred AFTER the crash - and this post is long enough already.
>So, maybe Dodi's decoy plan was not as stupid as it would first seem,
>because not only was he trying to "decoy" the paps, but also a member (or
>members) of his own staff.
I thought you'd abandoned the idea that the car-switch was really
designed to "decoy the paps" at all. Certainly, I cannot see how it
could have been. But recognition of another motive for it - and the
correct one, in my view (suspicion about the escort) - is an important
step, even if the grounds for this attributed suspicion are not, in my
opinion, sufficient to explain the other odd events which surrounded it.
--
Steve Reed
GODS...@home.com
OK. What do we call this? The daily replay of the
daily revised version of the God's Brain Suppositional
Hypothesis. Act ______ Scene ________
Having read the below a time or two, or few, some
opportunity to explain weighted influence factors
in the construction of the daily hypothesis.
Since the authorities have had two and a half years
with the manpower, peoplepower, staff power, of
what was it reported? Some 24 full time investigators
and million(s) dollar equivalent budgets I am not
competing with that.
The outcome reports of that investigation appear to
be: Drunk driver speeds without the care of
D+D+TRJ and abruptly turns left into a central
column. Simple Road Traffic Accident RTA.
When and over the time since the creation of
alt.conspiracy.princess-diana by b.anana his
philosophical position as I read it is to approximately
take the position for sake of arguement that Diana
was killed as the result of a conspiracy.
Because it has appeared to me that while times,
places, people, and motives have been discussed
I have a feeling that there has been less than
reasonable consideration of some possibilities.
As a consequence of that belief I am trying to
construct a suppositional hypothesis that will
identify possible, persons, places, things that
may be considered as possible. The intent is
to create multiple fictional tracks such that the
most possible/ununderstood may be considered.
Many of the pieces are for the most part agreed
as having been in the area but there is a lot
of discrepancy as to the EXACT location at a
SPECIFIC INSTANT.
My intent is to create this fictional supposition
to give, or try to determine, the differences
between points of agreement and points
of disharmony. Agreement/Disagreement
and Harmony/Disharmony. Concord vs
Discord.
If there might have been common interest to
finance a joint project to lessen Diana's
influence with the media because she was
percieved to be "stepping on someones toes" ,
my words, then how might some such plan,
plot, conspiracy, have been considered
achievable from a variety of possible participant's
points of view?
My typing fingers are not going to stand too long
a discussion at this point so I am going to try to
speed along.
My supposition is that if there was a conspiracy
it had to be to do something.
A photo of Diana giving Dodi a blow job in the
back seat of a limo would be pretty good.
For the photo to achieve maximum benefit it
had to be secret and to be used as a threat.
The actual publication in mass media would
deflate its power. But it had to have strong
and undisputable evidence that it was TRUE
if it were ever going to be used.
For some paparazzi to "peeping tom" photo
a divorcee with her boyfriend in private
was not going to do the job.
So the construct of a whore for money
with an oily bedhopper in the back seat
of a very expensive limo would be much
more philosophically correct for the purpose
of a conspiracy to get a photo to use
for blackmail in the future but not for
actual publication.
On Wed, 3 May 2000 17:07:26 +0100, Steve Reed
<asr...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> wrote:
>Path: news1.frmt1.sfba.home.com!newshub2.rdc1.sfba.home.com!newshub1.home.com!news.home.com!feeder.via.net!diablo.theplanet.net!news.theplanet.net!newspost.theplanet.net!lastings.softnet.co.uk!asreed
>From: Steve Reed <asr...@lastings.softnet.co.uk>
>Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.princess-diana
>Subject: Re: Di: Paul, Henri, History, 60 Page Autopsy, Etc.
>Date: Wed, 3 May 2000 17:07:26 +0100
>Organization: Home
>Lines: 297
>Message-ID: <EwaIiIA+...@lastings.softnet.co.uk>
>References: <20000416201432...@ng-cg1.aol.com>
> <20000416220330...@ng-cg1.aol.com> <38fa9...@huge.aa.net>
> <8n1mfss0cu2ou4qhe...@4ax.com>
> <025220ee...@usw-ex0104-033.remarq.com>
> <VHL8$AAWpz$4I...@lastings.softnet.co.uk>
> <03cfeca4...@usw-ex0105-038.remarq.com>
> <5AGHurAe...@lastings.softnet.co.uk>
> <022cd178...@usw-ex0105-037.remarq.com>
> <0PU0NLBY...@lastings.softnet.co.uk>
> <2ehrgsobh76u0sheo...@4ax.com>
>Reply-To: Andrew Steven Reed <ar...@lastings.softnet.co.uk>
>NNTP-Posting-Host: modem88.fred.pol.co.uk
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>X-Trace: newsreaderg1.core.theplanet.net 957376918 19338 195.92.7.216 (3 May 2000 18:01:58 GMT)
>NNTP-Posting-Date: 3 May 2000 18:01:58 GMT
>X-Complaints-To: ab...@theplanet.net
>X-Newsreader: Turnpike Integrated Version 4.02 M <TWkHBtca5wWBvmfWwoLIWQkgFM>
>Xref: newshub1.home.com alt.conspiracy.princess-diana:30031199
>
>In article <2ehrgsobh76u0sheo...@4ax.com>,
>GODS...@HOME.COM writes
>>>there was "a white car",
>>>in the middle of the road, behind him.
>>
>>So Livestre lied. The white car was not in the middle
>>of the road, the Mercedes was in the middle of the
>>road. Why did Livestre lie?
Maybe Livestre did not lie in that particular. One
needs to be very careful as to "at what instant"
and did he say the middle of the road or the middle
of the lane? It was said that he had moved into
the right lane. If he said the white car was in the
middle of the [right] lane I would agree.
>
>Levistre is not contradicting himself. He saw the white car "au milieu
>de la chaussee"
So, does "chaussee" come closer to translating as "lane" or on the
other hand, "road?" Road having two lanes.
>and was overtaken by it ("elle me double")
But exactly where were the other actors at the exact instant
that "elle me double?"
>"Then", he
>says ("puis j'observe [retroviseur] une autre auto toujours au milieu de
>la route") "I saw [rear-view mirror] another car, also in the middle of
>the road"
So here we have a "milieu de la route." Does that mean closer the
lane or the road?
>("et soudain une grosse moto sur sa gauche qui lui fait une
>queue de poisson") "and, all of a sudden, a large motor-bike, to the
>left of it, cutting-in in front of it".
I will take it that AT SOME POINT a large motor-bike,
comming from the left of it, and then cutting-in in front of it.
>
>(another ambiguity is created by the expression "sur sa gauche", which
>could be translated "to ITS left" [to the right of it, from where
>Levistre says he was] or "to the left of it" [as seen from Levistre's
>alleged position] and, since Levistre claims that the Mercedes "was in
>the middle of the road" at that point, it could be either)
Since I am trying to construct a hypothetical scene where the Merc
was astraddle the white line that separated the two west bound lanes
and a photographing motorcycle was to the left side of the Merc
at the exact instant that the white car was on the right side. . . .
>
>"At the same instant, for a fraction of a second, there was a tremendous
>flash of light, but nothing like the flash of a camera" ("Au meme
>moment, en une fraction de seconde, un enorme eclair jaillit, mais rien
>a voir avec le flash d'un appareil-photo")
>
>My point is that the order of events is not completely clear. It could
>be that the bike cut-in in front of the Mercedes just before the white
>car passed Levistre - either that, or the bike was further behind the
>Mercedes, as both vehicles entered the tunnel, than Clifford, Olivier
>and Thierry imply. I suppose the bike could have braked, just before the
Is there any chance that one of the skid marks, like the single one,
was the bike?
>tunnel (to avoid running into a Mercedes/white-car pile-up) and that
>Levistre might not have been as far along the tunnel as he thought he
>was.
There is another branch of my lack of understanding and that follows
along a train of thought that the picture was intended but the
crash was an accident. In the "accident" hypothesis approximately
the motorcycle photographer could have accidently fired a half
metre too far forward and instead of shooting in to the back seat he
could have accidently hit HP directly in the eyes as Henri Paul looked
to the left as the motorcycle came along side his side window.
Then the blinding flash could have caused HP to FLINCH and swerve
to the right just a little. At that point hitting the rear of the
accelerating white car. As the white car's rear goes to the right
its front goes to the left. To correct, the driver throws to the
right and the rear goes to the left. Essentially tossing the front of
the Merc into the central columns.
>Thus, the Mercedes hit the white car, side-to-side, and impelled it
>forwards, towards Levistre, and was FOLLOWING it, as it passed
>Levistre's position, and as the bike overtook the Mercedes.
I think that the first, photographing, bike should have been ahead
of the white car. If the bike and the car essentially accelerated at
the same instant the bike would outrun the car. I think. Bikes are
far faster at acceleration that cars. Any disagreements?
Of course, with two riders and a turbo car ...?
For one thing, you are supposing then that the white car was ahead of
the Merc at the instant that the Merc hit the central
column/pilar/post.
That is in accord with my first guess.
>
>Does that clear things up?
No. It smokes them up. But gives a number of possible occurances
to consider.
>>
>>>Behind that, he says, there was
>>>"another car" (presumably the Mercedes S- 280) and behind that, a large
>>>motor-bike.
So my first thought on that is that that is a second bike.
And if we are talking about the left that might be better
described as a second bike on the left as there might have
been one or more bikes on the right in addition.
>>
>>Livestre lies again.
>
>What do you mean? What evidence is there that Levistre is "lying"?
My supposition.
>
>> He clearly saw and may have been a part
>>of a conspiracy to cover up. So in my supposition he saw it
>>and he lied about it. Now if we go off on a train of thought to
>>explore a hypothesis that Livestre was deliberately lying then
>>I'll have to think about that some more. I have not until the
>>present considered the possibility that he was deliberately
>>lying.
>>
>I have - he could be in the pay of Al-Fayed (or his high-level masters)
>That's always a possibility; but why should we single him out?
I'm not singling him out. I am theorizing that there may have been
a whole swarm of conspiring pap's surrounding Diana's car.
>What
>about any (or ALL) of the other witnesses? I am inclined to go with the
>majority (who saw closely pursuing vehicles) and focus suspicion on
>Mohammed and Souad who - alone - say they did not.
>
>>If he were deliberately lying and saw the three vehicles
>>abreast,
>
> He says he saw them one behind the other - until the bike overtook the
>Mercedes. Then the bike and the Mercedes were "abreast", but the white
>car - so he implies - had already overtaken him by then! But why should
>you suspect this to be a lie?
I think you, we, need to be very careful about exactly what instant is
being described as being related to any single comment.
>
>> the photo flashes, the motorcycle accelerate,
>>the car on the right bump the Merc into the central
>>pilars,
>
>You want to hypothesize that the bike-overtake/flash occurred BEFORE the
>sliding collision? What on earth for?
Well, if the supposition is as two photographing vehicles taking a
photograph from both sides at the same instant . . . .
There may also have been two contacts between the two vehicles?
The mirror thing may not have been considered significant. The
mirror would not have broken out the tail light. So if the tail light
was broken would not one suspect a corresponding dent on the
Merc's right front fender?
>
In reading this over I can not understand quickly the actions to
cover up circumstances by police, courts, etc. unless Diana
bite off and swallowed the tip of Dodi's penis from the force of the
crash.
If some such had happened then that could explain a lot of things,
But it would also demonstrate that there was no fear in the
back seat at the time of crash which would be important to
suggest that there was no demonstrated disagreement with
Henri Paul's driving performance prior to the crash.
>> that the first photoflashing motorcycle sped off
>>past him and out of the tunnel as well as the vehicle that
>>had bumped the Merc. and then reported that in essence
>>a followup motorcycle stopped to view into the Merc
>>and it then resumed to exit the tunnel, etc.
>>
>You mean Levistre is concealing the existence of a second motorcycle?
>True, Thierry H. says he saw "several" motorcycles pursuing the
>Mercedes, closely, towards the tunnel (he had a view along the cour
>Albert Premier from the carriageway itself) but Clifford G. and Olivier
>P (who were positioned to the right [north] of the road and could see no
>more than the tunnel-entrance) report only " a car in front of the
>Mercedes and a [one!] powerful motor-cycle, 30 - 40 metres behind.
I think it was Brian Anderson's story that a motorcycle moved to
pass the Merc on its left as it entered the tunnel, which would
be exact in accord with my one theory.
>
>Why should we not assume that the other bikes left the cour Albert
>Premier, at the exit slip-road, leaving the pair on the bike, which
>Clifford, Olivier and Levistre saw, to proceed into the tunnel for the
>kill!?
I don't think that the word "kill" is at all proper in a larger view.
"Photo" would I suggest be a more prevalent term for that point.
>
>>I would like to see the animation sequences down to the 1 meter
>>resolution. I think the main constant that we can use is the
>>physical distance on the road as being traversed by the Merc.
>>So the animation reference frames could be identified by reference
>>to the tunnel face as metres + "plus" or - "minus" the tunnel face.
>>>
>We would all (those of us who really wish to have it explained in
>detail, that is) like to see sophisticated event-reconstruction
>techniques brought to bear, together with an account of exactly what
>data was employed and how it was used. Fat chance of that, however -
>unless you happen to have an event-reconstruction team on hand and you
>can afford to cock a snoot at the politico-media complex.
There is the traffic accident reconstruction site off my web page. I
saw reference to the most professional software photosho or paint shop
of something like that. I got a copy off the web. One of these years
I will move to do my accident and if at the same time I did a second
of the Diana crash not much for starters.
>
>>>Note that there is no vehicle present, in Levistre's story, which could
>>>be the car of the witnesses Souad M. and Mohammed M. If we believe
>>>Levistre, they weren't there! On the other hand, if we believe THEM,
>>>the Mercedes crashed without any help from anyone - a very convenient
>>>version of events, for the authorities, and completely contrary to the
>>>testimony of ALL the other witnesses.
>>
I am not suggesting that consideration should be limited to only one
hypothetically possible series of events.
It appears to me that there are apparently conflicting reports of
circumstances. Therefore I suggest several parallel hypothetical
story lines.
That calls to mind something that I think Senator Sam Ervin
said during the course of the Watergate hearings on Nixon's
impeachment. The in the four gospels there are accounts of
what was reported to have been written by Pilate on the sign
to be placed over Jesus Christ's head on the cross. Senator
Sam said that if individuals whose testimoney we so reverence
from the written testimony could be so reported as divergent
then we need not be dismayed that good people of our own
day may be reported as to not have agreed perfectly.
>>Hummnn
>>>
>>>The sequence of events, as Levistre recounts it, is very interesting,
>>>because he seems to be saying that the "white car" stayed ahead of the
>>>Mercedes and the motor-bike.
I would think "ahead" of the Merc would be correct but not that the
white car stayed ahead of the bike. Explaination given above.
>>
>>Well, in my SH one possibility that I want to consider is that both
>>the white car on the Merc's right hand side and the motorcycle on
>>the Merc's left hand side came to a synchronized position along side
>>the Merc such as to be able to take symultaneous flash photographs
>>into the Merc from both sides at the same time. If one is in a very
>>heavy law suit one needs at least TWO corroberating withnesses.
And a big pile of paps only seconds behind would be very important
also. If somebody hinted at the presence of a blackmail photo they
could be assassinated in short order before they could ever get close
to a court of law, and I heard a song the other day called "Smuggler's
Blues" done in the Eighties by Glenn Frey has some good words.
>>
>This seems to me to be fanciful in the extreme. On what grounds do you
>suggest it?
>
>>The same scene photographed by two separate photographers at
>>exactly the same instant would be IDEAL.
>>
>"Ideal" for what? Come on Al! What are these simultaneous, two-angle
>flash-photos supposed to be for? Okay - you've said before that you
>think they would have been compromising photos, and that MAF set up the
>car-switch and the pursuit in order to obtain them. This is an
>interesting idea, because, although it seems most likely to me that MAF
>DID make these arrangements, I cannot decide precisely what it was that
>he thought was going to happen.
A compromising photograph. Exactly in line with MAF's general opinion
of John. Q. Public, Di, etc.
>
>Let us say that Diana and Dodi were not sleeping together, she was not
>pregnant by him and they were not going to get engaged - or some
>combination of these negatives - such that, in order to (what?) gain
>influence over Diana or disgrace her or force her to marry Dodi? - the
>Al-Fayeds conceived the scheme
I would guess that conception of the scheme would have happened
far away from MAF. If a group were looking for someone to set
up some such scheme MAF might have been found to have been
a good candidate to approach for the leading role but the script had
been written long before and they just needed some one to play the
part.
>of obtaining compromising photographs. A
>clever ruse is employed to get rid of some of the escort (but why not
>all?)
THE COMPROMISING photo to be used for blackmail to influence Diana
not to take a strong public stand on some particular issue from time
to time would have been financed by an external consortium, QEII,
Chas, Military landmine sales proponents, etc.
In order to be of use at selected times the photo could not be
public. If that happened it would have been a one time shot
when ever it fell into public hands. To be worth the expense and
effort it had to be kept secret but its circumstance had to be
indisputable else any single person threatening exposure of some
such would be under extremely high surveillance in moments.
> the remaining escort follows from the Hotel, against orders, thus
>giving the impression that they are up to no good. Henri has been
>briefed to flee them - he flees. An ambush of pursuers has been arranged
>on the cour la Reine - to keep Henri in flight and to give Dodi an
>excuse for grabbing Diana (as though protectively)
I can't imagine anything but a photograph of a blowjob. Sex is no big
thing nowadays. In royal family tradition, the past, it may have been
able to throw a little influence at an intense moment of public
conflict.
There is so much detailed sex on the web that I wouldn't doubt that
to find a microscopic photo of a pubic hair would take more than a
few minutes. So if any eyebrows were going to be raised maybe
a court threatening a loss of Di's finances for breach of contract
re: approximately non modest public behavior.
So if Di was very cognizant of contract provisions regarding public
behavior as a determinant of her divorce settlement then she
would have to have exercised the utmost discression. But if she
was going to find any male support outside of her ex's she would
have to at some point show some affection.
Now where could one find any more hope of privacy than in the
tunnel of love in a speeding limosine?
But to be effective for black mail the photo would have to appear
as immodest public behavior. I said PUBLIC. So on the one hand
Diana would have shyed away from any PUBLIC behavior but
people interested in obtaining a photo for blackmail would have to
make the circumstances of the photo look as public as possible.
TWO photo's from TWO different photographers and surrounding
photos from another hundred photographers could be made to
look like PUBLIC IMMODESTY while the circumstance of the
back seat of a speeding limosine in the tunnel in the middle of
the night is about as close to "private" behavior as I can imagine
anyone could get on short notice.
>- a car is stationed
>at the tunnel-entrance to stop the Mercedes (a very risky proceeding,
>from a father's point of view, don't you think?) the Mercedes is slowed,
>the pursuers catch up, the photographs are taken.
>
>Photographs of what?
Diana giving Dodi a blow job.
What else could even raise an eyebrowe nowadays?
Hell, if you had to sell such a photograph to get a
MacDonald's hamburger you would have a lot of
competition in the current market.
> A terrified Diana in Dodi's arms? Diana being
>raped by Dodi? - is that what you're working up to saying? My dear chap!
Who is going to conspire, and pay big money, for something like that?
Nobody.
>Diana crouched down on the floor behind Henri's seat, and Dodi remained
>upright - probably viewing the pursuit with anxiety - possibly grappling
>with TRJ to prevent him interfering with the driving. What sign is
>there - apart from the fact that neither Diana nor Dodi were wearing
>seat-belts - that Dodi was attempting to grapple with Diana?
>
>Again, I say, "photographs of what?" - precisely - and what were they
>for? - according to your theory.
A picture of a blow job - for blackmail.
>
>Why could these photographs not have been taken with spy-cameras at one
>of the Fayed residences
Because such a photo would possibly be identified as an invasion of
privacy.
It had to look like PUBLIC Immodest Behavior to cause a diminution
of Diana's influence in the public media.
>at which Diana stayed? How could it have been
>hoped that photographs of an especially compromising nature could have
>been obtained at high speed in the Alma Tunnel, rather than on the
>Jonikal, at the Ritz or at the rue Arsene? What on earth is the point?
Would behavior on the yatch or at the Ritz be considered public or
private by Diana. My guess is that Diana would have considered it
PUBLIC.
>
>One glimmer of a suggestion of a possibility does occur to me, as a
>result of examining this idea, however. What if Dodi was having
>difficulty getting physical with Diana? Did Dad devise an elaborate
>ruse to throw them together? Or rather, was he advised to do so by
>those who wanted Diana dead
NOT DEAD. There is a whole hell of a lot of difference in wanting
some one to have less public influence in the public media than in
wanting someone to be dead.
>- so that he would implement the scheme
>without knowing what it was really for?
Quite simple. A compromising photograph.
>Something of the sort must have
>happened, I think - and it's not so incredible if you consider that
>MAF's masters may have been pretending to attempt to pull off a Fayed-
>Spencer match (with big bucks in it for MAF) for some time - so that
>the Machiavellian complexity of engineering the car-switch, the
>disposition of the escort, the arrangements for the route and the
>programming of Henri Paul, might not have aroused MAF's suspicions.
A photograph would be the most logical thing in the whole world.
No body would be suspicious of anything.
>
>Other factors, such as sabotaging the S-280's brakes and air-bags,
>briefing the escort to monitor the crash but not get involved, etc,
>could have been achieved by MAF's backers, over MAF's head,
The theft and modification of the vehicle could have been well
disguised.
>such that
>Siegel and Musa (Etoile Limousines) and Wingfield and Dournot were not
>only working for MAF, but for his masters, DIRECTLY.
However, if that were part of the plot, then PLANS TO GET THAT
VEHICLE TO THAT PLACE IN TIME WOULD HAVE TO HAVE BEEN
ROCK SOLID FOR MONTHS IN ADVANCE.
There is the clear windows in one train of thought and defective
equipment as possibly another.
>
>Indeed, assuming that MAF did not know that the fatal crash was
>intended, those of MAF's employees who MUST have known that a fatal
>crash was intended, MUST have been working directly for those who
>intentionally engineered it.
>
If a crash after the photo were planned the least people in the area
who needed to know was just the driver of the white car. Second
could have been the photographer on the back of the motorcycle
who had to aim a shot into the driver's eyes.
Alvin H. White
roy andrew crabtree
Tri-Ess or Social Club to imply a certain type of disrepute ... I seem to have encountered that occassionally myself.).
The following is a collimation and replay of what I previously annotated in the ACPD group earlier:
Question: Has anyone attempted to tie down the time frame of "stopped momentarily"; is this a second or two, or 15 seconds, or as long as a minute? (opportunity) Were they wearing gloves? (fingerprint)
What type? (cyclists with helmet and WITHOUT riding gloves?)
Question: Did he only look into the car? (position) If so, from how far away? (access) Or did he actually go up to the car and lean into it? (contact) FROM WHAT SIDE? (intentional action)
Has anyone seen a CLEAR PHOTO SHOT of the UNMODIFIED ROOF OF THE CAR AFTER THE
WRECK? Is it possible to OBSERVE THE CARS CONTENTS withOUT going under the roof?
If not, and if this (unnamed, possibly unidentified) individual (or pair) DID reach INTO the car, for over
about 10 seconds, then from which side? Remember that the roof was collapsed downwards on the forward side of the car, and had to be removed prior to body extraction; this implies NO room to do anything from the FORWARD (inner tunnel, or river) side of the car.
Thus, to see closely into the car, the rearward (from the direction of travel, or outer tunnel, or land and not river) side would have been the choice.
For an individual to get off, run BACK (remember, "cut in front" of the Mercedes), to AROUND BEHIND THE CAR, and look into the vehicle, would have resulted ONLY from intentional purposive action.
THAT individual COULD BE remiscible (& remissible) at French law for "failing to lend assistance".
Certainly for leaving the scene of an accident (if French law is the same as US).
If you will recollect the context of the initial reports of Di's loss of blood culminating in the description (with diagram, but not with medical photo!) of the torn pulmonary vein (aorta?) on her RHS of body.
Question: Was this a diagrammed provided by the doctor's in care of her directly, or a member of staff
from Saltpetrie(?misspelled)? If so, was it attested for its accuracy AT THAT TIME, and accurately
reproduced? (Evidence of a medical photo taken later would have to be examined closely
for verity ....). If so, then:
Recall that the diagram showed the "tear" in a position that would NOT have been proper to occur
from the force vectoring placed on Di's body as she was hurled by the impact; the twisting forces
do NOT (to my mind's eye) place the INTERNALS of the body under torsion in the correct order
to stress the RHS "Y" in the correct direction; remember that torsion (from bird's eye view down)
on the auto, counterclockwise from impact, slew and spin, would slew and spin Di's body ALSO
clockwise (known as a RIGHT HAND SPIN: take your right hand, point your thumb at your
nose, and curl your fingers: this is right hand spin).
This would force the the body internal organs to torque clockwise, or crush (NOT expand)
against Di's RIGHT side.
The medical report indicated an expansion TEAR. not a compression FOLD.
Please note: an undiagnosed flaw in a blood vessel can result in a rupture from a compression
as well as from an expansion stretch. However, usually flaws of this type have to be large
and fail catastrophically; a failure of ANY type on a pulmonary aorta is lethal within almost NO
time (seconds); on the heart as well. Failure on the primary veins of the lung or heart also
bleed spectacularly fast, unless there wound is so small as to be almost invisible.
She survived bleeding of a major vessel for TWO HOURS. This implies a SMALL wound,
one that COULD have been done by a < 1mm probe, pick, blade, or scythe.
The tissue there is VERY thick; you have to see it to believe it.
Now, examine the diagram published in web pages and the press: you will note the DIRECTION of
the "tear" is ALONG THE VESSEL and BELOW THEY JUNCTURE OF THE "Y"; PARALLEL to the
blood vessel.
The force vectoring of EITHER a compression OR an expansion of such a "Y" joint would be to
FOLD (ar antifold: linearize) the junction of the "Y"; this would produce a compression (expansion)
failure PERPENDICULAR to the wall of the vessel (cross the circle of the pipe, in the armpit of
the "Y", not parallel to the core of the pipe).
Recall the articles that describe Di's body: in at least three contexts I recall that there was a description
of there being a small wound on her RHS rib cage under the pectoral muscles ... can anyone confirm this?
WHY would an innocuous wound among SO MANY OTHERS be so assiduously described?
Was Di so unmarked that this WAS THE ONLY ONE in that area? (why, if so?) How did it
come to be there? (cause within the car) Were the clothes ripped or torn as from an impact
in that area?, or was a puncture marl present within the car? What size was the wound in
that area? Ws there ANYTHING in the car that COULD HAVE caused that wound (remember all
the motions involved). Was the wound transected? (Not so listed) Examined microscopically?
(if not, then probably not the blood vessel either; if not, indications of blade marking would
have been missed).
Now, recall that the description of Di's final resting position, as described by the first IDENTIFIED
paparazzi or cyclist was: between the seats, face up (is this correct? I do not recollect completely).
Note that this again puts DI's RHS on the rear side of the crash (auto's LHS, where she was sitting).
Conceive: if you want to kill someone who is merely injured, and do so leaving no OBVIOUS trace of
injury, poke a hole in an area bloodied and/or bruised or likely to be so (Dodi would have hit Di on that
side as the car torqued, HARD: I have had this occur to me in an accident.); his elbow would have
likely hit her in this area.
Could an assassin have known it would be in this spot? (No. training would let him/her ID
where, on a person, a bruise would be, and allow an insertion there, within 2-4 seconds, or
to CREATE such a site (a steel knuckle or any hard hand karate blow will make a mark ONLY
an expert KNOWING TO LOOK could distinguish from a severe accidental hematoma. Again,
time to do so, 2-4 seconds.
Now: a normal implement carried by many professionals would look like a lecturer's folding
pointer (or about half a dozen other implements), possibly with its own builtin light. (so the
assassin could in fact se what and where the tool was pointed.
Size and length, folded: 3-6 inches, 1/4 to 1/2 inch across. Invisible in the palm of a hand.
To kill an injured semiconscious or unconscious party:
1) Reach the proper access side (2-4 seconds); inspect for witnesses within 5 feet;
safe if none.
2) Inspect as reaching in and determine which of 3-5 lethal points that would be difficult
to detect; choose one (1-3 seconds).
3) With one hand, taking OUT the implement with one hand, trip the pointer into
extension and trigger any light. With the other, use an existing wound, or create one
with a strike to hide the entry point. (1-3 seconds).
4) Brushing aside clothing (or going through it to create a false impression of an internal
object strike causing the wound), use both hands to insert the probe (having removed
the pointer tip to expose a pick, or a small scythic blade); face the blade AWAY from the
blood vessel; FEEL the pumping blood THROUGH the steel instrument; rotate and SCYTHE
along the vessel JUST UNDER THE "Y" JUNCTION. (2-5 seconds)
5) Remove (wiping the instrument clean; microtome and plating preventing most scratch
fingeprints (even if detected AS A CUT you CANNOT identify WHICH BLADE made it))
replace the pointer ball or at the end as you turn to leave, turning off the lamp in it if any,
and returning to your cycle. You leave. (2-3 seconds).
Total timing: 8-18 seconds or so, off the cycle to back on.
If what I recollect about the OTHER paparazzi cycles, the distance to the rear of the accident was
some 1/8th of a mile or more so; there have been NO estimates I have seen that accurately show the
speed of the cycles coming into the tunnel; assume it was NO faster than the car (or else
they would have been overtaking it, not falling behind).
Thus, 65-78 MPH, or 55 seconds. Deceleration would approximately halve the speed or double+
the timing; or abut 30MPH. This would take about 15 seconds to traverse; estimates I recall
state that the first to arrive at the car were 15-25 seconds AFTER the impact (and I also recall
a LONG hot harangue in the initial two months in ACPD where the attempt was made to FORCE
the discussion to pursue form the thesis that Mr. Rat (?correct one?) was at the car IMMEDIATELY
and thus no one else could have been there, or he would have seen them.
Question: Did the lights in the tunnel ALWAYS stay on? If so, hw would anyone have seen a bright flash of ANY type from a lit tunnel (does a camera flash remain that visible at night from within a brightly lit tunnel?)
Did this happen?
Look at the entire sequence.
Identify form objective photos and videos and directly recorded identification sequences.
Examine everything top to bottom
Does it fit, or are there holes where the "cracks" in the flow of the scene could hide it?
Any comments?
Question: Did the cycle MOVE BACK towards the person who got off, or zip down and turn around to
PREPARE AN ESCAPE after the first one got off?
Steve Reed wrote:
> In article <022cd178...@usw-ex0105-037.remarq.com>, ron <ron_winnN
> Oro...@lineone.net.invalid> writes
> >Steve, can I ask you or other members a few questions:-
> >
> >· The ATER describes the position of the Limo in the Concorde-
> >Boulogne Lane so is it true to say that neither lane was
> >slow/fast lane, both lanes had speed limit of 30 mph .
>
> I think you'll find that the speed limit was 50 km/h which, admittedly
> is not quite 32 mph; but speed-limits are as stupid - at certain times
> of day - in France, as they are here, and are not observed.
>
> According to Francois Levistre, he was doing "entre 110 et 120 km/h"
> (between 68 and 75mph) on the (westbound) approach to the Alma Tunnel,
> when he saw vehicles coming up fast behind.
>
> "The speed-trap which picked up the Mercedes doing 196 km/h (122 mph)
> was situated on the straight stretch of the cour Albert Premier about
> 400 metres before the tunnel" (France Dimanche, No 2667, 10/97)
>
> The Mercedes 280 and its attendant pursuers had already passed Brenda
> Wells and Thierry H (by taking the left-hand lane) and were closing on
> Levistre, as he and his wife, entered the tunnel - keeping to the right
> in readiness to be overtaken. As Levistre remembers it, looking back
> from a point about half-way through the tunnel, there was "a white car",
> in the middle of the road, behind him. Behind that, he says, there was
> "another car" (presumably the Mercedes S- 280) and behind that, a large
> motor-bike.
>
> Note that there is no vehicle present, in Levistre's story, which could
> be the car of the witnesses Souad M. and Mohammed M. If we believe
> Levistre, they weren't there! On the other hand, if we believe THEM,
> the Mercedes crashed without any help from anyone - a very convenient
> version of events, for the authorities, and completely contrary to the
> testimony of ALL the other witnesses.
>
> The sequence of events, as Levistre recounts it, is very interesting,
> because he seems to be saying that the "white car" stayed ahead of the
> Mercedes and the motor-bike. At least, he describes the "white car"
> passing him, and disappearing westwards, before he begins to describe
> the motor-bike overtaking the Mercedes and cutting-in in front of it.
>
> The impression given (that the "white car" was a long way ahead of the
> Mercedes and the motorbike) is probably an illusion created by the
> difficulty involved in describing the situation; but there is no
> escaping the conclusion that the Mercedes did not completely squeeze
> past the white car, but came alongside it, on its left, in a sliding
> collision, which impelled the white car forwards, towards Levistre and
> out of harm's way; whereupon the motorbike overtook the slowed Mercedes
> and (also according to Levistre) cut-in in front of it and produced "a
> searing burst of light, much brighter than a photo-flash".
>
> At this point, Levistre, braked and came to a halt near the western end
> of the tunnel. The Mercedes had crashed, and the bikers (like Brenda
> Wells, Levistre affirms that there were two of them) had stopped by the
> wreck. One of them got off, momentarily, to look into the Mercedes,
> jumped back on again, and the bike sped off, passing Levistre as it did
> so. Levistre describes the bike as "black" and the two men as "dressed
> in black with black helmets". The whole thing took just a few seconds.
>
> Considerable efforts have been made to discredit Levistre. It has been
> said, for example, that his attitude to the press was "hostile" and that
> he was trying to "gain attention"; but there could be another reason for
> these attacks on his character - he witnessed a murder! There is no
> other interpretation you can put on his testimony.
>
> Yes, indeed (to answer your question) the lanes were used as a slow-lane
> and an overtaking lane - ludicrous speed-limit signs notwithstanding!
>
> Other answers in another post
>
GODS...@home.com
>From GODS...@HOME.COM Wed May 03 15:40:25 2000 Path: news1.
>Dès GODSBRAIN@ LOGIS. COM Wed mai 3 15: 40: 25 2000 sentier: news1.
>frmt1.
>frmt1.
>sfba.
>sfba.
>home.
>Logis.
>com!
>com!
>newshub1.
>newshub1.
>home.
>Logis.
>com!
>com!
>news.
>news.
>home.
>Logis.
>com!
>com!
>news1.
>news1.
>frmt1.
>frmt1.
>sfba.
>sfba.
>home.
>Logis.
>com.
>com.
>POSTED!
>POSTED!
>not-for-mail From: GODS...@HOME.COM Newsgroups: alt.
>not-for-mail dès: GODSBRAIN@ LOGIS. COM Newsgroups: alt.
>conspiracy.
>Conspiration.
>princess-diana Subject: Re: Di: Paul, Henri, History, 60 Page Autopsy, Etc. Organization: <a href="http://members.home.com/godsbrain">G.O.D.S.B.R.A.I.N.</a><br> Reply-To: GODS...@HOME.COM,GODS...@AOL.COM Message-ID: <suv0hs4b86ldf6kh1...@4ax.com> References: <20000416220330.
>princess-diana sujet: Re: Di: Paul, Henri, histoire, 60 page autopsie, etc. organisation: < comme href=" http:// membre. logis. com/ godsbrain"> G. O. D. S. B. R. comme. je. N.</ comme>< br> Reply-To: GODSBRAIN@ LOGIS. COM, GODSBRAIN@ AOL. COM Message-ID: < suv0hs4b86ldf6kh11pg4usgb988mp55km@ 4ax. com> postes: < 20000416220330.
>18658.
>18658.
>0000...@ng-cg1.aol.com> <38fa9...@huge.aa.net> <8n1mfss0cu2ou4qhe...@4ax.com> <025220ee.
>4069@ ng-cg1. aol. com> < 38fa90de_2@ immense. aa. net> < 8n1mfss0cu2ou4qhej2ujs106jhqfrbbol@ 4ax. com> < 025220ee.
>5e23...@usw-ex0104-033.remarq.com> <VHL8$AAWpz$4I...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> <03cfeca4.
>5e23de39@ usw-ex0104-033. remarq. com> < VHL8$ AAWpz$ 4IAaS@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> < 03cfeca4.
>e454...@usw-ex0105-038.remarq.com> <5AGHurAe...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> <022cd178.
>e454e6ea@ usw-ex0105-038. remarq. com> < 5AGHurAeP0A5IAT7@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> < 022cd178.
>7c06...@usw-ex0105-037.remarq.com> <0PU0NLBY...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> <2ehrgsobh76u0sheo...@4ax.com> <EwaIiIA+...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.
>7c06d2cf@ usw-ex0105-037. remarq. com> < 0PU0NLBYabD5IAaW@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> < 2ehrgsobh76u0sheo8fsoso92h16ood0pr@ 4ax. com> < EwaIiIA+ 6EE5IAXR@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> X-Newsreader: Forte agent 1.
>7/32.
>7/ 32.
>534 MIME-Version: 1.
>534 MIME-Version: 1.
>0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 683 Date: Wed, 03 May 2000 22:40:25 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.
>0 Content-Type: texte/ plain; charset= us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit ligne: 683 date: Wed, 3 mai 2000 22: 40: 25 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.
>7.
>7.
>83.
>83.
>23 X-Complaints-To: ab...@home.net X-Trace: news1.
>23 X-Complaints-To: abus@ logis. net X-Trace: news1.
>frmt1.
>frmt1.
>sfba.
>sfba.
>home.
>Logis.
>com 957393625 24.
>com 957393625 24.
>7.
>7.
>83.
>83.
>23 (Wed, 03 May 2000 15:40:25 PDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 03 May 2000 15:40:25 PDT Xref: newshub1.
>23( Wed, 3 mai 2000 15: 40: 25 PDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 3 mai 2000 15: 40: 25 PDT Xref: newshub1.
>home.
>Logis.
>com alt.
>com alt.
>conspiracy.
>Conspiration.
>princess-diana:30031204 -------- </html> OK.
>princess-diana: 30031204 --------</ html> OK.
> What do we call this?
>Qu'est-ce-que faire nous appel ce?
> The daily replay of the daily revised version of the God's Brain Suppositional Hypothesis.
>La diurne replay de la diurne révisa version de la dieu cerveau Suppositional hypothèse.
> Act ______ Scene ________ Having read the below a time or two, or few, some opportunity to explain weighted influence factors in the construction of the daily hypothesis.
>Acte ______ scene ________ a lire la ci-dessous comme fois ou 2, ou few, quelque occasion pour expliqua weighted influence facteur aux la construction de la diurne hypothèse.
> Since the authorities have had two and a half years with the manpower, peoplepower, staff power, of what was it reported?
>Depuis la autorité a a 2 et comme demi an avec la manpower, peoplepower, staff pouvoir, de qu'est-ce-que was ca rapporta?
> Some 24 full time investigators and million(s) dollar equivalent budgets I am not competing with that.
>Quelque 24 plein fois investigators et 1000000( s) dollar équivalent budget je am non concourant avec cela.
> The outcome reports of that investigation appear to be: Drunk driver speeds without the care of D+D+TRJ and abruptly turns left into a central column.
>La outcome compte-rendu de cela investigation apparaissant pour be: boire chauffeur vitesse sans la soin de D+ D+ TRJ et abruptly tourna sort into comme centrale colonne.
> Simple Road Traffic Accident RTA.
>Simples chemin circulation accident RTA.
> When and over the time since the creation of alt.
>Lorsque et dessus la fois depuis la création de alt.
>conspiracy.
>Conspiration.
>princess-diana by b.
>princess-diana par b.
>anana his philosophical position as I read it is to approximately take the position for sake of arguement that Diana was killed as the result of a conspiracy.
>anana ses philosophique position comme je lire ca is pour approximately prenant la position pour sake de arguement cela Diana was tua comme la résultat de comme conspiration.
> Because it has appeared to me that while times, places, people, and motives have been discussed I have a feeling that there has been less than reasonable consideration of some possibilities.
>Because ca a apparaissant pour me cela while fois, lieu, gens, et motif a been discuta je a comme sent cela delà a been moins than raisonnable considération de quelque possibilité.
> As a consequence of that belief I am trying to construct a suppositional hypothesis that will identify possible, persons, places, things that may be considered as possible.
>Comme comme conséquence de cela créance je am essaya pour bâti comme suppositional hypothèse cela volonté identifia possible, personne, lieu, chose cela mai be considera comme possible.
> The intent is to create multiple fictional tracks such that the most possible/ununderstood may be considered.
>La intent is pour crées multiple fictional piste tel cela la most possible/ ununderstood mai be considera.
> Many of the pieces are for the most part agreed as having been in the area but there is a lot of discrepancy as to the EXACT location at a SPECIFIC INSTANT.
>Many de la pièce are pour la most partie accorda comme a been aux la aire mais delà is comme lot de discrepancy comme pour la EXACT emplacement chez comme SPÉCIFIQUE INSTANT.
> My intent is to create this fictional supposition to give, or try to determine, the differences between points of agreement and points of disharmony.
>Ma intent is pour crées ce fictional supposition pour donna, ou essaya pour détermina, la différence entre point de accord et point de disharmony.
> Agreement/Disagreement and Harmony/Disharmony.
>Accord/ Disagreement et harmonie/ Disharmony.
> Concord vs Discord.
>Concord vs Discord.
> If there might have been common interest to finance a joint project to lessen Diana's influence with the media because she was percieved to be "stepping on someones toes" , my words, then how might some such plan, plot, conspiracy, have been considered achievable from a variety of possible participant's points of view?
>Si delà might a been commun intérêt pour finance comme jointure projet pour lessen Diana's influence avec la media because celle was percieved pour be" stepping sur someones toes" , ma mot, alors comment might quelque tel plan, complot, conspiration, a been considera achievable dès comme variété de possible participant point de vue?
> My typing fingers are not going to stand too long a discussion at this point so I am going to try to speed along.
>Ma typing doigt are non going to stand trop longtemps comme discussion chez ce point ainsi je am going to essaya pour vitesse along.
> My supposition is that if there was a conspiracy it had to be to do something.
>Ma supposition is cela si delà was comme conspiration ca a pour be pour faire something.
> A photo of Diana giving Dodi a blow job in the back seat of a limo would be pretty good.
>Comme photo de Diana donna Dodi comme souffla job aux la back siège de comme limo would be joli bon.
>For the photo to achieve maximum benefit it had to be secret and to be used as a threat.
>Pour la photo pour acheva max bénéfice ca a pour be secret et pour be utilisé comme comme threat.
>The actual publication in mass media would deflate its power.
>La actual parution aux mass media would dégonfla sa pouvoir.
> But it had to have strong and undisputable evidence that it was TRUE if it were ever going to be used.
>Mais ca a pour a fort et undisputable évidence cela ca was VRAI si ca were ever going to be utilisé.
> For some paparazzi to "peeping tom" photo a divorcee with her boyfriend in private was not going to do the job.
>Pour quelque paparazzi pour" peeping tom" photo comme divorcee avec elle boyfriend aux privé was non going to faire la job.
> So the construct of a whore for money with an oily bedhopper in the back seat of a very expensive limo would be much more philosophically correct for the purpose of a conspiracy to get a photo to use for blackmail in the future but not for actual publication.
>Ainsi la bâti de comme putain pour argent avec an graisseuse bedhopper aux la back siège de comme très expensive limo would be beaucoup plus philosophically corrige pour la finalité de comme conspiration pour get comme photo pour usage pour chantage aux la futur mais non pour actual parution.
> On Wed, 3 May 2000 17:07:26 +0100, Steve Reed <asr...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> wrote: >Path: news1.
>Sur Wed, 3 mai 2000 17: 7: 26+ 100, Steve Reed< asreed@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> écrire: > sentier: news1.
>frmt1.
>frmt1.
>sfba.
>sfba.
>home.
>Logis.
>com!
>com!
>newshub2.
>newshub2.
>rdc1.
>rdc1.
>sfba.
>sfba.
>home.
>Logis.
>com!
>com!
>newshub1.
>newshub1.
>home.
>Logis.
>com!
>com!
>news.
>news.
>home.
>Logis.
>com!
>com!
>feeder.
>feeder.
>via.
>via.
>net!
>Net!
>diablo.
>diablo.
>theplanet.
>theplanet.
>net!
>Net!
>news.
>news.
>theplanet.
>theplanet.
>net!
>Net!
>newspost.
>newspost.
>theplanet.
>theplanet.
>net!
>Net!
>lastings.
>lastings.
>softnet.
>softnet.
>co.
>co.
>uk!
>uk!
>asreed >From: Steve Reed <asr...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> >Newsgroups: alt.
>asreed> dès: Steve Reed< asreed@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> > Newsgroups: alt.
>conspiracy.
>Conspiration.
>princess-diana >Subject: Re: Di: Paul, Henri, History, 60 Page Autopsy, Etc. >Date: Wed, 3 May 2000 17:07:26 +0100 >Organization: Home >Lines: 297 >Message-ID: <EwaIiIA+...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> >References: <20000416201432.
>princess-diana> sujet: Re: Di: Paul, Henri, histoire, 60 page autopsie, etc. > date: Wed, 3 mai 2000 17: 7: 26+ 100> organisation: logis> ligne: 297> Message-ID: < EwaIiIA+ 6EE5IAXR@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> > postes: < 20000416201432.
>18648.
>18648.
>0000...@ng-cg1.aol.com> > <20000416220330.
>4517@ ng-cg1. aol. com> > < 20000416220330.
>18658.
>18658.
>0000...@ng-cg1.aol.com> <38fa9...@huge.aa.net> > <8n1mfss0cu2ou4qhe...@4ax.com> > <025220ee.
>4069@ ng-cg1. aol. com> < 38fa90de_2@ immense. aa. net> > < 8n1mfss0cu2ou4qhej2ujs106jhqfrbbol@ 4ax. com> > < 025220ee.
>5e23...@usw-ex0104-033.remarq.com> > <VHL8$AAWpz$4I...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> > <03cfeca4.
>5e23de39@ usw-ex0104-033. remarq. com> > < VHL8$ AAWpz$ 4IAaS@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> > < 03cfeca4.
>e454...@usw-ex0105-038.remarq.com> > <5AGHurAe...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> > <022cd178.
>e454e6ea@ usw-ex0105-038. remarq. com> > < 5AGHurAeP0A5IAT7@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> > < 022cd178.
>7c06...@usw-ex0105-037.remarq.com> > <0PU0NLBY...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> > <2ehrgsobh76u0sheo...@4ax.com> >Reply-To: Andrew Steven Reed <ar...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> >NNTP-Posting-Host: modem88.
>7c06d2cf@ usw-ex0105-037. remarq. com> > < 0PU0NLBYabD5IAaW@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> > < 2ehrgsobh76u0sheo8fsoso92h16ood0pr@ 4ax. com> > Reply-To: Andrew Steven Reed< areed@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> > NNTP-Posting-Host: modem88.
>fred.
>fred.
>pol.
>pol.
>co.
>co.
>uk >Mime-Version: 1.
>uk> Mime-Version: 1.
>0 >X-Trace: newsreaderg1.
>0> X-Trace: newsreaderg1.
>core.
>core.
>theplanet.
>theplanet.
>net 957376918 19338 195.
>Net 957376918 19338 195.
>92.
>92.
>7.
>7.
>216 (3 May 2000 18:01:58 GMT) >NNTP-Posting-Date: 3 May 2000 18:01:58 GMT >X-Complaints-To: ab...@theplanet.net >X-Newsreader: Turnpike Integrated Version 4.
>216( 3 mai 2000 18: 1: 58 GMT) > NNTP-Posting-Date: 3 mai 2000 18: 1: 58 GMT> X-Complaints-To: abus@ theplanet. net> X-Newsreader: Turnpike intégra version 4.
>02 M <TWkHBtca5wWBvmfWwoLIWQkgFM> >Xref: newshub1.
>2 M< TWkHBtca5wWBvmfWwoLIWQkgFM> > Xref: newshub1.
>home.
>Logis.
>com alt.
>com alt.
>conspiracy.
>Conspiration.
>princess-diana:30031199 > >In article <2ehrgsobh76u0sheo...@4ax.com>, >GODS...@HOME.COM writes >>>there was "a white car", >>>in the middle of the road, behind him.
>princess-diana: 30031199> > aux article< 2ehrgsobh76u0sheo8fsoso92h16ood0pr@ 4ax. com>, > GODSBRAIN@ LOGIS. COM écrire>>> delà was" comme blanc auto", >>> aux la moyen de la chemin, behind lui.
> >> >>So Livestre lied.
>>> >>Ainsi Livestre gis.
> The white car was not in the middle >>of the road, the Mercedes was in the middle of the >>road.
>La blanc auto was non aux la moyen>> de la chemin, la Mercedes was aux la moyen de la>> chemin.
> Why did Livestre lie?
>Pourquoi faire Livestre gis?
> Maybe Livestre did not lie in that particular.
>Maybe Livestre faire non gis aux cela particulier.
> One needs to be very careful as to "at what instant" and did he say the middle of the road or the middle of the lane?
>1 besoin pour be très careful comme pour" chez qu'est-ce-que instant" et faire celui dirent la moyen de la chemin ou la moyen de la lane?
> It was said that he had moved into the right lane.
>Ca was dirent cela celui a meut into la droit lane.
> If he said the white car was in the middle of the [right] lane I would agree.
>Si celui dirent la blanc auto was aux la moyen de la[ droit] lane je would accorda.
>> >Levistre is not contradicting himself.
>> >Levistre is non contredire lui-même.
> He saw the white car "au milieu >de la chaussee" So, does "chaussee" come closer to translating as "lane" or on the other hand, "road?
>Celui vit la blanc auto" au milieu> de la chaussee" ainsi, faire" chaussee" venant proche pour traduire comme" lane" ou sur la autre main, " chemin?
>" Road having two lanes.
>"Chemin a 2 lanes.
> >and was overtaken by it ("elle me double") But exactly where were the other actors at the exact instant that "elle me double?
>>Et was distanca par ca(" elle me double") mais exactly là were la autre actors chez la exact instant cela" elle me double?
>" >"Then", he >says ("puis j'observe [retroviseur] une autre auto toujours au milieu de >la route") "I saw [rear-view mirror] another car, also in the middle of >the road" So here we have a "milieu de la route.
>" >"Alors", celui> dirent(" puis j'observe[ retroviseur] une autre auto toujours au milieu de> la parcours") " je vit[ rear-view miroir] another auto, et aux la moyen de> la chemin" ainsi ci nous a comme" milieu de la parcours.
>" Does that mean closer the lane or the road?
>"Faire cela moyens proche la lane ou la chemin?
> >("et soudain une grosse moto sur sa gauche qui lui fait une >queue de poisson") "and, all of a sudden, a large motor-bike, to the >left of it, cutting-in in front of it".
>>("et soudain une grosse moto sur sa gauche qui lui fait une> queue de poisson") " et, tous de comme subit, comme large motor-bike, pour la> sort de ca, cutting-in in front of ca".
> I will take it that AT SOME POINT a large motor-bike, comming from the left of it, and then cutting-in in front of it.
>Je volonté prenant ca cela CHEZ QUELQUE POINT comme large motor-bike, comming dès la sort de ca, et alors cutting-in in front of ca.
> > >(another ambiguity is created by the expression "sur sa gauche", which >could be translated "to ITS left" [to the right of it, from where >Levistre says he was] or "to the left of it" [as seen from Levistre's >alleged position] and, since Levistre claims that the Mercedes "was in >the middle of the road" at that point, it could be either) Since I am trying to construct a hypothetical scene where the Merc was astraddle the white line that separated the two west bound lanes and a photographing motorcycle was to the left side of the Merc at the exact instant that the white car was on the right side.
>> >(another ambiguïté is crées par la expression" sur sa gauche", laquel> peut be traduire" pour SA sort" [ pour la droit de ca, dès là> Levistre dirent celui was] ou" pour la sort de ca" [ comme vit dès Levistre's> allégua position] et, depuis Levistre arroge cela la Mercedes" was aux> la moyen de la chemin" chez cela point, ca peut be either) depuis je am essaya pour bâti comme hypothetical scene là la Merc was astraddle la blanc ligne cela sépara la 2 ouest bound lanes et comme photographing motorcycle was pour la sort côté de la Merc chez la exact instant cela la blanc auto was sur la droit côté.
> .
>
> .
>
> .
>
>> >"At the same instant, for a fraction of a second, there was a tremendous >flash of light, but nothing like the flash of a camera" ("Au meme >moment, en une fraction de seconde, un enorme eclair jaillit, mais rien >a voir avec le flash d'un appareil-photo") > >My point is that the order of events is not completely clear.
>> >"Chez la meme instant, pour comme fraction de comme 2, delà was comme tremendous> flash de alluma, mais rien like la flash de comme caméra" (" Au meme> moment, en une fraction de seconde, un enorme eclair jaillit, mais rien> comme voir avec le flash d'un appareil-photo") > > ma point is cela la ordre de événement is non complètement clair.
> It could >be that the bike cut-in in front of the Mercedes just before the white >car passed Levistre - either that, or the bike was further behind the >Mercedes, as both vehicles entered the tunnel, than Clifford, Olivier >and Thierry imply.
>Ca peut> be cela la bike cut-in in front of la Mercedes just avant la blanc> auto passa Levistre - either cela, ou la bike was further behind la> Mercedes, comme both véhicule entra la tunnel, than Clifford, Olivier> et Thierry imply.
> I suppose the bike could have braked, just before the Is there any chance that one of the skid marks, like the single one, was the bike?
>Je si la bike peut a freina, just avant la Is delà quelconque chance cela 1 de la dérapa marqua, like la seul 1, was la bike?
> >tunnel (to avoid running into a Mercedes/white-car pile-up) and that >Levistre might not have been as far along the tunnel as he thought he >was.
>>Tunnel( pour évita courant into comme Mercedes/ white-car pile-up) et cela> Levistre might non a been comme loin along la tunnel comme celui pensa celui> was.
> There is another branch of my lack of understanding and that follows along a train of thought that the picture was intended but the crash was an accident.
>Delà is another succursale de ma manque de comprenez et cela ensuit along comme train de pensa cela la picture was prévues mais la fracas was an accident.
> In the "accident" hypothesis approximately the motorcycle photographer could have accidently fired a half metre too far forward and instead of shooting in to the back seat he could have accidently hit HP directly in the eyes as Henri Paul looked to the left as the motorcycle came along side his side window.
>Aux la" accident" hypothèse approximately la motorcycle photographe peut a accidently fired comme demi metre trop loin achemina et instead of tira aux pour la back siège celui peut a accidently hit HP directly aux la oeil comme Henri Paul regarda pour la sort comme la motorcycle venant along côté ses côté fenêtre.
>Then the blinding flash could have caused HP to FLINCH and swerve to the right just a little.
>Alors la blinding flash peut a causa HP pour FLINCH et swerve pour la droit just comme moins.
> At that point hitting the rear of the accelerating white car.
>Chez cela point hitting la rear de la accéléra blanc auto.
> As the white car's rear goes to the right its front goes to the left.
>Comme la blanc auto rear goes to la droit sa devant goes to la sort.
> To correct, the driver throws to the right and the rear goes to the left.
>Pour corrige, la chauffeur jeta pour la droit et la rear goes to la sort.
> Essentially tossing the front of the Merc into the central columns.
>Essentiellement tossing la devant de la Merc into la centrale colonne.
> >Thus, the Mercedes hit the white car, side-to-side, and impelled it >forwards, towards Levistre, and was FOLLOWING it, as it passed >Levistre's position, and as the bike overtook the Mercedes.
>>Thus, la Mercedes hit la blanc auto, side-to-side, et impelled ca> achemina, towards Levistre, et was ENSUIT ca, comme ca passa> Levistre's position, et comme la bike distanca la Mercedes.
> I think that the first, photographing, bike should have been ahead of the white car.
>Je pensa cela la 1, photographing, bike doit a been au-devant de la blanc auto.
> If the bike and the car essentially accelerated at the same instant the bike would outrun the car.
>Si la bike et la auto essentiellement accéléra chez la meme instant la bike would outrun la auto.
> I think.
>Je pensa.
> Bikes are far faster at acceleration that cars.
>Bikes are loin faster chez accélération cela auto.
> Any disagreements?
>Quelconque disagreements?
>Of course, with two riders and a turbo car ...?
>De cours, avec 2 riders et comme turbo auto...?
> For one thing, you are supposing then that the white car was ahead of the Merc at the instant that the Merc hit the central column/pilar/post.
>Pour 1 chose, te are si alors cela la blanc auto was au-devant de la Merc chez la instant cela la Merc hit la centrale colonne/ pilar/ post.
> That is in accord with my first guess.
>Cela is aux accord avec ma 1 devina.
>> >Does that clear things up?
>> >Faire cela clair chose up?
> No.
>Aucun.
> It smokes them up.
>Ca fumée eux up.
> But gives a number of possible occurances to consider.
>Mais donna comme nombre de possible occurances pour considera.
>>> >>>Behind that, he says, there was >>>"another car" (presumably the Mercedes S- 280) and behind that, a large >>>motor-bike.
>>> >>>Behind cela, celui dirent, delà was>>>" another auto" ( presumably la Mercedes S- 280) et behind cela, comme large>>> motor-bike.
> So my first thought on that is that that is a second bike.
>Ainsi ma 1 pensa sur cela is cela cela is comme 2 bike.
> And if we are talking about the left that might be better described as a second bike on the left as there might have been one or more bikes on the right in addition.
>Et si nous are parla about la sort cela might be bon décrire comme comme 2 bike sur la sort comme delà might a been 1 ou plus bikes sur la droit aux addition.
>>> >>Livestre lies again.
>>> >>Livestre gis encore.
>> >What do you mean?
>> >Qu'est-ce-que faire te moyens?
> What evidence is there that Levistre is "lying"?
>Qu'est-ce-que évidence is delà cela Levistre is" gis"?
> My supposition.
>Ma supposition.
>> >> He clearly saw and may have been a part >>of a conspiracy to cover up.
>> >>Celui nettement vit et mai a been comme partie>> de comme conspiration pour couverture up.
> So in my supposition he saw it >>and he lied about it.
>Ainsi aux ma supposition celui vit ca>> et celui gis about ca.
> Now if we go off on a train of thought to >>explore a hypothesis that Livestre was deliberately lying then >>I'll have to think about that some more.
>Présent si nous alla off sur comme train de pensa pour>> explora comme hypothèse cela Livestre was deliberately gis alors>> je I'll a pour pensa about cela quelque plus.
> I have not until the >>present considered the possibility that he was deliberately >>lying.
>Je a non jusq la>> présenta considera la possibilité cela celui was deliberately>> gis.
>>> >I have - he could be in the pay of Al-Fayed (or his high-level masters) >That's always a possibility; but why should we single him out?
>>> >Je a - celui peut be aux la paya de Al-Fayed( ou ses high-level maitre) > cela That's toujours comme possibilité; mais pourquoi doit nous seul lui out?
> I'm not singling him out.
>Je I'm non singling lui out.
> I am theorizing that there may have been a whole swarm of conspiring pap's surrounding Diana's car.
>Je am theorizing cela delà mai a been comme whole essaim de conspira pap's entoura Diana's auto.
> >What >about any (or ALL) of the other witnesses?
>>Qu'est-ce-que> about quelconque( ou TOUS) de la autre témoin?
> I am inclined to go with the >majority (who saw closely pursuing vehicles) and focus suspicion on >Mohammed and Souad who - alone - say they did not.
>Je am inclina pour alla avec la> majorité( qui vit closely poursuis véhicule) et focus soupçons sur> Mohammed et Souad qui - alone - dirent celles faire non.
>> >>If he were deliberately lying and saw the three vehicles >>abreast, > > He says he saw them one behind the other - until the bike overtook the >Mercedes.
>> >>Si celui were deliberately gis et vit la 3 véhicule>> abreast, > > celui dirent celui vit eux 1 behind la autre - jusq la bike distanca la> Mercedes.
> Then the bike and the Mercedes were "abreast", but the white >car - so he implies - had already overtaken him by then!
>Alors la bike et la Mercedes were" abreast", mais la blanc> auto - ainsi celui implies - a déja distanca lui par alors!
> But why should >you suspect this to be a lie?
>Mais pourquoi doit> te soupçonnai ce pour be comme gis?
> I think you, we, need to be very careful about exactly what instant is being described as being related to any single comment.
>Je pensa te, nous, besoin pour be très careful about exactly qu'est-ce-que instant is being décrire comme being raconté pour quelconque seul commentaire.
>> >> the photo flashes, the motorcycle accelerate, >>the car on the right bump the Merc into the central >>pilars, > >You want to hypothesize that the bike-overtake/flash occurred BEFORE the >sliding collision?
>> >>La photo flash, la motorcycle accéléra, >> la auto sur la droit bump la Merc into la centrale>> pilars, > > te indigence pour hypothesize cela la bike-overtake/ flash occurred AVANT la> sliding collision?
> What on earth for?
>Qu'est-ce-que sur earth pour?
> Well, if the supposition is as two photographing vehicles taking a photograph from both sides at the same instant .
>Meilleur, si la supposition is comme 2 photographing véhicule prenant comme photo dès both côté chez la meme instant.
> .
>
> .
>
> .
>
> There may also have been two contacts between the two vehicles?
>Delà mai et a been 2 contact entre la 2 véhicule?
>The mirror thing may not have been considered significant.
>La miroir chose mai non a been considera signifiant.
> The mirror would not have broken out the tail light.
>La miroir would non a brisa out la queue alluma.
> So if the tail light was broken would not one suspect a corresponding dent on the Merc's right front fender?
>Ainsi si la queue alluma was brisa would non 1 soupçonnai comme correspond dent sur la Merc's droit devant fender?
>> In reading this over I can not understand quickly the actions to cover up circumstances by police, courts, etc. unless Diana bite off and swallowed the tip of Dodi's penis from the force of the crash.
>>Aux lecture ce dessus je peut non comprenez quickly la action pour couverture up circonstance par police, tribunal, etc. unless Diana mord off et avala la pourboire de Dodi's penis dès la force de la fracas.
> If some such had happened then that could explain a lot of things, But it would also demonstrate that there was no fear in the back seat at the time of crash which would be important to suggest that there was no demonstrated disagreement with Henri Paul's driving performance prior to the crash.
>Si quelque tel a advenir alors cela peut expliqua comme lot de chose, mais ca would et démontra cela delà was aucun peur aux la back siège chez la fois de fracas laquel would be important pour suggérai cela delà was aucun démontra disagreement avec Henri Paul's entraine performance prior pour la fracas.
> >> that the first photoflashing motorcycle sped off >>past him and out of the tunnel as well as the vehicle that >>had bumped the Merc.
>>>Cela la 1 photoflashing motorcycle sped off>> passé lui et out of la tunnel as well as la véhicule cela>> a bumped la Merc.
> and then reported that in essence >>a followup motorcycle stopped to view into the Merc >>and it then resumed to exit the tunnel, etc. >> >You mean Levistre is concealing the existence of a second motorcycle?
>Et alors rapporta cela aux essence>> comme followup motorcycle arrêta pour vue into la Merc>> et ca alors reprenant pour exit la tunnel, etc. >> > te moyens Levistre is cacha la existence de comme 2 motorcycle?
>>True, Thierry H.
>>Vrai, Thierry H.
> says he saw "several" motorcycles pursuing the >Mercedes, closely, towards the tunnel (he had a view along the cour >Albert Premier from the carriageway itself) but Clifford G.
>Dirent celui vit" plusieurs" motorcycles poursuis la> Mercedes, closely, towards la tunnel( celui a comme vue along la cour> Albert Premier dès la carriageway itself) mais Clifford G.
> and Olivier >P (who were positioned to the right [north] of the road and could see no >more than the tunnel-entrance) report only " a car in front of the >Mercedes and a [one!
>Et Olivier> P( qui were positionne pour la droit[ nord] de la chemin et peut vit aucun> plus than la tunnel-entrance) compte-rendu qu'à" comme auto in front of la> Mercedes et comme[ 1!
>] powerful motor-cycle, 30 - 40 metres behind.
>]Puissant motor-cycle, 30 - 40 metres behind.
> I think it was Brian Anderson's story that a motorcycle moved to pass the Merc on its left as it entered the tunnel, which would be exact in accord with my one theory.
>Je pensa ca was Brian Anderson's conte cela comme motorcycle meut pour passe la Merc sur sa sort comme ca entra la tunnel, laquel would be exact aux accord avec ma 1 théorie.
>> >Why should we not assume that the other bikes left the cour Albert >Premier, at the exit slip-road, leaving the pair on the bike, which >Clifford, Olivier and Levistre saw, to proceed into the tunnel for the >kill!?
>> >Pourquoi doit nous non assuma cela la autre bikes sort la cour Albert> Premier, chez la exit slip-road, sort la paire sur la bike, laquel> Clifford, Olivier et Levistre vit, pour procéda into la tunnel pour la> tua!?
> I don't think that the word "kill" is at all proper in a larger view.
>Je faire non pensa cela la mot" tua" is chez tous convenable aux comme larger vue.
>"Photo" would I suggest be a more prevalent term for that point.
>"Photo" would je suggérai be comme plus prevalent terme pour cela point.
>> >>I would like to see the animation sequences down to the 1 meter >>resolution.
>> >>Je would like pour vit la animation enchaînement down pour la 1 mêtre>> resolution.
> I think the main constant that we can use is the >>physical distance on the road as being traversed by the Merc.
>Je pensa la main constante cela nous peut usage is la>> physique distance sur la chemin comme being traversed par la Merc.
> >>So the animation reference frames could be identified by reference >>to the tunnel face as metres + "plus" or - "minus" the tunnel face.
>>>Ainsi la animation postes ossature peut be identifia par postes>> pour la tunnel visage comme metres+ " plus" ou -" minus" la tunnel visage.
>>>> >We would all (those of us who really wish to have it explained in >detail, that is) like to see sophisticated event-reconstruction >techniques brought to bear, together with an account of exactly what >data was employed and how it was used.
>>>> >Nous would tous( ceux de us qui réellement souhait pour a ca expliqua aux> détail, cela is) like pour vit raffiné event-reconstruction> technique brought pour naissant, together avec an compte de exactly qu'est-ce-que> data was emploie et comment ca was utilisé.
> Fat chance of that, however - >unless you happen to have an event-reconstruction team on hand and you >can afford to cock a snoot at the politico-media complex.
>Fat chance de cela, toutefois -> unless te advenir pour a an event-reconstruction équipe sur main et te> peut afford pour coq comme snoot chez la politico-media complexe.
> There is the traffic accident reconstruction site off my web page.
>Delà is la circulation accident reconstruction endroit off ma web page.
> I saw reference to the most professional software photosho or paint shop of something like that.
>Je vit postes pour la most professionnel logiciel photosho ou peignant magasin de something like cela.
> I got a copy off the web.
>Je got comme copie off la web.
> One of these years I will move to do my accident and if at the same time I did a second of the Diana crash not much for starters.
>1 de celles-ci an je volonté meut pour faire ma accident et si chez la meme fois je faire comme 2 de la Diana fracas non beaucoup pour démarreur.
> > >>>Note that there is no vehicle present, in Levistre's story, which could >>>be the car of the witnesses Souad M.
>> >>>Annotation cela delà is aucun véhicule présenta, aux Levistre's conte, laquel peut>>> be la auto de la témoin Souad M.
> and Mohammed M.
>Et Mohammed M.
> If we believe >>>Levistre, they weren't there!
>Si nous croie>>> Levistre, celles weren't non delà!
> On the other hand, if we believe THEM, >>>the Mercedes crashed without any help from anyone - a very convenient >>>version of events, for the authorities, and completely contrary to the >>>testimony of ALL the other witnesses.
>Sur la autre main, si nous croie EUX, >>> la Mercedes crashed sans quelconque aida dès anyone - comme très commode>>> version de événement, pour la autorité, et complètement contraire pour la>>> testimony de TOUS la autre témoin.
>>> I am not suggesting that consideration should be limited to only one hypothetically possible series of events.
>>>Je am non suggérai cela considération doit be circonscrire pour qu'à 1 hypothetically possible series de événement.
> It appears to me that there are apparently conflicting reports of circumstances.
>Ca apparaissant pour me cela delà are apparemment conflicting compte-rendu de circonstance.
> Therefore I suggest several parallel hypothetical story lines.
>Donc je suggérai plusieurs parallèle hypothetical conte ligne.
> That calls to mind something that I think Senator Sam Ervin said during the course of the Watergate hearings on Nixon's impeachment.
>Cela appel pour mind something cela je pensa sénateur Sam Ervin dirent durant la cours de la Watergate ouie sur Nixon's impeachment.
> The in the four gospels there are accounts of what was reported to have been written by Pilate on the sign to be placed over Jesus Christ's head on the cross.
>La aux la 4 gospels delà are compte de qu'est-ce-que was rapporta pour a been écrire par Pilate sur la signe pour be place dessus Jesus Christ's tête sur la croix.
> Senator Sam said that if individuals whose testimoney we so reverence from the written testimony could be so reported as divergent then we need not be dismayed that good people of our own day may be reported as to not have agreed perfectly.
>Sénateur Sam dirent cela si individu duquel testimoney nous ainsi révérence dès la écrire testimony peut be ainsi rapporta comme divergent alors nous besoin non be atterra cela bon gens de nos own jour mai be rapporta comme pour non a accorda perfectly.
> >>Hummnn >>> >>>The sequence of events, as Levistre recounts it, is very interesting, >>>because he seems to be saying that the "white car" stayed ahead of the >>>Mercedes and the motor-bike.
>>>Hummnn>>> >>> la enchaînement de événement, comme Levistre recounts ca, is très intéressa, >>> because celui parais pour be dirent cela la" blanc auto" stayed au-devant de la>>> Mercedes et la motor-bike.
> I would think "ahead" of the Merc would be correct but not that the white car stayed ahead of the bike.
>Je would pensa" au-devant" de la Merc would be corrige mais non cela la blanc auto stayed au-devant de la bike.
> Explaination given above.
>Explaination donna au-dessus.
>>> >>Well, in my SH one possibility that I want to consider is that both >>the white car on the Merc's right hand side and the motorcycle on >>the Merc's left hand side came to a synchronized position along side >>the Merc such as to be able to take symultaneous flash photographs >>into the Merc from both sides at the same time.
>>> >>Meilleur, aux ma SH 1 possibilité cela je indigence pour considera is cela both>> la blanc auto sur la Merc's droit main côté et la motorcycle sur>> la Merc's sort main côté venant pour comme synchronized position along côté>> la Merc tel comme pour be able pour prenant symultaneous flash photo>> into la Merc dès both côté chez la meme fois.
> If one is in a very >>heavy law suit one needs at least TWO corroberating withnesses.
>Si 1 is aux comme très>> lourd loi procés 1 besoin chez moins 2 corroberating withnesses.
> And a big pile of paps only seconds behind would be very important also.
>Et comme grand pilotis de paps qu'à seconds behind would be très important et.
> If somebody hinted at the presence of a blackmail photo they could be assassinated in short order before they could ever get close to a court of law, and I heard a song the other day called "Smuggler's Blues" done in the Eighties by Glenn Frey has some good words.
>Si somebody hinted chez la présence de comme chantage photo celles peut be assassinated aux short ordre avant celles peut ever get ferma pour comme tribunal de loi, et je entend comme chant la autre jour appela" contrebandier Blues" faire aux la Eighties par Glenn Frey a quelque bon mot.
>>> >This seems to me to be fanciful in the extreme.
>>> >Ce parais pour me pour be fanciful aux la extrême.
> On what grounds do you >suggest it?
>Sur qu'est-ce-que grounds faire te> suggérai ca?
>> >>The same scene photographed by two separate photographers at >>exactly the same instant would be IDEAL.
>> >>La meme scene photographed par 2 sépara photographe chez>> exactly la meme instant would be IDÉAL.
>>> >"Ideal" for what?
>>> >"Idéal" pour qu'est-ce-que?
> Come on Al!
>Venant sur Al!
> What are these simultaneous, two-angle >flash-photos supposed to be for?
>Qu'est-ce-que are celles-ci simultané, two-angle> flash-photos supposa pour be pour?
> Okay - you've said before that you >think they would have been compromising photos, and that MAF set up the >car-switch and the pursuit in order to obtain them.
>Okay - te a dirent avant cela te> pensa celles would a been compromet photos, et cela MAF set up la> car-switch et la poursuite aux ordre pour obtenant eux.
> This is an >interesting idea, because, although it seems most likely to me that MAF >DID make these arrangements, I cannot decide precisely what it was that >he thought was going to happen.
>Ce is an> intéressa idée, because, quoique ca parais most likely pour me cela MAF> FAIRE faite celles-ci aménagement, je peut non décida précisément qu'est-ce-que ca was cela> celui pensa was going to advenir.
> A compromising photograph.
>Comme compromet photo.
> Exactly in line with MAF's general opinion of John.
>Exactly aux ligne avec MAF's général opinion de John.
> Q.
>Q.
> Public, Di, etc. > >Let us say that Diana and Dodi were not sleeping together, she was not >pregnant by him and they were not going to get engaged - or some >combination of these negatives - such that, in order to (what?
>Public, Di, etc. > > laissa us dirent cela Diana et Dodi were non dormant together, celle was non> enceinte par lui et celles were non going to get accrocha - ou quelque> combinaison de celles-ci negatives - tel cela, aux ordre pour( qu'est-ce-que?
>) gain >influence over Diana or disgrace her or force her to marry Dodi?
>)gain> influence dessus Diana ou disgrace elle ou force elle pour maria Dodi?
> - the >Al-Fayeds conceived the scheme I would guess that conception of the scheme would have happened far away from MAF.
>- la> Al-Fayeds concevant la schéma je would devina cela conception de la schéma would a advenir loin away dès MAF.
> If a group were looking for someone to set up some such scheme MAF might have been found to have been a good candidate to approach for the leading role but the script had been written long before and they just needed some one to play the part.
>Si comme groupe were looking for someone pour set up quelque tel schéma MAF might a been trouva pour a been comme bon candidat pour rapprochement pour la mener rôle mais la manuscrit a been écrire longtemps avant et celles just nécessita quelque 1 pour joua la partie.
> >of obtaining compromising photographs.
>>De obtenant compromet photo.
> A >clever ruse is employed to get rid of some of the escort (but why not >all?
>Comme> clever ruse is emploie pour get rid de quelque de la escorte( mais pourquoi non> tous?
>) THE COMPROMISING photo to be used for blackmail to influence Diana not to take a strong public stand on some particular issue from time to time would have been financed by an external consortium, QEII, Chas, Military landmine sales proponents, etc. In order to be of use at selected times the photo could not be public.
>)LA COMPROMET photo pour be utilisé pour chantage pour influence Diana non pour prenant comme fort public stand sur quelque particulier émission dès fois pour fois would a been finance par an externe consortium, QEII, Chas, militaire landmine vente proponents, etc. aux ordre pour be de usage chez sélectionna fois la photo peut non be public.
> If that happened it would have been a one time shot when ever it fell into public hands.
>Si cela advenir ca would a been comme 1 fois tira lorsque ever ca choir into public main.
> To be worth the expense and effort it had to be kept secret but its circumstance had to be indisputable else any single person threatening exposure of some such would be under extremely high surveillance in moments.
>Pour be worth la expense et effort ca a pour be garda secret mais sa circonstance a pour be indiscutable else quelconque seul personne menace exposure de quelque tel would be au-dessous extremely haut surveillance aux moment.
> > the remaining escort follows from the Hotel, against orders, thus >giving the impression that they are up to no good.
>>La resta escorte ensuit dès la hotel, contre commanda, thus> donna la impression cela celles are up pour aucun bon.
> Henri has been >briefed to flee them - he flees.
>Henri a been> brève pour flee eux - celui flees.
> An ambush of pursuers has been arranged >on the cour la Reine - to keep Henri in flight and to give Dodi an >excuse for grabbing Diana (as though protectively) I can't imagine anything but a photograph of a blowjob.
>An embuscade de pursuers a been agence> sur la cour la Reine - pour garda Henri aux essor et pour donna Dodi an> excuse pour grabbing Diana( comme quoique protectively) je peut non imagina anything mais comme photo de comme blowjob.
> Sex is no big thing nowadays.
>Sexe is aucun grand chose nowadays.
> In royal family tradition, the past, it may have been able to throw a little influence at an intense moment of public conflict.
>Aux royal famille tradition, la passé, ca mai a peut jeta comme moins influence chez an intense moment de public conflit.
> There is so much detailed sex on the web that I wouldn't doubt that to find a microscopic photo of a pubic hair would take more than a few minutes.
>Delà is ainsi beaucoup détaillé sexe sur la web cela je wouldn't non doute cela pour trouva comme microscopique photo de comme pubic cheveu would prenant plus than comme few minute.
> So if any eyebrows were going to be raised maybe a court threatening a loss of Di's finances for breach of contract re: approximately non modest public behavior.
>Ainsi si quelconque eyebrows were going to be arbora maybe comme tribunal menace comme déchet de Di's finance pour breach de contrat re: approximately non modeste public comportement.
> So if Di was very cognizant of contract provisions regarding public behavior as a determinant of her divorce settlement then she would have to have exercised the utmost discression.
>Ainsi si Di was très cognizant de contrat provisions regarding public comportement comme comme déterminant de elle divorce settlement alors celle would a pour a exerce la utmost discression.
> But if she was going to find any male support outside of her ex's she would have to at some point show some affection.
>Mais si celle was going to trouva quelconque male appui dehors de elle ex celle would a pour chez quelque point dénota quelque affection.
> Now where could one find any more hope of privacy than in the tunnel of love in a speeding limosine?
>Présent là peut 1 trouva quelconque plus espoir de privacy than aux la tunnel de amour aux comme speeding limosine?
> But to be effective for black mail the photo would have to appear as immodest public behavior.
>Mais pour be effectif pour noir courrier la photo would a pour apparaissant comme immodeste public comportement.
> I said PUBLIC.
>Je dirent PUBLIC.
> So on the one hand Diana would have shyed away from any PUBLIC behavior but people interested in obtaining a photo for blackmail would have to make the circumstances of the photo look as public as possible.
>Ainsi sur la 1 main Diana would a shyed away dès quelconque PUBLIC comportement mais gens intéressa aux obtenant comme photo pour chantage would a pour faite la circonstance de la photo regarda comme public comme possible.
> TWO photo's from TWO different photographers and surrounding photos from another hundred photographers could be made to look like PUBLIC IMMODESTY while the circumstance of the back seat of a speeding limosine in the tunnel in the middle of the night is about as close to "private" behavior as I can imagine anyone could get on short notice.
>2 photo's dès 2 différent photographe et entoura photos dès another 100 photographe peut be faite pour regarda like PUBLIC IMMODESTY while la circonstance de la back siège de comme speeding limosine aux la tunnel aux la moyen de la nuit is about comme ferma pour" privé" comportement comme je peut imagina anyone peut get sur short avis.
> >- a car is stationed >at the tunnel-entrance to stop the Mercedes (a very risky proceeding, >from a father's point of view, don't you think?
>>- comme auto is stationed> chez la tunnel-entrance pour arrêt la Mercedes( comme très aléatoire procéda, > dès comme pere point de vue, faire non te pensa?
>) the Mercedes is slowed, >the pursuers catch up, the photographs are taken.
>)La Mercedes is décéléra, > la pursuers attrapa up, la photo are prenant.
>> >Photographs of what?
>> >Photo de qu'est-ce-que?
> Diana giving Dodi a blow job.
>Diana donna Dodi comme souffla job.
> What else could even raise an eyebrowe nowadays?
>Qu'est-ce-que else peut soir hausse an eyebrowe nowadays?
> Hell, if you had to sell such a photograph to get a MacDonald's hamburger you would have a lot of competition in the current market.
>Enfer, si te a pour brada tel comme photo pour get comme MacDonald's hamburger te would a comme lot de concours aux la courant marché.
> > A terrified Diana in Dodi's arms?
>>Comme terrifié Diana aux Dodi's bras?
> Diana being >raped by Dodi?
>Diana being> raped par Dodi?
> - is that what you're working up to saying?
>- is cela qu'est-ce-que te you're travailla up pour dirent?
> My dear chap!
>Ma cher chap!
> Who is going to conspire, and pay big money, for something like that?
>Qui is going to conspira, et paya grand argent, pour something like cela?
>Nobody.
>Personne.
> >Diana crouched down on the floor behind Henri's seat, and Dodi remained >upright - probably viewing the pursuit with anxiety - possibly grappling >with TRJ to prevent him interfering with the driving.
>>Diana crouched down sur la plancher behind Henri's siège, et Dodi resta> debout - vraisemblablement viewing la poursuite avec anxiété - possiblement grappling> avec TRJ pour empêcha lui interfering avec la entraine.
> What sign is >there - apart from the fact that neither Diana nor Dodi were wearing >seat-belts - that Dodi was attempting to grapple with Diana?
>Qu'est-ce-que signe is> delà - apart dès la factum cela ni Diana nor Dodi were wearing> seat-belts - cela Dodi was attenta pour grapple avec Diana?
>> >Again, I say, "photographs of what?
>> >Encore, je dirent, " photo de qu'est-ce-que?
>" - precisely - and what were they >for?
>"- précisément - et qu'est-ce-que were celles> pour?
> - according to your theory.
>- according to ta théorie.
> A picture of a blow job - for blackmail.
>Comme picture de comme souffla job - pour chantage.
>> >Why could these photographs not have been taken with spy-cameras at one >of the Fayed residences Because such a photo would possibly be identified as an invasion of privacy.
>> >Pourquoi peut celles-ci photo non a been prenant avec spy-cameras chez 1> de la Fayed résidence Because tel comme photo would possiblement be identifia comme an invasion de privacy.
> It had to look like PUBLIC Immodest Behavior to cause a diminution of Diana's influence in the public media.
>Ca a pour regarda like PUBLIC immodeste comportement pour cause comme diminution de Diana's influence aux la public media.
> >at which Diana stayed?
>>Chez laquel Diana stayed?
> How could it have been >hoped that photographs of an especially compromising nature could have >been obtained at high speed in the Alma Tunnel, rather than on the >Jonikal, at the Ritz or at the rue Arsene?
>Comment peut ca a been> hoped cela photo de an nottamment compromet nature peut a> been obtenant chez haut vitesse aux la Alma tunnel, plutôt than sur la> Jonikal, chez la Ritz ou chez la rue Arsene?
> What on earth is the point?
>Qu'est-ce-que sur earth is la point?
> Would behavior on the yatch or at the Ritz be considered public or private by Diana.
>Would comportement sur la yatch ou chez la Ritz be considera public ou privé par Diana.
> My guess is that Diana would have considered it PUBLIC.
>Ma devina is cela Diana would a considera ca PUBLIC.
>> >One glimmer of a suggestion of a possibility does occur to me, as a >result of examining this idea, however.
>> >1 glimmer de comme suggestion de comme possibilité faire occur pour me, comme comme> résultat de examina ce idée, toutefois.
> What if Dodi was having >difficulty getting physical with Diana?
>Qu'est-ce-que si Dodi was a> difficulté getting physique avec Diana?
> Did Dad devise an elaborate >ruse to throw them together?
>Faire Dad devise an elaborate> ruse pour jeta eux together?
> Or rather, was he advised to do so by >those who wanted Diana dead NOT DEAD.
>Ou plutôt, was celui avisa pour faire ainsi par> ceux qui veulent Diana mort NON MORT.
> There is a whole hell of a lot of difference in wanting some one to have less public influence in the public media than in wanting someone to be dead.
>Delà is comme whole enfer de comme lot de différence aux veulent quelque 1 pour a moins public influence aux la public media than aux veulent someone pour be mort.
> >- so that he would implement the scheme >without knowing what it was really for?
>>- so that celui would implement la schéma> sans connais qu'est-ce-que ca was réellement pour?
> Quite simple.
>Quite simples.
> A compromising photograph.
>Comme compromet photo.
> >Something of the sort must have >happened, I think - and it's not so incredible if you consider that >MAF's masters may have been pretending to attempt to pull off a Fayed- >Spencer match (with big bucks in it for MAF) for some time - so that >the Machiavellian complexity of engineering the car-switch, the >disposition of the escort, the arrangements for the route and the >programming of Henri Paul, might not have aroused MAF's suspicions.
>>Something de la tri must a> advenir, je pensa - et ca it's non ainsi incroyable si te considera cela> MAF's maitre mai a been feignant pour attenta pour pull off comme Fayed-> Spencer alllumette( avec grand bucks aux ca pour MAF) pour quelque fois - so that> la Machiavellian complexité de engineering la car-switch, la> disposition de la escorte, la aménagement pour la parcours et la> programmation de Henri Paul, might non a aroused MAF's soupçons.
> A photograph would be the most logical thing in the whole world.
>Comme photo would be la most logique chose aux la whole monde.
>No body would be suspicious of anything.
>Aucun corps would be soupçonneuse de anything.
>> >Other factors, such as sabotaging the S-280's brakes and air-bags, >briefing the escort to monitor the crash but not get involved, etc, >could have been achieved by MAF's backers, over MAF's head, The theft and modification of the vehicle could have been well disguised.
>> >Autre facteur, tel comme sabotaging la S-280's frein et air-bags, > brève la escorte pour moniteurs la fracas mais non get concerné, etc, > peut a been acheva par MAF's backers, dessus MAF's tête, la vol et modification de la véhicule peut a been meilleur déguisa.
> >such that >Siegel and Musa (Etoile Limousines) and Wingfield and Dournot were not >only working for MAF, but for his masters, DIRECTLY.
>>Tel cela> Siegel et Musa( Etoile Limousines) et Wingfield et Dournot were non> qu'à travailla pour MAF, mais pour ses maitre, DIRECTLY.
> However, if that were part of the plot, then PLANS TO GET THAT VEHICLE TO THAT PLACE IN TIME WOULD HAVE TO HAVE BEEN ROCK SOLID FOR MONTHS IN ADVANCE.
>Toutefois, si cela were partie de la complot, alors PLAN POUR GET CELA VÉHICULE POUR CELA LIEU AUX FOIS WOULD A POUR A BEEN ROCHER SOLIDE POUR MOIS AUX AVANCE.
> There is the clear windows in one train of thought and defective equipment as possibly another.
>Delà is la clair fenêtre aux 1 train de pensa et défectueuse équipement comme possiblement another.
>> >Indeed, assuming that MAF did not know that the fatal crash was >intended, those of MAF's employees who MUST have known that a fatal >crash was intended, MUST have been working directly for those who >intentionally engineered it.
>> >Indeed, assuma cela MAF faire non connais cela la fatal fracas was> prévues, ceux de MAF's employé qui MUST a connais cela comme fatal> fracas was prévues, MUST a been travailla directly pour ceux qui> intentionally engineered ca.
>> If a crash after the photo were planned the least people in the area who needed to know was just the driver of the white car.
>>Si comme fracas après la photo were planifia la moins gens aux la aire qui nécessita pour connais was just la chauffeur de la blanc auto.
> Second could have been the photographer on the back of the motorcycle who had to aim a shot into the driver's eyes.
>2 peut a been la photographe sur la back de la motorcycle qui a pour visons comme tira into la chauffeur oeil.
> >>>At least, he describes the "white car" >>>passing him, and disappearing westwards, before he begins to describe >>>the motor-bike overtaking the Mercedes and cutting-in in front of it.
>>>>Chez moins, celui décrire la" blanc auto" >>> passa lui, et disparais westwards, avant celui commence pour décrire>>> la motor-bike distanca la Mercedes et cutting-in in front of ca.
> >> >>So this gets the locations screwed up and out of sync.
>>> >>Ainsi ce gets la emplacement vissa up et out of sync.
>>> >>> >>> The impression given (that the "white car" was a long way ahead of the >>>Mercedes and the motorbike) is probably an illusion created by the >>>difficulty involved in describing the situation; >> >>Also, a witness in a high speed drive has their own road to watch as >>well as looking in the rear view mirror.
>>> >>> >>>La impression donna( cela la" blanc auto" was comme longtemps voie au-devant de la>>> Mercedes et la motorbike) is vraisemblablement an illusion crées par la>>> difficulté concerné aux décrire la situation; >> >> et, comme témoin aux comme haut vitesse entraine a leur own chemin pour montre comme>> meilleur comme regarda aux la rear vue miroir.
> So one might have a strobe >>light effect of only seeing a flash of an instant when they happened >>to have the opportunity to look in the mirror.
>Ainsi 1 might a comme strobe>> alluma effet de qu'à vit comme flash de an instant lorsque celles advenir>> pour a la occasion pour regarda aux la miroir.
>>> >>>but there is no >>>escaping the conclusion that the Mercedes did not completely squeeze >>>past the white car, but came alongside it, on its left, in a sliding >>>collision, >> >>My suggestion would be to consider that the Merc was the >>vehicle in the middle of the road, that the white vehicle would >>have been on its right and the motorcycle on its left, three >>abreast.
>>> >>>Mais delà is aucun>>> enfui la conclusion cela la Mercedes faire non complètement squeeze>>> passé la blanc auto, mais venant alongside ca, sur sa sort, aux comme sliding>>> collision, >> >> ma suggestion would be pour considera cela la Merc was la>> véhicule aux la moyen de la chemin, cela la blanc véhicule would>> a been sur sa droit et la motorcycle sur sa sort, 3>> abreast.
>>> >>And that point photoflashes were fired and then the white >>car accelerated >> >>>which impelled the white car forwards, towards Levistre and >>>out of harm's way; >> >>And the motorcycle accelerated >> >>>whereupon the motorbike >> >>accelerated and swerved in front of >>the Mercedes.
>>> >>Et cela point photoflashes were fired et alors la blanc>> auto accéléra>> >>> laquel impelled la blanc auto achemina, towards Levistre et>>> out of tort voie; >> >> et la motorcycle accéléra>> >>> whereupon la motorbike>> >> accéléra et swerved in front of>> la Mercedes.
>>> >>No.
>>> >>Aucun.
> That is even wrong.
>Cela is soir wrong.
> In my SH.
>Aux ma SH.
>>> >>Let's try it another way.
>>> >>Laissa Let's essaya ca another voie.
> More to the >>"DELIBERATE BUMP OFF" conspiracy >>supposition.
>Plus pour la>>" DÉLIBÉRA BUMP OFF" conspiration>> supposition.
>>> >>In that, the motorcycle would have fired >>a series of quick flashes as it accelerated >>in front of the Mercedes.
>>> >>Aux cela, la motorcycle would a fired>> comme series de vite flash comme ca accéléra>> in front of la Mercedes.
> The first flash >>would have been into the back seat but >>a second would have been directly into >>the eyes of Henri Paul.
>La 1 flash>> would a been into la back siège mais>> comme 2 would a been directly into>> la oeil de Henri Paul.
> Having blinded >>him, it would then accelerate and as soon >>as it was clear the vehicle on the right would >>bump the Mercedes' front into the center >>pilars.
>A blinded>> lui, ca would alors accéléra et comme bientôt>> comme ca was clair la véhicule sur la droit would>> bump la Mercedes' devant into la centre>> pilars.
>>> >>>overtook the slowed Mercedes >>>and (also according to Levistre) cut-in in front of it and produced "a >>>searing burst of light, much brighter than a photo-flash".
>>> >>>Distanca la décéléra Mercedes>>> et( et according to Levistre) cut-in in front of ca et génèrent" comme>>> searing burst de alluma, beaucoup brighter than comme photo-flash".
>>>> >>>At this point, Levistre, braked and came to a halt near the western end >>>of the tunnel.
>>>> >>>Chez ce point, Levistre, freina et venant pour comme halt auprés la occidental fin>>> de la tunnel.
> >> >>More correctly, NOT "At this point" but at "A POINT" near the >>western end of the tunnel.
>>> >>Plus correctly, NON" chez ce point" mais chez" comme POINT" auprés la>> occidental fin de la tunnel.
>>> >>>The Mercedes had crashed, and the bikers (like Brenda >>>Wells, Levistre affirms that there were two of them) had stopped by the >>>wreck.
>>> >>>La Mercedes a crashed, et la bikers( like Brenda>>> puits, Levistre affirms cela delà were 2 de eux) a arrêta par la>>> épave.
> >> >>That does not sound possible to me.
>>> >>Cela faire non son possible pour me.
> It may depend upon speed.
>Ca mai dépend sur vitesse.
>>>Assuming that the whole action was taking place at some >>above average speed then if at least the bike on the left had >>accelerated ahead of the Merc it could not have stopped.
>>>Assuma cela la whole action was prenant lieu chez quelque>> au-dessus moyen vitesse alors si chez moins la bike sur la sort a>> accéléra au-devant de la Merc ca peut non a arrêta.
> If it >>did not stop then it may have passed Livestre and exited the >>tunnel.
>Si ca>> faire non arrêt alors ca mai a passa Livestre et exited la>> tunnel.
> Whether a second bike stopped might be considerable.
>Whether comme 2 bike arrêta might be estimable.
>>> >>>One of them got off, momentarily, to look into the Mercedes, >>>jumped back on again, and the bike sped off, passing Levistre as it did >>>so.
>>> >>>1 de eux got off, momentanément, pour regarda into la Mercedes, >>> sauta back sur encore, et la bike sped off, passa Levistre comme ca faire>>> ainsi.
> Levistre describes the bike as "black" and the two men as "dressed >>>in black with black helmets".
>Levistre décrire la bike comme" noir" et la 2 homme comme" habilla>>> aux noir avec noir casque".
> The whole thing took just a few seconds.
>La whole chose prenant just comme few seconds.
>>>> >>>Considerable efforts have been made to discredit Levistre.
>>>> >>>Estimable effort a been faite pour discrédit Levistre.
> It has been >>>said, for example, that his attitude to the press was "hostile" and that >>>he was trying to "gain attention"; but there could be another reason for >>>these attacks on his character - he witnessed a murder!
>Ca a been>>> dirent, pour ex, cela ses attitude pour la presse was" hostile" et cela>>> celui was essaya pour" gain attention"; mais delà peut be another raison pour>>> celles-ci attaque sur ses caractere - celui témoigna comme assassinat!
> There is no >>>other interpretation you can put on his testimony.
>Delà is aucun>>> autre interprétation te peut met sur ses testimony.
>>>> >>>Yes, indeed (to answer your question) the lanes were used as a slow-lane >>>and an overtaking lane - ludicrous speed-limit signs notwithstanding!
>>>> >>>Yes, indeed( pour répond ta question) la lanes were utilisé comme comme slow-lane>>> et an distanca lane - rigolo speed-limit signe notwithstanding!
>>>> >>>Other answers in another post >> >><a href="http://members.home.com/godsbrain">G.O.D.S.B.R.A.I.N.</a><br> > >-- >Steve Reed Alvin H.
>>>> >>>Autre répond aux another post>> >>< comme href=" http:// membre. logis. com/ godsbrain"> G. O. D. S. B. R. comme. je. N.</ comme>< br> > > --> Steve Reed Alvin H.
> White <a href="http://members.home.com/godsbrain">G.O.D.S.B.R.A.I.N.</a><br>
>Blanc< comme href=" http:// membre. logis. com/ godsbrain"> G. O. D. S. B. R. comme. je. N.</ comme>< br>
GODS...@home.com
>From GODS...@HOME.COM Wed May 03 15:40:25 2000 Path: news1.
>Ab GODSBRAIN@ HEIMAT. COM Wed mai 3 15: 40: 25 2000 pfad: news1.
>frmt1.
>frmt1.
>sfba.
>sfba.
>home.
>Heimat.
>com!
>com!
>newshub1.
>newshub1.
>home.
>Heimat.
>com!
>com!
>news.
>news.
>home.
>Heimat.
>com!
>com!
>news1.
>news1.
>frmt1.
>frmt1.
>sfba.
>sfba.
>home.
>Heimat.
>com.
>com.
>POSTED!
>AUSGEHANGEN!
>not-for-mail From: GODS...@HOME.COM Newsgroups: alt.
>not-for-mail ab: GODSBRAIN@ HEIMAT. COM Newsgroups: alt.
>conspiracy.
>Verschwörung.
>princess-diana Subject: Re: Di: Paul, Henri, History, 60 Page Autopsy, Etc. Organization: <a href="http://members.home.com/godsbrain">G.O.D.S.B.R.A.I.N.</a><br> Reply-To: GODS...@HOME.COM,GODS...@AOL.COM Message-ID: <suv0hs4b86ldf6kh1...@4ax.com> References: <20000416220330.
>princess-diana untergeworfen: Re: Di: Paul, Henri, geschichte, 60 Page leichenöffnung, usw. einrichtung: < ein href=" http:// mitglied. heimat. com/ godsbrain"> G. O. D. S. B. R. ein. ich. N.</ ein>< br> Reply-To: GODSBRAIN@ HEIMAT. COM, GODSBRAIN@ AOL. COM Message-ID: < suv0hs4b86ldf6kh11pg4usgb988mp55km@ 4ax. com> beziehung: < 20000416220330.
>18658.
>18658.
>0000...@ng-cg1.aol.com> <38fa9...@huge.aa.net> <8n1mfss0cu2ou4qhe...@4ax.com> <025220ee.
>4069@ ng-cg1. aol. com> < 38fa90de_2@ gewaltig. aa. net> < 8n1mfss0cu2ou4qhej2ujs106jhqfrbbol@ 4ax. com> < 025220ee.
>5e23...@usw-ex0104-033.remarq.com> <VHL8$AAWpz$4I...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> <03cfeca4.
>5e23de39@ usw-ex0104-033. remarq. com> < VHL8$ AAWpz$ 4IAaS@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> < 03cfeca4.
>e454...@usw-ex0105-038.remarq.com> <5AGHurAe...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> <022cd178.
>e454e6ea@ usw-ex0105-038. remarq. com> < 5AGHurAeP0A5IAT7@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> < 022cd178.
>7c06...@usw-ex0105-037.remarq.com> <0PU0NLBY...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> <2ehrgsobh76u0sheo...@4ax.com> <EwaIiIA+...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.
>7c06d2cf@ usw-ex0105-037. remarq. com> < 0PU0NLBYabD5IAaW@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> < 2ehrgsobh76u0sheo8fsoso92h16ood0pr@ 4ax. com> < EwaIiIA+ 6EE5IAXR@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> X-Newsreader: Forte agent 1.
>7/32.
>7/ 32.
>534 MIME-Version: 1.
>534 MIME-Version: 1.
>0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 683 Date: Wed, 03 May 2000 22:40:25 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.
>0 Content-Type: text/ ebene; charset= us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit leitung: 683 datum: Wed, 3 mai 2000 22: 40: 25 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.
>7.
>7.
>83.
>83.
>23 X-Complaints-To: ab...@home.net X-Trace: news1.
>23 X-Complaints-To: missbrauch@ heimat. net X-Trace: news1.
>frmt1.
>frmt1.
>sfba.
>sfba.
>home.
>Heimat.
>com 957393625 24.
>com 957393625 24.
>7.
>7.
>83.
>83.
>23 (Wed, 03 May 2000 15:40:25 PDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 03 May 2000 15:40:25 PDT Xref: newshub1.
>23( Wed, 3 mai 2000 15: 40: 25 PDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 3 mai 2000 15: 40: 25 PDT Xref: newshub1.
>home.
>Heimat.
>com alt.
>com alt.
>conspiracy.
>Verschwörung.
>princess-diana:30031204 -------- </html> OK.
>princess-diana: 30031204 --------</ html> OK.
> What do we call this?
>Was getan wir ruf das?
> The daily replay of the daily revised version of the God's Brain Suppositional Hypothesis.
>Das täglich replay von das täglich gerevidiert version von das gott gehirn Suppositional hypothese.
> Act ______ Scene ________ Having read the below a time or two, or few, some opportunity to explain weighted influence factors in the construction of the daily hypothesis.
>Tat ______ szene ________ gehabt gelesen das below ein zeit oder 2, oder wenige, einige gelegenheit bis erkläre weighted einfluss faktor auf das bau von das täglich hypothese.
> Since the authorities have had two and a half years with the manpower, peoplepower, staff power, of what was it reported?
>Seit das autorität gehabt gehabt 2 und ein hälfte jahr mit das manpower, peoplepower, stab gewalt, von was was es berichten über?
> Some 24 full time investigators and million(s) dollar equivalent budgets I am not competing with that.
>Einige 24 voll zeit investigators und 1000000( s) dollar gleichwertig budget ich am nicht gekonkurriert mit dass.
> The outcome reports of that investigation appear to be: Drunk driver speeds without the care of D+D+TRJ and abruptly turns left into a central column.
>Das outcome bericht von dass erforschung erscheine bis be: gesoffen fahrer speeds ohne das pflege von D+ D+ TRJ und abruptly drehung abfahre into ein zentrale kolonne.
> Simple Road Traffic Accident RTA.
>Einfach Road verkehr unfall RTA.
> When and over the time since the creation of alt.
>Als und über das zeit seit das schöfungen von alt.
>conspiracy.
>Verschwörung.
>princess-diana by b.
>princess-diana per b.
>anana his philosophical position as I read it is to approximately take the position for sake of arguement that Diana was killed as the result of a conspiracy.
>anana ihn philosophisch lage as ich gelesen es is bis approximately genommen das lage für sake von arguement dass Diana was erschlage as das ergebnis von ein verschwörung.
> Because it has appeared to me that while times, places, people, and motives have been discussed I have a feeling that there has been less than reasonable consideration of some possibilities.
>Because es gehabt erscheine bis mich dass indem zeit, gedeck, volk, und motiv gehabt been besprach ich gehabt ein empfand dass da gehabt been klein than vernünftig betrachtungen von einige möglichkeit.
> As a consequence of that belief I am trying to construct a suppositional hypothesis that will identify possible, persons, places, things that may be considered as possible.
>As ein folge von dass glaube ich am geprobiert bis aufbaue ein suppositional hypothese dass will geidentifiziert möglich, person, gedeck, ding dass mai be erachte as möglich.
> The intent is to create multiple fictional tracks such that the most possible/ununderstood may be considered.
>Das intent is bis erschaffe vielfach erdichtet tracks solch dass das most möglich/ ununderstood mai be erachte.
> Many of the pieces are for the most part agreed as having been in the area but there is a lot of discrepancy as to the EXACT location at a SPECIFIC INSTANT.
>Viele von das stück are für das most teil entsprach as gehabt been auf das fläche aber da is ein los von discrepancy as bis das GENAU standort at ein EINZELHEITEN MOMENTAN.
> My intent is to create this fictional supposition to give, or try to determine, the differences between points of agreement and points of disharmony.
>Mein intent is bis erschaffe das erdichtet vernehmung bis gab, oder geprobiert bis gekonstatiert, das unterschied zwischen punkt von vereinbarung und punkt von disharmony.
> Agreement/Disagreement and Harmony/Disharmony.
>Vereinbarung/ uneinigkeit und einklang/ Disharmony.
> Concord vs Discord.
>Concord vs Discord.
> If there might have been common interest to finance a joint project to lessen Diana's influence with the media because she was percieved to be "stepping on someones toes" , my words, then how might some such plan, plot, conspiracy, have been considered achievable from a variety of possible participant's points of view?
>Ob da might gehabt been gemein interesse bis finanzwesen ein falz projekt bis lessen Diana's einfluss mit das media because sie was percieved bis be" getreten an someones toes" , mein wort, dann wie might einige solch plan, komplott, verschwörung, gehabt been erachte erreichbar ab ein mannigfaltigkeit von möglich teilnehmer punkt von sehen?
> My typing fingers are not going to stand too long a discussion at this point so I am going to try to speed along.
>Mein typing finger are nicht going to gestanden auch lang ein besprechung at das punkt so ich am going to geprobiert bis speed along.
> My supposition is that if there was a conspiracy it had to be to do something.
>Mein vernehmung is dass ob da was ein verschwörung es gehabt bis be bis getan etwas.
> A photo of Diana giving Dodi a blow job in the back seat of a limo would be pretty good.
>Ein photo von Diana gab Dodi ein blase arbeiten auf das zurück sitz von ein limo would be schöner besser.
>For the photo to achieve maximum benefit it had to be secret and to be used as a threat.
>Für das photo bis erreiche maximum benefit es gehabt bis be geheimnis und bis be benutzt as ein bedrohung.
>The actual publication in mass media would deflate its power.
>Das actual publication auf messe media would deflate sein gewalt.
> But it had to have strong and undisputable evidence that it was TRUE if it were ever going to be used.
>Aber es gehabt bis gehabt stark und undisputable zeugnis dass es was WAHR ob es were ever going to be benutzt.
> For some paparazzi to "peeping tom" photo a divorcee with her boyfriend in private was not going to do the job.
>Für einige paparazzi bis" gespäht tom" photo ein geschiedene mit ihr boyfriend auf private was nicht going to getan das arbeiten.
> So the construct of a whore for money with an oily bedhopper in the back seat of a very expensive limo would be much more philosophically correct for the purpose of a conspiracy to get a photo to use for blackmail in the future but not for actual publication.
>So das aufbaue von ein hure für geld mit ein ölig bedhopper auf das zurück sitz von ein sehr teuer limo would be much mehr philosophically gekorrigiert für das vorsatz von ein verschwörung bis gekriegt ein photo bis gebrauch für erpressung auf das künftig aber nicht für actual publication.
> On Wed, 3 May 2000 17:07:26 +0100, Steve Reed <asr...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> wrote: >Path: news1.
>An Wed, 3 mai 2000 17: 7: 26+ 100, Steve Reed< asreed@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> geschrieben: > pfad: news1.
>frmt1.
>frmt1.
>sfba.
>sfba.
>home.
>Heimat.
>com!
>com!
>newshub2.
>newshub2.
>rdc1.
>rdc1.
>sfba.
>sfba.
>home.
>Heimat.
>com!
>com!
>newshub1.
>newshub1.
>home.
>Heimat.
>com!
>com!
>news.
>news.
>home.
>Heimat.
>com!
>com!
>feeder.
>feeder.
>via.
>via.
>net!
>net!
>diablo.
>diablo.
>theplanet.
>theplanet.
>net!
>net!
>news.
>news.
>theplanet.
>theplanet.
>net!
>net!
>newspost.
>newspost.
>theplanet.
>theplanet.
>net!
>net!
>lastings.
>lastings.
>softnet.
>softnet.
>co.
>co.
>uk!
>uk!
>asreed >From: Steve Reed <asr...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> >Newsgroups: alt.
>asreed> ab: Steve Reed< asreed@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> > Newsgroups: alt.
>conspiracy.
>Verschwörung.
>princess-diana >Subject: Re: Di: Paul, Henri, History, 60 Page Autopsy, Etc. >Date: Wed, 3 May 2000 17:07:26 +0100 >Organization: Home >Lines: 297 >Message-ID: <EwaIiIA+...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> >References: <20000416201432.
>princess-diana> untergeworfen: Re: Di: Paul, Henri, geschichte, 60 Page leichenöffnung, usw. > datum: Wed, 3 mai 2000 17: 7: 26+ 100> einrichtung: heimat> leitung: 297> Message-ID: < EwaIiIA+ 6EE5IAXR@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> > beziehung: < 20000416201432.
>18648.
>18648.
>0000...@ng-cg1.aol.com> > <20000416220330.
>4517@ ng-cg1. aol. com> > < 20000416220330.
>18658.
>18658.
>0000...@ng-cg1.aol.com> <38fa9...@huge.aa.net> > <8n1mfss0cu2ou4qhe...@4ax.com> > <025220ee.
>4069@ ng-cg1. aol. com> < 38fa90de_2@ gewaltig. aa. net> > < 8n1mfss0cu2ou4qhej2ujs106jhqfrbbol@ 4ax. com> > < 025220ee.
>5e23...@usw-ex0104-033.remarq.com> > <VHL8$AAWpz$4I...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> > <03cfeca4.
>5e23de39@ usw-ex0104-033. remarq. com> > < VHL8$ AAWpz$ 4IAaS@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> > < 03cfeca4.
>e454...@usw-ex0105-038.remarq.com> > <5AGHurAe...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> > <022cd178.
>e454e6ea@ usw-ex0105-038. remarq. com> > < 5AGHurAeP0A5IAT7@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> > < 022cd178.
>7c06...@usw-ex0105-037.remarq.com> > <0PU0NLBY...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> > <2ehrgsobh76u0sheo...@4ax.com> >Reply-To: Andrew Steven Reed <ar...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> >NNTP-Posting-Host: modem88.
>7c06d2cf@ usw-ex0105-037. remarq. com> > < 0PU0NLBYabD5IAaW@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> > < 2ehrgsobh76u0sheo8fsoso92h16ood0pr@ 4ax. com> > Reply-To: Andrew Steven Reed< areed@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> > NNTP-Posting-Host: modem88.
>fred.
>fred.
>pol.
>pol.
>co.
>co.
>uk >Mime-Version: 1.
>uk> Mime-Version: 1.
>0 >X-Trace: newsreaderg1.
>0> X-Trace: newsreaderg1.
>core.
>core.
>theplanet.
>theplanet.
>net 957376918 19338 195.
>net 957376918 19338 195.
>92.
>92.
>7.
>7.
>216 (3 May 2000 18:01:58 GMT) >NNTP-Posting-Date: 3 May 2000 18:01:58 GMT >X-Complaints-To: ab...@theplanet.net >X-Newsreader: Turnpike Integrated Version 4.
>216( 3 mai 2000 18: 1: 58 GMT) > NNTP-Posting-Date: 3 mai 2000 18: 1: 58 GMT> X-Complaints-To: missbrauch@ theplanet. net> X-Newsreader: schnellstrasse eingegliedert Version 4.
>02 M <TWkHBtca5wWBvmfWwoLIWQkgFM> >Xref: newshub1.
>2 M< TWkHBtca5wWBvmfWwoLIWQkgFM> > Xref: newshub1.
>home.
>Heimat.
>com alt.
>com alt.
>conspiracy.
>Verschwörung.
>princess-diana:30031199 > >In article <2ehrgsobh76u0sheo...@4ax.com>, >GODS...@HOME.COM writes >>>there was "a white car", >>>in the middle of the road, behind him.
>princess-diana: 30031199> > auf artikel< 2ehrgsobh76u0sheo8fsoso92h16ood0pr@ 4ax. com>, > GODSBRAIN@ HEIMAT. COM geschrieben>>> da was" ein weiss auto", >>> auf das mittler von das road, hinter er.
> >> >>So Livestre lied.
>>> >>So Livestre gelegen.
> The white car was not in the middle >>of the road, the Mercedes was in the middle of the >>road.
>Das weiss auto was nicht auf das mittler>> von das road, das Mercedes was auf das mittler von das>> road.
> Why did Livestre lie?
>Warum getan Livestre gelegen?
> Maybe Livestre did not lie in that particular.
>Maybe Livestre getan nicht gelegen auf dass particular.
> One needs to be very careful as to "at what instant" and did he say the middle of the road or the middle of the lane?
>1 not bis be sehr sorgfaltig as bis" at was momentan" und getan er gesagt das mittler von das road oder das mittler von das lane?
> It was said that he had moved into the right lane.
>Es was gesagt dass er gehabt gerückt into das recht lane.
> If he said the white car was in the middle of the [right] lane I would agree.
>Ob er gesagt das weiss auto was auf das mittler von das[ recht] lane ich would entsprach.
>> >Levistre is not contradicting himself.
>> >Levistre is nicht widergesprochen himself.
> He saw the white car "au milieu >de la chaussee" So, does "chaussee" come closer to translating as "lane" or on the other hand, "road?
>Er gesehen das weiss auto" au milieu> de la chaussee" So, getan" chaussee" ausgekommen closer bis übergesetzt as" lane" oder an das ander hand, " road?
>" Road having two lanes.
>"Road gehabt 2 lanes.
> >and was overtaken by it ("elle me double") But exactly where were the other actors at the exact instant that "elle me double?
>>Und was overtaken per es(" elle mich doppelt") aber exactly wo were das ander schauspieler at das genau momentan dass" elle mich doppelt?
>" >"Then", he >says ("puis j'observe [retroviseur] une autre auto toujours au milieu de >la route") "I saw [rear-view mirror] another car, also in the middle of >the road" So here we have a "milieu de la route.
>" >"Dann", er> gesagt(" puis j'observe[ retroviseur] une autre auto toujours au milieu de> la route") " ich gesehen[ rear-view spiegel] anderer auto, und auf das mittler von> das road" So hier wir gehabt ein" milieu de la route.
>" Does that mean closer the lane or the road?
>"Getan dass mittel closer das lane oder das road?
> >("et soudain une grosse moto sur sa gauche qui lui fait une >queue de poisson") "and, all of a sudden, a large motor-bike, to the >left of it, cutting-in in front of it".
>>("et soudain une grosse moto sur sa gauche qui lui fait une> queue de poisson") " und, all von ein plötzlich, ein gross motor-bike, bis das> abfahre von es, cutting-in in front of es".
> I will take it that AT SOME POINT a large motor-bike, comming from the left of it, and then cutting-in in front of it.
>Ich will genommen es dass AT EINIGE PUNKT ein gross motor-bike, comming ab das abfahre von es, und dann cutting-in in front of es.
> > >(another ambiguity is created by the expression "sur sa gauche", which >could be translated "to ITS left" [to the right of it, from where >Levistre says he was] or "to the left of it" [as seen from Levistre's >alleged position] and, since Levistre claims that the Mercedes "was in >the middle of the road" at that point, it could be either) Since I am trying to construct a hypothetical scene where the Merc was astraddle the white line that separated the two west bound lanes and a photographing motorcycle was to the left side of the Merc at the exact instant that the white car was on the right side.
>> >(Anderer zweideutigkeit is erschaffe per das expression" sur sa gauche", welche> gekonnt be übergesetzt" bis SEIN abfahre" [ bis das recht von es, ab wo> Levistre gesagt er was] oder" bis das abfahre von es" [ as gesehen ab Levistre's> alleged lage] und, seit Levistre claims dass das Mercedes" was auf> das mittler von das road" at dass punkt, es gekonnt be entweder) seit ich am geprobiert bis aufbaue ein hypothetisch szene wo das Merc was astraddle das weiss leitung dass geschieden das 2 westen bound lanes und ein photographing motorrad was bis das abfahre seite von das Merc at das genau momentan dass das weiss auto was an das recht seite.
> .
>
> .
>
> .
>
>> >"At the same instant, for a fraction of a second, there was a tremendous >flash of light, but nothing like the flash of a camera" ("Au meme >moment, en une fraction de seconde, un enorme eclair jaillit, mais rien >a voir avec le flash d'un appareil-photo") > >My point is that the order of events is not completely clear.
>> >"At das dasselbste momentan, für ein bruchteil von ein 2, da was ein furchtbar> flash von licht, aber nothing like das flash von ein kamera" (" Au meme> augenblick, en une bruchteil de seconde, un enorme eclair jaillit, mais rien> ein voir avec le flash d'un appareil-photo") > > mein punkt is dass das befahl von ereignis is nicht completely freigesprochen.
> It could >be that the bike cut-in in front of the Mercedes just before the white >car passed Levistre - either that, or the bike was further behind the >Mercedes, as both vehicles entered the tunnel, than Clifford, Olivier >and Thierry imply.
>Es gekonnt> be dass das bike cut-in in front of das Mercedes gerecht bevor das weiss> auto gepassiert Levistre - entweder dass, oder das bike was further hinter das> Mercedes, as beide fahrzeug betrat das tunnel, than Clifford, Olivier> und Thierry imply.
> I suppose the bike could have braked, just before the Is there any chance that one of the skid marks, like the single one, was the bike?
>Ich ob das bike gekonnt gehabt braked, gerecht bevor das Is da etwas zufall dass 1 von das skid gemarkiert, like das einzeln 1, was das bike?
> >tunnel (to avoid running into a Mercedes/white-car pile-up) and that >Levistre might not have been as far along the tunnel as he thought he >was.
>>Tunnel( bis gemieden gelaufen into ein Mercedes/ white-car pile-up) und dass> Levistre might nicht gehabt been as weit along das tunnel as er dachte er> was.
> There is another branch of my lack of understanding and that follows along a train of thought that the picture was intended but the crash was an accident.
>Da is anderer zweig von mein gemangelt von begreife und dass folge along ein zug von dachte dass das bild was beabsichtige aber das absturz was ein unfall.
> In the "accident" hypothesis approximately the motorcycle photographer could have accidently fired a half metre too far forward and instead of shooting in to the back seat he could have accidently hit HP directly in the eyes as Henri Paul looked to the left as the motorcycle came along side his side window.
>Auf das" unfall" hypothese approximately das motorrad photograph gekonnt gehabt accidently feure ein hälfte metre auch weit nachgesandt und instead of erschiesse auf bis das zurück sitz er gekonnt gehabt accidently anfahre HP directly auf das auge as Henri Paul gekiekt bis das abfahre as das motorrad ausgekommen along seite ihn seite fenster.
>Then the blinding flash could have caused HP to FLINCH and swerve to the right just a little.
>Dann das verblende flash gekonnt gehabt herbeiführe HP bis FLINCH und swerve bis das recht gerecht ein klein.
> At that point hitting the rear of the accelerating white car.
>At dass punkt anfahre das hinter von das accelerating weiss auto.
> As the white car's rear goes to the right its front goes to the left.
>As das weiss auto hinter goes to das recht sein stirn goes to das abfahre.
> To correct, the driver throws to the right and the rear goes to the left.
>Bis gekorrigiert, das fahrer geschmissen bis das recht und das hinter goes to das abfahre.
> Essentially tossing the front of the Merc into the central columns.
>Essentially tossing das stirn von das Merc into das zentrale kolonne.
> >Thus, the Mercedes hit the white car, side-to-side, and impelled it >forwards, towards Levistre, and was FOLLOWING it, as it passed >Levistre's position, and as the bike overtook the Mercedes.
>>Also, das Mercedes anfahre das weiss auto, side-to-side, und impelled es> nachgesandt, towards Levistre, und was FOLGENDEN es, as es gepassiert> Levistre's lage, und as das bike overtook das Mercedes.
> I think that the first, photographing, bike should have been ahead of the white car.
>Ich dachte dass das 1, photographing, bike darf gehabt been ahead von das weiss auto.
> If the bike and the car essentially accelerated at the same instant the bike would outrun the car.
>Ob das bike und das auto essentially accelerated at das dasselbste momentan das bike would outrun das auto.
> I think.
>Ich dachte.
> Bikes are far faster at acceleration that cars.
>Bikes are weit geschwindst at beschleunigung dass auto.
> Any disagreements?
>Etwas uneinigkeit?
>Of course, with two riders and a turbo car ...?
>Von kurs, mit 2 riders und ein turbo auto...?
> For one thing, you are supposing then that the white car was ahead of the Merc at the instant that the Merc hit the central column/pilar/post.
>Für 1 ding, dich are ob dann dass das weiss auto was ahead von das Merc at das momentan dass das Merc anfahre das zentrale kolonne/ pilar/ posten.
> That is in accord with my first guess.
>Dass is auf übereinstimmung mit mein 1 eraten.
>> >Does that clear things up?
>> >Getan dass freigesprochen ding oben?
> No.
>Kein.
> It smokes them up.
>Es rauch sie oben.
> But gives a number of possible occurances to consider.
>Aber gab ein nummer von möglich occurances bis erachte.
>>> >>>Behind that, he says, there was >>>"another car" (presumably the Mercedes S- 280) and behind that, a large >>>motor-bike.
>>> >>>Hinter dass, er gesagt, da was>>>" anderer auto" ( presumably das Mercedes S- 280) und hinter dass, ein gross>>> motor-bike.
> So my first thought on that is that that is a second bike.
>So mein 1 dachte an dass is dass dass is ein 2 bike.
> And if we are talking about the left that might be better described as a second bike on the left as there might have been one or more bikes on the right in addition.
>Und ob wir are talking about das abfahre dass might be besser beschreibe as ein 2 bike an das abfahre as da might gehabt been 1 oder mehr bikes an das recht auf beifügung.
>>> >>Livestre lies again.
>>> >>Livestre gelegen wieder.
>> >What do you mean?
>> >Was getan dich mittel?
> What evidence is there that Levistre is "lying"?
>Was zeugnis is da dass Levistre is" gelegen"?
> My supposition.
>Mein vernehmung.
>> >> He clearly saw and may have been a part >>of a conspiracy to cover up.
>> >>Er clearly gesehen und mai gehabt been ein teil>> von ein verschwörung bis abdeckung oben.
> So in my supposition he saw it >>and he lied about it.
>So auf mein vernehmung er gesehen es>> und er gelegen about es.
> Now if we go off on a train of thought to >>explore a hypothesis that Livestre was deliberately lying then >>I'll have to think about that some more.
>Jetzt ob wir gegangen off an ein zug von dachte bis>> erforsche ein hypothese dass Livestre was deliberately gelegen dann>> ich I'll gehabt bis dachte about dass einige mehr.
> I have not until the >>present considered the possibility that he was deliberately >>lying.
>Ich gehabt nicht until das>> gepräsentiert erachte das möglichkeit dass er was deliberately>> gelegen.
>>> >I have - he could be in the pay of Al-Fayed (or his high-level masters) >That's always a possibility; but why should we single him out?
>>> >Ich gehabt - er gekonnt be auf das bezahle von Al-Fayed( oder ihn high-level beherrscht) > dass That's always ein möglichkeit; aber warum darf wir einzeln er raus?
> I'm not singling him out.
>Ich I'm nicht single er raus.
> I am theorizing that there may have been a whole swarm of conspiring pap's surrounding Diana's car.
>Ich am getheoretisiert dass da mai gehabt been ein ganz schwarm von gekonspiriert pap's umgab Diana's auto.
> >What >about any (or ALL) of the other witnesses?
>>Was> about etwas( oder ALL) von das ander zeuge?
> I am inclined to go with the >majority (who saw closely pursuing vehicles) and focus suspicion on >Mohammed and Souad who - alone - say they did not.
>Ich am zugeneigt bis gegangen mit das> mehrheit( wer gesehen closely nachgejagt fahrzeug) und brennpunkt verdacht an> Mohammed und Souad wer - alone - gesagt ihnen getan nicht.
>> >>If he were deliberately lying and saw the three vehicles >>abreast, > > He says he saw them one behind the other - until the bike overtook the >Mercedes.
>> >>Ob er were deliberately gelegen und gesehen das 3 fahrzeug>> abreast, > > er gesagt er gesehen sie 1 hinter das ander - until das bike overtook das> Mercedes.
> Then the bike and the Mercedes were "abreast", but the white >car - so he implies - had already overtaken him by then!
>Dann das bike und das Mercedes were" abreast", aber das weiss> auto - so er implies - gehabt bereits overtaken er per dann!
> But why should >you suspect this to be a lie?
>Aber warum darf> dich verdachtsperson das bis be ein gelegen?
> I think you, we, need to be very careful about exactly what instant is being described as being related to any single comment.
>Ich dachte dich, wir, not bis be sehr sorgfaltig about exactly was momentan is sein beschreibe as sein zugeordnet bis etwas einzeln bemerkung.
>> >> the photo flashes, the motorcycle accelerate, >>the car on the right bump the Merc into the central >>pilars, > >You want to hypothesize that the bike-overtake/flash occurred BEFORE the >sliding collision?
>> >>Das photo flashes, das motorrad accelerate, >> das auto an das recht gerumpelt das Merc into das zentrale>> pilars, > > dich mögend bis hypothesize dass das bike-overtake/ flash ereigne BEVOR das> geschlittert zusammenstoss?
> What on earth for?
>Was an erde für?
> Well, if the supposition is as two photographing vehicles taking a photograph from both sides at the same instant .
>Brunnen, ob das vernehmung is as 2 photographing fahrzeug genommen ein photograph ab beide seite at das dasselbste momentan.
> .
>
> .
>
> .
>
> There may also have been two contacts between the two vehicles?
>Da mai und gehabt been 2 fühlung zwischen das 2 fahrzeug?
>The mirror thing may not have been considered significant.
>Das spiegel ding mai nicht gehabt been erachte bedeutsam.
> The mirror would not have broken out the tail light.
>Das spiegel would nicht gehabt brach raus das schwanz licht.
> So if the tail light was broken would not one suspect a corresponding dent on the Merc's right front fender?
>So ob das schwanz licht was brach would nicht 1 verdachtsperson ein gekorrespondiert beule an das Merc's recht stirn fender?
>> In reading this over I can not understand quickly the actions to cover up circumstances by police, courts, etc. unless Diana bite off and swallowed the tip of Dodi's penis from the force of the crash.
>>Auf lesen das über ich gekonnt nicht begreife quickly das actions bis abdeckung oben umstand per polizei, gericht, usw. unless Diana beisse off und geschluckt das trinkgeld von Dodi's penis ab das gezwungen von das absturz.
> If some such had happened then that could explain a lot of things, But it would also demonstrate that there was no fear in the back seat at the time of crash which would be important to suggest that there was no demonstrated disagreement with Henri Paul's driving performance prior to the crash.
>Ob einige solch gehabt geschah dann dass gekonnt erkläre ein los von ding, aber es would und aufgewiesen dass da was kein furcht auf das zurück sitz at das zeit von absturz welche would be wichtig bis gesuggeriert dass da was kein aufgewiesen uneinigkeit mit Henri Paul's angetrieben verrichtung prior bis das absturz.
> >> that the first photoflashing motorcycle sped off >>past him and out of the tunnel as well as the vehicle that >>had bumped the Merc.
>>>Dass das 1 photoflashing motorrad sped off>> vergangen er und out of das tunnel as well as das fahrzeug dass>> gehabt gerumpelt das Merc.
> and then reported that in essence >>a followup motorcycle stopped to view into the Merc >>and it then resumed to exit the tunnel, etc. >> >You mean Levistre is concealing the existence of a second motorcycle?
>Und dann berichten über dass auf essence>> ein followup motorrad gestoppt bis sehen into das Merc>> und es dann wiederaufgenommen bis ausgang das tunnel, usw. >> > dich mittel Levistre is gekaschiert das dasein von ein 2 motorrad?
>>True, Thierry H.
>>Wahr, Thierry H.
> says he saw "several" motorcycles pursuing the >Mercedes, closely, towards the tunnel (he had a view along the cour >Albert Premier from the carriageway itself) but Clifford G.
>Gesagt er gesehen" several" motorrad nachgejagt das> Mercedes, closely, towards das tunnel( er gehabt ein sehen along das cour> Albert premierminister ab das carriageway itself) aber Clifford G.
> and Olivier >P (who were positioned to the right [north] of the road and could see no >more than the tunnel-entrance) report only " a car in front of the >Mercedes and a [one!
>Und Olivier> P( wer were positioned bis das recht[ norden] von das road und gekonnt gesehen kein> mehr than das tunnel-entrance) bericht nur" ein auto in front of das> Mercedes und ein[ 1!
>] powerful motor-cycle, 30 - 40 metres behind.
>]powerful motor-cycle, 30 - 40 metres hinter.
> I think it was Brian Anderson's story that a motorcycle moved to pass the Merc on its left as it entered the tunnel, which would be exact in accord with my one theory.
>Ich dachte es was Brian Anderson's stockwerk dass ein motorrad gerückt bis gepassiert das Merc an sein abfahre as es betrat das tunnel, welche would be genau auf übereinstimmung mit mein 1 theorie.
>> >Why should we not assume that the other bikes left the cour Albert >Premier, at the exit slip-road, leaving the pair on the bike, which >Clifford, Olivier and Levistre saw, to proceed into the tunnel for the >kill!?
>> >Warum darf wir nicht assume dass das ander bikes abfahre das cour Albert> premierminister, at das ausgang slip-road, abfahre das paar an das bike, welche> Clifford, Olivier und Levistre gesehen, bis proceed into das tunnel für das> erschlage!?
> I don't think that the word "kill" is at all proper in a larger view.
>Ich getan nicht dachte dass das wort" erschlage" is at all angebracht auf ein gross sehen.
>"Photo" would I suggest be a more prevalent term for that point.
>"Photo" would ich gesuggeriert be ein mehr prevalent zeitdauer für dass punkt.
>> >>I would like to see the animation sequences down to the 1 meter >>resolution.
>> >>Ich would like bis gesehen das belebung nachspiel down bis das 1 meter>> resolution.
> I think the main constant that we can use is the >>physical distance on the road as being traversed by the Merc.
>Ich dachte das main konstant dass wir gekonnt gebrauch is das>> physisch abstand an das road as sein traversed per das Merc.
> >>So the animation reference frames could be identified by reference >>to the tunnel face as metres + "plus" or - "minus" the tunnel face.
>>>So das belebung beziehung rahmen gekonnt be geidentifiziert per beziehung>> bis das tunnel gesicht as metres+ " plus" oder -" minus" das tunnel gesicht.
>>>> >We would all (those of us who really wish to have it explained in >detail, that is) like to see sophisticated event-reconstruction >techniques brought to bear, together with an account of exactly what >data was employed and how it was used.
>>>> >Wir would all( jene von uns wer wirklich wunsch bis gehabt es erkläre auf> detail, dass is) like bis gesehen sophisticated event-reconstruction> technik brachte bis langweile, zusammen mit ein konten von exactly was> daten was employed und wie es was benutzt.
> Fat chance of that, however - >unless you happen to have an event-reconstruction team on hand and you >can afford to cock a snoot at the politico-media complex.
>Fett zufall von dass, jedoch -> unless dich geschah bis gehabt ein event-reconstruction team an hand und dich> gekonnt afford bis cock ein snoot at das politico-media komplex.
> There is the traffic accident reconstruction site off my web page.
>Da is das verkehr unfall wiederaufbau site off mein web page.
> I saw reference to the most professional software photosho or paint shop of something like that.
>Ich gesehen beziehung bis das most fachmann software photosho oder gelackiert laden von etwas like dass.
> I got a copy off the web.
>Ich gekriegt ein abschrift off das web.
> One of these years I will move to do my accident and if at the same time I did a second of the Diana crash not much for starters.
>1 von diese jahr ich will gerückt bis getan mein unfall und ob at das dasselbste zeit ich getan ein 2 von das Diana absturz nicht much für starter.
> > >>>Note that there is no vehicle present, in Levistre's story, which could >>>be the car of the witnesses Souad M.
>> >>>Anmerkung dass da is kein fahrzeug gepräsentiert, auf Levistre's stockwerk, welche gekonnt>>> be das auto von das zeuge Souad M.
> and Mohammed M.
>Und Mohammed M.
> If we believe >>>Levistre, they weren't there!
>Ob wir geglaubt>>> Levistre, ihnen weren't nicht da!
> On the other hand, if we believe THEM, >>>the Mercedes crashed without any help from anyone - a very convenient >>>version of events, for the authorities, and completely contrary to the >>>testimony of ALL the other witnesses.
>An das ander hand, ob wir geglaubt SIE, >>> das Mercedes gekaramboliert ohne etwas hilfe ab anyone - ein sehr dienlich>>> version von ereignis, für das autorität, und completely contrary bis das>>> zeugnisse von ALL das ander zeuge.
>>> I am not suggesting that consideration should be limited to only one hypothetically possible series of events.
>>>Ich am nicht gesuggeriert dass betrachtungen darf be beschränke bis nur 1 hypothetically möglich series von ereignis.
> It appears to me that there are apparently conflicting reports of circumstances.
>Es erscheine bis mich dass da are apparently conflicting bericht von umstand.
> Therefore I suggest several parallel hypothetical story lines.
>Dafür ich gesuggeriert several gleichlaufend hypothetisch stockwerk leitung.
> That calls to mind something that I think Senator Sam Ervin said during the course of the Watergate hearings on Nixon's impeachment.
>Dass ruf bis mind etwas dass ich dachte senator Sam Ervin gesagt during das kurs von das Watergate verhör an Nixon's anzweiflung.
> The in the four gospels there are accounts of what was reported to have been written by Pilate on the sign to be placed over Jesus Christ's head on the cross.
>Das auf das 4 gospels da are konten von was was berichten über bis gehabt been geschrieben per Pilate an das zeichen bis be anbrachte über jesus christ kopf an das kreuzes.
> Senator Sam said that if individuals whose testimoney we so reverence from the written testimony could be so reported as divergent then we need not be dismayed that good people of our own day may be reported as to not have agreed perfectly.
>Senator Sam gesagt dass ob individuen wessen testimoney wir so reverence ab das geschrieben zeugnisse gekonnt be so berichten über as divergierend dann wir not nicht be dismayed dass besser volk von unser eigen tag mai be berichten über as bis nicht gehabt entsprach perfectly.
> >>Hummnn >>> >>>The sequence of events, as Levistre recounts it, is very interesting, >>>because he seems to be saying that the "white car" stayed ahead of the >>>Mercedes and the motor-bike.
>>>Hummnn>>> >>> das nachspiel von ereignis, as Levistre recounts es, is sehr geinteressiert, >>> because er geschienen bis be gesagt dass das" weiss auto" weile ahead von das>>> Mercedes und das motor-bike.
> I would think "ahead" of the Merc would be correct but not that the white car stayed ahead of the bike.
>Ich would dachte" ahead" von das Merc would be gekorrigiert aber nicht dass das weiss auto weile ahead von das bike.
> Explaination given above.
>Explaination gab obig.
>>> >>Well, in my SH one possibility that I want to consider is that both >>the white car on the Merc's right hand side and the motorcycle on >>the Merc's left hand side came to a synchronized position along side >>the Merc such as to be able to take symultaneous flash photographs >>into the Merc from both sides at the same time.
>>> >>Brunnen, auf mein SH 1 möglichkeit dass ich mögend bis erachte is dass beide>> das weiss auto an das Merc's recht hand seite und das motorrad an>> das Merc's abfahre hand seite ausgekommen bis ein gesynchronisiert lage along seite>> das Merc solch as bis be fähig bis genommen symultaneous flash photographs>> into das Merc ab beide seite at das dasselbste zeit.
> If one is in a very >>heavy law suit one needs at least TWO corroberating withnesses.
>Ob 1 is auf ein sehr>> schwer gesetz suit 1 not at klein 2 corroberating withnesses.
> And a big pile of paps only seconds behind would be very important also.
>Und ein gross hämorrhoiden von paps nur seconds hinter would be sehr wichtig und.
> If somebody hinted at the presence of a blackmail photo they could be assassinated in short order before they could ever get close to a court of law, and I heard a song the other day called "Smuggler's Blues" done in the Eighties by Glenn Frey has some good words.
>Ob irdendwer hinted at das gegenwart von ein erpressung photo ihnen gekonnt be gemordet auf kurz befahl bevor ihnen gekonnt ever gekriegt geschlossen bis ein gericht von gesetz, und ich gehört ein gesang das ander tag abgerufen" schmuggler Blues" getan auf das Eighties per Glenn Frey gehabt einige besser wort.
>>> >This seems to me to be fanciful in the extreme.
>>> >Das geschienen bis mich bis be phantastisch auf das extreme.
> On what grounds do you >suggest it?
>An was boden getan dich> gesuggeriert es?
>> >>The same scene photographed by two separate photographers at >>exactly the same instant would be IDEAL.
>> >>Das dasselbste szene photographed per 2 geschieden photograph at>> exactly das dasselbste momentan would be IDEAL.
>>> >"Ideal" for what?
>>> >"Ideal" für was?
> Come on Al!
>Ausgekommen an Al!
> What are these simultaneous, two-angle >flash-photos supposed to be for?
>Was are diese gleichzeitig, two-angle> flash-photos angenommen bis be für?
> Okay - you've said before that you >think they would have been compromising photos, and that MAF set up the >car-switch and the pursuit in order to obtain them.
>Okay - dich gehabt gesagt bevor dass dich> dachte ihnen would gehabt been gekompromittiert photos, und dass MAF satz oben das> car-switch und das verfolgung auf befahl bis erhalte sie.
> This is an >interesting idea, because, although it seems most likely to me that MAF >DID make these arrangements, I cannot decide precisely what it was that >he thought was going to happen.
>Das is ein> geinteressiert einfall, because, obgleich es geschienen most likely bis mich dass MAF> GETAN gemacht diese anordnung, ich gekonnt nicht beschliesse precisely was es was dass> er dachte was going to geschah.
> A compromising photograph.
>Ein gekompromittiert photograph.
> Exactly in line with MAF's general opinion of John.
>Exactly auf leitung mit MAF's general meinung von John.
> Q.
>Q.
> Public, Di, etc. > >Let us say that Diana and Dodi were not sleeping together, she was not >pregnant by him and they were not going to get engaged - or some >combination of these negatives - such that, in order to (what?
>Öffentlichkeit, Di, usw. > > gelassen uns gesagt dass Diana und Dodi were nicht geschlafen zusammen, sie was nicht> schwanger per er und ihnen were nicht going to gekriegt angestellt - oder einige> kombination von diese negativ - solch dass, auf befahl bis( was?
>) gain >influence over Diana or disgrace her or force her to marry Dodi?
>)gain> einfluss über Diana oder ungnade ihr oder gezwungen ihr bis geheiratet Dodi?
> - the >Al-Fayeds conceived the scheme I would guess that conception of the scheme would have happened far away from MAF.
>- das> Al-Fayeds conceived das schema ich would eraten dass conception von das schema would gehabt geschah weit away ab MAF.
> If a group were looking for someone to set up some such scheme MAF might have been found to have been a good candidate to approach for the leading role but the script had been written long before and they just needed some one to play the part.
>Ob ein gruppe were looking for jemand bis satz oben einige solch schema MAF might gehabt been aufbrachte bis gehabt been ein besser kandidat bis annäherung für das führe rolle aber das script gehabt been geschrieben lang bevor und ihnen gerecht needed einige 1 bis geintoniert das teil.
> >of obtaining compromising photographs.
>>Von erhalte gekompromittiert photographs.
> A >clever ruse is employed to get rid of some of the escort (but why not >all?
>Ein> geistreich ruse is employed bis gekriegt rid von einige von das eskorte( aber warum nicht> all?
>) THE COMPROMISING photo to be used for blackmail to influence Diana not to take a strong public stand on some particular issue from time to time would have been financed by an external consortium, QEII, Chas, Military landmine sales proponents, etc. In order to be of use at selected times the photo could not be public.
>)DAS GEKOMPROMITTIERT photo bis be benutzt für erpressung bis einfluss Diana nicht bis genommen ein stark öffentlichkeit gestanden an einige particular herauskommen ab zeit bis zeit would gehabt been financed per ein äusserlich consortium, QEII, Chas, militär landmine verkauf proponents, usw. auf befahl bis be von gebrauch at ausgewählt zeit das photo gekonnt nicht be öffentlichkeit.
> If that happened it would have been a one time shot when ever it fell into public hands.
>Ob dass geschah es would gehabt been ein 1 zeit erschiesse als ever es falle into öffentlichkeit hand.
> To be worth the expense and effort it had to be kept secret but its circumstance had to be indisputable else any single person threatening exposure of some such would be under extremely high surveillance in moments.
>Bis be worth das expense und anstrengung es gehabt bis be behalte geheimnis aber sein umstand gehabt bis be unbestreitbar sonst etwas einzeln person bedrohe aufdeckung von einige solch would be unter extremely hoher überwachung auf augenblick.
> > the remaining escort follows from the Hotel, against orders, thus >giving the impression that they are up to no good.
>>Das bleibe eskorte folge ab das hotel, gegen befahl, also> gab das eindruck dass ihnen are oben bis kein besser.
> Henri has been >briefed to flee them - he flees.
>Henri gehabt been> briefed bis fliehe sie - er fliehe.
> An ambush of pursuers has been arranged >on the cour la Reine - to keep Henri in flight and to give Dodi an >excuse for grabbing Diana (as though protectively) I can't imagine anything but a photograph of a blowjob.
>Ein hinterhalt von verfolger gehabt been abgesprochen> an das cour la Reine - bis behalte Henri auf flight und bis gab Dodi ein> entschuldigung für gerafft Diana( as obgleich protectively) ich gekonnt nicht einbilde anything aber ein photograph von ein blowjob.
> Sex is no big thing nowadays.
>Sex is kein gross ding nowadays.
> In royal family tradition, the past, it may have been able to throw a little influence at an intense moment of public conflict.
>Auf königlich familie tradition, das vergangen, es mai gehabt gekonnt geschmissen ein klein einfluss at ein intense augenblick von öffentlichkeit konflikt.
> There is so much detailed sex on the web that I wouldn't doubt that to find a microscopic photo of a pubic hair would take more than a few minutes.
>Da is so much ausführlich sex an das web dass ich wouldn't nicht zweifel dass bis aufbrachte ein microscopic photo von ein pubic haar would genommen mehr than ein wenige minute.
> So if any eyebrows were going to be raised maybe a court threatening a loss of Di's finances for breach of contract re: approximately non modest public behavior.
>So ob etwas augenbraue were going to be angehoben maybe ein gericht bedrohe ein verlust von Di's finanzwesen für breach von vertrag re: approximately non bescheiden öffentlichkeit benehmen.
> So if Di was very cognizant of contract provisions regarding public behavior as a determinant of her divorce settlement then she would have to have exercised the utmost discression.
>So ob Di was sehr cognizant von vertrag verfügung regarding öffentlichkeit benehmen as ein determinant von ihr ehescheidung abrechnung dann sie would gehabt bis gehabt geturnt das äusserste discression.
> But if she was going to find any male support outside of her ex's she would have to at some point show some affection.
>Aber ob sie was going to aufbrachte etwas male unterhalt aussenstehend von ihr ex's sie would gehabt bis at einige punkt gewiesen einige affection.
> Now where could one find any more hope of privacy than in the tunnel of love in a speeding limosine?
>Jetzt wo gekonnt 1 aufbrachte etwas mehr hoffnung von privacy than auf das tunnel von liebe auf ein speeding limosine?
> But to be effective for black mail the photo would have to appear as immodest public behavior.
>Aber bis be wirksam für schwarz post das photo would gehabt bis erscheine as unbescheiden öffentlichkeit benehmen.
> I said PUBLIC.
>Ich gesagt ÖFFENTLICHKEIT.
> So on the one hand Diana would have shyed away from any PUBLIC behavior but people interested in obtaining a photo for blackmail would have to make the circumstances of the photo look as public as possible.
>So an das 1 hand Diana would gehabt shyed away ab etwas ÖFFENTLICHKEIT benehmen aber volk geinteressiert auf erhalte ein photo für erpressung would gehabt bis gemacht das umstand von das photo blick as öffentlichkeit as möglich.
> TWO photo's from TWO different photographers and surrounding photos from another hundred photographers could be made to look like PUBLIC IMMODESTY while the circumstance of the back seat of a speeding limosine in the tunnel in the middle of the night is about as close to "private" behavior as I can imagine anyone could get on short notice.
>2 photo's ab 2 verschieden photograph und umgab photos ab anderer 100 photograph gekonnt be gemacht bis blick like ÖFFENTLICHKEIT UNBESCHEIDENHEIT indem das umstand von das zurück sitz von ein speeding limosine auf das tunnel auf das mittler von das nacht is about as geschlossen bis" private" benehmen as ich gekonnt einbilde anyone gekonnt gekriegt an kurz anzeige.
> >- a car is stationed >at the tunnel-entrance to stop the Mercedes (a very risky proceeding, >from a father's point of view, don't you think?
>>- ein auto is gestationiert> at das tunnel-entrance bis halt das Mercedes( ein sehr gefahrvoll proceeding, > ab ein erzeuger punkt von sehen, getan nicht dich dachte?
>) the Mercedes is slowed, >the pursuers catch up, the photographs are taken.
>)Das Mercedes is slowed, > das verfolger ertappe oben, das photographs are genommen.
>> >Photographs of what?
>> >Photographs von was?
> Diana giving Dodi a blow job.
>Diana gab Dodi ein blase arbeiten.
> What else could even raise an eyebrowe nowadays?
>Was sonst gekonnt abend angehoben ein eyebrowe nowadays?
> Hell, if you had to sell such a photograph to get a MacDonald's hamburger you would have a lot of competition in the current market.
>Hell, ob dich gehabt bis verkaufe solch ein photograph bis gekriegt ein MacDonald's hamburger dich would gehabt ein los von wettbewerb auf das laufend markt.
> > A terrified Diana in Dodi's arms?
>>Ein erschrocken Diana auf Dodi's arm?
> Diana being >raped by Dodi?
>Diana sein> raped per Dodi?
> - is that what you're working up to saying?
>- is dass was dich you're arbeite oben bis gesagt?
> My dear chap!
>Mein lieber chap!
> Who is going to conspire, and pay big money, for something like that?
>Wer is going to gekonspiriert, und bezahle gross geld, für etwas like dass?
>Nobody.
>Keiner.
> >Diana crouched down on the floor behind Henri's seat, and Dodi remained >upright - probably viewing the pursuit with anxiety - possibly grappling >with TRJ to prevent him interfering with the driving.
>>Diana crouched down an das böden hinter Henri's sitz, und Dodi bleibe> aufrecht - wahrscheinlich viewing das verfolgung mit angst - possibly grappling> mit TRJ bis vereiteln er dazwischengekommen mit das angetrieben.
> What sign is >there - apart from the fact that neither Diana nor Dodi were wearing >seat-belts - that Dodi was attempting to grapple with Diana?
>Was zeichen is> da - auseinander ab das tatsache dass weder Diana nor Dodi were wearing> seat-belts - dass Dodi was attempting bis grapple mit Diana?
>> >Again, I say, "photographs of what?
>> >Wieder, ich gesagt, " photographs von was?
>" - precisely - and what were they >for?
>"- precisely - und was were ihnen> für?
> - according to your theory.
>- according to dein theorie.
> A picture of a blow job - for blackmail.
>Ein bild von ein blase arbeiten - für erpressung.
>> >Why could these photographs not have been taken with spy-cameras at one >of the Fayed residences Because such a photo would possibly be identified as an invasion of privacy.
>> >Warum gekonnt diese photographs nicht gehabt been genommen mit spy-cameras at 1> von das Fayed residences Because solch ein photo would possibly be geidentifiziert as ein invasion von privacy.
> It had to look like PUBLIC Immodest Behavior to cause a diminution of Diana's influence in the public media.
>Es gehabt bis blick like ÖFFENTLICHKEIT unbescheiden benehmen bis ursache ein verminderung von Diana's einfluss auf das öffentlichkeit media.
> >at which Diana stayed?
>>at welche Diana weile?
> How could it have been >hoped that photographs of an especially compromising nature could have >been obtained at high speed in the Alma Tunnel, rather than on the >Jonikal, at the Ritz or at the rue Arsene?
>Wie gekonnt es gehabt been> gehofft dass photographs von ein especially gekompromittiert natur gekonnt gehabt> been erhalte at hoher speed auf das Alma tunnel, lieber than an das> Jonikal, at das Ritz oder at das rue Arsene?
> What on earth is the point?
>Was an erde is das punkt?
> Would behavior on the yatch or at the Ritz be considered public or private by Diana.
>Would benehmen an das yatch oder at das Ritz be erachte öffentlichkeit oder private per Diana.
> My guess is that Diana would have considered it PUBLIC.
>Mein eraten is dass Diana would gehabt erachte es ÖFFENTLICHKEIT.
>> >One glimmer of a suggestion of a possibility does occur to me, as a >result of examining this idea, however.
>> >1 glimmer von ein suggestion von ein möglichkeit getan ereigne bis mich, as ein> ergebnis von geprüft das einfall, jedoch.
> What if Dodi was having >difficulty getting physical with Diana?
>Was ob Dodi was gehabt> schwierigkeit gekriegt physisch mit Diana?
> Did Dad devise an elaborate >ruse to throw them together?
>Getan Dad devise ein umständlich> ruse bis geschmissen sie zusammen?
> Or rather, was he advised to do so by >those who wanted Diana dead NOT DEAD.
>Oder lieber, was er geraten bis getan so per> jene wer mögend Diana tot NICHT TOT.
> There is a whole hell of a lot of difference in wanting some one to have less public influence in the public media than in wanting someone to be dead.
>Da is ein ganz hell von ein los von unterschied auf mögend einige 1 bis gehabt klein öffentlichkeit einfluss auf das öffentlichkeit media than auf mögend jemand bis be tot.
> >- so that he would implement the scheme >without knowing what it was really for?
>>- so that er would implement das schema> ohne gekannt was es was wirklich für?
> Quite simple.
>Recht einfach.
> A compromising photograph.
>Ein gekompromittiert photograph.
> >Something of the sort must have >happened, I think - and it's not so incredible if you consider that >MAF's masters may have been pretending to attempt to pull off a Fayed- >Spencer match (with big bucks in it for MAF) for some time - so that >the Machiavellian complexity of engineering the car-switch, the >disposition of the escort, the arrangements for the route and the >programming of Henri Paul, might not have aroused MAF's suspicions.
>>Etwas von das sorte must gehabt> geschah, ich dachte - und es it's nicht so unglaubhaft ob dich erachte dass> MAF's beherrscht mai gehabt been gemimt bis versuch bis ziehen off ein Fayed-> Spencer match( mit gross bucks auf es für MAF) für einige zeit - so that> das Machiavellian complexity von engineering das car-switch, das> disposition von das eskorte, das anordnung für das route und das> programmierung von Henri Paul, might nicht gehabt aroused MAF's verdacht.
> A photograph would be the most logical thing in the whole world.
>Ein photograph would be das most logisch ding auf das ganz welt.
>No body would be suspicious of anything.
>Kein körper would be misstraurisch von anything.
>> >Other factors, such as sabotaging the S-280's brakes and air-bags, >briefing the escort to monitor the crash but not get involved, etc, >could have been achieved by MAF's backers, over MAF's head, The theft and modification of the vehicle could have been well disguised.
>> >Ander faktor, solch as sabotaging das S-280's bremse und air-bags, > briefing das eskorte bis monitor das absturz aber nicht gekriegt geinvolviert, usw, > gekonnt gehabt been erreiche per MAF's backers, über MAF's kopf, das theft und modification von das fahrzeug gekonnt gehabt been brunnen getarnt.
> >such that >Siegel and Musa (Etoile Limousines) and Wingfield and Dournot were not >only working for MAF, but for his masters, DIRECTLY.
>>Solch dass> Siegel und Musa( Etoile limousine) und Wingfield und Dournot were nicht> nur arbeite für MAF, aber für ihn beherrscht, DIRECTLY.
> However, if that were part of the plot, then PLANS TO GET THAT VEHICLE TO THAT PLACE IN TIME WOULD HAVE TO HAVE BEEN ROCK SOLID FOR MONTHS IN ADVANCE.
>Jedoch, ob dass were teil von das komplott, dann PLAN BIS GEKRIEGT DASS FAHRZEUG BIS DASS GEDECK AUF ZEIT WOULD GEHABT BIS GEHABT BEEN FELS SOLID FÜR MONAT AUF FORTSCHRITTE.
> There is the clear windows in one train of thought and defective equipment as possibly another.
>Da is das freigesprochen fenster auf 1 zug von dachte und mangelhaft ausrüstung as possibly anderer.
>> >Indeed, assuming that MAF did not know that the fatal crash was >intended, those of MAF's employees who MUST have known that a fatal >crash was intended, MUST have been working directly for those who >intentionally engineered it.
>> >Indeed, assuming dass MAF getan nicht gekannt dass das verhängnisvoll absturz was> beabsichtige, jene von MAF's angestellter wer MUST gehabt gekannt dass ein verhängnisvoll> absturz was beabsichtige, MUST gehabt been arbeite directly für jene wer> intentionally engineered es.
>> If a crash after the photo were planned the least people in the area who needed to know was just the driver of the white car.
>>Ob ein absturz nach das photo were vorgenommen das klein volk auf das fläche wer needed bis gekannt was gerecht das fahrer von das weiss auto.
> Second could have been the photographer on the back of the motorcycle who had to aim a shot into the driver's eyes.
>2 gekonnt gehabt been das photograph an das zurück von das motorrad wer gehabt bis gevisiert ein erschiesse into das fahrer auge.
> >>>At least, he describes the "white car" >>>passing him, and disappearing westwards, before he begins to describe >>>the motor-bike overtaking the Mercedes and cutting-in in front of it.
>>>>At klein, er beschreibe das" weiss auto" >>> gepassiert er, und verfliege westwards, bevor er anfange bis beschreibe>>> das motor-bike overtaking das Mercedes und cutting-in in front of es.
> >> >>So this gets the locations screwed up and out of sync.
>>> >>So das gekriegt das standort geschraubt oben und out of sync.
>>> >>> >>> The impression given (that the "white car" was a long way ahead of the >>>Mercedes and the motorbike) is probably an illusion created by the >>>difficulty involved in describing the situation; >> >>Also, a witness in a high speed drive has their own road to watch as >>well as looking in the rear view mirror.
>>> >>> >>>Das eindruck gab( dass das" weiss auto" was ein lang weg ahead von das>>> Mercedes und das motorbike) is wahrscheinlich ein illusion erschaffe per das>>> schwierigkeit geinvolviert auf beschreibe das situation; >> >> und, ein zeuge auf ein hoher speed angetrieben gehabt euer eigen road bis achte as>> brunnen as gekiekt auf das hinter sehen spiegel.
> So one might have a strobe >>light effect of only seeing a flash of an instant when they happened >>to have the opportunity to look in the mirror.
>So 1 might gehabt ein strobe>> licht wirkung von nur gesehen ein flash von ein momentan als ihnen geschah>> bis gehabt das gelegenheit bis blick auf das spiegel.
>>> >>>but there is no >>>escaping the conclusion that the Mercedes did not completely squeeze >>>past the white car, but came alongside it, on its left, in a sliding >>>collision, >> >>My suggestion would be to consider that the Merc was the >>vehicle in the middle of the road, that the white vehicle would >>have been on its right and the motorcycle on its left, three >>abreast.
>>> >>>Aber da is kein>>> entgangen das folgerung dass das Mercedes getan nicht completely geklemmt>>> vergangen das weiss auto, aber ausgekommen alongside es, an sein abfahre, auf ein geschlittert>>> zusammenstoss, >> >> mein suggestion would be bis erachte dass das Merc was das>> fahrzeug auf das mittler von das road, dass das weiss fahrzeug would>> gehabt been an sein recht und das motorrad an sein abfahre, 3>> abreast.
>>> >>And that point photoflashes were fired and then the white >>car accelerated >> >>>which impelled the white car forwards, towards Levistre and >>>out of harm's way; >> >>And the motorcycle accelerated >> >>>whereupon the motorbike >> >>accelerated and swerved in front of >>the Mercedes.
>>> >>Und dass punkt photoflashes were feure und dann das weiss>> auto accelerated>> >>> welche impelled das weiss auto nachgesandt, towards Levistre und>>> out of harm's weg; >> >> und das motorrad accelerated>> >>> whereupon das motorbike>> >> accelerated und swerved in front of>> das Mercedes.
>>> >>No.
>>> >>Kein.
> That is even wrong.
>Dass is abend wrong.
> In my SH.
>Auf mein SH.
>>> >>Let's try it another way.
>>> >>Gelassen uns geprobiert es anderer weg.
> More to the >>"DELIBERATE BUMP OFF" conspiracy >>supposition.
>Mehr bis das>>" VORSÄTZLICH GERUMPELT OFF" verschwörung>> vernehmung.
>>> >>In that, the motorcycle would have fired >>a series of quick flashes as it accelerated >>in front of the Mercedes.
>>> >>Auf dass, das motorrad would gehabt feure>> ein series von schnell flashes as es accelerated>> in front of das Mercedes.
> The first flash >>would have been into the back seat but >>a second would have been directly into >>the eyes of Henri Paul.
>Das 1 flash>> would gehabt been into das zurück sitz aber>> ein 2 would gehabt been directly into>> das auge von Henri Paul.
> Having blinded >>him, it would then accelerate and as soon >>as it was clear the vehicle on the right would >>bump the Mercedes' front into the center >>pilars.
>Gehabt verblende>> er, es would dann accelerate und as bald>> as es was freigesprochen das fahrzeug an das recht would>> gerumpelt das Mercedes' stirn into das gezentriert>> pilars.
>>> >>>overtook the slowed Mercedes >>>and (also according to Levistre) cut-in in front of it and produced "a >>>searing burst of light, much brighter than a photo-flash".
>>> >>>overtook das slowed Mercedes>>> und( und according to Levistre) cut-in in front of es und ergab" ein>>> searing barst von licht, much aufgeweckt than ein photo-flash".
>>>> >>>At this point, Levistre, braked and came to a halt near the western end >>>of the tunnel.
>>>> >>>At das punkt, Levistre, braked und ausgekommen bis ein halt bei das westlich aufhören>>> von das tunnel.
> >> >>More correctly, NOT "At this point" but at "A POINT" near the >>western end of the tunnel.
>>> >>Mehr correctly, NICHT" At das punkt" aber at" ein PUNKT" bei das>> westlich aufhören von das tunnel.
>>> >>>The Mercedes had crashed, and the bikers (like Brenda >>>Wells, Levistre affirms that there were two of them) had stopped by the >>>wreck.
>>> >>>Das Mercedes gehabt gekaramboliert, und das bikers( like Brenda>>> brunnen, Levistre affirms dass da were 2 von sie) gehabt gestoppt per das>>> wrack.
> >> >>That does not sound possible to me.
>>> >>Dass getan nicht erklang möglich bis mich.
> It may depend upon speed.
>Es mai abgehangen an speed.
>>>Assuming that the whole action was taking place at some >>above average speed then if at least the bike on the left had >>accelerated ahead of the Merc it could not have stopped.
>>>Assuming dass das ganz action was genommen gedeck at einige>> obig durchschnittlich speed dann ob at klein das bike an das abfahre gehabt>> accelerated ahead von das Merc es gekonnt nicht gehabt gestoppt.
> If it >>did not stop then it may have passed Livestre and exited the >>tunnel.
>Ob es>> getan nicht halt dann es mai gehabt gepassiert Livestre und exited das>> tunnel.
> Whether a second bike stopped might be considerable.
>Whether ein 2 bike gestoppt might be beträchtlich.
>>> >>>One of them got off, momentarily, to look into the Mercedes, >>>jumped back on again, and the bike sped off, passing Levistre as it did >>>so.
>>> >>>1 von sie gekriegt off, momentarily, bis blick into das Mercedes, >>> gesprungen zurück an wieder, und das bike sped off, gepassiert Levistre as es getan>>> so.
> Levistre describes the bike as "black" and the two men as "dressed >>>in black with black helmets".
>Levistre beschreibe das bike as" schwarz" und das 2 herr as" gekleidet>>> auf schwarz mit schwarz helm".
> The whole thing took just a few seconds.
>Das ganz ding genommen gerecht ein wenige seconds.
>>>> >>>Considerable efforts have been made to discredit Levistre.
>>>> >>>Beträchtlich anstrengung gehabt been gemacht bis geschändet Levistre.
> It has been >>>said, for example, that his attitude to the press was "hostile" and that >>>he was trying to "gain attention"; but there could be another reason for >>>these attacks on his character - he witnessed a murder!
>Es gehabt been>>> gesagt, für beispiel, dass ihn einstellung bis das presse was" feindlich" und dass>>> er was geprobiert bis" gain aufmerksamkeit"; aber da gekonnt be anderer gründe für>>> diese angriffe an ihn charakter - er miterlebe ein mord!
> There is no >>>other interpretation you can put on his testimony.
>Da is kein>>> ander auslegung dich gekonnt gestellt an ihn zeugnisse.
>>>> >>>Yes, indeed (to answer your question) the lanes were used as a slow-lane >>>and an overtaking lane - ludicrous speed-limit signs notwithstanding!
>>>> >>>Yes, indeed( bis antwort dein ausfragen) das lanes were benutzt as ein slow-lane>>> und ein overtaking lane - ludicrous speed-limit zeichen notwithstanding!
>>>> >>>Other answers in another post >> >><a href="http://members.home.com/godsbrain">G.O.D.S.B.R.A.I.N.</a><br> > >-- >Steve Reed Alvin H.
>>>> >>>Ander antwort auf anderer posten>> >>< ein href=" http:// mitglied. heimat. com/ godsbrain"> G. O. D. S. B. R. ein. ich. N.</ ein>< br> > > --> Steve Reed Alvin H.
> White <a href="http://members.home.com/godsbrain">G.O.D.S.B.R.A.I.N.</a><br>
>Weiss< ein href=" http:// mitglied. heimat. com/ godsbrain"> G. O. D. S. B. R. ein. ich. N.</ ein>< br>
GODS...@home.com
>From GODS...@HOME.COM Wed May 03 15:40:25 2000 Path: news1.
>A GODSBRAIN@ DOMUS. COM festum maius 3 15: 40: 25 2000 Path: news1.
>frmt1.
>frmt1.
>sfba.
>sfba.
>home.
>Domus.
>com!
>com!
>newshub1.
>newshub1.
>home.
>Domus.
>com!
>com!
>news.
>news.
>home.
>Domus.
>com!
>com!
>news1.
>news1.
>frmt1.
>frmt1.
>sfba.
>sfba.
>home.
>Domus.
>com.
>com.
>POSTED!
>POSTED!
>not-for-mail From: GODS...@HOME.COM Newsgroups: alt.
>not-for-mail a: GODSBRAIN@ DOMUS. COM Newsgroups: alt.
>conspiracy.
>conspiracy.
>princess-diana Subject: Re: Di: Paul, Henri, History, 60 Page Autopsy, Etc. Organization: <a href="http://members.home.com/godsbrain">G.O.D.S.B.R.A.I.N.</a><br> Reply-To: GODS...@HOME.COM,GODS...@AOL.COM Message-ID: <suv0hs4b86ldf6kh1...@4ax.com> References: <20000416220330.
>princess-diana Subject: Re: Di: Paul, Henri, History, 60 folium Autopsy, Etc. Organization: < prout href=" http:// members. domus. com/ godsbrain"> G. O. D. S. B. R. prout. ego. N.</ prout>< br> Reply-To: GODSBRAIN@ DOMUS. COM, GODSBRAIN@ AOL. COM Message-ID: < suv0hs4b86ldf6kh11pg4usgb988mp55km@ 4ax. com> References: < 20000416220330.
>18658.
>18658.
>0000...@ng-cg1.aol.com> <38fa9...@huge.aa.net> <8n1mfss0cu2ou4qhe...@4ax.com> <025220ee.
>4069@ ng-cg1. aol. com> < 38fa90de_2@ huge. aa. net> < 8n1mfss0cu2ou4qhej2ujs106jhqfrbbol@ 4ax. com> < 025220ee.
>5e23...@usw-ex0104-033.remarq.com> <VHL8$AAWpz$4I...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> <03cfeca4.
>5e23de39@ usw-ex0104-033. remarq. com> < VHL8$ AAWpz$ 4IAaS@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> < 03cfeca4.
>e454...@usw-ex0105-038.remarq.com> <5AGHurAe...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> <022cd178.
>e454e6ea@ usw-ex0105-038. remarq. com> < 5AGHurAeP0A5IAT7@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> < 022cd178.
>7c06...@usw-ex0105-037.remarq.com> <0PU0NLBY...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> <2ehrgsobh76u0sheo...@4ax.com> <EwaIiIA+...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.
>7c06d2cf@ usw-ex0105-037. remarq. com> < 0PU0NLBYabD5IAaW@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> < 2ehrgsobh76u0sheo8fsoso92h16ood0pr@ 4ax. com> < EwaIiIA+ 6EE5IAXR@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.
>7/32.
>7/ 32.
>534 MIME-Version: 1.
>534 MIME-Version: 1.
>0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 683 Date: Wed, 03 May 2000 22:40:25 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.
>0 Content-Type: text/ plain; charset= us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 683 datum: festum, 3 maius 2000 22: 40: 25 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.
>7.
>7.
>83.
>83.
>23 X-Complaints-To: ab...@home.net X-Trace: news1.
>23 X-Complaints-To: abuse@ domus. net X-Trace: news1.
>frmt1.
>frmt1.
>sfba.
>sfba.
>home.
>Domus.
>com 957393625 24.
>com 957393625 24.
>7.
>7.
>83.
>83.
>23 (Wed, 03 May 2000 15:40:25 PDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 03 May 2000 15:40:25 PDT Xref: newshub1.
>23( festum, 3 maius 2000 15: 40: 25 PDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: festum, 3 maius 2000 15: 40: 25 PDT Xref: newshub1.
>home.
>Domus.
>com alt.
>com alt.
>conspiracy.
>conspiracy.
>princess-diana:30031204 -------- </html> OK.
>princess-diana: 30031204 --------</ html> OK.
> What do we call this?
>Quae perfecit nos alias haec?
> The daily replay of the daily revised version of the God's Brain Suppositional Hypothesis.
> daily replay de daily revised version de deus Brain Suppositional Hypothesis.
> Act ______ Scene ________ Having read the below a time or two, or few, some opportunity to explain weighted influence factors in the construction of the daily hypothesis.
>Act ______ Scene ________ habet read infra prout temporis alias 2, alias few, some opportunity to explain weighted influence factors in construction de daily hypothesis.
> Since the authorities have had two and a half years with the manpower, peoplepower, staff power, of what was it reported?
>Abinde authorities habet habet 2 ac prout dimidium annus cum manpower, peoplepower, staff power, de quae est it reported?
> Some 24 full time investigators and million(s) dollar equivalent budgets I am not competing with that.
>Some 24 foderator temporis investigators ac 1000000( s) dollar equivalent budgets ego est haud competing cum ut.
> The outcome reports of that investigation appear to be: Drunk driver speeds without the care of D+D+TRJ and abruptly turns left into a central column.
> outcome reports de ut investigation comparuit to est: Drunk driver speeds absque care de D+ D+ TRJ ac abruptly turns sinister into prout central column.
> Simple Road Traffic Accident RTA.
>Simple via Traffic Accident RTA.
> When and over the time since the creation of alt.
>Dum ac over temporis abinde creation de alt.
>conspiracy.
>conspiracy.
>princess-diana by b.
>princess-diana a b.
>anana his philosophical position as I read it is to approximately take the position for sake of arguement that Diana was killed as the result of a conspiracy.
>anana his philosophical position prout ego read it est to circiter take position enim causa de arguement ut Diana est killed prout result de prout conspiracy.
> Because it has appeared to me that while times, places, people, and motives have been discussed I have a feeling that there has been less than reasonable consideration of some possibilities.
>Because it habet comparuit to me ut dum temporis, locus, people, ac motives habet est discussed ego habet prout feeling ut ibi habet est minus than reasonable consideration de some possibilities.
> As a consequence of that belief I am trying to construct a suppositional hypothesis that will identify possible, persons, places, things that may be considered as possible.
>Prout prout consequence de ut belief ego est trying to construct prout suppositional hypothesis ut testimentum identify possible, persons, locus, things ut maius est considered prout possible.
> The intent is to create multiple fictional tracks such that the most possible/ununderstood may be considered.
> intent est to create multiple fictional tracks such ut most possible/ ununderstood maius est considered.
> Many of the pieces are for the most part agreed as having been in the area but there is a lot of discrepancy as to the EXACT location at a SPECIFIC INSTANT.
>Multus de pieces est enim most part agreed prout habet est in pars at ibi est prout lot de discrepancy prout to EXACT location alias prout SPECIFIC INSTANT.
> My intent is to create this fictional supposition to give, or try to determine, the differences between points of agreement and points of disharmony.
>My intent est to create haec fictional supposition to datum, alias try to determine, differences inter points de agreement ac points de disharmony.
> Agreement/Disagreement and Harmony/Disharmony.
>Agreement/ Disagreement ac Harmony/ Disharmony.
> Concord vs Discord.
>Concord vs Discord.
> If there might have been common interest to finance a joint project to lessen Diana's influence with the media because she was percieved to be "stepping on someones toes" , my words, then how might some such plan, plot, conspiracy, have been considered achievable from a variety of possible participant's points of view?
>Si ibi might habet est mutuus interest to finance prout joint project to lessen Diana's influence cum media because she est percieved to est" stepping on someones toes" , my words, deinde quam might some such plan, plot, conspiracy, habet est considered achievable a prout variety de possible participant's points de view?
> My typing fingers are not going to stand too long a discussion at this point so I am going to try to speed along.
>My generis fingers est haud going to stand too long prout discussion alias haec point ita ego est going to try to speed along.
> My supposition is that if there was a conspiracy it had to be to do something.
>My supposition est ut si ibi est prout conspiracy it habet to est to perfecit something.
> A photo of Diana giving Dodi a blow job in the back seat of a limo would be pretty good.
>Prout photo de Diana datum Dodi prout blow job in back seat de prout limo would est pretty bonus.
>For the photo to achieve maximum benefit it had to be secret and to be used as a threat.
>Enim photo to achieve maximum benefit it habet to est secret ac to est used prout prout threat.
>The actual publication in mass media would deflate its power.
> actual publication in mass media would deflate its power.
> But it had to have strong and undisputable evidence that it was TRUE if it were ever going to be used.
>At it habet to habet strong ac undisputable evidence ut it est TRUE si it est ever going to est used.
> For some paparazzi to "peeping tom" photo a divorcee with her boyfriend in private was not going to do the job.
>Enim some paparazzi to" peeping tom" photo prout divorcee cum eam boyfriend in private est haud going to perfecit job.
> So the construct of a whore for money with an oily bedhopper in the back seat of a very expensive limo would be much more philosophically correct for the purpose of a conspiracy to get a photo to use for blackmail in the future but not for actual publication.
>Ita construct de prout scorta enim moneta cum an oily bedhopper in back seat de prout very expensive limo would est much magis philosophically correct enim purpose de prout conspiracy to get prout photo to use enim blackmail in future at haud enim actual publication.
> On Wed, 3 May 2000 17:07:26 +0100, Steve Reed <asr...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> wrote: >Path: news1.
>On festum, 3 maius 2000 17: 7: 26+ 100, Steve Reed< asreed@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> scripsit: > Path: news1.
>frmt1.
>frmt1.
>sfba.
>sfba.
>home.
>Domus.
>com!
>com!
>newshub2.
>newshub2.
>rdc1.
>rdc1.
>sfba.
>sfba.
>home.
>Domus.
>com!
>com!
>newshub1.
>newshub1.
>home.
>Domus.
>com!
>com!
>news.
>news.
>home.
>Domus.
>asreed >From: Steve Reed <asr...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> >Newsgroups: alt.
>asreed> a: Steve Reed< asreed@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> > Newsgroups: alt.
>conspiracy.
>conspiracy.
>princess-diana >Subject: Re: Di: Paul, Henri, History, 60 Page Autopsy, Etc. >Date: Wed, 3 May 2000 17:07:26 +0100 >Organization: Home >Lines: 297 >Message-ID: <EwaIiIA+...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> >References: <20000416201432.
>princess-diana> Subject: Re: Di: Paul, Henri, History, 60 folium Autopsy, Etc. > datum: festum, 3 maius 2000 17: 7: 26+ 100> Organization: domus> Lines: 297> Message-ID: < EwaIiIA+ 6EE5IAXR@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> > References: < 20000416201432.
>18648.
>18648.
>0000...@ng-cg1.aol.com> > <20000416220330.
>4517@ ng-cg1. aol. com> > < 20000416220330.
>18658.
>18658.
>0000...@ng-cg1.aol.com> <38fa9...@huge.aa.net> > <8n1mfss0cu2ou4qhe...@4ax.com> > <025220ee.
>4069@ ng-cg1. aol. com> < 38fa90de_2@ huge. aa. net> > < 8n1mfss0cu2ou4qhej2ujs106jhqfrbbol@ 4ax. com> > < 025220ee.
>5e23...@usw-ex0104-033.remarq.com> > <VHL8$AAWpz$4I...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> > <03cfeca4.
>5e23de39@ usw-ex0104-033. remarq. com> > < VHL8$ AAWpz$ 4IAaS@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> > < 03cfeca4.
>e454...@usw-ex0105-038.remarq.com> > <5AGHurAe...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> > <022cd178.
>e454e6ea@ usw-ex0105-038. remarq. com> > < 5AGHurAeP0A5IAT7@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> > < 022cd178.
>7c06...@usw-ex0105-037.remarq.com> > <0PU0NLBY...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> > <2ehrgsobh76u0sheo...@4ax.com> >Reply-To: Andrew Steven Reed <ar...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> >NNTP-Posting-Host: modem88.
>7c06d2cf@ usw-ex0105-037. remarq. com> > < 0PU0NLBYabD5IAaW@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> > < 2ehrgsobh76u0sheo8fsoso92h16ood0pr@ 4ax. com> > Reply-To: Andrew Steven Reed< areed@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> > NNTP-Posting-Host: modem88.
>fred.
>fred.
>pol.
>pol.
>co.
>co.
>uk >Mime-Version: 1.
>uk> Mime-Version: 1.
>0 >X-Trace: newsreaderg1.
>0> X-Trace: newsreaderg1.
>core.
>core.
>theplanet.
>theplanet.
>net 957376918 19338 195.
>net 957376918 19338 195.
>92.
>92.
>7.
>7.
>216 (3 May 2000 18:01:58 GMT) >NNTP-Posting-Date: 3 May 2000 18:01:58 GMT >X-Complaints-To: ab...@theplanet.net >X-Newsreader: Turnpike Integrated Version 4.
>216( 3 maius 2000 18: 1: 58 GMT) > NNTP-Posting-Date: 3 maius 2000 18: 1: 58 GMT> X-Complaints-To: abuse@ theplanet. net> X-Newsreader: Turnpike Integrated Version 4.
>02 M <TWkHBtca5wWBvmfWwoLIWQkgFM> >Xref: newshub1.
>2 M< TWkHBtca5wWBvmfWwoLIWQkgFM> > Xref: newshub1.
>home.
>Domus.
>com alt.
>com alt.
>conspiracy.
>conspiracy.
>princess-diana:30031199 > >In article <2ehrgsobh76u0sheo...@4ax.com>, >GODS...@HOME.COM writes >>>there was "a white car", >>>in the middle of the road, behind him.
>princess-diana: 30031199> > in article< 2ehrgsobh76u0sheo8fsoso92h16ood0pr@ 4ax. com>, > GODSBRAIN@ DOMUS. COM scripsit>>> ibi est" prout albus car", >>> in middle de via, behind eum.
> >> >>So Livestre lied.
>>> >>Ita Livestre lied.
> The white car was not in the middle >>of the road, the Mercedes was in the middle of the >>road.
> albus car est haud in middle>> de via, Mercedes est in middle de >> via.
> Why did Livestre lie?
>Cur perfecit Livestre lie?
> Maybe Livestre did not lie in that particular.
>Maybe Livestre perfecit haud lie in ut particular.
> One needs to be very careful as to "at what instant" and did he say the middle of the road or the middle of the lane?
>1 needs to est very careful prout to" alias quae instant" ac perfecit he dictus middle de via alias middle de lane?
> It was said that he had moved into the right lane.
>It est dictus ut he habet moved into dexter lane.
> If he said the white car was in the middle of the [right] lane I would agree.
>Si he dictus albus car est in middle de [ dexter] lane ego would agree.
>> >Levistre is not contradicting himself.
>> >Levistre est haud contradicting ipse.
> He saw the white car "au milieu >de la chaussee" So, does "chaussee" come closer to translating as "lane" or on the other hand, "road?
>He vide albus car" au milieu> de la chaussee" ita, perfecit" chaussee" advenit closer to translating prout" lane" alias on aliud manus, " via?
>" Road having two lanes.
>"Via habet 2 lanes.
> >and was overtaken by it ("elle me double") But exactly where were the other actors at the exact instant that "elle me double?
>>Ac est overtaken a it(" elle me double") at exactly ubi est aliud actors alias exact instant ut" elle me double?
>" >"Then", he >says ("puis j'observe [retroviseur] une autre auto toujours au milieu de >la route") "I saw [rear-view mirror] another car, also in the middle of >the road" So here we have a "milieu de la route.
>" >"Deinde", he> dictus(" puis j'observe[ retroviseur] une autre auto toujours au milieu de> la route") " ego vide[ rear-view mirror] alias car, ac in middle de> via" ita hic nos habet prout" milieu de la route.
>" Does that mean closer the lane or the road?
>"Perfecit ut mean closer lane alias via?
> >("et soudain une grosse moto sur sa gauche qui lui fait une >queue de poisson") "and, all of a sudden, a large motor-bike, to the >left of it, cutting-in in front of it".
>>("et soudain une grosse moto sur sa gauche qui lui fait une> queue de poisson") " ac, omnis de prout sudden, prout magnus motor-bike, to > sinister de it, cutting-in in front of it".
> I will take it that AT SOME POINT a large motor-bike, comming from the left of it, and then cutting-in in front of it.
>Ego testimentum take it ut ALIAS SOME POINT prout magnus motor-bike, comming a sinister de it, ac deinde cutting-in in front of it.
> > >(another ambiguity is created by the expression "sur sa gauche", which >could be translated "to ITS left" [to the right of it, from where >Levistre says he was] or "to the left of it" [as seen from Levistre's >alleged position] and, since Levistre claims that the Mercedes "was in >the middle of the road" at that point, it could be either) Since I am trying to construct a hypothetical scene where the Merc was astraddle the white line that separated the two west bound lanes and a photographing motorcycle was to the left side of the Merc at the exact instant that the white car was on the right side.
>> >(Alias ambiguity est created a expression" sur sa gauche", quae> potuit est translated" to ITS sinister" [ to dexter de it, a ubi> Levistre dictus he est] alias" to sinister de it" [ prout vide a Levistre's> alleged position] ac, abinde Levistre claims ut Mercedes" est in> middle de via" alias ut point, it potuit est either) abinde ego est trying to construct prout hypothetical scene ubi Merc est astraddle albus line ut separated 2 west bound lanes ac prout photographing motorcycle est to sinister side de Merc alias exact instant ut albus car est on dexter side.
> .
>
> .
>
> .
>
>> >"At the same instant, for a fraction of a second, there was a tremendous >flash of light, but nothing like the flash of a camera" ("Au meme >moment, en une fraction de seconde, un enorme eclair jaillit, mais rien >a voir avec le flash d'un appareil-photo") > >My point is that the order of events is not completely clear.
>> >"Alias same instant, enim prout fraction de prout 2, ibi est prout tremendous> flash de light, at nihil like flash de prout camera" (" Au meme> moment, en une fraction de seconde, un enorme eclair jaillit, mais rien> prout voir avec le flash d'un appareil-photo") > > My point est ut order de events est haud completely clear.
> It could >be that the bike cut-in in front of the Mercedes just before the white >car passed Levistre - either that, or the bike was further behind the >Mercedes, as both vehicles entered the tunnel, than Clifford, Olivier >and Thierry imply.
>It potuit> est ut bike cut-in in front of Mercedes just ante albus> car passed Levistre - either ut, alias bike est further behind > Mercedes, prout ambo vehicles iniit tunnel, than Clifford, Olivier> ac Thierry imply.
> I suppose the bike could have braked, just before the Is there any chance that one of the skid marks, like the single one, was the bike?
>Ego si bike potuit habet braked, just ante est ibi any chance ut 1 de skid signum, like single 1, est bike?
> >tunnel (to avoid running into a Mercedes/white-car pile-up) and that >Levistre might not have been as far along the tunnel as he thought he >was.
>>tunnel( to avoid running into prout Mercedes/ white-car pile-up) ac ut> Levistre might haud habet est prout far along tunnel prout he thought he> est.
> There is another branch of my lack of understanding and that follows along a train of thought that the picture was intended but the crash was an accident.
>Ibi est alias branch de my lack de understanding ac ut posterus along prout train de thought ut picture est intended at crash est an accident.
> In the "accident" hypothesis approximately the motorcycle photographer could have accidently fired a half metre too far forward and instead of shooting in to the back seat he could have accidently hit HP directly in the eyes as Henri Paul looked to the left as the motorcycle came along side his side window.
>In " accident" hypothesis circiter motorcycle photographer potuit habet accidently fired prout dimidium metre too far forward ac instead of shooting in to back seat he potuit habet accidently hit HP directly in eyes prout Henri Paul looked to sinister prout motorcycle advenit along side his side window.
>Then the blinding flash could have caused HP to FLINCH and swerve to the right just a little.
>Deinde blinding flash potuit habet causa HP to FLINCH ac swerve to dexter just prout parvus.
> At that point hitting the rear of the accelerating white car.
>Alias ut point hitting rear de accelerating albus car.
> As the white car's rear goes to the right its front goes to the left.
>Prout albus car's rear goes to dexter its front goes to sinister.
> To correct, the driver throws to the right and the rear goes to the left.
>To correct, driver throws to dexter ac rear goes to sinister.
> Essentially tossing the front of the Merc into the central columns.
>Essentially tossing front de Merc into central columns.
> >Thus, the Mercedes hit the white car, side-to-side, and impelled it >forwards, towards Levistre, and was FOLLOWING it, as it passed >Levistre's position, and as the bike overtook the Mercedes.
>>Ita, Mercedes hit albus car, side-to-side, ac impelled it> forwards, towards Levistre, ac est POSTERUS it, prout it passed> Levistre's position, ac prout bike overtook Mercedes.
> I think that the first, photographing, bike should have been ahead of the white car.
>Ego think ut 1, photographing, bike should habet est ahead de albus car.
> If the bike and the car essentially accelerated at the same instant the bike would outrun the car.
>Si bike ac car essentially accelerated alias same instant bike would outrun car.
> I think.
>Ego think.
> Bikes are far faster at acceleration that cars.
>Bikes est far faster alias acceleration ut cars.
> Any disagreements?
>Any disagreements?
>Of course, with two riders and a turbo car ...?
>De course, cum 2 riders ac prout turbo car...?
> For one thing, you are supposing then that the white car was ahead of the Merc at the instant that the Merc hit the central column/pilar/post.
>Enim 1 thing, vos est si deinde ut albus car est ahead de Merc alias instant ut Merc hit central column/ pilar/ post.
> That is in accord with my first guess.
>Ut est in accord cum my 1 guess.
>> >Does that clear things up?
>> >Perfecit ut clear things up?
> No.
>Non.
> It smokes them up.
>It smokes them up.
> But gives a number of possible occurances to consider.
>At datum prout numerus de possible occurances to consider.
>>> >>>Behind that, he says, there was >>>"another car" (presumably the Mercedes S- 280) and behind that, a large >>>motor-bike.
>>> >>>Behind ut, he dictus, ibi est>>>" alias car" ( presumably Mercedes S- 280) ac behind ut, prout magnus>>> motor-bike.
> So my first thought on that is that that is a second bike.
>Ita my 1 thought on ut est ut ut est prout 2 bike.
> And if we are talking about the left that might be better described as a second bike on the left as there might have been one or more bikes on the right in addition.
>Ac si nos est talking circa sinister ut might est bonus described prout prout 2 bike on sinister prout ibi might habet est 1 alias magis bikes on dexter in addition.
>>> >>Livestre lies again.
>>> >>Livestre lies again.
>> >What do you mean?
>> >Quae perfecit vos mean?
> What evidence is there that Levistre is "lying"?
>Quae evidence est ibi ut Levistre est" lying"?
> My supposition.
>My supposition.
>> >> He clearly saw and may have been a part >>of a conspiracy to cover up.
>> >>He clearly vide ac maius habet est prout part>> de prout conspiracy to cover up.
> So in my supposition he saw it >>and he lied about it.
>Ita in my supposition he vide it>> ac he lied circa it.
> Now if we go off on a train of thought to >>explore a hypothesis that Livestre was deliberately lying then >>I'll have to think about that some more.
>Modo si nos iit off on prout train de thought to>> explore prout hypothesis ut Livestre est deliberately lying deinde>> ego I'll habet to think circa ut some magis.
> I have not until the >>present considered the possibility that he was deliberately >>lying.
>Ego habet haud dum >> presens considered possibility ut he est deliberately>> lying.
>>> >I have - he could be in the pay of Al-Fayed (or his high-level masters) >That's always a possibility; but why should we single him out?
>>> >Ego habet - he potuit est in pay de Al-Fayed( alias his high-level magister) > ut est semper prout possibility; at cur should nos single eum out?
> I'm not singling him out.
>Ego est haud singling eum out.
> I am theorizing that there may have been a whole swarm of conspiring pap's surrounding Diana's car.
>Ego est theorizing ut ibi maius habet est prout whole swarm de conspiring pap's surrounding Diana's car.
> >What >about any (or ALL) of the other witnesses?
>>Quae> circa any( alias OMNIS) de aliud testes?
> I am inclined to go with the >majority (who saw closely pursuing vehicles) and focus suspicion on >Mohammed and Souad who - alone - say they did not.
>Ego est inclined to iit cum > majoritatatis( quae vide closely pursuing vehicles) ac focus suspicion on> Mohammed ac Souad quae - alone - dictus they perfecit haud.
>> >>If he were deliberately lying and saw the three vehicles >>abreast, > > He says he saw them one behind the other - until the bike overtook the >Mercedes.
>> >>Si he est deliberately lying ac vide 3 vehicles>> abreast, > > He dictus he vide them 1 behind aliud - dum bike overtook > Mercedes.
> Then the bike and the Mercedes were "abreast", but the white >car - so he implies - had already overtaken him by then!
>Deinde bike ac Mercedes est" abreast", at albus> car - ita he implies - habet iam overtaken eum a deinde!
> But why should >you suspect this to be a lie?
>At cur should> vos suspect haec to est prout lie?
> I think you, we, need to be very careful about exactly what instant is being described as being related to any single comment.
>Ego think vos, nos, need to est very careful circa exactly quae instant est est described prout est related to any single comment.
>> >> the photo flashes, the motorcycle accelerate, >>the car on the right bump the Merc into the central >>pilars, > >You want to hypothesize that the bike-overtake/flash occurred BEFORE the >sliding collision?
>> >> photo flashes, motorcycle accelerate, >> car on dexter bump Merc into central>> pilars, > > vos want to hypothesize ut bike-overtake/ flash occurred ANTE > sliding collision?
> What on earth for?
>Quae on terra enim?
> Well, if the supposition is as two photographing vehicles taking a photograph from both sides at the same instant .
>Bene, si supposition est prout 2 photographing vehicles taking prout photograph a ambo sides alias same instant.
> .
>
> .
>
> .
>
> There may also have been two contacts between the two vehicles?
>Ibi maius ac habet est 2 contacts inter 2 vehicles?
>The mirror thing may not have been considered significant.
> mirror thing maius haud habet est considered significant.
> The mirror would not have broken out the tail light.
> mirror would haud habet broken out tail light.
> So if the tail light was broken would not one suspect a corresponding dent on the Merc's right front fender?
>Ita si tail light est broken would haud 1 suspect prout corresponding dent on Merc's dexter front fender?
>> In reading this over I can not understand quickly the actions to cover up circumstances by police, courts, etc. unless Diana bite off and swallowed the tip of Dodi's penis from the force of the crash.
>>In reading haec over ego potuit haud understand quickly actions to cover up circumstances a police, judicium, etc. unless Diana bite off ac swallowed tip de Dodi's penis a force de crash.
> If some such had happened then that could explain a lot of things, But it would also demonstrate that there was no fear in the back seat at the time of crash which would be important to suggest that there was no demonstrated disagreement with Henri Paul's driving performance prior to the crash.
>Si some such habet happened deinde ut potuit explain prout lot de things, at it would ac demonstrate ut ibi est non fear in back seat alias temporis de crash quae would est important to suggest ut ibi est non demonstrated disagreement cum Henri Paul's driving performance prior to crash.
> >> that the first photoflashing motorcycle sped off >>past him and out of the tunnel as well as the vehicle that >>had bumped the Merc.
>>>Ut 1 photoflashing motorcycle sped off>> elapsus eum ac out of tunnel as well as vehicle ut>> habet bumped Merc.
> and then reported that in essence >>a followup motorcycle stopped to view into the Merc >>and it then resumed to exit the tunnel, etc. >> >You mean Levistre is concealing the existence of a second motorcycle?
>Ac deinde reported ut in essence>> prout followup motorcycle stopped to view into Merc>> ac it deinde resumed to exit tunnel, etc. >> > vos mean Levistre est concealing existence de prout 2 motorcycle?
>>True, Thierry H.
>>True, Thierry H.
> says he saw "several" motorcycles pursuing the >Mercedes, closely, towards the tunnel (he had a view along the cour >Albert Premier from the carriageway itself) but Clifford G.
>Dictus he vide" several" motorcycles pursuing > Mercedes, closely, towards tunnel( he habet prout view along cour> Albert Premier a carriageway ipse) at Clifford G.
> and Olivier >P (who were positioned to the right [north] of the road and could see no >more than the tunnel-entrance) report only " a car in front of the >Mercedes and a [one!
>Ac Olivier> P( quae est positioned to dexter[ north] de via ac potuit vide non> magis than tunnel-entrance) report unus" prout car in front of > Mercedes ac prout[ 1!
>] powerful motor-cycle, 30 - 40 metres behind.
>]powerful motor-cycle, 30 - 40 metres behind.
> I think it was Brian Anderson's story that a motorcycle moved to pass the Merc on its left as it entered the tunnel, which would be exact in accord with my one theory.
>Ego think it est Brian Anderson's story ut prout motorcycle moved to pass Merc on its sinister prout it iniit tunnel, quae would est exact in accord cum my 1 theory.
>> >Why should we not assume that the other bikes left the cour Albert >Premier, at the exit slip-road, leaving the pair on the bike, which >Clifford, Olivier and Levistre saw, to proceed into the tunnel for the >kill!?
>> >Cur should nos haud assume ut aliud bikes sinister cour Albert> Premier, alias exit slip-road, sinister pair on bike, quae> Clifford, Olivier ac Levistre vide, to proceed into tunnel enim > kill!?
> I don't think that the word "kill" is at all proper in a larger view.
>Ego perfecit haud think ut word" kill" est alias omnis proper in prout magnus view.
>"Photo" would I suggest be a more prevalent term for that point.
>"Photo" would ego suggest est prout magis prevalent term enim ut point.
>> >>I would like to see the animation sequences down to the 1 meter >>resolution.
>> >>Ego would like to vide animation sequences down to 1 meter>> resolution.
> I think the main constant that we can use is the >>physical distance on the road as being traversed by the Merc.
>Ego think main constant ut nos potuit use est >> physical distance on via prout est traversed a Merc.
> >>So the animation reference frames could be identified by reference >>to the tunnel face as metres + "plus" or - "minus" the tunnel face.
>>>Ita animation reference frames potuit est identified a reference>> to tunnel face prout metres+ " plus" alias -" minus" tunnel face.
>>>> >We would all (those of us who really wish to have it explained in >detail, that is) like to see sophisticated event-reconstruction >techniques brought to bear, together with an account of exactly what >data was employed and how it was used.
>>>> >Nos would omnis( those de nos quae really wish to habet it explained in> detail, ut est) like to vide sophisticated event-reconstruction> techniques brought to bear, unus cum an account de exactly quae> data est employed ac quam it est used.
> Fat chance of that, however - >unless you happen to have an event-reconstruction team on hand and you >can afford to cock a snoot at the politico-media complex.
>Fat chance de ut, autem -> unless vos happen to habet an event-reconstruction team on manus ac vos> potuit afford to cock prout snoot alias politico-media complex.
> There is the traffic accident reconstruction site off my web page.
>Ibi est traffic accident reconstruction site off my web folium.
> I saw reference to the most professional software photosho or paint shop of something like that.
>Ego vide reference to most professional software photosho alias paint shop de something like ut.
> I got a copy off the web.
>Ego got prout copy off web.
> One of these years I will move to do my accident and if at the same time I did a second of the Diana crash not much for starters.
>1 de these annus ego testimentum move to perfecit my accident ac si alias same temporis ego perfecit prout 2 de Diana crash haud much enim starters.
> > >>>Note that there is no vehicle present, in Levistre's story, which could >>>be the car of the witnesses Souad M.
>> >>>Note ut ibi est non vehicle presens, in Levistre's story, quae potuit>>> est car de testes Souad M.
> and Mohammed M.
>Ac Mohammed M.
> If we believe >>>Levistre, they weren't there!
>Si nos believe>>> Levistre, they est haud ibi!
> On the other hand, if we believe THEM, >>>the Mercedes crashed without any help from anyone - a very convenient >>>version of events, for the authorities, and completely contrary to the >>>testimony of ALL the other witnesses.
>On aliud manus, si nos believe THEM, >>> Mercedes crashed absque any help a anyone - prout very convenient>>> version de events, enim authorities, ac completely contrary to >>> testimony de OMNIS aliud testes.
>>> I am not suggesting that consideration should be limited to only one hypothetically possible series of events.
>>>Ego est haud suggesting ut consideration should est limited to unus 1 hypothetically possible series de events.
> It appears to me that there are apparently conflicting reports of circumstances.
>It comparuit to me ut ibi est apparently conflicting reports de circumstances.
> Therefore I suggest several parallel hypothetical story lines.
>Ergo ego suggest several parallel hypothetical story lines.
> That calls to mind something that I think Senator Sam Ervin said during the course of the Watergate hearings on Nixon's impeachment.
>Ut alias to mind something ut ego think Senator Sam Ervin dictus intra course de Watergate hearings on Nixon's impeachment.
> The in the four gospels there are accounts of what was reported to have been written by Pilate on the sign to be placed over Jesus Christ's head on the cross.
> in 4 gospels ibi est accounts de quae est reported to habet est scripsit a Pilate on signum to est locus over Jesus Christ's head on cross.
> Senator Sam said that if individuals whose testimoney we so reverence from the written testimony could be so reported as divergent then we need not be dismayed that good people of our own day may be reported as to not have agreed perfectly.
>Senator Sam dictus ut si individuals whose testimoney nos ita reverence a scripsit testimony potuit est ita reported prout divergent deinde nos need haud est dismayed ut bonus people de noster suus diei maius est reported prout to haud habet agreed perfectly.
> >>Hummnn >>> >>>The sequence of events, as Levistre recounts it, is very interesting, >>>because he seems to be saying that the "white car" stayed ahead of the >>>Mercedes and the motor-bike.
>>>Hummnn>>> >>> sequence de events, prout Levistre recounts it, est very interesting, >>> because he seems to est dictus ut " albus car" stayed ahead de >>> Mercedes ac motor-bike.
> I would think "ahead" of the Merc would be correct but not that the white car stayed ahead of the bike.
>Ego would think" ahead" de Merc would est correct at haud ut albus car stayed ahead de bike.
> Explaination given above.
>Explaination datum supra.
>>> >>Well, in my SH one possibility that I want to consider is that both >>the white car on the Merc's right hand side and the motorcycle on >>the Merc's left hand side came to a synchronized position along side >>the Merc such as to be able to take symultaneous flash photographs >>into the Merc from both sides at the same time.
>>> >>Bene, in my SH 1 possibility ut ego want to consider est ut ambo>> albus car on Merc's dexter manus side ac motorcycle on>> Merc's sinister manus side advenit to prout synchronized position along side>> Merc such prout to est able to take symultaneous flash photographs>> into Merc a ambo sides alias same temporis.
> If one is in a very >>heavy law suit one needs at least TWO corroberating withnesses.
>Si 1 est in prout very>> heavy juris suit 1 needs alias minus 2 corroberating withnesses.
> And a big pile of paps only seconds behind would be very important also.
>Ac prout big pile de paps unus seconds behind would est very important ac.
> If somebody hinted at the presence of a blackmail photo they could be assassinated in short order before they could ever get close to a court of law, and I heard a song the other day called "Smuggler's Blues" done in the Eighties by Glenn Frey has some good words.
>Si somebody hinted alias comparatio de prout blackmail photo they potuit est assassinated in short order ante they potuit ever get clausit to prout judicium de juris, ac ego heard prout song aliud diei alias" Smuggler's Blues" perfecit in Eighties a Glenn Frey habet some bonus words.
>>> >This seems to me to be fanciful in the extreme.
>>> >Haec seems to me to est fanciful in extreme.
> On what grounds do you >suggest it?
>On quae grounds perfecit vos> suggest it?
>> >>The same scene photographed by two separate photographers at >>exactly the same instant would be IDEAL.
>> >> same scene photographed a 2 separate photographers alias>> exactly same instant would est IDEAL.
>>> >"Ideal" for what?
>>> >"Ideal" enim quae?
> Come on Al!
>Advenit on Al!
> What are these simultaneous, two-angle >flash-photos supposed to be for?
>Quae est these simultaneous, two-angle> flash-photos supposed to est enim?
> Okay - you've said before that you >think they would have been compromising photos, and that MAF set up the >car-switch and the pursuit in order to obtain them.
>Okay - vos habet dictus ante ut vos> think they would habet est compromising photos, ac ut MAF set up > car-switch ac pursuit in order to obtain them.
> This is an >interesting idea, because, although it seems most likely to me that MAF >DID make these arrangements, I cannot decide precisely what it was that >he thought was going to happen.
>Haec est an> interesting idea, because, although it seems most likely to me ut MAF> PERFECIT factus these arrangements, ego potuit haud decide precisely quae it est ut> he thought est going to happen.
> A compromising photograph.
>Prout compromising photograph.
> Exactly in line with MAF's general opinion of John.
>Exactly in line cum MAF's general opinion de John.
> Q.
>Q.
> Public, Di, etc. > >Let us say that Diana and Dodi were not sleeping together, she was not >pregnant by him and they were not going to get engaged - or some >combination of these negatives - such that, in order to (what?
>Public, Di, etc. > > Let nos dictus ut Diana ac Dodi est haud sleeping unus, she est haud> fecunda a eum ac they est haud going to get desponsatus - alias some> combination de these negatives - such ut, in order to( quae?
>) gain >influence over Diana or disgrace her or force her to marry Dodi?
>)gain> influence over Diana alias disgrace eam alias force eam to conjugatus Dodi?
> - the >Al-Fayeds conceived the scheme I would guess that conception of the scheme would have happened far away from MAF.
>- > Al-Fayeds conceived scheme ego would guess ut conception de scheme would habet happened far away a MAF.
> If a group were looking for someone to set up some such scheme MAF might have been found to have been a good candidate to approach for the leading role but the script had been written long before and they just needed some one to play the part.
>Si prout group est looking for someone to set up some such scheme MAF might habet est invenit to habet est prout bonus candidate to approach enim leading role at script habet est scripsit long ante ac they just needed some 1 to play part.
> >of obtaining compromising photographs.
>>De obtaining compromising photographs.
> A >clever ruse is employed to get rid of some of the escort (but why not >all?
>Prout> clever ruse est employed to get rid de some de escort( at cur haud> omnis?
>) THE COMPROMISING photo to be used for blackmail to influence Diana not to take a strong public stand on some particular issue from time to time would have been financed by an external consortium, QEII, Chas, Military landmine sales proponents, etc. In order to be of use at selected times the photo could not be public.
>) COMPROMISING photo to est used enim blackmail to influence Diana haud to take prout strong public stand on some particular proles a temporis to temporis would habet est financed a an external consortium, QEII, Chas, Military landmine sales proponents, etc. in order to est de use alias selected temporis photo potuit haud est public.
> If that happened it would have been a one time shot when ever it fell into public hands.
>Si ut happened it would habet est prout 1 temporis shot dum ever it fell into public manus.
> To be worth the expense and effort it had to be kept secret but its circumstance had to be indisputable else any single person threatening exposure of some such would be under extremely high surveillance in moments.
>To est worth expense ac effort it habet to est kept secret at its circumstance habet to est indisputable else any single person threatening exposure de some such would est infra extremely high surveillance in moments.
> > the remaining escort follows from the Hotel, against orders, thus >giving the impression that they are up to no good.
>> remaining escort posterus a Hotel, contra orders, ita> datum impression ut they est up to non bonus.
> Henri has been >briefed to flee them - he flees.
>Henri habet est> briefed to flee them - he flees.
> An ambush of pursuers has been arranged >on the cour la Reine - to keep Henri in flight and to give Dodi an >excuse for grabbing Diana (as though protectively) I can't imagine anything but a photograph of a blowjob.
>An ambush de pursuers habet est arranged> on cour la Reine - to keep Henri in flight ac to datum Dodi an> excuse enim grabbing Diana( prout though protectively) ego potuit haud imagine anything at prout photograph de prout blowjob.
> Sex is no big thing nowadays.
>Generis est non big thing nowadays.
> In royal family tradition, the past, it may have been able to throw a little influence at an intense moment of public conflict.
>In regius domus tradition, elapsus, it maius habet potuit throw prout parvus influence alias an intense moment de public conflict.
> There is so much detailed sex on the web that I wouldn't doubt that to find a microscopic photo of a pubic hair would take more than a few minutes.
>Ibi est ita much detailed generis on web ut ego wouldn't haud doubt ut to invenit prout microscopic photo de prout pubic hair would take magis than prout few minutes.
> So if any eyebrows were going to be raised maybe a court threatening a loss of Di's finances for breach of contract re: approximately non modest public behavior.
>Ita si any eyebrows est going to est levabat maybe prout judicium threatening prout loss de Di's finances enim breach de contracti re: circiter non modest public behavior.
> So if Di was very cognizant of contract provisions regarding public behavior as a determinant of her divorce settlement then she would have to have exercised the utmost discression.
>Ita si Di est very cognizant de contracti provisions regarding public behavior prout prout determinant de eam divortium settlement deinde she would habet to habet exercised utmost discression.
> But if she was going to find any male support outside of her ex's she would have to at some point show some affection.
>At si she est going to invenit any mas support outside de eam ex's she would habet to alias some point show some affection.
> Now where could one find any more hope of privacy than in the tunnel of love in a speeding limosine?
>Modo ubi potuit 1 invenit any magis hope de privacy than in tunnel de love in prout speeding limosine?
> But to be effective for black mail the photo would have to appear as immodest public behavior.
>At to est effective enim niger mail photo would habet to comparuit prout immodest public behavior.
> I said PUBLIC.
>Ego dictus PUBLIC.
> So on the one hand Diana would have shyed away from any PUBLIC behavior but people interested in obtaining a photo for blackmail would have to make the circumstances of the photo look as public as possible.
>Ita on 1 manus Diana would habet shyed away a any PUBLIC behavior at people interested in obtaining prout photo enim blackmail would habet to factus circumstances de photo look prout public prout possible.
> TWO photo's from TWO different photographers and surrounding photos from another hundred photographers could be made to look like PUBLIC IMMODESTY while the circumstance of the back seat of a speeding limosine in the tunnel in the middle of the night is about as close to "private" behavior as I can imagine anyone could get on short notice.
>2 photo's a 2 different photographers ac surrounding photos a alias 100 photographers potuit est factus to look like PUBLIC IMMODESTY dum circumstance de back seat de prout speeding limosine in tunnel in middle de nox est circa prout clausit to" private" behavior prout ego potuit imagine anyone potuit get on short nota bene.
> >- a car is stationed >at the tunnel-entrance to stop the Mercedes (a very risky proceeding, >from a father's point of view, don't you think?
>>- prout car est stationed> alias tunnel-entrance to stop Mercedes( prout very risky proceeding, > a prout genitor point de view, perfecit haud vos think?
>) the Mercedes is slowed, >the pursuers catch up, the photographs are taken.
>) Mercedes est slowed, > pursuers catch up, photographs est taken.
>> >Photographs of what?
>> >Photographs de quae?
> Diana giving Dodi a blow job.
>Diana datum Dodi prout blow job.
> What else could even raise an eyebrowe nowadays?
>Quae else potuit et levabat an eyebrowe nowadays?
> Hell, if you had to sell such a photograph to get a MacDonald's hamburger you would have a lot of competition in the current market.
>Hell, si vos habet to sell such prout photograph to get prout MacDonald's hamburger vos would habet prout lot de competition in current market.
> > A terrified Diana in Dodi's arms?
>>Prout terrified Diana in Dodi's arms?
> Diana being >raped by Dodi?
>Diana est> raped a Dodi?
> - is that what you're working up to saying?
>- est ut quae vos est working up to dictus?
> My dear chap!
>My dear chap!
> Who is going to conspire, and pay big money, for something like that?
>Quae est going to conspire, ac pay big moneta, enim something like ut?
>Nobody.
>Nobody.
> >Diana crouched down on the floor behind Henri's seat, and Dodi remained >upright - probably viewing the pursuit with anxiety - possibly grappling >with TRJ to prevent him interfering with the driving.
>>Diana crouched down on floor behind Henri's seat, ac Dodi remained> pudica - probably viewing pursuit cum anxiety - possibly grappling> cum TRJ to prevent eum interfering cum driving.
> What sign is >there - apart from the fact that neither Diana nor Dodi were wearing >seat-belts - that Dodi was attempting to grapple with Diana?
>Quae signum est> ibi - apart a fact ut nec Diana nor Dodi est wearing> seat-belts - ut Dodi est attempting to grapple cum Diana?
>> >Again, I say, "photographs of what?
>> >Again, ego dictus, " photographs de quae?
>" - precisely - and what were they >for?
>"- precisely - ac quae est they> enim?
> - according to your theory.
>- according to tuus theory.
> A picture of a blow job - for blackmail.
>Prout picture de prout blow job - enim blackmail.
>> >Why could these photographs not have been taken with spy-cameras at one >of the Fayed residences Because such a photo would possibly be identified as an invasion of privacy.
>> >Cur potuit these photographs haud habet est taken cum spy-cameras alias 1> de Fayed habitatio Because such prout photo would possibly est identified prout an invasion de privacy.
> It had to look like PUBLIC Immodest Behavior to cause a diminution of Diana's influence in the public media.
>It habet to look like PUBLIC Immodest Behavior to causa prout diminution de Diana's influence in public media.
> >at which Diana stayed?
>>Alias quae Diana stayed?
> How could it have been >hoped that photographs of an especially compromising nature could have >been obtained at high speed in the Alma Tunnel, rather than on the >Jonikal, at the Ritz or at the rue Arsene?
>Quam potuit it habet est> hoped ut photographs de an especially compromising nature potuit habet> est obtained alias high speed in Alma Tunnel, rather than on > Jonikal, alias Ritz alias alias rue Arsene?
> What on earth is the point?
>Quae on terra est point?
> Would behavior on the yatch or at the Ritz be considered public or private by Diana.
>Would behavior on yatch alias alias Ritz est considered public alias private a Diana.
> My guess is that Diana would have considered it PUBLIC.
>My guess est ut Diana would habet considered it PUBLIC.
>> >One glimmer of a suggestion of a possibility does occur to me, as a >result of examining this idea, however.
>> >1 glimmer de prout suggestion de prout possibility perfecit occur to me, prout prout> result de examining haec idea, autem.
> What if Dodi was having >difficulty getting physical with Diana?
>Quae si Dodi est habet> difficulty getting physical cum Diana?
> Did Dad devise an elaborate >ruse to throw them together?
>Perfecit Dad devise an elaborate> ruse to throw them unus?
> Or rather, was he advised to do so by >those who wanted Diana dead NOT DEAD.
>Alias rather, est he advised to perfecit ita a> those quae wanted Diana denatus HAUD DENATUS.
> There is a whole hell of a lot of difference in wanting some one to have less public influence in the public media than in wanting someone to be dead.
>Ibi est prout whole hell de prout lot de difference in wanting some 1 to habet minus public influence in public media than in wanting someone to est denatus.
> >- so that he would implement the scheme >without knowing what it was really for?
>>- so that he would implement scheme> absque knowing quae it est really enim?
> Quite simple.
>Quite simple.
> A compromising photograph.
>Prout compromising photograph.
> >Something of the sort must have >happened, I think - and it's not so incredible if you consider that >MAF's masters may have been pretending to attempt to pull off a Fayed- >Spencer match (with big bucks in it for MAF) for some time - so that >the Machiavellian complexity of engineering the car-switch, the >disposition of the escort, the arrangements for the route and the >programming of Henri Paul, might not have aroused MAF's suspicions.
>>Something de sort must habet> happened, ego think - ac it's est haud ita incredible si vos consider ut> MAF's magister maius habet est pretending to attempt to pull off prout Fayed-> Spencer match( cum big bucks in it enim MAF) enim some temporis - so that> Machiavellian complexity de engineering car-switch, > disposition de escort, arrangements enim route ac > programming de Henri Paul, might haud habet aroused MAF's suspicions.
> A photograph would be the most logical thing in the whole world.
>Prout photograph would est most logical thing in whole saeculum.
>No body would be suspicious of anything.
>Non corporis would est suspicious de anything.
>> >Other factors, such as sabotaging the S-280's brakes and air-bags, >briefing the escort to monitor the crash but not get involved, etc, >could have been achieved by MAF's backers, over MAF's head, The theft and modification of the vehicle could have been well disguised.
>> >Aliud factors, such prout sabotaging S-280's brakes ac air-bags, > briefing escort to monitor crash at haud get involved, etc, > potuit habet est achieved a MAF's backers, over MAF's head, theft ac modification de vehicle potuit habet est bene disguised.
> >such that >Siegel and Musa (Etoile Limousines) and Wingfield and Dournot were not >only working for MAF, but for his masters, DIRECTLY.
>>such ut> Siegel ac Musa( Etoile Limousines) ac Wingfield ac Dournot est haud> unus working enim MAF, at enim his magister, DIRECTLY.
> However, if that were part of the plot, then PLANS TO GET THAT VEHICLE TO THAT PLACE IN TIME WOULD HAVE TO HAVE BEEN ROCK SOLID FOR MONTHS IN ADVANCE.
>Autem, si ut est part de plot, deinde PLANS TO GET UT VEHICLE TO UT LOCUS IN TEMPORIS WOULD HABET TO HABET EST ROCK SOLID ENIM MENSIS IN ADVANCE.
> There is the clear windows in one train of thought and defective equipment as possibly another.
>Ibi est clear windows in 1 train de thought ac defective equipment prout possibly alias.
>> >Indeed, assuming that MAF did not know that the fatal crash was >intended, those of MAF's employees who MUST have known that a fatal >crash was intended, MUST have been working directly for those who >intentionally engineered it.
>> >Indeed, assuming ut MAF perfecit haud know ut fatal crash est> intended, those de MAF's employees quae MUST habet known ut prout fatal> crash est intended, MUST habet est working directly enim those quae> intentionally engineered it.
>> If a crash after the photo were planned the least people in the area who needed to know was just the driver of the white car.
>>Si prout crash post photo est planned minus people in pars quae needed to know est just driver de albus car.
> Second could have been the photographer on the back of the motorcycle who had to aim a shot into the driver's eyes.
>2 potuit habet est photographer on back de motorcycle quae habet to aim prout shot into driver's eyes.
> >>>At least, he describes the "white car" >>>passing him, and disappearing westwards, before he begins to describe >>>the motor-bike overtaking the Mercedes and cutting-in in front of it.
>>>>Alias minus, he describes " albus car" >>> passing eum, ac disappearing westwards, ante he iniit to describe>>> motor-bike overtaking Mercedes ac cutting-in in front of it.
> >> >>So this gets the locations screwed up and out of sync.
>>> >>Ita haec gets locations screwed up ac out of sync.
>>> >>> >>> The impression given (that the "white car" was a long way ahead of the >>>Mercedes and the motorbike) is probably an illusion created by the >>>difficulty involved in describing the situation; >> >>Also, a witness in a high speed drive has their own road to watch as >>well as looking in the rear view mirror.
>>> >>> >>> impression datum( ut " albus car" est prout long modus ahead de >>> Mercedes ac motorbike) est probably an illusion created a >>> difficulty involved in describing situation; >> >> ac, prout testes in prout high speed drive habet their suus via to watch prout>> bene prout looking in rear view mirror.
> So one might have a strobe >>light effect of only seeing a flash of an instant when they happened >>to have the opportunity to look in the mirror.
>Ita 1 might habet prout strobe>> light effect de unus vide prout flash de an instant dum they happened>> to habet opportunity to look in mirror.
>>> >>>but there is no >>>escaping the conclusion that the Mercedes did not completely squeeze >>>past the white car, but came alongside it, on its left, in a sliding >>>collision, >> >>My suggestion would be to consider that the Merc was the >>vehicle in the middle of the road, that the white vehicle would >>have been on its right and the motorcycle on its left, three >>abreast.
>>> >>>At ibi est non>>> escaping conclusion ut Mercedes perfecit haud completely squeeze>>> elapsus albus car, at advenit alongside it, on its sinister, in prout sliding>>> collision, >> >> My suggestion would est to consider ut Merc est >> vehicle in middle de via, ut albus vehicle would>> habet est on its dexter ac motorcycle on its sinister, 3>> abreast.
>>> >>And that point photoflashes were fired and then the white >>car accelerated >> >>>which impelled the white car forwards, towards Levistre and >>>out of harm's way; >> >>And the motorcycle accelerated >> >>>whereupon the motorbike >> >>accelerated and swerved in front of >>the Mercedes.
>>> >>Ac ut point photoflashes est fired ac deinde albus>> car accelerated>> >>> quae impelled albus car forwards, towards Levistre ac>>> out of harm's modus; >> >> ac motorcycle accelerated>> >>> whereupon motorbike>> >> accelerated ac swerved in front of>> Mercedes.
>>> >>No.
>>> >>Non.
> That is even wrong.
>Ut est et wrong.
> In my SH.
>In my SH.
>>> >>Let's try it another way.
>>> >>Let's nos try it alias modus.
> More to the >>"DELIBERATE BUMP OFF" conspiracy >>supposition.
>Magis to >>" DELIBERATE BUMP OFF" conspiracy>> supposition.
>>> >>In that, the motorcycle would have fired >>a series of quick flashes as it accelerated >>in front of the Mercedes.
>>> >>In ut, motorcycle would habet fired>> prout series de quick flashes prout it accelerated>> in front of Mercedes.
> The first flash >>would have been into the back seat but >>a second would have been directly into >>the eyes of Henri Paul.
> 1 flash>> would habet est into back seat at>> prout 2 would habet est directly into>> eyes de Henri Paul.
> Having blinded >>him, it would then accelerate and as soon >>as it was clear the vehicle on the right would >>bump the Mercedes' front into the center >>pilars.
>Habet blinded>> eum, it would deinde accelerate ac prout soon>> prout it est clear vehicle on dexter would>> bump Mercedes' front into center>> pilars.
>>> >>>overtook the slowed Mercedes >>>and (also according to Levistre) cut-in in front of it and produced "a >>>searing burst of light, much brighter than a photo-flash".
>>> >>>overtook slowed Mercedes>>> ac( ac according to Levistre) cut-in in front of it ac produced" prout>>> searing burst de light, much brighter than prout photo-flash".
>>>> >>>At this point, Levistre, braked and came to a halt near the western end >>>of the tunnel.
>>>> >>>Alias haec point, Levistre, braked ac advenit to prout halt apud western finis>>> de tunnel.
> >> >>More correctly, NOT "At this point" but at "A POINT" near the >>western end of the tunnel.
>>> >>Magis correctly, HAUD" alias haec point" at alias" prout POINT" apud >> western finis de tunnel.
>>> >>>The Mercedes had crashed, and the bikers (like Brenda >>>Wells, Levistre affirms that there were two of them) had stopped by the >>>wreck.
>>> >>> Mercedes habet crashed, ac bikers( like Brenda>>> bene, Levistre affirmavit ut ibi est 2 de them) habet stopped a >>> wreck.
> >> >>That does not sound possible to me.
>>> >>Ut perfecit haud sound possible to me.
> It may depend upon speed.
>It maius depend upon speed.
>>>Assuming that the whole action was taking place at some >>above average speed then if at least the bike on the left had >>accelerated ahead of the Merc it could not have stopped.
>>>Assuming ut whole action est taking locus alias some>> supra average speed deinde si alias minus bike on sinister habet>> accelerated ahead de Merc it potuit haud habet stopped.
> If it >>did not stop then it may have passed Livestre and exited the >>tunnel.
>Si it>> perfecit haud stop deinde it maius habet passed Livestre ac exited >> tunnel.
> Whether a second bike stopped might be considerable.
>Whether prout 2 bike stopped might est considerable.
>>> >>>One of them got off, momentarily, to look into the Mercedes, >>>jumped back on again, and the bike sped off, passing Levistre as it did >>>so.
>>> >>>1 de them got off, momentarily, to look into Mercedes, >>> jumped back on again, ac bike sped off, passing Levistre prout it perfecit>>> ita.
> Levistre describes the bike as "black" and the two men as "dressed >>>in black with black helmets".
>Levistre describes bike prout" niger" ac 2 hominis prout" dressed>>> in niger cum niger helmets".
> The whole thing took just a few seconds.
> whole thing took just prout few seconds.
>>>> >>>Considerable efforts have been made to discredit Levistre.
>>>> >>>Considerable efforts habet est factus to discredit Levistre.
> It has been >>>said, for example, that his attitude to the press was "hostile" and that >>>he was trying to "gain attention"; but there could be another reason for >>>these attacks on his character - he witnessed a murder!
>It habet est>>> dictus, enim example, ut his attitude to press est" hostile" ac ut>>> he est trying to" gain attention"; at ibi potuit est alias reason enim>>> these attacks on his character - he testes prout murder!
> There is no >>>other interpretation you can put on his testimony.
>Ibi est non>>> aliud interpretation vos potuit put on his testimony.
>>>> >>>Yes, indeed (to answer your question) the lanes were used as a slow-lane >>>and an overtaking lane - ludicrous speed-limit signs notwithstanding!
>>>> >>>Yes, indeed( to answer tuus question) lanes est used prout prout slow-lane>>> ac an overtaking lane - ludicrous speed-limit signum notwithstanding!
>>>> >>>Other answers in another post >> >><a href="http://members.home.com/godsbrain">G.O.D.S.B.R.A.I.N.</a><br> > >-- >Steve Reed Alvin H.
>>>> >>>Aliud answers in alias post>> >>< prout href=" http:// members. domus. com/ godsbrain"> G. O. D. S. B. R. prout. ego. N.</ prout>< br> > > --> Steve Reed Alvin H.
> White <a href="http://members.home.com/godsbrain">G.O.D.S.B.R.A.I.N.</a><br>
>Albus< prout href=" http:// members. domus. com/ godsbrain"> G. O. D. S. B. R. prout. ego. N.</ prout>< br>
GODS...@home.com
>From GODS...@HOME.COM Wed May 03 15:40:25 2000 Path: news1.
>Da GODSBRAIN@ CASE. COM Wed maggio 3 15: 40: 25 2000 percorso: news1.
>frmt1.
>frmt1.
>sfba.
>sfba.
>home.
>Case.
>com!
>com!
>newshub1.
>newshub1.
>home.
>Case.
>com!
>com!
>news.
>news.
>home.
>Case.
>com!
>com!
>news1.
>news1.
>frmt1.
>frmt1.
>sfba.
>sfba.
>home.
>Case.
>com.
>com.
>POSTED!
>POSTED!
>not-for-mail From: GODS...@HOME.COM Newsgroups: alt.
>not-for-mail da: GODSBRAIN@ CASE. COM Newsgroups: alt.
>conspiracy.
>Cospirazione.
>princess-diana Subject: Re: Di: Paul, Henri, History, 60 Page Autopsy, Etc. Organization: <a href="http://members.home.com/godsbrain">G.O.D.S.B.R.A.I.N.</a><br> Reply-To: GODS...@HOME.COM,GODS...@AOL.COM Message-ID: <suv0hs4b86ldf6kh1...@4ax.com> References: <20000416220330.
>princess-diana soggetti: Re: Di: Paul, Henri, storia, 60 pagina autopsia, ecc. organizzazione: < poiché href=" http:// membro. case. com/ godsbrain"> G. O. D. S. B. R. poiché. io. N.</ poiché>< br> Reply-To: GODSBRAIN@ CASE. COM, GODSBRAIN@ AOL. COM Message-ID: < suv0hs4b86ldf6kh11pg4usgb988mp55km@ 4ax. com> referenza: < 20000416220330.
>18658.
>18658.
>0000...@ng-cg1.aol.com> <38fa9...@huge.aa.net> <8n1mfss0cu2ou4qhe...@4ax.com> <025220ee.
>4069@ ng-cg1. aol. com> < 38fa90de_2@ huge. aa. net> < 8n1mfss0cu2ou4qhej2ujs106jhqfrbbol@ 4ax. com> < 025220ee.
>5e23...@usw-ex0104-033.remarq.com> <VHL8$AAWpz$4I...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> <03cfeca4.
>5e23de39@ usw-ex0104-033. remarq. com> < VHL8$ AAWpz$ 4IAaS@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> < 03cfeca4.
>e454...@usw-ex0105-038.remarq.com> <5AGHurAe...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> <022cd178.
>e454e6ea@ usw-ex0105-038. remarq. com> < 5AGHurAeP0A5IAT7@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> < 022cd178.
>7c06...@usw-ex0105-037.remarq.com> <0PU0NLBY...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> <2ehrgsobh76u0sheo...@4ax.com> <EwaIiIA+...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.
>7c06d2cf@ usw-ex0105-037. remarq. com> < 0PU0NLBYabD5IAaW@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> < 2ehrgsobh76u0sheo8fsoso92h16ood0pr@ 4ax. com> < EwaIiIA+ 6EE5IAXR@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> X-Newsreader: Forte agente 1.
>7/32.
>7/ 32.
>534 MIME-Version: 1.
>534 MIME-Version: 1.
>0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 683 Date: Wed, 03 May 2000 22:40:25 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.
>0 Content-Type: testo/ pianura; charset= us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit linea: 683 data: Wed, 3 maggio 2000 22: 40: 25 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.
>7.
>7.
>83.
>83.
>23 X-Complaints-To: ab...@home.net X-Trace: news1.
>23 X-Complaints-To: abuso@ case. net X-Trace: news1.
>frmt1.
>frmt1.
>sfba.
>sfba.
>home.
>Case.
>com 957393625 24.
>com 957393625 24.
>7.
>7.
>83.
>83.
>23 (Wed, 03 May 2000 15:40:25 PDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 03 May 2000 15:40:25 PDT Xref: newshub1.
>23( Wed, 3 maggio 2000 15: 40: 25 PDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 3 maggio 2000 15: 40: 25 PDT Xref: newshub1.
>home.
>Case.
>com alt.
>com alt.
>conspiracy.
>Cospirazione.
>princess-diana:30031204 -------- </html> OK.
>princess-diana: 30031204 --------</ html> OK.
> What do we call this?
>Che cosa dos we chiamata questa?
> The daily replay of the daily revised version of the God's Brain Suppositional Hypothesis.
>Gli quotidiana replay di gli quotidiana rivede versione di gli dio cervello Suppositional ipotesi.
> Act ______ Scene ________ Having read the below a time or two, or few, some opportunity to explain weighted influence factors in the construction of the daily hypothesis.
>Atto ______ scena ________ abbi legemmo gli below poiché tempo o 2, o pochi, alcuni opportunità a spiegammo weighted influence fattore in gli costruzione di gli quotidiana ipotesi.
> Since the authorities have had two and a half years with the manpower, peoplepower, staff power, of what was it reported?
>Since gli autorità abbi abbi 2 e poiché metà anni con gli manpower, peoplepower, staff potenza, di che cosa was esso riporta?
> Some 24 full time investigators and million(s) dollar equivalent budgets I am not competing with that.
>Alcuni 24 pieni tempo investigators e 1000000( s) dollari equivalente bilancio io am non compete con cui.
> The outcome reports of that investigation appear to be: Drunk driver speeds without the care of D+D+TRJ and abruptly turns left into a central column.
>Gli outcome resoconto di cui investigazione appaio a be: bere driver speeds senza gli care di D+ D+ TRJ e abruptly giro esce into poiché centrale colonna.
> Simple Road Traffic Accident RTA.
>Semplice strada traffico incidente RTA.
> When and over the time since the creation of alt.
>Quando e sopra gli tempo since gli creazione di alt.
>conspiracy.
>Cospirazione.
>princess-diana by b.
>princess-diana by b.
>anana his philosophical position as I read it is to approximately take the position for sake of arguement that Diana was killed as the result of a conspiracy.
>anana suoi filosofica posizione poiché io legemmo esso is a approximately prende gli posizione per sake di arguement cui Diana was stecchendo poiché gli risultati di poiché cospirazione.
> Because it has appeared to me that while times, places, people, and motives have been discussed I have a feeling that there has been less than reasonable consideration of some possibilities.
>Because esso abbi appaio a me cui while tempo, luoghi, gente, e movente abbi been discusse io abbi poiché sente cui là abbi been meno than ragionevole considerazione di alcuni possibilità.
> As a consequence of that belief I am trying to construct a suppositional hypothesis that will identify possible, persons, places, things that may be considered as possible.
>Poiché poiché conseguenza di cui credenza io am prova a costruendo poiché suppositional ipotesi cui will identificammo possibile, persona, luoghi, cosa cui maggio be considera poiché possibile.
> The intent is to create multiple fictional tracks such that the most possible/ununderstood may be considered.
>Gli intent is a crei multipla romanzata pista tale cui gli most possibile/ ununderstood maggio be considera.
> Many of the pieces are for the most part agreed as having been in the area but there is a lot of discrepancy as to the EXACT location at a SPECIFIC INSTANT.
>Molti di gli pezzo are per gli most parte accorda poiché abbi been in gli area ma là is poiché sorte di discrepanza poiché a gli ESATTA località at poiché SPECIFICI INSTANT.
> My intent is to create this fictional supposition to give, or try to determine, the differences between points of agreement and points of disharmony.
>Mia intent is a crei questa romanzata supposition a dai, o prova a determina, gli differenza tra punta di accordo e punta di disharmony.
> Agreement/Disagreement and Harmony/Disharmony.
>Accordo/ disaccordo e armonia/ Disharmony.
> Concord vs Discord.
>Concord vs discordia.
> If there might have been common interest to finance a joint project to lessen Diana's influence with the media because she was percieved to be "stepping on someones toes" , my words, then how might some such plan, plot, conspiracy, have been considered achievable from a variety of possible participant's points of view?
>Qualora là might abbi been comune interesse a finanza poiché joint progetto a lessen Diana's influence con gli media because ella was percieved a be" stepping su someones toes" , mia parola, allora come might alcuni tale piani, plot, cospirazione, abbi been considera achievable da poiché varietà di possibile partecipante punta di view?
> My typing fingers are not going to stand too long a discussion at this point so I am going to try to speed along.
>Mia typing dito are non going to sta troppo lunga poiché discussione at questa punta so io am going to prova a speed along.
> My supposition is that if there was a conspiracy it had to be to do something.
>Mia supposition is cui qualora là was poiché cospirazione esso abbi a be a dos qualcosa.
> A photo of Diana giving Dodi a blow job in the back seat of a limo would be pretty good.
>Poiché photo di Diana dai Dodi poiché soffi job in gli ritorno sede di poiché limo voleste be carina bene.
>For the photo to achieve maximum benefit it had to be secret and to be used as a threat.
>Per gli photo a riesce massima beneficio esso abbi a be segreto e a be adopera poiché poiché minaccia.
>The actual publication in mass media would deflate its power.
>Gli attuale divulgazione in massa media voleste deflate suo potenza.
> But it had to have strong and undisputable evidence that it was TRUE if it were ever going to be used.
>Ma esso abbi a abbi forte e undisputable prove cui esso was VERA qualora esso were ever going to be adopera.
> For some paparazzi to "peeping tom" photo a divorcee with her boyfriend in private was not going to do the job.
>Per alcuni paparazzi a" peeping tom" photo poiché divorziato con le boyfriend in privata was non going to dos gli job.
> So the construct of a whore for money with an oily bedhopper in the back seat of a very expensive limo would be much more philosophically correct for the purpose of a conspiracy to get a photo to use for blackmail in the future but not for actual publication.
>So gli costruendo di poiché puttana per denaro con un oleosa bedhopper in gli ritorno sede di poiché molto expensive limo voleste be much più philosophically corregeste per gli intento di poiché cospirazione a get poiché photo a uso per ricatto in gli futura ma non per attuale divulgazione.
> On Wed, 3 May 2000 17:07:26 +0100, Steve Reed <asr...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> wrote: >Path: news1.
>Su Wed, 3 maggio 2000 17: 7: 26+ 100, Steve Reed< asreed@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> scrisse: > percorso: news1.
>frmt1.
>frmt1.
>sfba.
>sfba.
>home.
>Case.
>com!
>com!
>newshub2.
>newshub2.
>rdc1.
>rdc1.
>sfba.
>sfba.
>home.
>Case.
>com!
>com!
>newshub1.
>newshub1.
>home.
>Case.
>com!
>com!
>news.
>news.
>home.
>Case.
>asreed >From: Steve Reed <asr...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> >Newsgroups: alt.
>asreed> da: Steve Reed< asreed@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> > Newsgroups: alt.
>conspiracy.
>Cospirazione.
>princess-diana >Subject: Re: Di: Paul, Henri, History, 60 Page Autopsy, Etc. >Date: Wed, 3 May 2000 17:07:26 +0100 >Organization: Home >Lines: 297 >Message-ID: <EwaIiIA+...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> >References: <20000416201432.
>princess-diana> soggetti: Re: Di: Paul, Henri, storia, 60 pagina autopsia, ecc. > data: Wed, 3 maggio 2000 17: 7: 26+ 100> organizzazione: case> linea: 297> Message-ID: < EwaIiIA+ 6EE5IAXR@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> > referenza: < 20000416201432.
>216 (3 May 2000 18:01:58 GMT) >NNTP-Posting-Date: 3 May 2000 18:01:58 GMT >X-Complaints-To: ab...@theplanet.net >X-Newsreader: Turnpike Integrated Version 4.
>216( 3 maggio 2000 18: 1: 58 GMT) > NNTP-Posting-Date: 3 maggio 2000 18: 1: 58 GMT> X-Complaints-To: abuso@ theplanet. net> X-Newsreader: Turnpike integra versione 4.
>02 M <TWkHBtca5wWBvmfWwoLIWQkgFM> >Xref: newshub1.
>2 M< TWkHBtca5wWBvmfWwoLIWQkgFM> > Xref: newshub1.
>home.
>Case.
>com alt.
>com alt.
>conspiracy.
>Cospirazione.
>princess-diana:30031199 > >In article <2ehrgsobh76u0sheo...@4ax.com>, >GODS...@HOME.COM writes >>>there was "a white car", >>>in the middle of the road, behind him.
>princess-diana: 30031199> > in articolo< 2ehrgsobh76u0sheo8fsoso92h16ood0pr@ 4ax. com>, > GODSBRAIN@ CASE. COM scrisse>>> là was" poiché bianca car", >>> in gli metà di gli strada, dietro lui.
> >> >>So Livestre lied.
>>> >>So Livestre mente.
> The white car was not in the middle >>of the road, the Mercedes was in the middle of the >>road.
>Gli bianca car was non in gli metà>> di gli strada, gli Mercedes was in gli metà di gli>> strada.
> Why did Livestre lie?
>Why did Livestre mente?
> Maybe Livestre did not lie in that particular.
>Maybe Livestre did non mente in cui particolari.
> One needs to be very careful as to "at what instant" and did he say the middle of the road or the middle of the lane?
>1 bisogna a be molto careful poiché a" at che cosa instant" e did egli dando gli metà di gli strada o gli metà di gli lane?
> It was said that he had moved into the right lane.
>Esso was dando cui egli abbi mosse into gli destra lane.
> If he said the white car was in the middle of the [right] lane I would agree.
>Qualora egli dando gli bianca car was in gli metà di gli[ destra] lane io voleste accorda.
>> >Levistre is not contradicting himself.
>> >Levistre is non contraddendo himself.
> He saw the white car "au milieu >de la chaussee" So, does "chaussee" come closer to translating as "lane" or on the other hand, "road?
>Egli vede gli bianca car" au milieu> de la chaussee" So, does" chaussee" provenendo peosimma a tradurre poiché" lane" o su gli all'altra mano, " strada?
>" Road having two lanes.
>"Strada abbi 2 lanes.
> >and was overtaken by it ("elle me double") But exactly where were the other actors at the exact instant that "elle me double?
>>E was overtaken by esso(" elle me doppi") ma exactly dove were gli all'altra attore at gli esatta instant cui" elle me doppi?
>" >"Then", he >says ("puis j'observe [retroviseur] une autre auto toujours au milieu de >la route") "I saw [rear-view mirror] another car, also in the middle of >the road" So here we have a "milieu de la route.
>" >"Allora", egli> dando(" puis j'observe[ retroviseur] une autre auto toujours au milieu de> la rotta") " io vede[ rear-view specchio] un'altra car, e in gli metà di> gli strada" So qui we abbi poiché" milieu de la rotta.
>" Does that mean closer the lane or the road?
>"Does cui significammo peosimma gli lane o gli strada?
> >("et soudain une grosse moto sur sa gauche qui lui fait une >queue de poisson") "and, all of a sudden, a large motor-bike, to the >left of it, cutting-in in front of it".
>>("et soudain une grosse moto sur sa gauche qui lui fait une> queue de poisson") " e, tutte di poiché improvvisa, poiché grande motor-bike, a gli> esce di esso, cutting-in in front of esso".
> I will take it that AT SOME POINT a large motor-bike, comming from the left of it, and then cutting-in in front of it.
>Io will prende esso cui AT ALCUNI PUNTA poiché grande motor-bike, comming da gli esce di esso, e allora cutting-in in front of esso.
> > >(another ambiguity is created by the expression "sur sa gauche", which >could be translated "to ITS left" [to the right of it, from where >Levistre says he was] or "to the left of it" [as seen from Levistre's >alleged position] and, since Levistre claims that the Mercedes "was in >the middle of the road" at that point, it could be either) Since I am trying to construct a hypothetical scene where the Merc was astraddle the white line that separated the two west bound lanes and a photographing motorcycle was to the left side of the Merc at the exact instant that the white car was on the right side.
>> >(Un'altra ambiguità is crei by gli espressione" sur sa gauche", quale> possiamo be tradurre" a SUO esce" [ a gli destra di esso, da dove> Levistre dando egli was] o" a gli esce di esso" [ poiché vede da Levistre's> alleged posizione] e, since Levistre claims cui gli Mercedes" was in> gli metà di gli strada" at cui punta, esso possiamo be either) Since io am prova a costruendo poiché ipotetica scena dove gli Merc was astraddle gli bianca linea cui separa gli 2 ovest rilegata lanes e poiché photographing motocicletta was a gli esce lato di gli Merc at gli esatta instant cui gli bianca car was su gli destra lato.
> .
>
> .
>
> .
>
>> >"At the same instant, for a fraction of a second, there was a tremendous >flash of light, but nothing like the flash of a camera" ("Au meme >moment, en une fraction de seconde, un enorme eclair jaillit, mais rien >a voir avec le flash d'un appareil-photo") > >My point is that the order of events is not completely clear.
>> >"At gli stesso instant, per poiché frazione di poiché 2, là was poiché tremenda> flash di luce, ma niente piacciamo gli flash di poiché fotografica" (" Au meme> momento, en une frazione de seconde, un enorme eclair jaillit, mais rien> poiché voir avec le flash d'un appareil-photo") > > mia punta is cui gli ordine di evento is non completely sgombra.
> It could >be that the bike cut-in in front of the Mercedes just before the white >car passed Levistre - either that, or the bike was further behind the >Mercedes, as both vehicles entered the tunnel, than Clifford, Olivier >and Thierry imply.
>Esso possiamo> be cui gli bike cut-in in front of gli Mercedes proprio prima gli bianca> car passa Levistre - either cui, o gli bike was oltre dietro gli> Mercedes, poiché entrambe veicolo entra gli tunnel, than Clifford, Olivier> e Thierry sottintende.
> I suppose the bike could have braked, just before the Is there any chance that one of the skid marks, like the single one, was the bike?
>Io qualora gli bike possiamo abbi braked, proprio prima gli Is là any chance cui 1 di gli skid marca, piacciamo gli singola 1, was gli bike?
> >tunnel (to avoid running into a Mercedes/white-car pile-up) and that >Levistre might not have been as far along the tunnel as he thought he >was.
>>Tunnel( a evita corre into poiché Mercedes/ white-car pile-up) e cui> Levistre might non abbi been poiché lontana along gli tunnel poiché egli pensa egli> was.
> There is another branch of my lack of understanding and that follows along a train of thought that the picture was intended but the crash was an accident.
>Là is un'altra rami di mia lack di capendo e cui segue along poiché treni di pensa cui gli picture was intende ma gli scontro was un incidente.
> In the "accident" hypothesis approximately the motorcycle photographer could have accidently fired a half metre too far forward and instead of shooting in to the back seat he could have accidently hit HP directly in the eyes as Henri Paul looked to the left as the motorcycle came along side his side window.
>In gli" incidente" ipotesi approximately gli motocicletta fotografo possiamo abbi accidently fired poiché metà metre troppo lontana inoltra e instead of spara in a gli ritorno sede egli possiamo abbi accidently colpendo HP directly in gli occhio poiché Henri Paul looked a gli esce poiché gli motocicletta provenendo along lato suoi lato finestra.
>Then the blinding flash could have caused HP to FLINCH and swerve to the right just a little.
>Allora gli blinding flash possiamo abbi causata HP a FLINCH e swerve a gli destra proprio poiché piccola.
> At that point hitting the rear of the accelerating white car.
>At cui punta colpendo gli posteriore di gli accelera bianca car.
> As the white car's rear goes to the right its front goes to the left.
>Poiché gli bianca car's posteriore goes to gli destra suo fronte goes to gli esce.
> To correct, the driver throws to the right and the rear goes to the left.
>A corregeste, gli driver getta a gli destra e gli posteriore goes to gli esce.
> Essentially tossing the front of the Merc into the central columns.
>Essentially tossing gli fronte di gli Merc into gli centrale colonna.
> >Thus, the Mercedes hit the white car, side-to-side, and impelled it >forwards, towards Levistre, and was FOLLOWING it, as it passed >Levistre's position, and as the bike overtook the Mercedes.
>>Così, gli Mercedes colpendo gli bianca car, side-to-side, e impelled esso> inoltra, towards Levistre, e was SEGUITO esso, poiché esso passa> Levistre's posizione, e poiché gli bike overtook gli Mercedes.
> I think that the first, photographing, bike should have been ahead of the white car.
>Io pensa cui gli 1, photographing, bike should abbi been ahead di gli bianca car.
> If the bike and the car essentially accelerated at the same instant the bike would outrun the car.
>Qualora gli bike e gli car essentially accelera at gli stesso instant gli bike voleste outrun gli car.
> I think.
>Io pensa.
> Bikes are far faster at acceleration that cars.
>Bikes are lontana veloce at accelerazione cui cars.
> Any disagreements?
>Any disaccordo?
>Of course, with two riders and a turbo car ...?
>Di corso, con 2 riders e poiché turbo car...?
> For one thing, you are supposing then that the white car was ahead of the Merc at the instant that the Merc hit the central column/pilar/post.
>Per 1 cosa, tu are qualora allora cui gli bianca car was ahead di gli Merc at gli instant cui gli Merc colpendo gli centrale colonna/ pilar/ posta.
> That is in accord with my first guess.
>Cui is in secondo con mia 1 indovina.
>> >Does that clear things up?
>> >Does cui sgombra cosa up?
> No.
>Nessuno.
> It smokes them up.
>Esso fumo gli up.
> But gives a number of possible occurances to consider.
>Ma dai poiché numero di possibile occurances a considera.
>>> >>>Behind that, he says, there was >>>"another car" (presumably the Mercedes S- 280) and behind that, a large >>>motor-bike.
>>> >>>Dietro cui, egli dando, là was>>>" un'altra car" ( presumably gli Mercedes S- 280) e dietro cui, poiché grande>>> motor-bike.
> So my first thought on that is that that is a second bike.
>So mia 1 pensa su cui is cui cui is poiché 2 bike.
> And if we are talking about the left that might be better described as a second bike on the left as there might have been one or more bikes on the right in addition.
>E qualora we are parla about gli esce cui might be bene descrisse poiché poiché 2 bike su gli esce poiché là might abbi been 1 o più bikes su gli destra in addition.
>>> >>Livestre lies again.
>>> >>Livestre mente again.
>> >What do you mean?
>> >Che cosa dos tu significammo?
> What evidence is there that Levistre is "lying"?
>Che cosa prove is là cui Levistre is" mente"?
> My supposition.
>Mia supposition.
>> >> He clearly saw and may have been a part >>of a conspiracy to cover up.
>> >>Egli clearly vede e maggio abbi been poiché parte>> di poiché cospirazione a coperchio up.
> So in my supposition he saw it >>and he lied about it.
>So in mia supposition egli vede esso>> e egli mente about esso.
> Now if we go off on a train of thought to >>explore a hypothesis that Livestre was deliberately lying then >>I'll have to think about that some more.
>Ora qualora we andai off su poiché treni di pensa a>> esplora poiché ipotesi cui Livestre was deliberately mente allora>> io I'll abbi a pensa about cui alcuni più.
> I have not until the >>present considered the possibility that he was deliberately >>lying.
>Io abbi non finché gli>> presente considera gli possibilità cui egli was deliberately>> mente.
>>> >I have - he could be in the pay of Al-Fayed (or his high-level masters) >That's always a possibility; but why should we single him out?
>>> >Io abbi - egli possiamo be in gli paga di Al-Fayed( o suoi high-level maestro) > cui That's sempre poiché possibilità; ma why should we singola lui fuori?
> I'm not singling him out.
>Io I'm non singling lui fuori.
> I am theorizing that there may have been a whole swarm of conspiring pap's surrounding Diana's car.
>Io am theorizing cui là maggio abbi been poiché intero sciame di cospira pap's circonda Diana's car.
> >What >about any (or ALL) of the other witnesses?
>>Che cosa> about any( o TUTTE) di gli all'altra testimone?
> I am inclined to go with the >majority (who saw closely pursuing vehicles) and focus suspicion on >Mohammed and Souad who - alone - say they did not.
>Io am inclined a andai con gli> maggioranza( che vede closely pursuing veicolo) e focus sospetto su> Mohammed e Souad che - alone - dando loro did non.
>> >>If he were deliberately lying and saw the three vehicles >>abreast, > > He says he saw them one behind the other - until the bike overtook the >Mercedes.
>> >>Qualora egli were deliberately mente e vede gli 3 veicolo>> abreast, > > egli dando egli vede gli 1 dietro gli all'altra - finché gli bike overtook gli> Mercedes.
> Then the bike and the Mercedes were "abreast", but the white >car - so he implies - had already overtaken him by then!
>Allora gli bike e gli Mercedes were" abreast", ma gli bianca> car - so egli sottintende - abbi già overtaken lui by allora!
> But why should >you suspect this to be a lie?
>Ma why should> tu sospetta questa a be poiché mente?
> I think you, we, need to be very careful about exactly what instant is being described as being related to any single comment.
>Io pensa tu, we, bisogna a be molto careful about exactly che cosa instant is essere descrisse poiché essere connessa a any singola comment.
>> >> the photo flashes, the motorcycle accelerate, >>the car on the right bump the Merc into the central >>pilars, > >You want to hypothesize that the bike-overtake/flash occurred BEFORE the >sliding collision?
>> >>Gli photo flashes, gli motocicletta accelera, >> gli car su gli destra bump gli Merc into gli centrale>> pilars, > > tu vogliamo a hypothesize cui gli bike-overtake/ flash accadde PRIMA gli> scivola collisione?
> What on earth for?
>Che cosa su terra per?
> Well, if the supposition is as two photographing vehicles taking a photograph from both sides at the same instant .
>Ben, qualora gli supposition is poiché 2 photographing veicolo prende poiché fotografia da entrambe lato at gli stesso instant.
> .
>
> .
>
> .
>
> There may also have been two contacts between the two vehicles?
>Là maggio e abbi been 2 contatto tra gli 2 veicolo?
>The mirror thing may not have been considered significant.
>Gli specchio cosa maggio non abbi been considera significativa.
> The mirror would not have broken out the tail light.
>Gli specchio voleste non abbi rompe fuori gli coda luce.
> So if the tail light was broken would not one suspect a corresponding dent on the Merc's right front fender?
>So qualora gli coda luce was rompe voleste non 1 sospetta poiché corrisponde ammaccatura su gli Merc's destra fronte fender?
>> In reading this over I can not understand quickly the actions to cover up circumstances by police, courts, etc. unless Diana bite off and swallowed the tip of Dodi's penis from the force of the crash.
>>In lettura questa sopra io possiamo non capendo quickly gli azione a coperchio up circostanza by polizia, corte, ecc. unless Diana morde off e swallowed gli tip di Dodi's pene da gli sforza di gli scontro.
> If some such had happened then that could explain a lot of things, But it would also demonstrate that there was no fear in the back seat at the time of crash which would be important to suggest that there was no demonstrated disagreement with Henri Paul's driving performance prior to the crash.
>Qualora alcuni tale abbi avvenuto allora cui possiamo spiegammo poiché sorte di cosa, ma esso voleste e dimostra cui là was nessuno paura in gli ritorno sede at gli tempo di scontro quale voleste be importante a suggerendo cui là was nessuno dimostra disaccordo con Henri Paul's pilota prestazione anteriore a gli scontro.
> >> that the first photoflashing motorcycle sped off >>past him and out of the tunnel as well as the vehicle that >>had bumped the Merc.
>>>Cui gli 1 photoflashing motocicletta sped off>> trascorsa lui e out of gli tunnel as well as gli veicolo cui>> abbi bumped gli Merc.
> and then reported that in essence >>a followup motorcycle stopped to view into the Merc >>and it then resumed to exit the tunnel, etc. >> >You mean Levistre is concealing the existence of a second motorcycle?
>E allora riporta cui in essenza>> poiché followup motocicletta smesso a view into gli Merc>> e esso allora resumed a uscita gli tunnel, ecc. >> > tu significammo Levistre is concealing gli esistenza di poiché 2 motocicletta?
>>True, Thierry H.
>>Vera, Thierry H.
> says he saw "several" motorcycles pursuing the >Mercedes, closely, towards the tunnel (he had a view along the cour >Albert Premier from the carriageway itself) but Clifford G.
>Dando egli vede" diverso" motocicletta pursuing gli> Mercedes, closely, towards gli tunnel( egli abbi poiché view along gli cour> Albert premier da gli carriageway itself) ma Clifford G.
> and Olivier >P (who were positioned to the right [north] of the road and could see no >more than the tunnel-entrance) report only " a car in front of the >Mercedes and a [one!
>E Olivier> P( che were positioned a gli destra[ nord] di gli strada e possiamo vede nessuno> più than gli tunnel-entrance) resoconto solo" poiché car in front of gli> Mercedes e poiché[ 1!
>] powerful motor-cycle, 30 - 40 metres behind.
>]Potente motor-cycle, 30 - 40 metres dietro.
> I think it was Brian Anderson's story that a motorcycle moved to pass the Merc on its left as it entered the tunnel, which would be exact in accord with my one theory.
>Io pensa esso was Brian Anderson's racconti cui poiché motocicletta mosse a passa gli Merc su suo esce poiché esso entra gli tunnel, quale voleste be esatta in secondo con mia 1 teoria.
>> >Why should we not assume that the other bikes left the cour Albert >Premier, at the exit slip-road, leaving the pair on the bike, which >Clifford, Olivier and Levistre saw, to proceed into the tunnel for the >kill!?
>> >Why should we non assume cui gli all'altra bikes esce gli cour Albert> premier, at gli uscita slip-road, esce gli paio su gli bike, quale> Clifford, Olivier e Levistre vede, a proceed into gli tunnel per gli> stecchendo!?
> I don't think that the word "kill" is at all proper in a larger view.
>Io dos non pensa cui gli parola" stecchendo" is at tutte proper in poiché grande view.
>"Photo" would I suggest be a more prevalent term for that point.
>"Photo" voleste io suggerendo be poiché più prevalent termine per cui punta.
>> >>I would like to see the animation sequences down to the 1 meter >>resolution.
>> >>Io voleste piacciamo a vede gli animazioni sequenza down a gli 1 metro>> risoluzione.
> I think the main constant that we can use is the >>physical distance on the road as being traversed by the Merc.
>Io pensa gli principale costante cui we possiamo uso is gli>> corporea distanza su gli strada poiché essere traversed by gli Merc.
> >>So the animation reference frames could be identified by reference >>to the tunnel face as metres + "plus" or - "minus" the tunnel face.
>>>So gli animazioni referenza cornice possiamo be identificammo by referenza>> a gli tunnel viso poiché metres+ " plus" o -" minus" gli tunnel viso.
>>>> >We would all (those of us who really wish to have it explained in >detail, that is) like to see sophisticated event-reconstruction >techniques brought to bear, together with an account of exactly what >data was employed and how it was used.
>>>> >We voleste tutte( quelli di ce che davvero desiderio a abbi esso spiegammo in> dettaglio, cui is) piacciamo a vede ricercata event-reconstruction> tecnica porta a annoi, assieme con un conto di exactly che cosa> dati was assume e come esso was adopera.
> Fat chance of that, however - >unless you happen to have an event-reconstruction team on hand and you >can afford to cock a snoot at the politico-media complex.
>Grassa chance di cui, comunque -> unless tu avvenuto a abbi un event-reconstruction team su mano e tu> possiamo afford a cock poiché snoot at gli politico-media complesso.
> There is the traffic accident reconstruction site off my web page.
>Là is gli traffico incidente ricostruzione site off mia web pagina.
> I saw reference to the most professional software photosho or paint shop of something like that.
>Io vede referenza a gli most professionista programmi photosho o pittura negozio di qualcosa piacciamo cui.
> I got a copy off the web.
>Io got poiché copia off gli web.
> One of these years I will move to do my accident and if at the same time I did a second of the Diana crash not much for starters.
>1 di queste anni io will mosse a dos mia incidente e qualora at gli stesso tempo io did poiché 2 di gli Diana scontro non much per starter.
> > >>>Note that there is no vehicle present, in Levistre's story, which could >>>be the car of the witnesses Souad M.
>> >>>Appunti cui là is nessuno veicolo presente, in Levistre's racconti, quale possiamo>>> be gli car di gli testimone Souad M.
> and Mohammed M.
>E Mohammed M.
> If we believe >>>Levistre, they weren't there!
>Qualora we crede>>> Levistre, loro weren't non là!
> On the other hand, if we believe THEM, >>>the Mercedes crashed without any help from anyone - a very convenient >>>version of events, for the authorities, and completely contrary to the >>>testimony of ALL the other witnesses.
>Su gli all'altra mano, qualora we crede GLI, >>> gli Mercedes crashed senza any aiuta da anyone - poiché molto conveniente>>> versione di evento, per gli autorità, e completely contrari a gli>>> testimonianza di TUTTE gli all'altra testimone.
>>> I am not suggesting that consideration should be limited to only one hypothetically possible series of events.
>>>Io am non suggerendo cui considerazione should be limita a solo 1 hypothetically possibile series di evento.
> It appears to me that there are apparently conflicting reports of circumstances.
>Esso appaio a me cui là are apparently conflicting resoconto di circostanza.
> Therefore I suggest several parallel hypothetical story lines.
>Perciò io suggerendo diverso parallelo ipotetica racconti linea.
> That calls to mind something that I think Senator Sam Ervin said during the course of the Watergate hearings on Nixon's impeachment.
>Cui chiamata a mente qualcosa cui io pensa senatore Sam Ervin dando durante gli corso di gli Watergate udito su Nixon's incriminazione.
> The in the four gospels there are accounts of what was reported to have been written by Pilate on the sign to be placed over Jesus Christ's head on the cross.
>Gli in gli 4 gospels là are conto di che cosa was riporta a abbi been scrisse by Pilate su gli segno a be placed sopra gesù cristo testa su gli croce.
> Senator Sam said that if individuals whose testimoney we so reverence from the written testimony could be so reported as divergent then we need not be dismayed that good people of our own day may be reported as to not have agreed perfectly.
>Senatore Sam dando cui qualora individui whose testimoney we so reverenza da gli scrisse testimonianza possiamo be so riporta poiché divergente allora we bisogna non be sgomenta cui bene gente di nostra propri giorni maggio be riporta poiché a non abbi accorda perfectly.
> >>Hummnn >>> >>>The sequence of events, as Levistre recounts it, is very interesting, >>>because he seems to be saying that the "white car" stayed ahead of the >>>Mercedes and the motor-bike.
>>>Hummnn>>> >>> gli sequenza di evento, poiché Levistre recounts esso, is molto interessano, >>> because egli sembra a be dando cui gli" bianca car" stayed ahead di gli>>> Mercedes e gli motor-bike.
> I would think "ahead" of the Merc would be correct but not that the white car stayed ahead of the bike.
>Io voleste pensa" ahead" di gli Merc voleste be corregeste ma non cui gli bianca car stayed ahead di gli bike.
> Explaination given above.
>Explaination dai above.
>>> >>Well, in my SH one possibility that I want to consider is that both >>the white car on the Merc's right hand side and the motorcycle on >>the Merc's left hand side came to a synchronized position along side >>the Merc such as to be able to take symultaneous flash photographs >>into the Merc from both sides at the same time.
>>> >>Ben, in mia SH 1 possibilità cui io vogliamo a considera is cui entrambe>> gli bianca car su gli Merc's destra mano lato e gli motocicletta su>> gli Merc's esce mano lato provenendo a poiché sincronizza posizione along lato>> gli Merc tale poiché a be abile a prende symultaneous flash fotografia>> into gli Merc da entrambe lato at gli stesso tempo.
> If one is in a very >>heavy law suit one needs at least TWO corroberating withnesses.
>Qualora 1 is in poiché molto>> pesante diritti conviene 1 bisogna at meno 2 corroberating withnesses.
> And a big pile of paps only seconds behind would be very important also.
>E poiché grande emorroidi di paps solo seconds dietro voleste be molto importante e.
> If somebody hinted at the presence of a blackmail photo they could be assassinated in short order before they could ever get close to a court of law, and I heard a song the other day called "Smuggler's Blues" done in the Eighties by Glenn Frey has some good words.
>Qualora qualcuno hinted at gli presenza di poiché ricatto photo loro possiamo be assassina in corta ordine prima loro possiamo ever get chiude a poiché corte di diritti, e io ode poiché canzone gli all'altra giorni chiama" contrabbandiere Blues" fatta in gli Eighties by Glenn Frey abbi alcuni bene parola.
>>> >This seems to me to be fanciful in the extreme.
>>> >Questa sembra a me a be fantasiosa in gli estrema.
> On what grounds do you >suggest it?
>Su che cosa grounds dos tu> suggerendo esso?
>> >>The same scene photographed by two separate photographers at >>exactly the same instant would be IDEAL.
>> >>Gli stesso scena photographed by 2 separa fotografo at>> exactly gli stesso instant voleste be IDEALE.
>>> >"Ideal" for what?
>>> >"Ideale" per che cosa?
> Come on Al!
>Provenendo su Al!
> What are these simultaneous, two-angle >flash-photos supposed to be for?
>Che cosa are queste simultanea, two-angle> flash-photos suppone a be per?
> Okay - you've said before that you >think they would have been compromising photos, and that MAF set up the >car-switch and the pursuit in order to obtain them.
>Okay - tu abbi dando prima cui tu> pensa loro voleste abbi been compromesso photos, e cui MAF assestata up gli> car-switch e gli inseguimento in ordine a consegue gli.
> This is an >interesting idea, because, although it seems most likely to me that MAF >DID make these arrangements, I cannot decide precisely what it was that >he thought was going to happen.
>Questa is un> interessano idea, because, although esso sembra most likely a me cui MAF> DID fa queste disposizioni, io possiamo non decide accuratamente che cosa esso was cui> egli pensa was going to avvenuto.
> A compromising photograph.
>Poiché compromesso fotografia.
> Exactly in line with MAF's general opinion of John.
>Exactly in linea con MAF's generale opinione di John.
> Q.
>Q.
> Public, Di, etc. > >Let us say that Diana and Dodi were not sleeping together, she was not >pregnant by him and they were not going to get engaged - or some >combination of these negatives - such that, in order to (what?
>Pubblico, Di, ecc. > > lasci ce dando cui Diana e Dodi were non dorme assieme, ella was non> pregnante by lui e loro were non going to get ingaggi - o alcuni> combinazione di queste negativa - tale cui, in ordine a( che cosa?
>) gain >influence over Diana or disgrace her or force her to marry Dodi?
>)Guadagno> influence sopra Diana o disgrazia le o sforza le a sposa Dodi?
> - the >Al-Fayeds conceived the scheme I would guess that conception of the scheme would have happened far away from MAF.
>- gli> Al-Fayeds concependo gli schema io voleste indovina cui concezione di gli schema voleste abbi avvenuto lontana away da MAF.
> If a group were looking for someone to set up some such scheme MAF might have been found to have been a good candidate to approach for the leading role but the script had been written long before and they just needed some one to play the part.
>Qualora poiché gruppo were looking for alcuna a assestata up alcuni tale schema MAF might abbi been trova a abbi been poiché bene candidati a avvicinamento per gli leading ruolo ma gli script abbi been scrisse lunga prima e loro proprio needed alcuni 1 a giocammo gli parte.
> >of obtaining compromising photographs.
>>Di consegue compromesso fotografia.
> A >clever ruse is employed to get rid of some of the escort (but why not >all?
>Poiché> brava ruse is assume a get rid di alcuni di gli scorta( ma why non> tutte?
>) THE COMPROMISING photo to be used for blackmail to influence Diana not to take a strong public stand on some particular issue from time to time would have been financed by an external consortium, QEII, Chas, Military landmine sales proponents, etc. In order to be of use at selected times the photo could not be public.
>)GLI COMPROMESSO photo a be adopera per ricatto a influence Diana non a prende poiché forte pubblico sta su alcuni particolari questione da tempo a tempo voleste abbi been financed by un esterna consortium, QEII, Chas, militare landmine vendita proponents, ecc. in ordine a be di uso at seleziona tempo gli photo possiamo non be pubblico.
> If that happened it would have been a one time shot when ever it fell into public hands.
>Qualora cui avvenuto esso voleste abbi been poiché 1 tempo spara quando ever esso cadde into pubblico mano.
> To be worth the expense and effort it had to be kept secret but its circumstance had to be indisputable else any single person threatening exposure of some such would be under extremely high surveillance in moments.
>A be worth gli spesa e sforzo esso abbi a be trattenemmo segreto ma suo circostanza abbi a be indiscutibile else any singola persona minacci exposure di alcuni tale voleste be sotto extremely alta sorveglianza in momento.
> > the remaining escort follows from the Hotel, against orders, thus >giving the impression that they are up to no good.
>>Gli resteranno scorta segue da gli albergo, contro ingiunge, così> dai gli impressione cui loro are up a nessuno bene.
> Henri has been >briefed to flee them - he flees.
>Henri abbi been> briefed a fugammo gli - egli fugammo.
> An ambush of pursuers has been arranged >on the cour la Reine - to keep Henri in flight and to give Dodi an >excuse for grabbing Diana (as though protectively) I can't imagine anything but a photograph of a blowjob.
>Un imboscata di inseguitore abbi been sistema> su gli cour la Reine - a trattenemmo Henri in voli e a dai Dodi un> scusa per grabbing Diana( poiché though protectively) io possiamo non immagina anything ma poiché fotografia di poiché blowjob.
> Sex is no big thing nowadays.
>Sesso is nessuno grande cosa nowadays.
> In royal family tradition, the past, it may have been able to throw a little influence at an intense moment of public conflict.
>In royal famiglia tradizione, gli trascorsa, esso maggio abbi possiamo getta poiché piccola influence at un intensa momento di pubblico conflitto.
> There is so much detailed sex on the web that I wouldn't doubt that to find a microscopic photo of a pubic hair would take more than a few minutes.
>Là is so much dettagliata sesso su gli web cui io voleste non dubbio cui a trova poiché microscopica photo di poiché pubic capelli voleste prende più than poiché pochi minuto.
> So if any eyebrows were going to be raised maybe a court threatening a loss of Di's finances for breach of contract re: approximately non modest public behavior.
>So qualora any sopracciglio were going to be erge maybe poiché corte minacci poiché calo di Di's finanza per breach di contratto re: approximately non modesta pubblico comportamento.
> So if Di was very cognizant of contract provisions regarding public behavior as a determinant of her divorce settlement then she would have to have exercised the utmost discression.
>So qualora Di was molto cognizant di contratto provvista circa pubblico comportamento poiché poiché determinant di le divorzio insediamento allora ella voleste abbi a abbi exercised gli maggiore discression.
> But if she was going to find any male support outside of her ex's she would have to at some point show some affection.
>Ma qualora ella was going to trova any maschi appoggio outside di le ex's ella voleste abbi a at alcuni punta indica alcuni affetti.
> Now where could one find any more hope of privacy than in the tunnel of love in a speeding limosine?
>Ora dove possiamo 1 trova any più speranza di privacy than in gli tunnel di amore in poiché speeding limosine?
> But to be effective for black mail the photo would have to appear as immodest public behavior.
>Ma a be effective per nera mail gli photo voleste abbi a appaio poiché immodesta pubblico comportamento.
> I said PUBLIC.
>Io dando PUBBLICO.
> So on the one hand Diana would have shyed away from any PUBLIC behavior but people interested in obtaining a photo for blackmail would have to make the circumstances of the photo look as public as possible.
>So su gli 1 mano Diana voleste abbi shyed away da any PUBBLICO comportamento ma gente interessano in consegue poiché photo per ricatto voleste abbi a fa gli circostanza di gli photo sguardo poiché pubblico poiché possibile.
> TWO photo's from TWO different photographers and surrounding photos from another hundred photographers could be made to look like PUBLIC IMMODESTY while the circumstance of the back seat of a speeding limosine in the tunnel in the middle of the night is about as close to "private" behavior as I can imagine anyone could get on short notice.
>2 photo's da 2 differente fotografo e circonda photos da un'altra 100 fotografo possiamo be fa a sguardo piacciamo PUBBLICO IMMODESTIA while gli circostanza di gli ritorno sede di poiché speeding limosine in gli tunnel in gli metà di gli notte is about poiché chiude a" privata" comportamento poiché io possiamo immagina anyone possiamo get su corta avviso.
> >- a car is stationed >at the tunnel-entrance to stop the Mercedes (a very risky proceeding, >from a father's point of view, don't you think?
>>- poiché car is stationed> at gli tunnel-entrance a fermata gli Mercedes( poiché molto rischiosa proceeding, > da poiché babbo punta di view, dos non tu pensa?
>) the Mercedes is slowed, >the pursuers catch up, the photographs are taken.
>)Gli Mercedes is slowed, > gli inseguitore catch up, gli fotografia are prende.
>> >Photographs of what?
>> >Fotografia di che cosa?
> Diana giving Dodi a blow job.
>Diana dai Dodi poiché soffi job.
> What else could even raise an eyebrowe nowadays?
>Che cosa else possiamo sera erge un eyebrowe nowadays?
> Hell, if you had to sell such a photograph to get a MacDonald's hamburger you would have a lot of competition in the current market.
>Hell, qualora tu abbi a vende tale poiché fotografia a get poiché MacDonald's hamburger tu voleste abbi poiché sorte di concorrenza in gli corrente mercato.
> > A terrified Diana in Dodi's arms?
>>Poiché terrorizzata Diana in Dodi's braccio?
> Diana being >raped by Dodi?
>Diana essere> raped by Dodi?
> - is that what you're working up to saying?
>- is cui che cosa tu you're lavora up a dando?
> My dear chap!
>Mia egregi chap!
> Who is going to conspire, and pay big money, for something like that?
>Che is going to cospira, e paga grande denaro, per qualcosa piacciamo cui?
>Nobody.
>Nobody.
> >Diana crouched down on the floor behind Henri's seat, and Dodi remained >upright - probably viewing the pursuit with anxiety - possibly grappling >with TRJ to prevent him interfering with the driving.
>>Diana crouched down su gli floor dietro Henri's sede, e Dodi resteranno> upright - probabilmente viewing gli inseguimento con anxiety - possibly grappling> con TRJ a impedendo lui interferendo con gli pilota.
> What sign is >there - apart from the fact that neither Diana nor Dodi were wearing >seat-belts - that Dodi was attempting to grapple with Diana?
>Che cosa segno is> là - parte da gli fatto cui neither Diana nor Dodi were indossa> seat-belts - cui Dodi was attempting a grapple con Diana?
>> >Again, I say, "photographs of what?
>> >Again, io dando, " fotografia di che cosa?
>" - precisely - and what were they >for?
>"- accuratamente - e che cosa were loro> per?
> - according to your theory.
>- according to sua teoria.
> A picture of a blow job - for blackmail.
>Poiché picture di poiché soffi job - per ricatto.
>> >Why could these photographs not have been taken with spy-cameras at one >of the Fayed residences Because such a photo would possibly be identified as an invasion of privacy.
>> >Why possiamo queste fotografia non abbi been prende con spy-cameras at 1> di gli Fayed residenza Because tale poiché photo voleste possibly be identificammo poiché un calata di privacy.
> It had to look like PUBLIC Immodest Behavior to cause a diminution of Diana's influence in the public media.
>Esso abbi a sguardo piacciamo PUBBLICO immodesta comportamento a causa poiché diminution di Diana's influence in gli pubblico media.
> >at which Diana stayed?
>>at quale Diana stayed?
> How could it have been >hoped that photographs of an especially compromising nature could have >been obtained at high speed in the Alma Tunnel, rather than on the >Jonikal, at the Ritz or at the rue Arsene?
>Come possiamo esso abbi been> spera cui fotografia di un especially compromesso natura possiamo abbi> been consegue at alta speed in gli Alma tunnel, piuttosto than su gli> Jonikal, at gli Ritz o at gli rue Arsene?
> What on earth is the point?
>Che cosa su terra is gli punta?
> Would behavior on the yatch or at the Ritz be considered public or private by Diana.
>Voleste comportamento su gli yatch o at gli Ritz be considera pubblico o privata by Diana.
> My guess is that Diana would have considered it PUBLIC.
>Mia indovina is cui Diana voleste abbi considera esso PUBBLICO.
>> >One glimmer of a suggestion of a possibility does occur to me, as a >result of examining this idea, however.
>> >1 glimmer di poiché suggerimento di poiché possibilità does accadde a me, poiché poiché> risultati di esamina questa idea, comunque.
> What if Dodi was having >difficulty getting physical with Diana?
>Che cosa qualora Dodi was abbi> difficoltà getting corporea con Diana?
> Did Dad devise an elaborate >ruse to throw them together?
>Did Dad devise un elaborata> ruse a getta gli assieme?
> Or rather, was he advised to do so by >those who wanted Diana dead NOT DEAD.
>O piuttosto, was egli consigli a dos so by> quelli che vogliamo Diana morto NON MORTO.
> There is a whole hell of a lot of difference in wanting some one to have less public influence in the public media than in wanting someone to be dead.
>Là is poiché intero hell di poiché sorte di differenza in vogliamo alcuni 1 a abbi meno pubblico influence in gli pubblico media than in vogliamo alcuna a be morto.
> >- so that he would implement the scheme >without knowing what it was really for?
>>- so that egli voleste effettua gli schema> senza conobbe che cosa esso was davvero per?
> Quite simple.
>Completamente semplice.
> A compromising photograph.
>Poiché compromesso fotografia.
> >Something of the sort must have >happened, I think - and it's not so incredible if you consider that >MAF's masters may have been pretending to attempt to pull off a Fayed- >Spencer match (with big bucks in it for MAF) for some time - so that >the Machiavellian complexity of engineering the car-switch, the >disposition of the escort, the arrangements for the route and the >programming of Henri Paul, might not have aroused MAF's suspicions.
>>Qualcosa di gli sorta must abbi> avvenuto, io pensa - e esso it's non so incredibile qualora tu considera cui> MAF's maestro maggio abbi been dissimula a tentativo a divelgo off poiché Fayed-> Spencer accoppi( con grande bucks in esso per MAF) per alcuni tempo - so that> gli Machiavellian complessità di ingegneria gli car-switch, gli> disposition di gli scorta, gli disposizioni per gli rotta e gli> programmazione di Henri Paul, might non abbi aroused MAF's sospetto.
> A photograph would be the most logical thing in the whole world.
>Poiché fotografia voleste be gli most logica cosa in gli intero mondo.
>No body would be suspicious of anything.
>Nessuno corpi voleste be sospettosa di anything.
>> >Other factors, such as sabotaging the S-280's brakes and air-bags, >briefing the escort to monitor the crash but not get involved, etc, >could have been achieved by MAF's backers, over MAF's head, The theft and modification of the vehicle could have been well disguised.
>> >All'altra fattore, tale poiché sabotaging gli S-280's freno e air-bags, > briefing gli scorta a monitor gli scontro ma non get coinvolge, ecc, > possiamo abbi been riesce by MAF's backers, sopra MAF's testa, gli theft e modifica di gli veicolo possiamo abbi been ben disguised.
> >such that >Siegel and Musa (Etoile Limousines) and Wingfield and Dournot were not >only working for MAF, but for his masters, DIRECTLY.
>>Tale cui> Siegel e Musa( Etoile limousine) e Wingfield e Dournot were non> solo lavora per MAF, ma per suoi maestro, DIRECTLY.
> However, if that were part of the plot, then PLANS TO GET THAT VEHICLE TO THAT PLACE IN TIME WOULD HAVE TO HAVE BEEN ROCK SOLID FOR MONTHS IN ADVANCE.
>Comunque, qualora cui were parte di gli plot, allora PIANI A GET CUI VEICOLO A CUI LUOGHI IN TEMPO VOLESTE ABBI A ABBI BEEN CIOTTOLO SOLIDA PER MESE IN ADVANCE.
> There is the clear windows in one train of thought and defective equipment as possibly another.
>Là is gli sgombra finestra in 1 treni di pensa e difettosa apparato poiché possibly un'altra.
>> >Indeed, assuming that MAF did not know that the fatal crash was >intended, those of MAF's employees who MUST have known that a fatal >crash was intended, MUST have been working directly for those who >intentionally engineered it.
>> >Indeed, assuming cui MAF did non conobbe cui gli fatale scontro was> intende, quelli di MAF's impiegato che MUST abbi conobbe cui poiché fatale> scontro was intende, MUST abbi been lavora directly per quelli che> intentionally engineered esso.
>> If a crash after the photo were planned the least people in the area who needed to know was just the driver of the white car.
>>Qualora poiché scontro dopo gli photo were planned gli meno gente in gli area che needed a conobbe was proprio gli driver di gli bianca car.
> Second could have been the photographer on the back of the motorcycle who had to aim a shot into the driver's eyes.
>2 possiamo abbi been gli fotografo su gli ritorno di gli motocicletta che abbi a mira poiché spara into gli driver's occhio.
> >>>At least, he describes the "white car" >>>passing him, and disappearing westwards, before he begins to describe >>>the motor-bike overtaking the Mercedes and cutting-in in front of it.
>>>>At meno, egli descrisse gli" bianca car" >>> passa lui, e scompai westwards, prima egli cominciammo a descrisse>>> gli motor-bike overtaking gli Mercedes e cutting-in in front of esso.
> >> >>So this gets the locations screwed up and out of sync.
>>> >>So questa gets gli località screwed up e out of sync.
>>> >>> >>> The impression given (that the "white car" was a long way ahead of the >>>Mercedes and the motorbike) is probably an illusion created by the >>>difficulty involved in describing the situation; >> >>Also, a witness in a high speed drive has their own road to watch as >>well as looking in the rear view mirror.
>>> >>> >>>Gli impressione dai( cui gli" bianca car" was poiché lunga vie ahead di gli>>> Mercedes e gli motorbike) is probabilmente un illusione crei by gli>>> difficoltà coinvolge in descrisse gli situazione; >> >> e, poiché testimone in poiché alta speed pilota abbi lora propri strada a watch poiché>> ben poiché looking in gli posteriore view specchio.
> So one might have a strobe >>light effect of only seeing a flash of an instant when they happened >>to have the opportunity to look in the mirror.
>So 1 might abbi poiché strobe>> luce effetto di solo vede poiché flash di un instant quando loro avvenuto>> a abbi gli opportunità a sguardo in gli specchio.
>>> >>>but there is no >>>escaping the conclusion that the Mercedes did not completely squeeze >>>past the white car, but came alongside it, on its left, in a sliding >>>collision, >> >>My suggestion would be to consider that the Merc was the >>vehicle in the middle of the road, that the white vehicle would >>have been on its right and the motorcycle on its left, three >>abreast.
>>> >>>Ma là is nessuno>>> escaping gli conclusione cui gli Mercedes did non completely spreme>>> trascorsa gli bianca car, ma provenendo alongside esso, su suo esce, in poiché scivola>>> collisione, >> >> mia suggerimento voleste be a considera cui gli Merc was gli>> veicolo in gli metà di gli strada, cui gli bianca veicolo voleste>> abbi been su suo destra e gli motocicletta su suo esce, 3>> abreast.
>>> >>And that point photoflashes were fired and then the white >>car accelerated >> >>>which impelled the white car forwards, towards Levistre and >>>out of harm's way; >> >>And the motorcycle accelerated >> >>>whereupon the motorbike >> >>accelerated and swerved in front of >>the Mercedes.
>>> >>E cui punta photoflashes were fired e allora gli bianca>> car accelera>> >>> quale impelled gli bianca car inoltra, towards Levistre e>>> out of harm's vie; >> >> e gli motocicletta accelera>> >>> whereupon gli motorbike>> >> accelera e swerved in front of>> gli Mercedes.
>>> >>No.
>>> >>Nessuno.
> That is even wrong.
>Cui is sera sbagliata.
> In my SH.
>In mia SH.
>>> >>Let's try it another way.
>>> >>Lasci ce prova esso un'altra vie.
> More to the >>"DELIBERATE BUMP OFF" conspiracy >>supposition.
>Più a gli>>" DELIBERATA BUMP OFF" cospirazione>> supposition.
>>> >>In that, the motorcycle would have fired >>a series of quick flashes as it accelerated >>in front of the Mercedes.
>>> >>In cui, gli motocicletta voleste abbi fired>> poiché series di quick flashes poiché esso accelera>> in front of gli Mercedes.
> The first flash >>would have been into the back seat but >>a second would have been directly into >>the eyes of Henri Paul.
>Gli 1 flash>> voleste abbi been into gli ritorno sede ma>> poiché 2 voleste abbi been directly into>> gli occhio di Henri Paul.
> Having blinded >>him, it would then accelerate and as soon >>as it was clear the vehicle on the right would >>bump the Mercedes' front into the center >>pilars.
>Abbi blinded>> lui, esso voleste allora accelera e poiché presto>> poiché esso was sgombra gli veicolo su gli destra voleste>> bump gli Mercedes' fronte into gli centro>> pilars.
>>> >>>overtook the slowed Mercedes >>>and (also according to Levistre) cut-in in front of it and produced "a >>>searing burst of light, much brighter than a photo-flash".
>>> >>>overtook gli slowed Mercedes>>> e( e according to Levistre) cut-in in front of esso e produced" poiché>>> searing scoppi di luce, much brighter than poiché photo-flash".
>>>> >>>At this point, Levistre, braked and came to a halt near the western end >>>of the tunnel.
>>>> >>>At questa punta, Levistre, braked e provenendo a poiché halt presso gli western fine>>> di gli tunnel.
> >> >>More correctly, NOT "At this point" but at "A POINT" near the >>western end of the tunnel.
>>> >>Più correctly, NON" At questa punta" ma at" poiché PUNTA" presso gli>> western fine di gli tunnel.
>>> >>>The Mercedes had crashed, and the bikers (like Brenda >>>Wells, Levistre affirms that there were two of them) had stopped by the >>>wreck.
>>> >>>Gli Mercedes abbi crashed, e gli bikers( piacciamo Brenda>>> ben, Levistre affirms cui là were 2 di gli) abbi smesso by gli>>> wreck.
> >> >>That does not sound possible to me.
>>> >>Cui does non suono possibile a me.
> It may depend upon speed.
>Esso maggio dipende su speed.
>>>Assuming that the whole action was taking place at some >>above average speed then if at least the bike on the left had >>accelerated ahead of the Merc it could not have stopped.
>>>Assuming cui gli intero azione was prende luoghi at alcuni>> above average speed allora qualora at meno gli bike su gli esce abbi>> accelera ahead di gli Merc esso possiamo non abbi smesso.
> If it >>did not stop then it may have passed Livestre and exited the >>tunnel.
>Qualora esso>> did non fermata allora esso maggio abbi passa Livestre e exited gli>> tunnel.
> Whether a second bike stopped might be considerable.
>Sia poiché 2 bike smesso might be considerevole.
>>> >>>One of them got off, momentarily, to look into the Mercedes, >>>jumped back on again, and the bike sped off, passing Levistre as it did >>>so.
>>> >>>1 di gli got off, momentarily, a sguardo into gli Mercedes, >>> jumped ritorno su again, e gli bike sped off, passa Levistre poiché esso did>>> so.
> Levistre describes the bike as "black" and the two men as "dressed >>>in black with black helmets".
>Levistre descrisse gli bike poiché" nera" e gli 2 uomini poiché" veste>>> in nera con nera elmetto".
> The whole thing took just a few seconds.
>Gli intero cosa prende proprio poiché pochi seconds.
>>>> >>>Considerable efforts have been made to discredit Levistre.
>>>> >>>Considerevole sforzo abbi been fa a scredita Levistre.
> It has been >>>said, for example, that his attitude to the press was "hostile" and that >>>he was trying to "gain attention"; but there could be another reason for >>>these attacks on his character - he witnessed a murder!
>Esso abbi been>>> dando, per esempio, cui suoi atteggiamenti a gli presse was" ostile" e cui>>> egli was prova a" guadagno attenzione"; ma là possiamo be un'altra ragione per>>> queste attacchi su suoi carattere - egli witnessed poiché omicidio!
> There is no >>>other interpretation you can put on his testimony.
>Là is nessuno>>> all'altra interpretazione tu possiamo messo su suoi testimonianza.
>>>> >>>Yes, indeed (to answer your question) the lanes were used as a slow-lane >>>and an overtaking lane - ludicrous speed-limit signs notwithstanding!
>>>> >>>Yes, indeed( a esaudendo sua domanda) gli lanes were adopera poiché poiché slow-lane>>> e un overtaking lane - ludicrous speed-limit segno notwithstanding!
>>>> >>>Other answers in another post >> >><a href="http://members.home.com/godsbrain">G.O.D.S.B.R.A.I.N.</a><br> > >-- >Steve Reed Alvin H.
>>>> >>>All'altra esaudendo in un'altra posta>> >>< poiché href=" http:// membro. case. com/ godsbrain"> G. O. D. S. B. R. poiché. io. N.</ poiché>< br> > > --> Steve Reed Alvin H.
> White <a href="http://members.home.com/godsbrain">G.O.D.S.B.R.A.I.N.</a><br>
>Bianca< poiché href=" http:// membro. case. com/ godsbrain"> G. O. D. S. B. R. poiché. io. N.</ poiché>< br>
GODS...@home.com
>From RCRA...@nc.rr.com Wed May 03 23:28:28 2000 Path: news1.
>Dès RCRABTREE@ nc. rr. com Wed mai 3 23: 28: 28 2000 sentier: news1.
>frmt1.
>frmt1.
>sfba.
>sfba.
>home.
>Logis.
>com!
>com!
>newshub2.
>newshub2.
>rdc1.
>rdc1.
>sfba.
>sfba.
>home.
>Logis.
>com!
>com!
>newshub1.
>newshub1.
>home.
>Logis.
>com!
>com!
>news.
>news.
>home.
>Logis.
>com!
>com!
>newsfeed.
>newsfeed.
>direct.
>Dirige.
>ca!
>ca!
>newsfeed.
>newsfeed.
>cwix.
>cwix.
>com!
>com!
>cyclone.
>Cyclone.
>southeast.
>Sud-est.
>rr.
>rr.
>com!
>com!
>typhoon.
>typhoon.
>southeast.
>Sud-est.
>rr.
>rr.
>com.
>com.
>POSTED!
>POSTED!
>not-for-mail Message-ID: <391117D0.
>not-for-mail Message-ID: < 391117.
>183E...@nc.rr.com> From: roy andrew crabtree <RCRA...@nc.rr.com> X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.
>183EE605@ nc. rr. com> dès: roy andrew crabtree< RCRABTREE@ nc. rr. com> X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.
>72 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.
>72[ en] ( Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.
>0 Newsgroups: alt.
>0 Newsgroups: alt.
>conspiracy.
>Conspiration.
>princess-diana Subject: Re: Di: Paul, Henri, History, 60 Page Autopsy, Etc. References: <20000416201432.
>princess-diana sujet: Re: Di: Paul, Henri, histoire, 60 page autopsie, etc. postes: < 20000416201432.
>18648.
>18648.
>0000...@ng-cg1.aol.com> <20000416220330.
>4517@ ng-cg1. aol. com> < 20000416220330.
>18658.
>18658.
>0000...@ng-cg1.aol.com> <38fa9...@huge.aa.net> <8n1mfss0cu2ou4qhe...@4ax.com> <025220ee.
>4069@ ng-cg1. aol. com> < 38fa90de_2@ immense. aa. net> < 8n1mfss0cu2ou4qhej2ujs106jhqfrbbol@ 4ax. com> < 025220ee.
>5e23...@usw-ex0104-033.remarq.com> <VHL8$AAWpz$4I...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> <03cfeca4.
>5e23de39@ usw-ex0104-033. remarq. com> < VHL8$ AAWpz$ 4IAaS@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> < 03cfeca4.
>e454...@usw-ex0105-038.remarq.com> <5AGHurAe...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> <022cd178.
>e454e6ea@ usw-ex0105-038. remarq. com> < 5AGHurAeP0A5IAT7@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> < 022cd178.
>7c06...@usw-ex0105-037.remarq.com> <0PU0NLBY...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Lines: 363 Date: Thu, 04 May 2000 06:28:28 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.
>7c06d2cf@ usw-ex0105-037. remarq. com> < 0PU0NLBYabD5IAaW@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> Content-Type: texte/ plain; charset= iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable ligne: 363 date: Thu, 4 mai 2000 6: 28: 28 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.
>25.
>25.
>31.
>31.
>195 X-Complaints-To: ab...@rr.com X-Trace: typhoon.
>195 X-Complaints-To: abus@ rr. com X-Trace: typhoon.
>southeast.
>Sud-est.
>rr.
>rr.
>com 957421708 24.
>com 957421708 24.
>25.
>25.
>31.
>31.
>195 (Thu, 04 May 2000 02:28:28 EDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 04 May 2000 02:28:28 EDT Organization: Road Runner - NC Xref: newshub1.
>195( Thu, 4 mai 2000 2: 28: 28 EDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 4 mai 2000 2: 28: 28 EDT organisation: chemin coureur - NC Xref: newshub1.
>home.
>Logis.
>com alt.
>com alt.
>conspiracy.
>Conspiration.
>princess-diana:30031207 -------- Something new for me too; I could SWEAR from the original sequence of events as described in ACPD that I did NOT see one of the points below; the narrative changes WHO were the FIRST individuals to actually STOP at the car; if so, and these individuals have NOT been identified BY THE ORIGINAL WITNESSES PLACING THEM THERE (not by authority), then perhaps the SECONDARY sequence of Mark Butts & Dr.
>princess-diana: 30031207 -------- Something neuf pour me trop; je peut JURA dès la original enchaînement de événement comme décrire aux ACPD cela je faire NON vit 1 de la point ci-dessous; la narrative changement QUI were la 1 individu pour actually ARRÊT chez la auto; si ainsi, et celles-ci individu a NON been identifia PAR LA ORIGINAL TÉMOIN PLACE EUX DELÀ( non par autorité), alors peut-être la SECONDAIRE enchaînement de marqua Butts& Dr.
> Mailliez(?
>Mailliez(?
>) later on is NOT a primary, but is a BOGUS PLANT; I have missed out on discussion; last I was aware of, Mark Butts had not been IDed by anyone further than the "companion" to Dr.
>)Tard sur is NON comme primaire, mais is comme BOGUS PLANT; je a manqua out sur discussion; dernier je was aware de, marqua Butts a non been IDed par anyone further than la" compagne" pour Dr.
> M.
>M.
> (in the context of a book excerpt and/or narrative using English phrasing that, to an American ear (eye, actually; though narrative implies spoken transcribed) would seem to intend to imply something about the social (or homophonous) relationship between the individuals, as attested to by un-referenced witnesses in the local nightlife scene.
>(Aux la contexte de comme livre excerpt et/ ou narrative using anglais phrasing cela, pour an americain oreille( oeil, actually; quoique narrative implies spoken transcrire) would parais pour prévues pour imply something about la social( ou homophonous) relationship entre la individu, comme attested pour par un-referenced témoin aux la local nightlife scene.
> (In short, you do not have to mention Greenwich Village or Tri-Ess or Social Club to imply a certain type of disrepute ...
>(Aux short, te faire non a pour mentionna Greenwich village ou Tri-Ess ou social Club pour imply comme certain espèce de disrepute...
> I seem to have encountered that occassionally myself.
>Je parais pour a rencontra cela occassionally moi-même.
>).
>
> The following is a collimation and replay of what I previously annotated in the ACPD group earlier: Question: Has anyone attempted to tie down the time frame of "stopped momentarily"; is this a second or two, or 15 seconds, or as long as a minute?
>La ensuit is comme collimation et replay de qu'est-ce-que je auparavant annotated aux la ACPD groupe earlier: question: a anyone attenta pour cravate down la fois ossature de" arrêta momentanément"; is ce comme 2 ou 2, ou 15 seconds, ou comme longtemps comme comme minute?
> (opportunity) Were they wearing gloves?
>(Occasion) Were celles wearing gant?
> (fingerprint) What type?
>(fingerprint) qu'est-ce-que espèce?
> (cyclists with helmet and WITHOUT riding gloves?
>(cyclists avec casque et SANS équitation gant?
>) Question: Did he only look into the car?
>)Question: faire celui qu'à regarda into la auto?
> (position) If so, from how far away?
>(Position) si ainsi, dès comment loin away?
> (access) Or did he actually go up to the car and lean into it?
>(Accéda) ou faire celui actually alla up pour la auto et adossa into ca?
> (contact) FROM WHAT SIDE?
>(Contact) DÈS QU'EST-CE-QUE CÔTÉ?
> (intentional action) Has anyone seen a CLEAR PHOTO SHOT of the UNMODIFIED ROOF OF THE CAR AFTER THE WRECK?
>(Intentionnel action) a anyone vit comme CLAIR PHOTO TIRA de la UNMODIFIED TOIT DE LA AUTO APRÈS LA ÉPAVE?
> Is it possible to OBSERVE THE CARS CONTENTS withOUT going under the roof?
>Is ca possible pour OBSERVA LA AUTO CONTENU sans alla au-dessous la toit?
> If not, and if this (unnamed, possibly unidentified) individual (or pair) DID reach INTO the car, for over about 10 seconds, then from which side?
>Si non, et si ce( unnamed, possiblement unidentified) individu( ou paire) FAIRE étendue INTO la auto, pour dessus about 10 seconds, alors dès laquel côté?
> Remember that the roof was collapsed downwards on the forward side of the car, and had to be removed prior to body extraction; this implies NO room to do anything from the FORWARD (inner tunnel, or river) side of the car.
>Rapella cela la toit was effondra downwards sur la achemina côté de la auto, et a pour be arracha prior pour corps extraction; ce implies AUCUN chambre pour faire anything dès la ACHEMINA( inner tunnel, ou riviere) côté de la auto.
> Thus, to see closely into the car, the rearward (from the direction of travel, or outer tunnel, or land and not river) side would have been the choice.
>Thus, pour vit closely into la auto, la rearward( dès la directions de voyage, ou outer tunnel, ou atterri et non riviere) côté would a been la choix.
> For an individual to get off, run BACK (remember, "cut in front" of the Mercedes), to AROUND BEHIND THE CAR, and look into the vehicle, would have resulted ONLY from intentional purposive action.
>Pour an individu pour get off, courant BACK( rapella, " coupa aux devant" de la Mercedes), pour AROUND BEHIND LA AUTO, et regarda into la véhicule, would a abouti QU'À dès intentionnel purposive action.
> THAT individual COULD BE remiscible (& remissible) at French law for "failing to lend assistance".
>CELA individu PEUT BE remiscible(& remissible) chez français loi pour" faillant pour prêta assistance".
> Certainly for leaving the scene of an accident (if French law is the same as US).
>Certainly pour sort la scene de an accident( si français loi is la meme comme US).
> If you will recollect the context of the initial reports of Di's loss of blood culminating in the description (with diagram, but not with medical photo!
>Si te volonté recollect la contexte de la initial compte-rendu de Di's déchet de sang culminait aux la description( avec diagramme, mais non avec médical photo!
>) of the torn pulmonary vein (aorta?
>)De la torn pulmonary veine( aorte?
>) on her RHS of body.
>)Sur elle RHS de corps.
> Question: Was this a diagrammed provided by the doctor's in care of her directly, or a member of staff from Saltpetrie(?
>Question: Was ce comme diagrammed si par la docteur aux soin de elle directly, ou comme membre de staff dès Saltpetrie(?
>misspelled)?
>misspelled)?
> If so, was it attested for its accuracy AT THAT TIME, and accurately reproduced?
>Si ainsi, was ca attested pour sa accuracy CHEZ CELA FOIS, et accurately reproduire?
> (Evidence of a medical photo taken later would have to be examined closely for verity ....
>(Évidence de comme médical photo prenant tard would a pour be examina closely pour verity....
>).
>
> If so, then: Recall that the diagram showed the "tear" in a position that would NOT have been proper to occur from the force vectoring placed on Di's body as she was hurled by the impact; the twisting forces do NOT (to my mind's eye) place the INTERNALS of the body under torsion in the correct order to stress the RHS "Y" in the correct direction; remember that torsion (from bird's eye view down) on the auto, counterclockwise from impact, slew and spin, would slew and spin Di's body ALSO clockwise (known as a RIGHT HAND SPIN: take your right hand, point your thumb at your nose, and curl your fingers: this is right hand spin).
>Si ainsi, alors: rappelons cela la diagramme dénota la" larme" aux comme position cela would NON a been convenable pour occur dès la force vectoring place sur Di's corps comme celle was hurled par la impact; la twisting force faire NON( pour ma mind's oeil) lieu la INTERNALS de la corps au-dessous torsion aux la corrige ordre pour stress la RHS" Y" aux la corrige directions; rapella cela torsion( dès oiseau oeil vue down) sur la auto, counterclockwise dès impact, slew et spin, would slew et spin Di's corps ET clockwise( connais comme comme DROIT MAIN SPIN: prenant ta droit main, point ta thumb chez ta nez, et curl ta doigt: ce is droit main spin).
> This would force the the body internal organs to torque clockwise, or crush (NOT expand) against Di's RIGHT side.
>Ce would force la la corps interne orgue pour torque clockwise, ou accabla( NON expand) contre Di's DROIT côté.
> The medical report indicated an expansion TEAR.
>La médical compte-rendu indiqua an expansion LARME.
> not a compression FOLD.
>Non comme compression PLI.
> Please note: an undiagnosed flaw in a blood vessel can result in a rupture from a compression as well as from an expansion stretch.
>Plaire annotation: an undiagnosed flaw aux comme sang vessel peut résultat aux comme rupture dès comme compression as well as dès an expansion étire.
> However, usually flaws of this type have to be large and fail catastrophically; a failure of ANY type on a pulmonary aorta is lethal within almost NO time (seconds); on the heart as well.
>Toutefois, usuellement flaws de ce espèce a pour be large et faillant catastrophically; comme failure de QUELCONQUE espèce sur comme pulmonary aorte is lethal within presque AUCUN fois( seconds); sur la coeur comme meilleur.
> Failure on the primary veins of the lung or heart also bleed spectacularly fast, unless there wound is so small as to be almost invisible.
>Failure sur la primaire veine de la poumon ou coeur et saigna spectacularly fast, unless delà blessent is ainsi petit comme pour be presque invisible.
> She survived bleeding of a major vessel for TWO HOURS.
>Celle survis saigna de comme majeur vessel pour 2 HEURE.
> This implies a SMALL wound, one that COULD have been done by a < 1mm probe, pick, blade, or scythe.
>Ce implies comme PETIT blessent, 1 cela PEUT a been faire par comme< 1mm sonde, pick, lame, ou scythe.
> The tissue there is VERY thick; you have to see it to believe it.
>La tissue delà is TRÈS épais; te a pour vit ca pour croie ca.
> Now, examine the diagram published in web pages and the press: you will note the DIRECTION of the "tear" is ALONG THE VESSEL and BELOW THEY JUNCTURE OF THE "Y"; PARALLEL to the blood vessel.
>Présent, examina la diagramme publia aux web page et la presse: te volonté annotation la DIRECTIONS de la" larme" is ALONG LA VESSEL et CI-DESSOUS CELLES JUNCTURE DE LA" Y"; PARALLÈLE pour la sang vessel.
> The force vectoring of EITHER a compression OR an expansion of such a "Y" joint would be to FOLD (ar antifold: linearize) the junction of the "Y"; this would produce a compression (expansion) failure PERPENDICULAR to the wall of the vessel (cross the circle of the pipe, in the armpit of the "Y", not parallel to the core of the pipe).
>La force vectoring de EITHER comme compression OU an expansion de tel comme" Y" jointure would be pour PLI( ar antifold: linearize) la jonction de la" Y"; ce would génèrent comme compression( expansion) failure PERPENDICULAIRE pour la mur de la vessel( croix la cercle de la pipe, aux la armpit de la" Y", non parallèle pour la core de la pipe).
> Recall the articles that describe Di's body: in at least three contexts I recall that there was a description of there being a small wound on her RHS rib cage under the pectoral muscles ...
>Rappelons la article cela décrire Di's corps: aux chez moins 3 contexte je rappelons cela delà was comme description de delà being comme petit blessent sur elle RHS rib cage au-dessous la pectoral muscle...
> can anyone confirm this?
>Peut anyone confirma ce?
> WHY would an innocuous wound among SO MANY OTHERS be so assiduously described?
>POURQUOI would an innocuous blessent among AINSI MANY OTHERS be ainsi assiduously décrire?
> Was Di so unmarked that this WAS THE ONLY ONE in that area?
>Was Di ainsi unmarked cela ce WAS LA QU'À 1 aux cela aire?
> (why, if so?
>(Pourquoi, si ainsi?
>) How did it come to be there?
>)Comment faire ca venant pour be delà?
> (cause within the car) Were the clothes ripped or torn as from an impact in that area?
>(Cause within la auto) Were la clothes ripped ou torn comme dès an impact aux cela aire?
>, or was a puncture marl present within the car?
>,Ou was comme puncture marl présenta within la auto?
> What size was the wound in that area?
>Qu'est-ce-que taille was la blessent aux cela aire?
> Ws there ANYTHING in the car that COULD HAVE caused that wound (remember all the motions involved).
>Ws delà ANYTHING aux la auto cela PEUT A causa cela blessent( rapella tous la motions concerné).
> Was the wound transected?
>Was la blessent transected?
> (Not so listed) Examined microscopically?
>(Non ainsi listed) examina microscopically?
> (if not, then probably not the blood vessel either; if not, indications of blade marking would have been missed).
>(Si non, alors vraisemblablement non la sang vessel either; si non, indication de lame marquage would a been manqua).
> Now, recall that the description of Di's final resting position, as described by the first IDENTIFIED paparazzi or cyclist was: between the seats, face up (is this correct?
>Présent, rappelons cela la description de Di's finale reposa position, comme décrire par la 1 IDENTIFIA paparazzi ou cyclist was: entre la siège, visage up( is ce corrige?
> I do not recollect completely).
>Je faire non recollect complètement).
> Note that this again puts DI's RHS on the rear side of the crash (auto's LHS, where she was sitting).
>Annotation cela ce encore met DI's RHS sur la rear côté de la fracas( auto's LHS, là celle was asseoir).
> Conceive: if you want to kill someone who is merely injured, and do so leaving no OBVIOUS trace of injury, poke a hole in an area bloodied and/or bruised or likely to be so (Dodi would have hit Di on that side as the car torqued, HARD: I have had this occur to me in an accident.
>Concevant: si te indigence pour tua someone qui is merely nui, et faire ainsi sort aucun OBVIOUS trace de dégat, poke comme trou aux an aire bloodied et/ ou bruised ou likely pour be ainsi( Dodi would a hit Di sur cela côté comme la auto torqued, DUR: je a a ce occur pour me aux an accident.
>); his elbow would have likely hit her in this area.
>);Ses coude would a likely hit elle aux ce aire.
> Could an assassin have known it would be in this spot?
>Peut an assassin a connais ca would be aux ce tache?
> (No.
>(Aucun.
> training would let him/her ID where, on a person, a bruise would be, and allow an insertion there, within 2-4 seconds, or to CREATE such a site (a steel knuckle or any hard hand karate blow will make a mark ONLY an expert KNOWING TO LOOK could distinguish from a severe accidental hematoma.
>training would laissa lui/ elle ID là, sur comme personne, comme bruise would be, et allow an insertion delà, within 2-4 seconds, ou pour CRÉES tel comme endroit( comme acier knuckle ou quelconque dur main karate souffla volonté faite comme marqua QU'À an expert CONNAIS POUR REGARDA peut distingua dès comme severe accidentel hematoma.
> Again, time to do so, 2-4 seconds.
>Encore, fois pour faire ainsi, 2-4 seconds.
> Now: a normal implement carried by many professionals would look like a lecturer's folding pointer (or about half a dozen other implements), possibly with its own builtin light.
>Présent: comme normal implement porta par many professionals would regarda like comme lecturer's plia pointeur( ou about demi comme douzaine autre implements), possiblement avec sa own builtin alluma.
> (so the assassin could in fact se what and where the tool was pointed.
>(Ainsi la assassin peut aux factum se qu'est-ce-que et là la outil was braqua.
> Size and length, folded: 3-6 inches, 1/4 to 1/2 inch across.
>Taille et longueur, plia: 3-6 pouce, 1/ 4 pour 1/ 2 pouce across.
> Invisible in the palm of a hand.
>Invisible aux la palmier de comme main.
> To kill an injured semiconscious or unconscious party: 1) Reach the proper access side (2-4 seconds); inspect for witnesses within 5 feet; safe if none.
>Pour tua an nui semiconscious ou inconscient party: 1) étendue la convenable accéda côté( 2-4 seconds); inspecta pour témoin within 5 pied; coffre-fort si aucun.
> 2) Inspect as reaching in and determine which of 3-5 lethal points that would be difficult to detect; choose one (1-3 seconds).
>2) inspecta comme parvenant aux et détermina laquel de 3-5 lethal point cela would be difficile pour détecta; choisi 1( 1-3 seconds).
> 3) With one hand, taking OUT the implement with one hand, trip the pointer into extension and trigger any light.
>3) avec 1 main, prenant OUT la implement avec 1 main, trip la pointeur into rallonge et détente quelconque alluma.
> With the other, use an existing wound, or create one with a strike to hide the entry point.
>Avec la autre, usage an exista blessent, ou crées 1 avec comme asséna pour hide la entrée point.
> (1-3 seconds).
>(1-3 seconds).
> 4) Brushing aside clothing (or going through it to create a false impression of an internal object strike causing the wound), use both hands to insert the probe (having removed the pointer tip to expose a pick, or a small scythic blade); face the blade AWAY from the blood vessel; FEEL the pumping blood THROUGH the steel instrument; rotate and SCYTHE along the vessel JUST UNDER THE "Y" JUNCTION.
>4) brossa aside clothing( ou alla through ca pour crées comme fau impression de an interne objet asséna causa la blessent), usage both main pour encarta la sonde( a arracha la pointeur pourboire pour démasqua comme pick, ou comme petit scythic lame); visage la lame AWAY dès la sang vessel; SENT la pompa sang THROUGH la acier instrument; rotate et SCYTHE along la vessel JUST AU-DESSOUS LA" Y" JONCTION.
> (2-5 seconds) 5) Remove (wiping the instrument clean; microtome and plating preventing most scratch fingeprints (even if detected AS A CUT you CANNOT identify WHICH BLADE made it)) replace the pointer ball or at the end as you turn to leave, turning off the lamp in it if any, and returning to your cycle.
>(2-5 seconds) 5) arracha( essuie la instrument nettoie; microtome et métallisation empêcha most rayure fingeprints( soir si détecta COMME COMME COUPA te PEUT NON identifia LAQUEL LAME faite ca)) remplace la pointeur pelote ou chez la fin comme te tourna pour sort, tourna off la lampe aux ca si quelconque, et renvoie pour ta cycle.
> You leave.
>Te sort.
> (2-3 seconds).
>(2-3 seconds).
> Total timing: 8-18 seconds or so, off the cycle to back on.
>Total timing: 8-18 seconds ou ainsi, off la cycle pour back sur.
> If what I recollect about the OTHER paparazzi cycles, the distance to the rear of the accident was some 1/8th of a mile or more so; there have been NO estimates I have seen that accurately show the speed of the cycles coming into the tunnel; assume it was NO faster than the car (or else they would have been overtaking it, not falling behind).
>Si qu'est-ce-que je recollect about la AUTRE paparazzi cycle, la distance pour la rear de la accident was quelque 1/ 8th de comme mille ou plus ainsi; delà a been AUCUN devis je a vit cela accurately dénota la vitesse de la cycle venant into la tunnel; assuma ca was AUCUN faster than la auto( ou else celles would a been distanca ca, non choir behind).
> Thus, 65-78 MPH, or 55 seconds.
>Thus, 65-78 MPH, ou 55 seconds.
> Deceleration would approximately halve the speed or double+ the timing; or abut 30MPH.
>Deceleration would approximately halve la vitesse ou double+ la timing; ou abut 30MPH.
> This would take about 15 seconds to traverse; estimates I recall state that the first to arrive at the car were 15-25 seconds AFTER the impact (and I also recall a LONG hot harangue in the initial two months in ACPD where the attempt was made to FORCE the discussion to pursue form the thesis that Mr. Rat (?
>Ce would prenant about 15 seconds pour traverse; devis je rappelons état cela la 1 pour arriva chez la auto were 15-25 seconds APRÈS la impact( et je et rappelons comme LONGTEMPS hot harangue aux la initial 2 mois aux ACPD là la attenta was faite pour FORCE la discussion pour poursuis fiche la thèse cela Mr. rat(?
>correct one?
>Corrige 1?
>) was at the car IMMEDIATELY and thus no one else could have been there, or he would have seen them.
>)was chez la auto AUSSITÔT et thus aucun 1 else peut a been delà, ou celui would a vit eux.
> Question: Did the lights in the tunnel ALWAYS stay on?
>Question: faire la alluma aux la tunnel TOUJOURS stay sur?
> If so, hw would anyone have seen a bright flash of ANY type from a lit tunnel (does a camera flash remain that visible at night from within a brightly lit tunnel?
>Si ainsi, hw would anyone a vit comme bright flash de QUELCONQUE espèce dès comme alluma tunnel( faire comme caméra flash resta cela visible chez nuit dès within comme brightly alluma tunnel?
>) Did this happen?
>)Faire ce advenir?
> Look at the entire sequence.
>Look at la entier enchaînement.
> Identify form objective photos and videos and directly recorded identification sequences.
>Identifia fiche objectif photos et videos et directly enregistra identification enchaînement.
> Examine everything top to bottom Does it fit, or are there holes where the "cracks" in the flow of the scene could hide it?
>Examina everything top pour fond faire ca fit, ou are delà trou là la" cracks" aux la flux de la scene peut hide ca?
> Any comments?
>Quelconque commentaire?
> Question: Did the cycle MOVE BACK towards the person who got off, or zip down and turn around to PREPARE AN ESCAPE after the first one got off?
>Question: faire la cycle MEUT BACK towards la personne qui got off, ou zip down et tourna around pour AMÉNAGE AN IMPASSE après la 1 1 got off?
> Steve Reed wrote: > In article <022cd178.
>Steve Reed écrire: > aux article< 022cd178.
>7c06...@usw-ex0105-037.remarq.com>, ron <ron_winnN > Oro...@lineone.net.invalid> writes > >Steve, can I ask you or other members a few questions:- > > > >· The ATER describes the position of the Limo in the Concorde- > >Boulogne Lane so is it true to say that neither lane was > >slow/fast lane, both lanes had speed limit of 30 mph .
>7c06d2cf@ usw-ex0105-037. remarq. com>, ron< ron_winnN> OroSPAM@ lineone. net. invalide> écrire> > Steve, peut je demanda te ou autre membre comme few question: -> > > > · la ATER décrire la position de la Limo aux la Concorde-> > Boulogne Lane ainsi is ca vrai pour dirent cela ni lane was> > décéléra/ fast lane, both lanes a vitesse limite de 30 mph.
>> > I think you'll find that the speed limit was 50 km/h which, admittedly > is not quite 32 mph; but speed-limits are as stupid - at certain times > of day - in France, as they are here, and are not observed.
>> >Je pensa te volonté trouva cela la vitesse limite was 50 km/ h laquel, admittedly> is non quite 32 mph; mais speed-limits are comme stupide - chez certain fois> de jour - aux france, comme celles are ci, et are non observa.
>> > According to Francois Levistre, he was doing "entre 110 et 120 km/h" > (between 68 and 75mph) on the (westbound) approach to the Alma Tunnel, > when he saw vehicles coming up fast behind.
>> >According to Francois Levistre, celui was faire" entre 110 et 120 km/ h" > ( entre 68 et 75mph) sur la( westbound) rapprochement pour la Alma tunnel, > lorsque celui vit véhicule venant up fast behind.
>> > "The speed-trap which picked up the Mercedes doing 196 km/h (122 mph) > was situated on the straight stretch of the cour Albert Premier about > 400 metres before the tunnel" (France Dimanche, No 2667, 10/97) > > The Mercedes 280 and its attendant pursuers had already passed Brenda > Wells and Thierry H (by taking the left-hand lane) and were closing on > Levistre, as he and his wife, entered the tunnel - keeping to the right > in readiness to be overtaken.
>> > "La speed-trap laquel picked up la Mercedes faire 196 km/ h( 122 mph) > was situa sur la straight étire de la cour Albert Premier about> 400 metres avant la tunnel" ( france Dimanche, aucun 2667, 10/ 97) > > la Mercedes 280 et sa attendant pursuers a déja passa Brenda> puits et Thierry H( par prenant la left-hand lane) et were ferma sur> Levistre, comme celui et ses épouse, entra la tunnel - garda pour la droit> aux readiness pour be distanca.
> As Levistre remembers it, looking back > from a point about half-way through the tunnel, there was "a white car", > in the middle of the road, behind him.
>Comme Levistre rapella ca, regarda back> dès comme point about half-way through la tunnel, delà was" comme blanc auto", > aux la moyen de la chemin, behind lui.
> Behind that, he says, there was > "another car" (presumably the Mercedes S- 280) and behind that, a large > motor-bike.
>Behind cela, celui dirent, delà was> " another auto" ( presumably la Mercedes S- 280) et behind cela, comme large> motor-bike.
>> > Note that there is no vehicle present, in Levistre's story, which could > be the car of the witnesses Souad M.
>> >Annotation cela delà is aucun véhicule présenta, aux Levistre's conte, laquel peut> be la auto de la témoin Souad M.
> and Mohammed M.
>Et Mohammed M.
> If we believe > Levistre, they weren't there!
>Si nous croie> Levistre, celles weren't non delà!
> On the other hand, if we believe THEM, > the Mercedes crashed without any help from anyone - a very convenient > version of events, for the authorities, and completely contrary to the > testimony of ALL the other witnesses.
>Sur la autre main, si nous croie EUX, > la Mercedes crashed sans quelconque aida dès anyone - comme très commode> version de événement, pour la autorité, et complètement contraire pour la> testimony de TOUS la autre témoin.
>> > The sequence of events, as Levistre recounts it, is very interesting, > because he seems to be saying that the "white car" stayed ahead of the > Mercedes and the motor-bike.
>> >La enchaînement de événement, comme Levistre recounts ca, is très intéressa, > because celui parais pour be dirent cela la" blanc auto" stayed au-devant de la> Mercedes et la motor-bike.
> At least, he describes the "white car" > passing him, and disappearing westwards, before he begins to describe > the motor-bike overtaking the Mercedes and cutting-in in front of it.
>Chez moins, celui décrire la" blanc auto" > passa lui, et disparais westwards, avant celui commence pour décrire> la motor-bike distanca la Mercedes et cutting-in in front of ca.
>> > The impression given (that the "white car" was a long way ahead of the > Mercedes and the motorbike) is probably an illusion created by the > difficulty involved in describing the situation; but there is no > escaping the conclusion that the Mercedes did not completely squeeze > past the white car, but came alongside it, on its left, in a sliding > collision, which impelled the white car forwards, towards Levistre and > out of harm's way; whereupon the motorbike overtook the slowed Mercedes > and (also according to Levistre) cut-in in front of it and produced "a > searing burst of light, much brighter than a photo-flash".
>> >La impression donna( cela la" blanc auto" was comme longtemps voie au-devant de la> Mercedes et la motorbike) is vraisemblablement an illusion crées par la> difficulté concerné aux décrire la situation; mais delà is aucun> enfui la conclusion cela la Mercedes faire non complètement squeeze> passé la blanc auto, mais venant alongside ca, sur sa sort, aux comme sliding> collision, laquel impelled la blanc auto achemina, towards Levistre et> out of tort voie; whereupon la motorbike distanca la décéléra Mercedes> et( et according to Levistre) cut-in in front of ca et génèrent" comme> searing burst de alluma, beaucoup brighter than comme photo-flash".
>> > At this point, Levistre, braked and came to a halt near the western end > of the tunnel.
>> >Chez ce point, Levistre, freina et venant pour comme halt auprés la occidental fin> de la tunnel.
> The Mercedes had crashed, and the bikers (like Brenda > Wells, Levistre affirms that there were two of them) had stopped by the > wreck.
>La Mercedes a crashed, et la bikers( like Brenda> puits, Levistre affirms cela delà were 2 de eux) a arrêta par la> épave.
> One of them got off, momentarily, to look into the Mercedes, > jumped back on again, and the bike sped off, passing Levistre as it did > so.
>1 de eux got off, momentanément, pour regarda into la Mercedes, > sauta back sur encore, et la bike sped off, passa Levistre comme ca faire> ainsi.
> Levistre describes the bike as "black" and the two men as "dressed > in black with black helmets".
>Levistre décrire la bike comme" noir" et la 2 homme comme" habilla> aux noir avec noir casque".
> The whole thing took just a few seconds.
>La whole chose prenant just comme few seconds.
>> > Considerable efforts have been made to discredit Levistre.
>> >Estimable effort a been faite pour discrédit Levistre.
> It has been > said, for example, that his attitude to the press was "hostile" and that > he was trying to "gain attention"; but there could be another reason for > these attacks on his character - he witnessed a murder!
>Ca a been> dirent, pour ex, cela ses attitude pour la presse was" hostile" et cela> celui was essaya pour" gain attention"; mais delà peut be another raison pour> celles-ci attaque sur ses caractere - celui témoigna comme assassinat!
> There is no > other interpretation you can put on his testimony.
>Delà is aucun> autre interprétation te peut met sur ses testimony.
>> > Yes, indeed (to answer your question) the lanes were used as a slow-lane > and an overtaking lane - ludicrous speed-limit signs notwithstanding!
>> >Yes, indeed( pour répond ta question) la lanes were utilisé comme comme slow-lane> et an distanca lane - rigolo speed-limit signe notwithstanding!
>> > Other answers in another post > > -- > Steve Reed -- Roy A.
>> >Autre répond aux another post> > --> Steve Reed -- Roy comme.
> Crabtree 3212-7 Stone's Throw Lane Durham, NC USA 27713-5215 919-696-1805 voicemail/cell/textpage roy_cr...@hotmail.com Primary Email rcra...@nc.rr.com Secondary Email roy.
>Crabtree 3212-7 Stone's jeta Lane Durham, NC ÉTATS-UNIS 27713-5215 919-696-1805 voicemail/ cellule/ textpage roy_crabtree@ hotmail. com primaire Email rcrabtree@ nc. rr. com secondaire Email roy.
>crab...@unc.edu Tertiary Email http://home.nc.rr.com/rcrabtree Primary web page http://skyscraper.fortunecity.com/activex/720 Seondary web page http://www.unc.edu/~royc Tertiary web page ICQ royc 17243474
>crabtree@ unc. edu Tertiary Email http:// logis. nc. rr. com/ rcrabtree primaire web page http:// gratte-ciel. fortunecity. com/ activex/ 720 Seondary web page http:// www. unc. edu/ ~royc Tertiary web page ICQ royc 17243474
GODS...@home.com
>From GODS...@HOME.COM Wed May 03 15:40:25 2000 Path: news1.
>De GODSBRAIN@ LAR. COM Wed maio 3 15: 40: 25 2000 Path: news1.
>frmt1.
>frmt1.
>sfba.
>sfba.
>home.
>Lar.
>com!
>com!
>newshub1.
>newshub1.
>home.
>Lar.
>com!
>com!
>news.
>news.
>home.
>Lar.
>com!
>com!
>news1.
>news1.
>frmt1.
>frmt1.
>sfba.
>sfba.
>home.
>Lar.
>com.
>com.
>POSTED!
>POSTED!
>not-for-mail From: GODS...@HOME.COM Newsgroups: alt.
>not-for-mail de: GODSBRAIN@ LAR. COM Newsgroups: alt.
>conspiracy.
>Conspiração.
>princess-diana Subject: Re: Di: Paul, Henri, History, 60 Page Autopsy, Etc. Organization: <a href="http://members.home.com/godsbrain">G.O.D.S.B.R.A.I.N.</a><br> Reply-To: GODS...@HOME.COM,GODS...@AOL.COM Message-ID: <suv0hs4b86ldf6kh1...@4ax.com> References: <20000416220330.
>princess-diana sujeito: Re: Di: Paul, Henri, história, 60 página autopsia, etc. organização: < um href=" http:// membro. lar. com/ godsbrain"> G. O. D. S. B. R. um. eu. N.</ um>< br> Reply-To: GODSBRAIN@ LAR. COM, GODSBRAIN@ AOL. COM Message-ID: < suv0hs4b86ldf6kh11pg4usgb988mp55km@ 4ax. com> referência: < 20000416220330.
>18658.
>18658.
>0000...@ng-cg1.aol.com> <38fa9...@huge.aa.net> <8n1mfss0cu2ou4qhe...@4ax.com> <025220ee.
>4069@ ng-cg1. aol. com> < 38fa90de_2@ huge. aa. net> < 8n1mfss0cu2ou4qhej2ujs106jhqfrbbol@ 4ax. com> < 025220ee.
>5e23...@usw-ex0104-033.remarq.com> <VHL8$AAWpz$4I...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> <03cfeca4.
>5e23de39@ usw-ex0104-033. remarq. com> < VHL8$ AAWpz$ 4IAaS@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> < 03cfeca4.
>e454...@usw-ex0105-038.remarq.com> <5AGHurAe...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> <022cd178.
>e454e6ea@ usw-ex0105-038. remarq. com> < 5AGHurAeP0A5IAT7@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> < 022cd178.
>7c06...@usw-ex0105-037.remarq.com> <0PU0NLBY...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> <2ehrgsobh76u0sheo...@4ax.com> <EwaIiIA+...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.
>7c06d2cf@ usw-ex0105-037. remarq. com> < 0PU0NLBYabD5IAaW@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> < 2ehrgsobh76u0sheo8fsoso92h16ood0pr@ 4ax. com> < EwaIiIA+ 6EE5IAXR@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> X-Newsreader: Forte agente 1.
>7/32.
>7/ 32.
>534 MIME-Version: 1.
>534 MIME-Version: 1.
>0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 683 Date: Wed, 03 May 2000 22:40:25 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.
>0 Content-Type: texto/ planície; charset= us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit linha: 683 data: Wed, 3 maio 2000 22: 40: 25 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.
>7.
>7.
>83.
>83.
>23 X-Complaints-To: ab...@home.net X-Trace: news1.
>23 X-Complaints-To: abuso@ lar. net X-Trace: news1.
>frmt1.
>frmt1.
>sfba.
>sfba.
>home.
>Lar.
>com 957393625 24.
>com 957393625 24.
>7.
>7.
>83.
>83.
>23 (Wed, 03 May 2000 15:40:25 PDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 03 May 2000 15:40:25 PDT Xref: newshub1.
>23( Wed, 3 maio 2000 15: 40: 25 PDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 3 maio 2000 15: 40: 25 PDT Xref: newshub1.
>home.
>Lar.
>com alt.
>com alt.
>conspiracy.
>Conspiração.
>princess-diana:30031204 -------- </html> OK.
>princess-diana: 30031204 --------</ html> OK.
> What do we call this?
>Que dos we chamada este?
> The daily replay of the daily revised version of the God's Brain Suppositional Hypothesis.
>A diária replay of a diária revisa versão of a deus cérebro Suppositional hipnoses.
> Act ______ Scene ________ Having read the below a time or two, or few, some opportunity to explain weighted influence factors in the construction of the daily hypothesis.
>Ato ______ cena ________ havei ledes a debaixo um tempo ou 2, ou pouca, algum maré a explica weighted influência fator em a construção of a diária hipnoses.
> Since the authorities have had two and a half years with the manpower, peoplepower, staff power, of what was it reported?
>Desde a autoridade havei havei 2 e um metade ano com a manpower, peoplepower, staff potência, of que was isto reporta?
> Some 24 full time investigators and million(s) dollar equivalent budgets I am not competing with that.
>Algum 24 cheia tempo investigators e 1000000( s) dólar equivalente orçamento eu am não compete com aquela.
> The outcome reports of that investigation appear to be: Drunk driver speeds without the care of D+D+TRJ and abruptly turns left into a central column.
>A outcome relatório of aquela investigação aparece a be: bebe condutores rapidezes sem a cuidado of D+ D+ TRJ e abrutamente giro sae into um centrais coluna.
> Simple Road Traffic Accident RTA.
>Simple caminho tráfico acidente RTA.
> When and over the time since the creation of alt.
>Quando e over a tempo desde a criação of alt.
>conspiracy.
>Conspiração.
>princess-diana by b.
>princess-diana por b.
>anana his philosophical position as I read it is to approximately take the position for sake of arguement that Diana was killed as the result of a conspiracy.
>anana his filosófica posição as eu ledes isto is a aproximadamente toma a posição for sake of arguement aquela Diana was mata as a resultado of um conspiração.
> Because it has appeared to me that while times, places, people, and motives have been discussed I have a feeling that there has been less than reasonable consideration of some possibilities.
>Because isto havei aparece a me aquela enquanto tempo, lugar, gente, e motivo havei been discute eu havei um sente aquela ali havei been menos than razoáveis consideração of algum possibilidade.
> As a consequence of that belief I am trying to construct a suppositional hypothesis that will identify possible, persons, places, things that may be considered as possible.
>As um consequência of aquela crença eu am trying a construi um suppositional hipnoses aquela vontade identifica possíveis, pessoa, lugar, coisa aquela maio be considera as possíveis.
> The intent is to create multiple fictional tracks such that the most possible/ununderstood may be considered.
>A intento is a cria múltipla fictional pistas tal aquela a most possíveis/ ununderstood maio be considera.
> Many of the pieces are for the most part agreed as having been in the area but there is a lot of discrepancy as to the EXACT location at a SPECIFIC INSTANT.
>Muitas of a pieces are for a most parte condigo as havei been em a área mas ali is um lote of discrepância as a a EXATA locais na um PARTICULARIDADES INSTANT.
> My intent is to create this fictional supposition to give, or try to determine, the differences between points of agreement and points of disharmony.
>Meu intento is a cria este fictional suposição a dada, ou try a determina, a diferença entre ponto of agreement e ponto of disharmony.
> Agreement/Disagreement and Harmony/Disharmony.
>Agreement/ discordância e harmonia/ Disharmony.
> Concord vs Discord.
>Concord vs discórdia.
> If there might have been common interest to finance a joint project to lessen Diana's influence with the media because she was percieved to be "stepping on someones toes" , my words, then how might some such plan, plot, conspiracy, have been considered achievable from a variety of possible participant's points of view?
>Se ali might havei been comum interesse a financia um junta projeto a lessen Diana's influência com a media because ela was percieved a be" stepping sobre someones toes" , meu palavra, then como might algum tal plano, alcovita, conspiração, havei been considera realizável de um variedade of possíveis participante ponto of vista?
> My typing fingers are not going to stand too long a discussion at this point so I am going to try to speed along.
>Meu typing dedo are não going to stand too longa um discussão na este ponto tão eu am going to try a rapidezes along.
> My supposition is that if there was a conspiracy it had to be to do something.
>Meu suposição is aquela se ali was um conspiração isto havei a be a dos algo.
> A photo of Diana giving Dodi a blow job in the back seat of a limo would be pretty good.
>Um photo of Diana dada Dodi um bufa trabalhos em a dorso assento of um limo would be bonita boa.
>For the photo to achieve maximum benefit it had to be secret and to be used as a threat.
>For a photo a logra máxima benefício isto havei a be segredo e a be usa as um threat.
>The actual publication in mass media would deflate its power.
>A atual publicação em massa media would esvazia seu potência.
> But it had to have strong and undisputable evidence that it was TRUE if it were ever going to be used.
>Mas isto havei a havei forte e undisputable evidência aquela isto was TRUE se isto were ever going to be usa.
> For some paparazzi to "peeping tom" photo a divorcee with her boyfriend in private was not going to do the job.
>For algum paparazzi a" peeping tom" photo um divorciado com a boyfriend em private was não going to dos a trabalhos.
> So the construct of a whore for money with an oily bedhopper in the back seat of a very expensive limo would be much more philosophically correct for the purpose of a conspiracy to get a photo to use for blackmail in the future but not for actual publication.
>Tão a construi of um whore for dinheiro com um oleosa bedhopper em a dorso assento of um very dispendiosa limo would be muita mais filosóficamente corrige for a propósito of um conspiração a get um photo a uso for chantagem em a futura mas não for atual publicação.
> On Wed, 3 May 2000 17:07:26 +0100, Steve Reed <asr...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> wrote: >Path: news1.
>Sobre Wed, 3 maio 2000 17: 7: 26+ 100, Steve Reed< asreed@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> escreve: > Path: news1.
>frmt1.
>frmt1.
>sfba.
>sfba.
>home.
>Lar.
>com!
>com!
>newshub2.
>newshub2.
>rdc1.
>rdc1.
>sfba.
>sfba.
>home.
>Lar.
>com!
>com!
>newshub1.
>newshub1.
>home.
>Lar.
>com!
>com!
>news.
>news.
>home.
>Lar.
>asreed >From: Steve Reed <asr...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> >Newsgroups: alt.
>asreed> de: Steve Reed< asreed@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> > Newsgroups: alt.
>conspiracy.
>Conspiração.
>princess-diana >Subject: Re: Di: Paul, Henri, History, 60 Page Autopsy, Etc. >Date: Wed, 3 May 2000 17:07:26 +0100 >Organization: Home >Lines: 297 >Message-ID: <EwaIiIA+...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> >References: <20000416201432.
>princess-diana> sujeito: Re: Di: Paul, Henri, história, 60 página autopsia, etc. > data: Wed, 3 maio 2000 17: 7: 26+ 100> organização: lar> linha: 297> Message-ID: < EwaIiIA+ 6EE5IAXR@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> > referência: < 20000416201432.
>18648.
>18648.
>0000...@ng-cg1.aol.com> > <20000416220330.
>4517@ ng-cg1. aol. com> > < 20000416220330.
>18658.
>18658.
>0000...@ng-cg1.aol.com> <38fa9...@huge.aa.net> > <8n1mfss0cu2ou4qhe...@4ax.com> > <025220ee.
>4069@ ng-cg1. aol. com> < 38fa90de_2@ huge. aa. net> > < 8n1mfss0cu2ou4qhej2ujs106jhqfrbbol@ 4ax. com> > < 025220ee.
>5e23...@usw-ex0104-033.remarq.com> > <VHL8$AAWpz$4I...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> > <03cfeca4.
>5e23de39@ usw-ex0104-033. remarq. com> > < VHL8$ AAWpz$ 4IAaS@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> > < 03cfeca4.
>e454...@usw-ex0105-038.remarq.com> > <5AGHurAe...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> > <022cd178.
>e454e6ea@ usw-ex0105-038. remarq. com> > < 5AGHurAeP0A5IAT7@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> > < 022cd178.
>7c06...@usw-ex0105-037.remarq.com> > <0PU0NLBY...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> > <2ehrgsobh76u0sheo...@4ax.com> >Reply-To: Andrew Steven Reed <ar...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> >NNTP-Posting-Host: modem88.
>7c06d2cf@ usw-ex0105-037. remarq. com> > < 0PU0NLBYabD5IAaW@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> > < 2ehrgsobh76u0sheo8fsoso92h16ood0pr@ 4ax. com> > Reply-To: Andrew Steven Reed< areed@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> > NNTP-Posting-Host: modem88.
>fred.
>fred.
>pol.
>pol.
>co.
>co.
>uk >Mime-Version: 1.
>uk> Mime-Version: 1.
>0 >X-Trace: newsreaderg1.
>0> X-Trace: newsreaderg1.
>core.
>Núcleos.
>theplanet.
>theplanet.
>net 957376918 19338 195.
>net 957376918 19338 195.
>92.
>92.
>7.
>7.
>216 (3 May 2000 18:01:58 GMT) >NNTP-Posting-Date: 3 May 2000 18:01:58 GMT >X-Complaints-To: ab...@theplanet.net >X-Newsreader: Turnpike Integrated Version 4.
>216( 3 maio 2000 18: 1: 58 GMT) > NNTP-Posting-Date: 3 maio 2000 18: 1: 58 GMT> X-Complaints-To: abuso@ theplanet. net> X-Newsreader: Turnpike integra versão 4.
>02 M <TWkHBtca5wWBvmfWwoLIWQkgFM> >Xref: newshub1.
>2 M< TWkHBtca5wWBvmfWwoLIWQkgFM> > Xref: newshub1.
>home.
>Lar.
>com alt.
>com alt.
>conspiracy.
>Conspiração.
>princess-diana:30031199 > >In article <2ehrgsobh76u0sheo...@4ax.com>, >GODS...@HOME.COM writes >>>there was "a white car", >>>in the middle of the road, behind him.
>princess-diana: 30031199> > em artículo< 2ehrgsobh76u0sheo8fsoso92h16ood0pr@ 4ax. com>, > GODSBRAIN@ LAR. COM escreve>>> ali was" um branca carro", >>> em a meio of a caminho, atrás dele.
> >> >>So Livestre lied.
>>> >>Tão Livestre deita.
> The white car was not in the middle >>of the road, the Mercedes was in the middle of the >>road.
>A branca carro was não em a meio>> of a caminho, a Mercedes was em a meio of a>> caminho.
> Why did Livestre lie?
>Porquê did Livestre deita?
> Maybe Livestre did not lie in that particular.
>Maybe Livestre did não deita em aquela particular.
> One needs to be very careful as to "at what instant" and did he say the middle of the road or the middle of the lane?
>1 necessidades a be very cuidadosa as a" na que instant" e did ele digo a meio of a caminho ou a meio of a lane?
> It was said that he had moved into the right lane.
>Isto was digo aquela ele havei comove into a direita lane.
> If he said the white car was in the middle of the [right] lane I would agree.
>Se ele digo a branca carro was em a meio of a[ direita] lane eu would condigo.
>> >Levistre is not contradicting himself.
>> >Levistre is não contradigo himself.
> He saw the white car "au milieu >de la chaussee" So, does "chaussee" come closer to translating as "lane" or on the other hand, "road?
>Ele serrais a branca carro" au milieu> de la chaussee" tão, does" chaussee" veio aproximado a traduz as" lane" ou sobre a other mão, " caminho?
>" Road having two lanes.
>"Caminho havei 2 lanes.
> >and was overtaken by it ("elle me double") But exactly where were the other actors at the exact instant that "elle me double?
>>E was overtaken por isto(" elle me dobrada") mas exatamente aonde were a other ator na a exata instant aquela" elle me dobrada?
>" >"Then", he >says ("puis j'observe [retroviseur] une autre auto toujours au milieu de >la route") "I saw [rear-view mirror] another car, also in the middle of >the road" So here we have a "milieu de la route.
>" >"Then", ele> digo(" puis j'observe[ retroviseur] une autre auto toujours au milieu de> la rota") " eu serrais[ rear-view espelho] another carro, e em a meio of> a caminho" tão aqui we havei um" milieu de la rota.
>" Does that mean closer the lane or the road?
>"Does aquela significa aproximado a lane ou a caminho?
> >("et soudain une grosse moto sur sa gauche qui lui fait une >queue de poisson") "and, all of a sudden, a large motor-bike, to the >left of it, cutting-in in front of it".
>>("et soudain une grosse moto sur sa gauche qui lui fait une> queue de poisson") " e, todos of um repentina, um large motor-bike, a a> sae of isto, cutting-in in front of isto".
> I will take it that AT SOME POINT a large motor-bike, comming from the left of it, and then cutting-in in front of it.
>Eu vontade toma isto aquela NA ALGUM PONTO um large motor-bike, comming de a sae of isto, e then cutting-in in front of isto.
> > >(another ambiguity is created by the expression "sur sa gauche", which >could be translated "to ITS left" [to the right of it, from where >Levistre says he was] or "to the left of it" [as seen from Levistre's >alleged position] and, since Levistre claims that the Mercedes "was in >the middle of the road" at that point, it could be either) Since I am trying to construct a hypothetical scene where the Merc was astraddle the white line that separated the two west bound lanes and a photographing motorcycle was to the left side of the Merc at the exact instant that the white car was on the right side.
>> >(another ambiguidade is cria por a expressão" sur sa gauche", which> posso be traduz" a SEU sae" [ a a direita of isto, de aonde> Levistre digo ele was] ou" a a sae of isto" [ as serrais de Levistre's> alleged posição] e, desde Levistre claims aquela a Mercedes" was em> a meio of a caminho" na aquela ponto, isto posso be either) desde eu am trying a construi um hipotética cena aonde a Merc was astraddle a branca linha aquela desune a 2 oeste limitais lanes e um fotografa motocicleta was a a sae lado of a Merc na a exata instant aquela a branca carro was sobre a direita lado.
> .
>
> .
>
> .
>
>> >"At the same instant, for a fraction of a second, there was a tremendous >flash of light, but nothing like the flash of a camera" ("Au meme >moment, en une fraction de seconde, un enorme eclair jaillit, mais rien >a voir avec le flash d'un appareil-photo") > >My point is that the order of events is not completely clear.
>> >"Na a mesma instant, for um fração of um 2, ali was um tremenda> fulmina of luz, mas nada gosta a fulmina of um câmera" (" Au meme> momento, en une fração de seconde, un enorme eclair jaillit, mais rien> um voir avec le fulmina d'un appareil-photo") > > meu ponto is aquela a ordem of evento is não completamente clara.
> It could >be that the bike cut-in in front of the Mercedes just before the white >car passed Levistre - either that, or the bike was further behind the >Mercedes, as both vehicles entered the tunnel, than Clifford, Olivier >and Thierry imply.
>Isto posso> be aquela a bike cut-in in front of a Mercedes justa antes a branca> carro passa Levistre - either aquela, ou a bike was further atrás a> Mercedes, as ambas veículo entra a túneis, than Clifford, Olivier> e Thierry imply.
> I suppose the bike could have braked, just before the Is there any chance that one of the skid marks, like the single one, was the bike?
>Eu se a bike posso havei breca, justa antes a Is ali any chance aquela 1 of a derrapa marca, gosta a solteira 1, was a bike?
> >tunnel (to avoid running into a Mercedes/white-car pile-up) and that >Levistre might not have been as far along the tunnel as he thought he >was.
>>Túneis( a evita correste into um Mercedes/ white-car pile-up) e aquela> Levistre might não havei been as longe along a túneis as ele pensa ele> was.
> There is another branch of my lack of understanding and that follows along a train of thought that the picture was intended but the crash was an accident.
>Ali is another ramo of meu carece of compreende e aquela segue along um trem of pensa aquela a retratos was intenta mas a choque was um acidente.
> In the "accident" hypothesis approximately the motorcycle photographer could have accidently fired a half metre too far forward and instead of shooting in to the back seat he could have accidently hit HP directly in the eyes as Henri Paul looked to the left as the motorcycle came along side his side window.
>Em a" acidente" hipnoses aproximadamente a motocicleta fotógrafo posso havei accidently fired um metade metre too longe remite e instead of balea em a a dorso assento ele posso havei accidently acerta HP diretamente em a olho as Henri Paul looked a a sae as a motocicleta veio along lado his lado janela.
>Then the blinding flash could have caused HP to FLINCH and swerve to the right just a little.
>Then a cega fulmina posso havei causa HP a FLINCH e swerve a a direita justa um pequena.
> At that point hitting the rear of the accelerating white car.
>Na aquela ponto acerta a traseira of a acelera branca carro.
> As the white car's rear goes to the right its front goes to the left.
>As a branca carro traseira goes to a direita seu frente goes to a sae.
> To correct, the driver throws to the right and the rear goes to the left.
>A corrige, a condutores atira a a direita e a traseira goes to a sae.
> Essentially tossing the front of the Merc into the central columns.
>Essentially tossing a frente of a Merc into a centrais coluna.
> >Thus, the Mercedes hit the white car, side-to-side, and impelled it >forwards, towards Levistre, and was FOLLOWING it, as it passed >Levistre's position, and as the bike overtook the Mercedes.
>>Assim, a Mercedes acerta a branca carro, side-to-side, e impelled isto> remite, towards Levistre, e was SEGUINTE isto, as isto passa> Levistre's posição, e as a bike overtook a Mercedes.
> I think that the first, photographing, bike should have been ahead of the white car.
>Eu pensa aquela a 1, fotografa, bike should havei been adiante of a branca carro.
> If the bike and the car essentially accelerated at the same instant the bike would outrun the car.
>Se a bike e a carro essentially acelera na a mesma instant a bike would outrun a carro.
> I think.
>Eu pensa.
> Bikes are far faster at acceleration that cars.
>Bikes are longe veloz na aceleração aquela carro.
> Any disagreements?
>Any discordância?
>Of course, with two riders and a turbo car ...?
>Of curso, com 2 riders e um turbo carro...?
> For one thing, you are supposing then that the white car was ahead of the Merc at the instant that the Merc hit the central column/pilar/post.
>For 1 coisa, tu are se then aquela a branca carro was adiante of a Merc na a instant aquela a Merc acerta a centrais coluna/ pilar/ post.
> That is in accord with my first guess.
>Aquela is em acordo com meu 1 adivinhação.
>> >Does that clear things up?
>> >Does aquela clara coisa up?
> No.
>No.
> It smokes them up.
>Isto fumaça as up.
> But gives a number of possible occurances to consider.
>Mas dada um número of possíveis occurances a considera.
>>> >>>Behind that, he says, there was >>>"another car" (presumably the Mercedes S- 280) and behind that, a large >>>motor-bike.
>>> >>>Atrás aquela, ele digo, ali was>>>" another carro" ( presumably a Mercedes S- 280) e atrás aquela, um large>>> motor-bike.
> So my first thought on that is that that is a second bike.
>Tão meu 1 pensa sobre aquela is aquela aquela is um 2 bike.
> And if we are talking about the left that might be better described as a second bike on the left as there might have been one or more bikes on the right in addition.
>E se we are dialoga about a sae aquela might be boa descreve as um 2 bike sobre a sae as ali might havei been 1 ou mais bikes sobre a direita em adição.
>>> >>Livestre lies again.
>>> >>Livestre deita novamente.
>> >What do you mean?
>> >Que dos tu significa?
> What evidence is there that Levistre is "lying"?
>Que evidência is ali aquela Levistre is" deita"?
> My supposition.
>Meu suposição.
>> >> He clearly saw and may have been a part >>of a conspiracy to cover up.
>> >>Ele claramente serrais e maio havei been um parte>> of um conspiração a coberta up.
> So in my supposition he saw it >>and he lied about it.
>Tão em meu suposição ele serrais isto>> e ele deita about isto.
> Now if we go off on a train of thought to >>explore a hypothesis that Livestre was deliberately lying then >>I'll have to think about that some more.
>Agora se we ia off sobre um trem of pensa a>> explora um hipnoses aquela Livestre was deliberately deita then>> eu I'll havei a pensa about aquela algum mais.
> I have not until the >>present considered the possibility that he was deliberately >>lying.
>Eu havei não até a>> presente considera a possibilidade aquela ele was deliberately>> deita.
>>> >I have - he could be in the pay of Al-Fayed (or his high-level masters) >That's always a possibility; but why should we single him out?
>>> >Eu havei - ele posso be em a paga of Al-Fayed( ou his high-level masters) > aquela That's sempre um possibilidade; mas porquê should we solteira dele out?
> I'm not singling him out.
>Eu I'm não singling dele out.
> I am theorizing that there may have been a whole swarm of conspiring pap's surrounding Diana's car.
>Eu am theorizing aquela ali maio havei been um whole enxame of conluia pap's cerca Diana's carro.
> >What >about any (or ALL) of the other witnesses?
>>Que> about any( ou TODOS) of a other presencia?
> I am inclined to go with the >majority (who saw closely pursuing vehicles) and focus suspicion on >Mohammed and Souad who - alone - say they did not.
>Eu am inclined a ia com a> maioria( quem serrais juntamente acossa veículo) e foco suspeita sobre> Mohammed e Souad quem - sozinho - digo elas did não.
>> >>If he were deliberately lying and saw the three vehicles >>abreast, > > He says he saw them one behind the other - until the bike overtook the >Mercedes.
>> >>Se ele were deliberately deita e serrais a 3 veículo>> abreast, > > ele digo ele serrais as 1 atrás a other - até a bike overtook a> Mercedes.
> Then the bike and the Mercedes were "abreast", but the white >car - so he implies - had already overtaken him by then!
>Then a bike e a Mercedes were" abreast", mas a branca> carro - tão ele implies - havei já overtaken dele por then!
> But why should >you suspect this to be a lie?
>Mas porquê should> tu suspeito este a be um deita?
> I think you, we, need to be very careful about exactly what instant is being described as being related to any single comment.
>Eu pensa tu, we, necessidades a be very cuidadosa about exatamente que instant is ser descreve as ser reconta a any solteira comentário.
>> >> the photo flashes, the motorcycle accelerate, >>the car on the right bump the Merc into the central >>pilars, > >You want to hypothesize that the bike-overtake/flash occurred BEFORE the >sliding collision?
>> >>A photo fulmina, a motocicleta acelera, >> a carro sobre a direita bump a Merc into a centrais>> pilars, > > tu cobica a hypothesize aquela a bike-overtake/ fulmina ocorre ANTES a> descamba colisão?
> What on earth for?
>Que sobre earth for?
> Well, if the supposition is as two photographing vehicles taking a photograph from both sides at the same instant .
>Poço, se a suposição is as 2 fotografa veículo toma um foto de ambas lado na a mesma instant.
> .
>
> .
>
> .
>
> There may also have been two contacts between the two vehicles?
>Ali maio e havei been 2 contato entre a 2 veículo?
>The mirror thing may not have been considered significant.
>A espelho coisa maio não havei been considera significante.
> The mirror would not have broken out the tail light.
>A espelho would não havei quebra out a rabo luz.
> So if the tail light was broken would not one suspect a corresponding dent on the Merc's right front fender?
>Tão se a rabo luz was quebra would não 1 suspeito um conve dent sobre a Merc's direita frente fender?
>> In reading this over I can not understand quickly the actions to cover up circumstances by police, courts, etc. unless Diana bite off and swallowed the tip of Dodi's penis from the force of the crash.
>>Em leitura este over eu posso não compreende depressa a atuação a coberta up circunstância por polícia, corte, etc. unless Diana morde off e swallowed a ponta of Dodi's pênis de a força of a choque.
> If some such had happened then that could explain a lot of things, But it would also demonstrate that there was no fear in the back seat at the time of crash which would be important to suggest that there was no demonstrated disagreement with Henri Paul's driving performance prior to the crash.
>Se algum tal havei acontece then aquela posso explica um lote of coisa, mas isto would e demonstrados aquela ali was no medo em a dorso assento na a tempo of choque which would be importante a sugere aquela ali was no demonstrados discordância com Henri Paul's driving performance prior a a choque.
> >> that the first photoflashing motorcycle sped off >>past him and out of the tunnel as well as the vehicle that >>had bumped the Merc.
>>>Aquela a 1 photoflashing motocicleta sped off>> past dele e out of a túneis as well as a veículo aquela>> havei bumped a Merc.
> and then reported that in essence >>a followup motorcycle stopped to view into the Merc >>and it then resumed to exit the tunnel, etc. >> >You mean Levistre is concealing the existence of a second motorcycle?
>E then reporta aquela em essência>> um followup motocicleta susta a vista into a Merc>> e isto then reassume a saída a túneis, etc. >> > tu significa Levistre is acobertar-me a existência of um 2 motocicleta?
>>True, Thierry H.
>>True, Thierry H.
> says he saw "several" motorcycles pursuing the >Mercedes, closely, towards the tunnel (he had a view along the cour >Albert Premier from the carriageway itself) but Clifford G.
>Digo ele serrais" several" motocicleta acossa a> Mercedes, juntamente, towards a túneis( ele havei um vista along a cour> Albert Premier de a carriageway mesmo) mas Clifford G.
> and Olivier >P (who were positioned to the right [north] of the road and could see no >more than the tunnel-entrance) report only " a car in front of the >Mercedes and a [one!
>E Olivier> P( quem were positioned a a direita[ norte] of a caminho e posso serrais no> mais than a tunnel-entrance) relatório somente" um carro in front of a> Mercedes e um[ 1!
>] powerful motor-cycle, 30 - 40 metres behind.
>]Poderosa motor-cycle, 30 - 40 metres atrás.
> I think it was Brian Anderson's story that a motorcycle moved to pass the Merc on its left as it entered the tunnel, which would be exact in accord with my one theory.
>Eu pensa isto was Brian Anderson's conto aquela um motocicleta comove a passa a Merc sobre seu sae as isto entra a túneis, which would be exata em acordo com meu 1 teoria.
>> >Why should we not assume that the other bikes left the cour Albert >Premier, at the exit slip-road, leaving the pair on the bike, which >Clifford, Olivier and Levistre saw, to proceed into the tunnel for the >kill!?
>> >Porquê should we não assume aquela a other bikes sae a cour Albert> Premier, na a saída slip-road, sae a par sobre a bike, which> Clifford, Olivier e Levistre serrais, a proceed into a túneis for a> mata!?
> I don't think that the word "kill" is at all proper in a larger view.
>Eu dos não pensa aquela a palavra" mata" is na todos proper em um larger vista.
>"Photo" would I suggest be a more prevalent term for that point.
>"Photo" would eu sugere be um mais prevalecente término for aquela ponto.
>> >>I would like to see the animation sequences down to the 1 meter >>resolution.
>> >>Eu would gosta a serrais a animação sequência abaixo a a 1 metro>> resolução.
> I think the main constant that we can use is the >>physical distance on the road as being traversed by the Merc.
>Eu pensa a main constante aquela we posso uso is a>> física distância sobre a caminho as ser percorre por a Merc.
> >>So the animation reference frames could be identified by reference >>to the tunnel face as metres + "plus" or - "minus" the tunnel face.
>>>Tão a animação referência moldura posso be identifica por referência>> a a túneis cara as metres+ " plus" ou -" minus" a túneis cara.
>>>> >We would all (those of us who really wish to have it explained in >detail, that is) like to see sophisticated event-reconstruction >techniques brought to bear, together with an account of exactly what >data was employed and how it was used.
>>>> >We would todos( aquelas of nos quem really desejo a havei isto explica em> detalhe, aquela is) gosta a serrais sophisticated event-reconstruction> técnica trago a aborreceis, junto com um conta of exatamente que> dado was emprega e como isto was usa.
> Fat chance of that, however - >unless you happen to have an event-reconstruction team on hand and you >can afford to cock a snoot at the politico-media complex.
>Gorda chance of aquela, however -> unless tu acontece a havei um event-reconstruction team sobre mão e tu> posso afford a cock um snoot na a politico-media complexo.
> There is the traffic accident reconstruction site off my web page.
>Ali is a tráfico acidente reconstrução site off meu web página.
> I saw reference to the most professional software photosho or paint shop of something like that.
>Eu serrais referência a a most profissional software photosho ou pintura loja of algo gosta aquela.
> I got a copy off the web.
>Eu got um cópia off a web.
> One of these years I will move to do my accident and if at the same time I did a second of the Diana crash not much for starters.
>1 of estas ano eu vontade comove a dos meu acidente e se na a mesma tempo eu did um 2 of a Diana choque não muita for starters.
> > >>>Note that there is no vehicle present, in Levistre's story, which could >>>be the car of the witnesses Souad M.
>> >>>Nota aquela ali is no veículo presente, em Levistre's conto, which posso>>> be a carro of a presencia Souad M.
> and Mohammed M.
>E Mohammed M.
> If we believe >>>Levistre, they weren't there!
>Se we cre>>> Levistre, elas weren't não ali!
> On the other hand, if we believe THEM, >>>the Mercedes crashed without any help from anyone - a very convenient >>>version of events, for the authorities, and completely contrary to the >>>testimony of ALL the other witnesses.
>Sobre a other mão, se we cre AS, >>> a Mercedes crashed sem any ajuda de anyone - um very conveniente>>> versão of evento, for a autoridade, e completamente contrary a a>>> testemunho of TODOS a other presencia.
>>> I am not suggesting that consideration should be limited to only one hypothetically possible series of events.
>>>Eu am não sugere aquela consideração should be limited a somente 1 hipotéticamente possíveis series of evento.
> It appears to me that there are apparently conflicting reports of circumstances.
>Isto aparece a me aquela ali are apparently conflicting relatório of circunstância.
> Therefore I suggest several parallel hypothetical story lines.
>Conseqüentemente eu sugere several paralelo hipotética conto linha.
> That calls to mind something that I think Senator Sam Ervin said during the course of the Watergate hearings on Nixon's impeachment.
>Aquela chamada a mente algo aquela eu pensa senador Sam Ervin digo durante a curso of a Watergate ouvido sobre Nixon's impeachment.
> The in the four gospels there are accounts of what was reported to have been written by Pilate on the sign to be placed over Jesus Christ's head on the cross.
>A em a 4 gospels ali are conta of que was reporta a havei been escreve por Pilate sobre a signo a be coloca over jesus cristo cabeça sobre a cruz.
> Senator Sam said that if individuals whose testimoney we so reverence from the written testimony could be so reported as divergent then we need not be dismayed that good people of our own day may be reported as to not have agreed perfectly.
>Senador Sam digo aquela se indivíduos whose testimoney we tão reverência de a escreve testemunho posso be tão reporta as divergente then we necessidades não be dismayed aquela boa gente of nossa própria dia maio be reporta as a não havei condigo perfeitamente.
> >>Hummnn >>> >>>The sequence of events, as Levistre recounts it, is very interesting, >>>because he seems to be saying that the "white car" stayed ahead of the >>>Mercedes and the motor-bike.
>>>Hummnn>>> >>> a sequência of evento, as Levistre recounts isto, is very interesting, >>> because ele parece a be digo aquela a" branca carro" fica adiante of a>>> Mercedes e a motor-bike.
> I would think "ahead" of the Merc would be correct but not that the white car stayed ahead of the bike.
>Eu would pensa" adiante" of a Merc would be corrige mas não aquela a branca carro fica adiante of a bike.
> Explaination given above.
>Explaination dada acima.
>>> >>Well, in my SH one possibility that I want to consider is that both >>the white car on the Merc's right hand side and the motorcycle on >>the Merc's left hand side came to a synchronized position along side >>the Merc such as to be able to take symultaneous flash photographs >>into the Merc from both sides at the same time.
>>> >>Poço, em meu SH 1 possibilidade aquela eu cobica a considera is aquela ambas>> a branca carro sobre a Merc's direita mão lado e a motocicleta sobre>> a Merc's sae mão lado veio a um sincroniza posição along lado>> a Merc tal as a be hábeis a toma symultaneous fulmina foto>> into a Merc de ambas lado na a mesma tempo.
> If one is in a very >>heavy law suit one needs at least TWO corroberating withnesses.
>Se 1 is em um very>> heavy law traje 1 necessidades na menos 2 corroberating withnesses.
> And a big pile of paps only seconds behind would be very important also.
>E um gran pile of paps somente seconds atrás would be very importante e.
> If somebody hinted at the presence of a blackmail photo they could be assassinated in short order before they could ever get close to a court of law, and I heard a song the other day called "Smuggler's Blues" done in the Eighties by Glenn Frey has some good words.
>Se alguém hinted na a presença of um chantagem photo elas posso be assassina em curta ordem antes elas posso ever get aproximado a um corte of law, e eu ouve um canção a other dia chama" contrabandista Blues" done em a Eighties por Glenn Frey havei algum boa palavra.
>>> >This seems to me to be fanciful in the extreme.
>>> >Este parece a me a be fantasiosa em a extrema.
> On what grounds do you >suggest it?
>Sobre que grounds dos tu> sugere isto?
>> >>The same scene photographed by two separate photographers at >>exactly the same instant would be IDEAL.
>> >>A mesma cena fotografa por 2 desune fotógrafo na>> exatamente a mesma instant would be IDEAIS.
>>> >"Ideal" for what?
>>> >"Ideais" for que?
> Come on Al!
>Veio sobre Al!
> What are these simultaneous, two-angle >flash-photos supposed to be for?
>Que are estas simultânea, two-angle> flash-photos subentende a be for?
> Okay - you've said before that you >think they would have been compromising photos, and that MAF set up the >car-switch and the pursuit in order to obtain them.
>Okay - tu havei digo antes aquela tu> pensa elas would havei been transige photos, e aquela MAF set up a> car-switch e a perseguição em ordem a consegue as.
> This is an >interesting idea, because, although it seems most likely to me that MAF >DID make these arrangements, I cannot decide precisely what it was that >he thought was going to happen.
>Este is um> interesting idéia, because, conquanto isto parece most likely a me aquela MAF> DID faz estas arranjo, eu posso não decide precisamente que isto was aquela> ele pensa was going to acontece.
> A compromising photograph.
>Um transige foto.
> Exactly in line with MAF's general opinion of John.
>Exatamente em linha com MAF's generais opinião of John.
> Q.
>Q.
> Public, Di, etc. > >Let us say that Diana and Dodi were not sleeping together, she was not >pregnant by him and they were not going to get engaged - or some >combination of these negatives - such that, in order to (what?
>Público, Di, etc. > > deixa nos digo aquela Diana e Dodi were não dorme junto, ela was não> pregnant por dele e elas were não going to get empenha - ou algum> combinação of estas negativo - tal aquela, em ordem a( que?
>) gain >influence over Diana or disgrace her or force her to marry Dodi?
>)gain> influência over Diana ou desgraça a ou força a a casa Dodi?
> - the >Al-Fayeds conceived the scheme I would guess that conception of the scheme would have happened far away from MAF.
>- a> Al-Fayeds concebe a esquema eu would adivinhação aquela concepção of a esquema would havei acontece longe away de MAF.
> If a group were looking for someone to set up some such scheme MAF might have been found to have been a good candidate to approach for the leading role but the script had been written long before and they just needed some one to play the part.
>Se um grupo were looking for someone a set up algum tal esquema MAF might havei been acha a havei been um boa candidato a acerca for a leading papeles mas a script havei been escreve longa antes e elas justa necessita algum 1 a brinca a parte.
> >of obtaining compromising photographs.
>>of consegue transige foto.
> A >clever ruse is employed to get rid of some of the escort (but why not >all?
>Um> clever ruse is emprega a get rid of algum of a escolta( mas porquê não> todos?
>) THE COMPROMISING photo to be used for blackmail to influence Diana not to take a strong public stand on some particular issue from time to time would have been financed by an external consortium, QEII, Chas, Military landmine sales proponents, etc. In order to be of use at selected times the photo could not be public.
>)A TRANSIGE photo a be usa for chantagem a influência Diana não a toma um forte público stand sobre algum particular issue de tempo a tempo would havei been financia por um externa consortium, QEII, Chas, militar landmine venda proponents, etc. em ordem a be of uso na seleciona tempo a photo posso não be público.
> If that happened it would have been a one time shot when ever it fell into public hands.
>Se aquela acontece isto would havei been um 1 tempo balea quando ever isto baquea into público mão.
> To be worth the expense and effort it had to be kept secret but its circumstance had to be indisputable else any single person threatening exposure of some such would be under extremely high surveillance in moments.
>A be worth a gasto e esforço isto havei a be guarda segredo mas seu circunstância havei a be indiscutíveis else any solteira pessoa ameacei exposições of algum tal would be under extremamente alta surveillance em momento.
> > the remaining escort follows from the Hotel, against orders, thus >giving the impression that they are up to no good.
>>A permanece escolta segue de a hotel, contra orders, assim> dada a impressão aquela elas are up a no boa.
> Henri has been >briefed to flee them - he flees.
>Henri havei been> briefed a escapa as - ele escapa.
> An ambush of pursuers has been arranged >on the cour la Reine - to keep Henri in flight and to give Dodi an >excuse for grabbing Diana (as though protectively) I can't imagine anything but a photograph of a blowjob.
>Um emboscada of pursuers havei been arranja> sobre a cour la Reine - a guarda Henri em flight e a dada Dodi um> escusa for grabbing Diana( as conquanto protectively) eu posso não imagina anything mas um foto of um blowjob.
> Sex is no big thing nowadays.
>Sexo is no gran coisa nowadays.
> In royal family tradition, the past, it may have been able to throw a little influence at an intense moment of public conflict.
>Em royal família tradição, a past, isto maio havei posso atira um pequena influência na um intensa momento of público conflito.
> There is so much detailed sex on the web that I wouldn't doubt that to find a microscopic photo of a pubic hair would take more than a few minutes.
>Ali is tão muita detailed sexo sobre a web aquela eu wouldn't não dúvida aquela a acha um microscópica photo of um pubic cabelo would toma mais than um pouca minuto.
> So if any eyebrows were going to be raised maybe a court threatening a loss of Di's finances for breach of contract re: approximately non modest public behavior.
>Tão se any sobrancelha were going to be alca maybe um corte ameacei um perda of Di's financia for brecha of contrato re: aproximadamente non modesta público comportamento.
> So if Di was very cognizant of contract provisions regarding public behavior as a determinant of her divorce settlement then she would have to have exercised the utmost discression.
>Tão se Di was very cognizant of contrato provisão regarding público comportamento as um determinante of a divórcio settlement then ela would havei a havei exercised a utmost discression.
> But if she was going to find any male support outside of her ex's she would have to at some point show some affection.
>Mas se ela was going to acha any macho apoio fora of a ex's ela would havei a na algum ponto mostra algum afeição.
> Now where could one find any more hope of privacy than in the tunnel of love in a speeding limosine?
>Agora aonde posso 1 acha any mais esperança of privacy than em a túneis of amor em um speeding limosine?
> But to be effective for black mail the photo would have to appear as immodest public behavior.
>Mas a be effective for negra correio a photo would havei a aparece as imodesta público comportamento.
> I said PUBLIC.
>Eu digo PÚBLICO.
> So on the one hand Diana would have shyed away from any PUBLIC behavior but people interested in obtaining a photo for blackmail would have to make the circumstances of the photo look as public as possible.
>Tão sobre a 1 mão Diana would havei shyed away de any PÚBLICO comportamento mas gente interested em consegue um photo for chantagem would havei a faz a circunstância of a photo olhar as público as possíveis.
> TWO photo's from TWO different photographers and surrounding photos from another hundred photographers could be made to look like PUBLIC IMMODESTY while the circumstance of the back seat of a speeding limosine in the tunnel in the middle of the night is about as close to "private" behavior as I can imagine anyone could get on short notice.
>2 photo's de 2 diferente fotógrafo e cerca photos de another 100 fotógrafo posso be faz a olhar gosta PÚBLICO IMODÉSTIA enquanto a circunstância of a dorso assento of um speeding limosine em a túneis em a meio of a noite is about as aproximado a" private" comportamento as eu posso imagina anyone posso get sobre curta notícia.
> >- a car is stationed >at the tunnel-entrance to stop the Mercedes (a very risky proceeding, >from a father's point of view, don't you think?
>>- um carro is stationed> na a tunnel-entrance a parada a Mercedes( um very risky proceeding, > de um father's ponto of vista, dos não tu pensa?
>) the Mercedes is slowed, >the pursuers catch up, the photographs are taken.
>)A Mercedes is slowed, > a pursuers agarra up, a foto are toma.
>> >Photographs of what?
>> >Foto of que?
> Diana giving Dodi a blow job.
>Diana dada Dodi um bufa trabalhos.
> What else could even raise an eyebrowe nowadays?
>Que else posso par alca um eyebrowe nowadays?
> Hell, if you had to sell such a photograph to get a MacDonald's hamburger you would have a lot of competition in the current market.
>Hell, se tu havei a vende tal um foto a get um MacDonald's hamburguesa tu would havei um lote of competência em a corrente mercado.
> > A terrified Diana in Dodi's arms?
>>Um terrified Diana em Dodi's braço?
> Diana being >raped by Dodi?
>Diana ser> raped por Dodi?
> - is that what you're working up to saying?
>- is aquela que tu you're labora up a digo?
> My dear chap!
>Meu cara chap!
> Who is going to conspire, and pay big money, for something like that?
>Quem is going to conluia, e paga gran dinheiro, for algo gosta aquela?
>Nobody.
>Ninguém.
> >Diana crouched down on the floor behind Henri's seat, and Dodi remained >upright - probably viewing the pursuit with anxiety - possibly grappling >with TRJ to prevent him interfering with the driving.
>>Diana crouched abaixo sobre a piso atrás Henri's assento, e Dodi permanece> upright - probably viewing a perseguição com ansiedade - possibly grappling> com TRJ a impede dele interfere com a driving.
> What sign is >there - apart from the fact that neither Diana nor Dodi were wearing >seat-belts - that Dodi was attempting to grapple with Diana?
>Que signo is> ali - apart de a feito aquela nem Diana nor Dodi were traja> seat-belts - aquela Dodi was ousa a grapple com Diana?
>> >Again, I say, "photographs of what?
>> >Novamente, eu digo, " foto of que?
>" - precisely - and what were they >for?
>"- precisamente - e que were elas> for?
> - according to your theory.
>- according to teu teoria.
> A picture of a blow job - for blackmail.
>Um retratos of um bufa trabalhos - for chantagem.
>> >Why could these photographs not have been taken with spy-cameras at one >of the Fayed residences Because such a photo would possibly be identified as an invasion of privacy.
>> >Porquê posso estas foto não havei been toma com spy-cameras na 1> of a Fayed residência Because tal um photo would possibly be identifica as um invasão of privacy.
> It had to look like PUBLIC Immodest Behavior to cause a diminution of Diana's influence in the public media.
>Isto havei a olhar gosta PÚBLICO imodesta comportamento a causa um diminution of Diana's influência em a público media.
> >at which Diana stayed?
>>Na which Diana fica?
> How could it have been >hoped that photographs of an especially compromising nature could have >been obtained at high speed in the Alma Tunnel, rather than on the >Jonikal, at the Ritz or at the rue Arsene?
>Como posso isto havei been> hoped aquela foto of um especially transige natureza posso havei> been consegue na alta rapidezes em a Alma túneis, rather than sobre a> Jonikal, na a Ritz ou na a rue Arsene?
> What on earth is the point?
>Que sobre earth is a ponto?
> Would behavior on the yatch or at the Ritz be considered public or private by Diana.
>Would comportamento sobre a yatch ou na a Ritz be considera público ou private por Diana.
> My guess is that Diana would have considered it PUBLIC.
>Meu adivinhação is aquela Diana would havei considera isto PÚBLICO.
>> >One glimmer of a suggestion of a possibility does occur to me, as a >result of examining this idea, however.
>> >1 glimmer of um sugestão of um possibilidade does ocorre a me, as um> resultado of examina este idéia, however.
> What if Dodi was having >difficulty getting physical with Diana?
>Que se Dodi was havei> dificuldade getting física com Diana?
> Did Dad devise an elaborate >ruse to throw them together?
>Did Dad devise um elaborate> ruse a atira as junto?
> Or rather, was he advised to do so by >those who wanted Diana dead NOT DEAD.
>Ou rather, was ele aconselha a dos tão por> aquelas quem cobica Diana morto NÃO MORTO.
> There is a whole hell of a lot of difference in wanting some one to have less public influence in the public media than in wanting someone to be dead.
>Ali is um whole hell of um lote of diferença em cobica algum 1 a havei menos público influência em a público media than em cobica someone a be morto.
> >- so that he would implement the scheme >without knowing what it was really for?
>>- so that ele would implemento a esquema> sem conhece que isto was really for?
> Quite simple.
>Quite simple.
> A compromising photograph.
>Um transige foto.
> >Something of the sort must have >happened, I think - and it's not so incredible if you consider that >MAF's masters may have been pretending to attempt to pull off a Fayed- >Spencer match (with big bucks in it for MAF) for some time - so that >the Machiavellian complexity of engineering the car-switch, the >disposition of the escort, the arrangements for the route and the >programming of Henri Paul, might not have aroused MAF's suspicions.
>>Algo of a sort must havei> acontece, eu pensa - e isto it's não tão incríveis se tu considera aquela> MAF's masters maio havei been disimula a ousa a puxa off um Fayed-> Spencer emparelha( com gran bucks em isto for MAF) for algum tempo - so that> a Machiavellian complexidade of engenharia a car-switch, a> disposição of a escolta, a arranjo for a rota e a> programação of Henri Paul, might não havei aroused MAF's suspeita.
> A photograph would be the most logical thing in the whole world.
>Um foto would be a most lógica coisa em a whole mundo.
>No body would be suspicious of anything.
>No corpo would be suspeita of anything.
>> >Other factors, such as sabotaging the S-280's brakes and air-bags, >briefing the escort to monitor the crash but not get involved, etc, >could have been achieved by MAF's backers, over MAF's head, The theft and modification of the vehicle could have been well disguised.
>> >Other fator, tal as sabota a S-280's freio e air-bags, > briefing a escolta a monitor a choque mas não get involved, etc, > posso havei been logra por MAF's backers, over MAF's cabeça, a theft e modificação of a veículo posso havei been poço disfarcei.
> >such that >Siegel and Musa (Etoile Limousines) and Wingfield and Dournot were not >only working for MAF, but for his masters, DIRECTLY.
>>Tal aquela> Siegel e Musa( Etoile limusine) e Wingfield e Dournot were não> somente labora for MAF, mas for his masters, DIRETAMENTE.
> However, if that were part of the plot, then PLANS TO GET THAT VEHICLE TO THAT PLACE IN TIME WOULD HAVE TO HAVE BEEN ROCK SOLID FOR MONTHS IN ADVANCE.
>However, se aquela were parte of a alcovita, then PLANO A GET AQUELA VEÍCULO A AQUELA LUGAR EM TEMPO WOULD HAVEI A HAVEI BEEN ROCHA SÓLIDA FOR MES EM AVANÇO.
> There is the clear windows in one train of thought and defective equipment as possibly another.
>Ali is a clara janela em 1 trem of pensa e defeituosa equipamento as possibly another.
>> >Indeed, assuming that MAF did not know that the fatal crash was >intended, those of MAF's employees who MUST have known that a fatal >crash was intended, MUST have been working directly for those who >intentionally engineered it.
>> >Indeed, assume aquela MAF did não conhece aquela a fatais choque was> intenta, aquelas of MAF's empregado quem MUST havei conhece aquela um fatais> choque was intenta, MUST havei been labora diretamente for aquelas quem> intentionally engineered isto.
>> If a crash after the photo were planned the least people in the area who needed to know was just the driver of the white car.
>>Se um choque depois a photo were planea a menos gente em a área quem necessita a conhece was justa a condutores of a branca carro.
> Second could have been the photographer on the back of the motorcycle who had to aim a shot into the driver's eyes.
>2 posso havei been a fotógrafo sobre a dorso of a motocicleta quem havei a pontaria um balea into a condutores olho.
> >>>At least, he describes the "white car" >>>passing him, and disappearing westwards, before he begins to describe >>>the motor-bike overtaking the Mercedes and cutting-in in front of it.
>>>>Na menos, ele descreve a" branca carro" >>> passa dele, e desaparece westwards, antes ele comecei a descreve>>> a motor-bike overtaking a Mercedes e cutting-in in front of isto.
> >> >>So this gets the locations screwed up and out of sync.
>>> >>Tão este gets a locais screwed up e out of sync.
>>> >>> >>> The impression given (that the "white car" was a long way ahead of the >>>Mercedes and the motorbike) is probably an illusion created by the >>>difficulty involved in describing the situation; >> >>Also, a witness in a high speed drive has their own road to watch as >>well as looking in the rear view mirror.
>>> >>> >>>A impressão dada( aquela a" branca carro" was um longa via adiante of a>>> Mercedes e a motorbike) is probably um ilusão cria por a>>> dificuldade involved em descreve a situação; >> >> e, um presencia em um alta rapidezes drive havei their própria caminho a relógio as>> poço as looking em a traseira vista espelho.
> So one might have a strobe >>light effect of only seeing a flash of an instant when they happened >>to have the opportunity to look in the mirror.
>Tão 1 might havei um strobe>> luz efeito of somente serrais um fulmina of um instant quando elas acontece>> a havei a maré a olhar em a espelho.
>>> >>>but there is no >>>escaping the conclusion that the Mercedes did not completely squeeze >>>past the white car, but came alongside it, on its left, in a sliding >>>collision, >> >>My suggestion would be to consider that the Merc was the >>vehicle in the middle of the road, that the white vehicle would >>have been on its right and the motorcycle on its left, three >>abreast.
>>> >>>Mas ali is no>>> escaping a conclusão aquela a Mercedes did não completamente squeeze>>> past a branca carro, mas veio alongside isto, sobre seu sae, em um descamba>>> colisão, >> >> meu sugestão would be a considera aquela a Merc was a>> veículo em a meio of a caminho, aquela a branca veículo would>> havei been sobre seu direita e a motocicleta sobre seu sae, 3>> abreast.
>>> >>And that point photoflashes were fired and then the white >>car accelerated >> >>>which impelled the white car forwards, towards Levistre and >>>out of harm's way; >> >>And the motorcycle accelerated >> >>>whereupon the motorbike >> >>accelerated and swerved in front of >>the Mercedes.
>>> >>E aquela ponto photoflashes were fired e then a branca>> carro acelera>> >>> which impelled a branca carro remite, towards Levistre e>>> out of harm's via; >> >> e a motocicleta acelera>> >>> whereupon a motorbike>> >> acelera e swerved in front of>> a Mercedes.
>>> >>No.
>>> >>No.
> That is even wrong.
>Aquela is par wrong.
> In my SH.
>Em meu SH.
>>> >>Let's try it another way.
>>> >>Deixa nos try isto another via.
> More to the >>"DELIBERATE BUMP OFF" conspiracy >>supposition.
>Mais a a>>" DELIBERA BUMP OFF" conspiração>> suposição.
>>> >>In that, the motorcycle would have fired >>a series of quick flashes as it accelerated >>in front of the Mercedes.
>>> >>Em aquela, a motocicleta would havei fired>> um series of quick fulmina as isto acelera>> in front of a Mercedes.
> The first flash >>would have been into the back seat but >>a second would have been directly into >>the eyes of Henri Paul.
>A 1 fulmina>> would havei been into a dorso assento mas>> um 2 would havei been diretamente into>> a olho of Henri Paul.
> Having blinded >>him, it would then accelerate and as soon >>as it was clear the vehicle on the right would >>bump the Mercedes' front into the center >>pilars.
>Havei cega>> dele, isto would then acelera e as cedinho>> as isto was clara a veículo sobre a direita would>> bump a Mercedes' frente into a centro>> pilars.
>>> >>>overtook the slowed Mercedes >>>and (also according to Levistre) cut-in in front of it and produced "a >>>searing burst of light, much brighter than a photo-flash".
>>> >>>overtook a slowed Mercedes>>> e( e according to Levistre) cut-in in front of isto e brota" um>>> searing estoura of luz, muita brighter than um photo-flash".
>>>> >>>At this point, Levistre, braked and came to a halt near the western end >>>of the tunnel.
>>>> >>>Na este ponto, Levistre, breca e veio a um pousa perto a western fim>>> of a túneis.
> >> >>More correctly, NOT "At this point" but at "A POINT" near the >>western end of the tunnel.
>>> >>Mais corretamente, NÃO" na este ponto" mas na" um PONTO" perto a>> western fim of a túneis.
>>> >>>The Mercedes had crashed, and the bikers (like Brenda >>>Wells, Levistre affirms that there were two of them) had stopped by the >>>wreck.
>>> >>>A Mercedes havei crashed, e a bikers( gosta Brenda>>> poços, Levistre affirms aquela ali were 2 of as) havei susta por a>>> naufraga.
> >> >>That does not sound possible to me.
>>> >>Aquela does não som possíveis a me.
> It may depend upon speed.
>Isto maio depende sobre rapidezes.
>>>Assuming that the whole action was taking place at some >>above average speed then if at least the bike on the left had >>accelerated ahead of the Merc it could not have stopped.
>>>Assume aquela a whole atuação was toma lugar na algum>> acima médias rapidezes then se na menos a bike sobre a sae havei>> acelera adiante of a Merc isto posso não havei susta.
> If it >>did not stop then it may have passed Livestre and exited the >>tunnel.
>Se isto>> did não parada then isto maio havei passa Livestre e exited a>> túneis.
> Whether a second bike stopped might be considerable.
>Quer um 2 bike susta might be consideráveis.
>>> >>>One of them got off, momentarily, to look into the Mercedes, >>>jumped back on again, and the bike sped off, passing Levistre as it did >>>so.
>>> >>>1 of as got off, momentâneamente, a olhar into a Mercedes, >>> salta dorso sobre novamente, e a bike sped off, passa Levistre as isto did>>> tão.
> Levistre describes the bike as "black" and the two men as "dressed >>>in black with black helmets".
>Levistre descreve a bike as" negra" e a 2 homens as" veste>>> em negra com negra elmo".
> The whole thing took just a few seconds.
>A whole coisa toma justa um pouca seconds.
>>>> >>>Considerable efforts have been made to discredit Levistre.
>>>> >>>Consideráveis esforço havei been faz a desabona Levistre.
> It has been >>>said, for example, that his attitude to the press was "hostile" and that >>>he was trying to "gain attention"; but there could be another reason for >>>these attacks on his character - he witnessed a murder!
>Isto havei been>>> digo, for exemplo, aquela his atitude a a editora was" hosteis" e aquela>>> ele was trying a" gain atenção"; mas ali posso be another razão for>>> estas ataque sobre his caracteres - ele presencia um assassinato!
> There is no >>>other interpretation you can put on his testimony.
>Ali is no>>> other interpretação tu posso mete sobre his testemunho.
>>>> >>>Yes, indeed (to answer your question) the lanes were used as a slow-lane >>>and an overtaking lane - ludicrous speed-limit signs notwithstanding!
>>>> >>>Yes, indeed( a contestação teu pergunta) a lanes were usa as um slow-lane>>> e um overtaking lane - lúdica speed-limit signo notwithstanding!
>>>> >>>Other answers in another post >> >><a href="http://members.home.com/godsbrain">G.O.D.S.B.R.A.I.N.</a><br> > >-- >Steve Reed Alvin H.
>>>> >>>Other contestação em another post>> >>< um href=" http:// membro. lar. com/ godsbrain"> G. O. D. S. B. R. um. eu. N.</ um>< br> > > --> Steve Reed Alvin H.
> White <a href="http://members.home.com/godsbrain">G.O.D.S.B.R.A.I.N.</a><br>
>Branca< um href=" http:// membro. lar. com/ godsbrain"> G. O. D. S. B. R. um. eu. N.</ um>< br>
GODS...@home.com
>From GODS...@HOME.COM Wed May 03 15:40:25 2000 Path: news1.
>Van GODSBRAIN@ TE'HUIS. COM Wed mei 3 15: 40: 25 2000 baan: news1.
>frmt1.
>frmt1.
>sfba.
>sfba.
>home.
>Te'huis.
>com!
>com!
>newshub1.
>newshub1.
>home.
>Te'huis.
>com!
>com!
>news.
>news.
>home.
>Te'huis.
>com!
>com!
>news1.
>news1.
>frmt1.
>frmt1.
>sfba.
>sfba.
>home.
>Te'huis.
>com.
>com.
>POSTED!
>POSTED!
>not-for-mail From: GODS...@HOME.COM Newsgroups: alt.
>not-for-mail van: GODSBRAIN@ TE'HUIS. COM Newsgroups: alt.
>conspiracy.
>Samenzweringen.
>princess-diana Subject: Re: Di: Paul, Henri, History, 60 Page Autopsy, Etc. Organization: <a href="http://members.home.com/godsbrain">G.O.D.S.B.R.A.I.N.</a><br> Reply-To: GODS...@HOME.COM,GODS...@AOL.COM Message-ID: <suv0hs4b86ldf6kh1...@4ax.com> References: <20000416220330.
>princess-diana subject: Re: Di: Paul, Henri, geschiedenis, 60 pagina lijkschouwing, enz. organisatie: < href=" http:// lid. te'huis. com/ godsbrain"> G. O. D. S. B. R. . ik. N.</ >< br> Reply-To: GODSBRAIN@ TE'HUIS. COM, GODSBRAIN@ AOL. COM Message-ID: < suv0hs4b86ldf6kh11pg4usgb988mp55km@ 4ax. com> verwijzing: < 20000416220330.
>18658.
>18658.
>0000...@ng-cg1.aol.com> <38fa9...@huge.aa.net> <8n1mfss0cu2ou4qhe...@4ax.com> <025220ee.
>4069@ ng-cg1. aol. com> < 38fa90de_2@ huge. aa. net> < 8n1mfss0cu2ou4qhej2ujs106jhqfrbbol@ 4ax. com> < 025220ee.
>5e23...@usw-ex0104-033.remarq.com> <VHL8$AAWpz$4I...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> <03cfeca4.
>5e23de39@ usw-ex0104-033. remarq. com> < VHL8$ AAWpz$ 4IAaS@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> < 03cfeca4.
>e454...@usw-ex0105-038.remarq.com> <5AGHurAe...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> <022cd178.
>e454e6ea@ usw-ex0105-038. remarq. com> < 5AGHurAeP0A5IAT7@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> < 022cd178.
>7c06...@usw-ex0105-037.remarq.com> <0PU0NLBY...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> <2ehrgsobh76u0sheo...@4ax.com> <EwaIiIA+...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.
>7c06d2cf@ usw-ex0105-037. remarq. com> < 0PU0NLBYabD5IAaW@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> < 2ehrgsobh76u0sheo8fsoso92h16ood0pr@ 4ax. com> < EwaIiIA+ 6EE5IAXR@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> X-Newsreader: Forte agens 1.
>7/32.
>7/ 32.
>534 MIME-Version: 1.
>534 MIME-Version: 1.
>0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 683 Date: Wed, 03 May 2000 22:40:25 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.
>0 Content-Type: tekst/ vlakte; charset= us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit lijn: 683 datum: Wed, 3 mei 2000 22: 40: 25 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.
>7.
>7.
>83.
>83.
>23 X-Complaints-To: ab...@home.net X-Trace: news1.
>23 X-Complaints-To: misbruik@ te'huis. net X-Trace: news1.
>frmt1.
>frmt1.
>sfba.
>sfba.
>home.
>Te'huis.
>com 957393625 24.
>com 957393625 24.
>7.
>7.
>83.
>83.
>23 (Wed, 03 May 2000 15:40:25 PDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 03 May 2000 15:40:25 PDT Xref: newshub1.
>23( Wed, 3 mei 2000 15: 40: 25 PDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 3 mei 2000 15: 40: 25 PDT Xref: newshub1.
>home.
>Te'huis.
>com alt.
>com alt.
>conspiracy.
>Samenzweringen.
>princess-diana:30031204 -------- </html> OK.
>princess-diana: 30031204 --------</ html> OK.
> What do we call this?
>Wat deden we telefoongesprek dit?
> The daily replay of the daily revised version of the God's Brain Suppositional Hypothesis.
>De dagelijks replay of de dagelijks herzag versie of de god hersenen Suppositional hypothese.
> Act ______ Scene ________ Having read the below a time or two, or few, some opportunity to explain weighted influence factors in the construction of the daily hypothesis.
>Daad ______ scčne ________ gehad gelezen de beneden maal or 2, or weinig, sommige gelegenheden jegens uiteengezet weighted invloed factor in de constructie of de dagelijks hypothese.
> Since the authorities have had two and a half years with the manpower, peoplepower, staff power, of what was it reported?
>Sinds de autoriteit gehad gehad 2 en helft jaar mede de manpower, peoplepower, staf macht, of wat was het gerapporteerd?
> Some 24 full time investigators and million(s) dollar equivalent budgets I am not competing with that.
>Sommige 24 vol maal onderzoeker en 1000000( s) dollar equivalent budget ik am niet concurreerde mede dat.
> The outcome reports of that investigation appear to be: Drunk driver speeds without the care of D+D+TRJ and abruptly turns left into a central column.
>De outcome verslag of dat onderzoek bleek jegens be: dronk bestuurder snelheid zonder de zorgde of D+ D+ TRJ en abrupt draai verlaat into voornaamste kolom.
> Simple Road Traffic Accident RTA.
>Enkelvoudig Road verkeer ongeluk RTA.
> When and over the time since the creation of alt.
>Toen en over de maal sinds de schepping of alt.
>conspiracy.
>Samenzweringen.
>princess-diana by b.
>princess-diana bij b.
>anana his philosophical position as I read it is to approximately take the position for sake of arguement that Diana was killed as the result of a conspiracy.
>anana zijn filosofisch positie als ik gelezen het is jegens geschat genomen de positie voor sake of arguement dat Diana was doden als de gevolge of samenzweringen.
> Because it has appeared to me that while times, places, people, and motives have been discussed I have a feeling that there has been less than reasonable consideration of some possibilities.
>Because het gehad bleek jegens mij dat terwijl maal, plaats, lieden, en motief gehad been discuteerde ik gehad gevoeld dat aldaar gehad been klein than redelijk overweging of sommige mogelijkheden.
> As a consequence of that belief I am trying to construct a suppositional hypothesis that will identify possible, persons, places, things that may be considered as possible.
>Als consequentie of dat belief ik am geprobeerd jegens bouwt suppositional hypothese dat will geďdentificeerd mogelijk, particulieren, plaats, ding dat mei be aangezien als mogelijk.
> The intent is to create multiple fictional tracks such that the most possible/ununderstood may be considered.
>De bedoeling is jegens geschapen veelvoudig fictional tracks dergelijk dat de meest mogelijk/ ununderstood mei be aangezien.
> Many of the pieces are for the most part agreed as having been in the area but there is a lot of discrepancy as to the EXACT location at a SPECIFIC INSTANT.
>Veel of de stuk are voor de meest deel afgesproken als gehad been in de areaal doch aldaar is boel of discrepantie als jegens de EXACT ligging at SPECIFIEK INSTANT.
> My intent is to create this fictional supposition to give, or try to determine, the differences between points of agreement and points of disharmony.
>Mijn bedoeling is jegens geschapen dit fictional supposition jegens gaf, or geprobeerd jegens bepaald, de verscheidenheden tussen punt of overeenkomst en punt of disharmony.
> Agreement/Disagreement and Harmony/Disharmony.
>Overeenkomst/ onenigheid en harmonie/ Disharmony.
> Concord vs Discord.
>Concord vs Discord.
> If there might have been common interest to finance a joint project to lessen Diana's influence with the media because she was percieved to be "stepping on someones toes" , my words, then how might some such plan, plot, conspiracy, have been considered achievable from a variety of possible participant's points of view?
>Als aldaar might gehad been gezondverstand belang jegens financiewezen gezamenlijk project jegens lessen Diana's invloed mede de media because she was percieved jegens be" gestapt aan someones toes" , mijn woord, dan hoe might sommige dergelijk plan, perceel, samenzweringen, gehad been aangezien bereikbaar van variety of mogelijk deelnemer punt of zicht?
> My typing fingers are not going to stand too long a discussion at this point so I am going to try to speed along.
>Mijn getypt vinger are niet going to gestaan ook lang bespreking at dit punt dus ik am going to geprobeerd jegens snelheid along.
> My supposition is that if there was a conspiracy it had to be to do something.
>Mijn supposition is dat als aldaar was samenzweringen het gehad jegens be jegens deden iets.
> A photo of Diana giving Dodi a blow job in the back seat of a limo would be pretty good.
> foto's of Diana gaf Dodi blasen taak in de terug zitplaats of limo would be mooi best.
>For the photo to achieve maximum benefit it had to be secret and to be used as a threat.
>Voor de foto's jegens achieve maximum benefit het gehad jegens be geheim en jegens be aangewend als bedreiging.
>The actual publication in mass media would deflate its power.
>De feitelijk publicatie in massa media would deflate hetis macht.
> But it had to have strong and undisputable evidence that it was TRUE if it were ever going to be used.
>Doch het gehad jegens gehad krachtig en undisputable bewijs dat het was WAAR als het were eeuwig going to be aangewend.
> For some paparazzi to "peeping tom" photo a divorcee with her boyfriend in private was not going to do the job.
>Voor sommige paparazzi jegens" peeping tom" foto's gescheidenvrouw mede haar boyfriend in besloten was niet going to deden de taak.
> So the construct of a whore for money with an oily bedhopper in the back seat of a very expensive limo would be much more philosophically correct for the purpose of a conspiracy to get a photo to use for blackmail in the future but not for actual publication.
>Dus de bouwt of hoer voor geld mede olieachtig bedhopper in de terug zitplaats of zeer duur limo would be much meer filosofisch corrigeerde voor de purpose of samenzweringen jegens kreeg foto's jegens gebruik voor chantage in de toekomst doch niet voor feitelijk publicatie.
> On Wed, 3 May 2000 17:07:26 +0100, Steve Reed <asr...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> wrote: >Path: news1.
>Aan Wed, 3 mei 2000 17: 7: 26+ 100, Steve rieten< asreed@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> geschreven: > baan: news1.
>frmt1.
>frmt1.
>sfba.
>sfba.
>home.
>Te'huis.
>com!
>com!
>newshub2.
>newshub2.
>rdc1.
>rdc1.
>sfba.
>sfba.
>home.
>Te'huis.
>com!
>com!
>newshub1.
>newshub1.
>home.
>Te'huis.
>com!
>com!
>news.
>news.
>home.
>Te'huis.
>com!
>com!
>feeder.
>feeder.
>via.
>via.
>net!
>Net!
>diablo.
>diablo.
>theplanet.
>theplanet.
>net!
>Net!
>news.
>news.
>theplanet.
>theplanet.
>net!
>Net!
>newspost.
>newspost.
>theplanet.
>theplanet.
>net!
>Net!
>lastings.
>lastings.
>softnet.
>softnet.
>co.
>co.
>uk!
>uk!
>asreed >From: Steve Reed <asr...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> >Newsgroups: alt.
>asreed> van: Steve rieten< asreed@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> > Newsgroups: alt.
>conspiracy.
>Samenzweringen.
>princess-diana >Subject: Re: Di: Paul, Henri, History, 60 Page Autopsy, Etc. >Date: Wed, 3 May 2000 17:07:26 +0100 >Organization: Home >Lines: 297 >Message-ID: <EwaIiIA+...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> >References: <20000416201432.
>princess-diana> subject: Re: Di: Paul, Henri, geschiedenis, 60 pagina lijkschouwing, enz. > datum: Wed, 3 mei 2000 17: 7: 26+ 100> organisatie: te'huis> lijn: 297> Message-ID: < EwaIiIA+ 6EE5IAXR@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> > verwijzing: < 20000416201432.
>18648.
>18648.
>0000...@ng-cg1.aol.com> > <20000416220330.
>4517@ ng-cg1. aol. com> > < 20000416220330.
>18658.
>18658.
>0000...@ng-cg1.aol.com> <38fa9...@huge.aa.net> > <8n1mfss0cu2ou4qhe...@4ax.com> > <025220ee.
>4069@ ng-cg1. aol. com> < 38fa90de_2@ huge. aa. net> > < 8n1mfss0cu2ou4qhej2ujs106jhqfrbbol@ 4ax. com> > < 025220ee.
>5e23...@usw-ex0104-033.remarq.com> > <VHL8$AAWpz$4I...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> > <03cfeca4.
>5e23de39@ usw-ex0104-033. remarq. com> > < VHL8$ AAWpz$ 4IAaS@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> > < 03cfeca4.
>e454...@usw-ex0105-038.remarq.com> > <5AGHurAe...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> > <022cd178.
>e454e6ea@ usw-ex0105-038. remarq. com> > < 5AGHurAeP0A5IAT7@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> > < 022cd178.
>7c06...@usw-ex0105-037.remarq.com> > <0PU0NLBY...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> > <2ehrgsobh76u0sheo...@4ax.com> >Reply-To: Andrew Steven Reed <ar...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> >NNTP-Posting-Host: modem88.
>7c06d2cf@ usw-ex0105-037. remarq. com> > < 0PU0NLBYabD5IAaW@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> > < 2ehrgsobh76u0sheo8fsoso92h16ood0pr@ 4ax. com> > Reply-To: Andrew Steven rieten< areed@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> > NNTP-Posting-Host: modem88.
>fred.
>fred.
>pol.
>pol.
>co.
>co.
>uk >Mime-Version: 1.
>uk> Mime-Version: 1.
>0 >X-Trace: newsreaderg1.
>0> X-Trace: newsreaderg1.
>core.
>Kern.
>theplanet.
>theplanet.
>net 957376918 19338 195.
>Net 957376918 19338 195.
>92.
>92.
>7.
>7.
>216 (3 May 2000 18:01:58 GMT) >NNTP-Posting-Date: 3 May 2000 18:01:58 GMT >X-Complaints-To: ab...@theplanet.net >X-Newsreader: Turnpike Integrated Version 4.
>216( 3 mei 2000 18: 1: 58 GMT) > NNTP-Posting-Date: 3 mei 2000 18: 1: 58 GMT> X-Complaints-To: misbruik@ theplanet. net> X-Newsreader: tolweg geďntegreerd versie 4.
>02 M <TWkHBtca5wWBvmfWwoLIWQkgFM> >Xref: newshub1.
>2 M< TWkHBtca5wWBvmfWwoLIWQkgFM> > Xref: newshub1.
>home.
>Te'huis.
>com alt.
>com alt.
>conspiracy.
>Samenzweringen.
>princess-diana:30031199 > >In article <2ehrgsobh76u0sheo...@4ax.com>, >GODS...@HOME.COM writes >>>there was "a white car", >>>in the middle of the road, behind him.
>princess-diana: 30031199> > in artikel< 2ehrgsobh76u0sheo8fsoso92h16ood0pr@ 4ax. com>, > GODSBRAIN@ TE'HUIS. COM geschreven>>> aldaar was" blanken auto", >>> in de middelst of de road, achter hem.
> >> >>So Livestre lied.
>>> >>Dus Livestre gelegen.
> The white car was not in the middle >>of the road, the Mercedes was in the middle of the >>road.
>De blanken auto was niet in de middelst>> of de road, de Mercedes was in de middelst of de>> road.
> Why did Livestre lie?
>Waarom deden Livestre gelegen?
> Maybe Livestre did not lie in that particular.
>Maybe Livestre deden niet gelegen in dat bijzonder.
> One needs to be very careful as to "at what instant" and did he say the middle of the road or the middle of the lane?
>1 behoefte jegens be zeer zorgvuldig als jegens" at wat instant" en deden hij gezegd de middelst of de road or de middelst of de lane?
> It was said that he had moved into the right lane.
>Het was gezegd dat hij gehad bewegen into de richtig lane.
> If he said the white car was in the middle of the [right] lane I would agree.
>Als hij gezegd de blanken auto was in de middelst of de[ richtig] lane ik would afgesproken.
>> >Levistre is not contradicting himself.
>> >Levistre is niet tegengesproken himself.
> He saw the white car "au milieu >de la chaussee" So, does "chaussee" come closer to translating as "lane" or on the other hand, "road?
>Hij gezien de blanken auto" au milieu> de la chaussee" dus, deden" chaussee" gekomen closer jegens vertaald als" lane" or aan de ander hand, " road?
>" Road having two lanes.
>"Road gehad 2 lanes.
> >and was overtaken by it ("elle me double") But exactly where were the other actors at the exact instant that "elle me double?
>>En was overtaken bij het(" elle mij dubbel") doch exact waar were de ander acteur at de exact instant dat" elle mij dubbel?
>" >"Then", he >says ("puis j'observe [retroviseur] une autre auto toujours au milieu de >la route") "I saw [rear-view mirror] another car, also in the middle of >the road" So here we have a "milieu de la route.
>" >"Dan", hij> gezegd(" puis j'observe[ retroviseur] une autre auto toujours au milieu de> la route") " ik gezien[ rear-view spiegel] another auto, en in de middelst of> de road" dus alhier we gehad " milieu de la route.
>" Does that mean closer the lane or the road?
>"Deden dat bedoeld closer de lane or de road?
> >("et soudain une grosse moto sur sa gauche qui lui fait une >queue de poisson") "and, all of a sudden, a large motor-bike, to the >left of it, cutting-in in front of it".
>>("et soudain une grosse moto sur sa gauche qui lui fait une> queue de poisson") " en, alle of plotseling, groot motor-bike, jegens de> verlaat of het, cutting-in in front of het".
> I will take it that AT SOME POINT a large motor-bike, comming from the left of it, and then cutting-in in front of it.
>Ik will genomen het dat AT SOMMIGE PUNT groot motor-bike, comming van de verlaat of het, en dan cutting-in in front of het.
> > >(another ambiguity is created by the expression "sur sa gauche", which >could be translated "to ITS left" [to the right of it, from where >Levistre says he was] or "to the left of it" [as seen from Levistre's >alleged position] and, since Levistre claims that the Mercedes "was in >the middle of the road" at that point, it could be either) Since I am trying to construct a hypothetical scene where the Merc was astraddle the white line that separated the two west bound lanes and a photographing motorcycle was to the left side of the Merc at the exact instant that the white car was on the right side.
>> >(another dubbelzinnigheden is geschapen bij de uitdrukking" sur sa gauche", hetwelk> kan be vertaald" jegens HETIS verlaat" [ jegens de richtig of het, van waar> Levistre gezegd hij was] or" jegens de verlaat of het" [ als gezien van Levistre's> alleged positie] en, sinds Levistre claims dat de Mercedes" was in> de middelst of de road" at dat punt, het kan be either) sinds ik am geprobeerd jegens bouwt hypothetisch scčne waar de Merc was astraddle de blanken lijn dat gescheiden de 2 west bound lanes en fotografeerde motorfiets was jegens de verlaat kant of de Merc at de exact instant dat de blanken auto was aan de richtig kant.
> .
>
> .
>
> .
>
>> >"At the same instant, for a fraction of a second, there was a tremendous >flash of light, but nothing like the flash of a camera" ("Au meme >moment, en une fraction de seconde, un enorme eclair jaillit, mais rien >a voir avec le flash d'un appareil-photo") > >My point is that the order of events is not completely clear.
>> >"At de dezelfde instant, voor fractie of 2, aldaar was geweldig> bliksemde of licht, doch niets evenals de bliksemde of camera" (" Au meme> moment, en une fractie de seconde, un enorme eclair jaillit, mais rien> voir avec le bliksemde d'un appareil-photo") > > mijn punt is dat de orde of gebeurtenis is niet compleet clear.
> It could >be that the bike cut-in in front of the Mercedes just before the white >car passed Levistre - either that, or the bike was further behind the >Mercedes, as both vehicles entered the tunnel, than Clifford, Olivier >and Thierry imply.
>Het kan> be dat de bike cut-in in front of de Mercedes gerecht vóór de blanken> auto doorgevaren Levistre - either dat, or de bike was verder achter de> Mercedes, als beide vervoermiddel binnengaan de tunnel, than Clifford, Olivier> en Thierry imply.
> I suppose the bike could have braked, just before the Is there any chance that one of the skid marks, like the single one, was the bike?
>Ik als de bike kan gehad remt, gerecht vóór de Is aldaar enig kans dat 1 of de gegleden gemarkeerd, evenals de enkele 1, was de bike?
> >tunnel (to avoid running into a Mercedes/white-car pile-up) and that >Levistre might not have been as far along the tunnel as he thought he >was.
>>Tunnel( jegens gemeden gelopen into Mercedes/ white-car pile-up) en dat> Levistre might niet gehad been als ver along de tunnel als hij dacht hij> was.
> There is another branch of my lack of understanding and that follows along a train of thought that the picture was intended but the crash was an accident.
>Aldaar is another filiaal of mijn ontbeerd of begreep en dat gevolgd along trein of dacht dat de afbeelding was bedoelen doch de ineenstorting was ongeluk.
> In the "accident" hypothesis approximately the motorcycle photographer could have accidently fired a half metre too far forward and instead of shooting in to the back seat he could have accidently hit HP directly in the eyes as Henri Paul looked to the left as the motorcycle came along side his side window.
>In de" ongeluk" hypothese geschat de motorfiets fotograaf kan gehad accidently fired helft metre ook ver nagezonden en instead of geschoten in jegens de terug zitplaats hij kan gehad accidently getroffen HP direct in de oog als Henri Paul gekeken jegens de verlaat als de motorfiets gekomen along kant zijn kant raam.
>Then the blinding flash could have caused HP to FLINCH and swerve to the right just a little.
>Dan de verblind bliksemde kan gehad bewerken HP jegens FLINCH en swerve jegens de richtig gerecht klein.
> At that point hitting the rear of the accelerating white car.
>At dat punt getroffen de achterkant of de versneld blanken auto.
> As the white car's rear goes to the right its front goes to the left.
>Als de blanken auto achterkant goes to de richtig hetis front goes to de verlaat.
> To correct, the driver throws to the right and the rear goes to the left.
>Jegens corrigeerde, de bestuurder geworpen jegens de richtig en de achterkant goes to de verlaat.
> Essentially tossing the front of the Merc into the central columns.
>Essentieel tossing de front of de Merc into de voornaamste kolom.
> >Thus, the Mercedes hit the white car, side-to-side, and impelled it >forwards, towards Levistre, and was FOLLOWING it, as it passed >Levistre's position, and as the bike overtook the Mercedes.
>>Aldus, de Mercedes getroffen de blanken auto, side-to-side, en impelled het> nagezonden, towards Levistre, en was VOLGEND het, als het doorgevaren> Levistre's positie, en als de bike overtook de Mercedes.
> I think that the first, photographing, bike should have been ahead of the white car.
>Ik dacht dat de 1, fotografeerde, bike zou gehad been ahead of de blanken auto.
> If the bike and the car essentially accelerated at the same instant the bike would outrun the car.
>Als de bike en de auto essentieel versneld at de dezelfde instant de bike would outrun de auto.
> I think.
>Ik dacht.
> Bikes are far faster at acceleration that cars.
>Bikes are ver sneller at versnelling dat auto.
> Any disagreements?
>Enig onenigheid?
>Of course, with two riders and a turbo car ...?
>Of course, mede 2 riders en turbo auto...?
> For one thing, you are supposing then that the white car was ahead of the Merc at the instant that the Merc hit the central column/pilar/post.
>Voor 1 ding, je are als dan dat de blanken auto was ahead of de Merc at de instant dat de Merc getroffen de voornaamste kolom/ pilar/ post.
> That is in accord with my first guess.
>Dat is in accord mede mijn 1 gissing.
>> >Does that clear things up?
>> >Deden dat clear ding op?
> No.
>Geen.
> It smokes them up.
>Het rook hen op.
> But gives a number of possible occurances to consider.
>Doch gaf aantal of mogelijk occurances jegens aangezien.
>>> >>>Behind that, he says, there was >>>"another car" (presumably the Mercedes S- 280) and behind that, a large >>>motor-bike.
>>> >>>Achter dat, hij gezegd, aldaar was>>>" another auto" ( presumably de Mercedes S- 280) en achter dat, groot>>> motor-bike.
> So my first thought on that is that that is a second bike.
>Dus mijn 1 dacht aan dat is dat dat is 2 bike.
> And if we are talking about the left that might be better described as a second bike on the left as there might have been one or more bikes on the right in addition.
>En als we are gepraat om de verlaat dat might be best beschreef als 2 bike aan de verlaat als aldaar might gehad been 1 or meer bikes aan de richtig in toevoeging.
>>> >>Livestre lies again.
>>> >>Livestre gelegen ervan.
>> >What do you mean?
>> >Wat deden je bedoeld?
> What evidence is there that Levistre is "lying"?
>Wat bewijs is aldaar dat Levistre is" gelegen"?
> My supposition.
>Mijn supposition.
>> >> He clearly saw and may have been a part >>of a conspiracy to cover up.
>> >>Hij clearly gezien en mei gehad been deel>> of samenzweringen jegens bedekking op.
> So in my supposition he saw it >>and he lied about it.
>Dus in mijn supposition hij gezien het>> en hij gelegen om het.
> Now if we go off on a train of thought to >>explore a hypothesis that Livestre was deliberately lying then >>I'll have to think about that some more.
>Nu als we begaf af aan trein of dacht jegens>> exploreerde hypothese dat Livestre was weloverwogen gelegen dan>> ik I'll gehad jegens dacht om dat sommige meer.
> I have not until the >>present considered the possibility that he was deliberately >>lying.
>Ik gehad niet tot de>> heden aangezien de mogelijkheden dat hij was weloverwogen>> gelegen.
>>> >I have - he could be in the pay of Al-Fayed (or his high-level masters) >That's always a possibility; but why should we single him out?
>>> >Ik gehad - hij kan be in de betaald of Al-Fayed( or zijn high-level meester) > dat That's altijd mogelijkheden; doch waarom zou we enkele hem uit?
> I'm not singling him out.
>Ik I'm niet singling hem uit.
> I am theorizing that there may have been a whole swarm of conspiring pap's surrounding Diana's car.
>Ik am theorizing dat aldaar mei gehad been gehele zwerm of samengezworen pap's omringd Diana's auto.
> >What >about any (or ALL) of the other witnesses?
>>Wat> om enig( or ALLE) of de ander getuige?
> I am inclined to go with the >majority (who saw closely pursuing vehicles) and focus suspicion on >Mohammed and Souad who - alone - say they did not.
>Ik am geheld jegens begaf mede de> meerderheid( wie gezien closely nagezet vervoermiddel) en focus verdenking aan> Mohammed en Souad wie - alleen - gezegd ze deden niet.
>> >>If he were deliberately lying and saw the three vehicles >>abreast, > > He says he saw them one behind the other - until the bike overtook the >Mercedes.
>> >>Als hij were weloverwogen gelegen en gezien de 3 vervoermiddel>> abreast, > > hij gezegd hij gezien hen 1 achter de ander - tot de bike overtook de> Mercedes.
> Then the bike and the Mercedes were "abreast", but the white >car - so he implies - had already overtaken him by then!
>Dan de bike en de Mercedes were" abreast", doch de blanken> auto - dus hij implies - gehad reeds overtaken hem bij dan!
> But why should >you suspect this to be a lie?
>Doch waarom zou> je verdachte dit jegens be gelegen?
> I think you, we, need to be very careful about exactly what instant is being described as being related to any single comment.
>Ik dacht je, we, behoefte jegens be zeer zorgvuldig om exact wat instant is wezen beschreef als wezen inverbandstaan jegens enig enkele commentaar.
>> >> the photo flashes, the motorcycle accelerate, >>the car on the right bump the Merc into the central >>pilars, > >You want to hypothesize that the bike-overtake/flash occurred BEFORE the >sliding collision?
>> >>De foto's bliksemde, de motorfiets versneld, >> de auto aan de richtig hotsen de Merc into de voornaamste>> pilars, > > je gewild jegens hypothesize dat de bike-overtake/ bliksemde voorgekomen VÓÓR de> gleden botsing?
> What on earth for?
>Wat aan aarde voor?
> Well, if the supposition is as two photographing vehicles taking a photograph from both sides at the same instant .
>Bronnen, als de supposition is als 2 fotografeerde vervoermiddel genomen foto van beide kant at de dezelfde instant.
> .
>
> .
>
> .
>
> There may also have been two contacts between the two vehicles?
>Aldaar mei en gehad been 2 contact tussen de 2 vervoermiddel?
>The mirror thing may not have been considered significant.
>De spiegel ding mei niet gehad been aangezien significant.
> The mirror would not have broken out the tail light.
>De spiegel would niet gehad barsten uit de staart licht.
> So if the tail light was broken would not one suspect a corresponding dent on the Merc's right front fender?
>Dus als de staart licht was barsten would niet 1 verdachte correspondeerde deuk aan de Merc's richtig front fender?
>> In reading this over I can not understand quickly the actions to cover up circumstances by police, courts, etc. unless Diana bite off and swallowed the tip of Dodi's penis from the force of the crash.
>>In lezing dit over ik kan niet begreep quickly de actie jegens bedekking op omstandighed bij politie, gerecht, enz. tenzij Diana beet af en gezwolgen de tip of Dodi's penis van de kracht of de ineenstorting.
> If some such had happened then that could explain a lot of things, But it would also demonstrate that there was no fear in the back seat at the time of crash which would be important to suggest that there was no demonstrated disagreement with Henri Paul's driving performance prior to the crash.
>Als sommige dergelijk gehad gebeurd dan dat kan uiteengezet boel of ding, doch het would en demonstreerde dat aldaar was geen angst in de terug zitplaats at de maal of ineenstorting hetwelk would be belangrijk jegens geopperd dat aldaar was geen demonstreerde onenigheid mede Henri Paul's drijft uitvoering prior jegens de ineenstorting.
> >> that the first photoflashing motorcycle sped off >>past him and out of the tunnel as well as the vehicle that >>had bumped the Merc.
>>>Dat de 1 photoflashing motorfiets sped af>> verleden hem en out of de tunnel as well as de vervoermiddel dat>> gehad hotsen de Merc.
> and then reported that in essence >>a followup motorcycle stopped to view into the Merc >>and it then resumed to exit the tunnel, etc. >> >You mean Levistre is concealing the existence of a second motorcycle?
>En dan gerapporteerd dat in essence>> followup motorfiets gestopt jegens zicht into de Merc>> en het dan hervat jegens uitgang de tunnel, enz. >> > je bedoeld Levistre is verheeld de bestaan of 2 motorfiets?
>>True, Thierry H.
>>Waar, Thierry H.
> says he saw "several" motorcycles pursuing the >Mercedes, closely, towards the tunnel (he had a view along the cour >Albert Premier from the carriageway itself) but Clifford G.
>Gezegd hij gezien" several" motorfiets nagezet de> Mercedes, closely, towards de tunnel( hij gehad zicht along de cour> Albert premier van de carriageway zichzelf) doch Clifford G.
> and Olivier >P (who were positioned to the right [north] of the road and could see no >more than the tunnel-entrance) report only " a car in front of the >Mercedes and a [one!
>En Olivier> P( wie were positioned jegens de richtig[ noord] of de road en kan gezien geen> meer than de tunnel-entrance) verslag slechts" auto in front of de> Mercedes en [ 1!
>] powerful motor-cycle, 30 - 40 metres behind.
>]Machtig motor-cycle, 30 - 40 metres achter.
> I think it was Brian Anderson's story that a motorcycle moved to pass the Merc on its left as it entered the tunnel, which would be exact in accord with my one theory.
>Ik dacht het was Brian Anderson's verhaal dat motorfiets bewegen jegens doorgevaren de Merc aan hetis verlaat als het binnengaan de tunnel, hetwelk would be exact in accord mede mijn 1 theorie.
>> >Why should we not assume that the other bikes left the cour Albert >Premier, at the exit slip-road, leaving the pair on the bike, which >Clifford, Olivier and Levistre saw, to proceed into the tunnel for the >kill!?
>> >Waarom zou we niet aangenomen dat de ander bikes verlaat de cour Albert> premier, at de uitgang slip-road, verlaat de pair aan de bike, hetwelk> Clifford, Olivier en Levistre gezien, jegens proceed into de tunnel voor de> doden!?
> I don't think that the word "kill" is at all proper in a larger view.
>Ik deden niet dacht dat de woord" doden" is at alle proper in groot zicht.
>"Photo" would I suggest be a more prevalent term for that point.
>"Foto's" would ik geopperd be meer heersend term voor dat punt.
>> >>I would like to see the animation sequences down to the 1 meter >>resolution.
>> >>Ik would evenals jegens gezien de animation opeenvolging down jegens de 1 meter>> resolution.
> I think the main constant that we can use is the >>physical distance on the road as being traversed by the Merc.
>Ik dacht de hoofd- constant dat we kan gebruik is de>> fysisch afstand aan de road als wezen doorkruisden bij de Merc.
> >>So the animation reference frames could be identified by reference >>to the tunnel face as metres + "plus" or - "minus" the tunnel face.
>>>Dus de animation verwijzing kader kan be geďdentificeerd bij verwijzing>> jegens de tunnel aangezicht als metres+ " plus" or -" minus" de tunnel aangezicht.
>>>> >We would all (those of us who really wish to have it explained in >detail, that is) like to see sophisticated event-reconstruction >techniques brought to bear, together with an account of exactly what >data was employed and how it was used.
>>>> >We would alle( degenen of ons wie werkelijk wens jegens gehad het uiteengezet in> detail, dat is) evenals jegens gezien verfijnd event-reconstruction> techniek bracht jegens vervelen, bijeen mede account of exact wat> gegevens was gebruiken en hoe het was aangewend.
> Fat chance of that, however - >unless you happen to have an event-reconstruction team on hand and you >can afford to cock a snoot at the politico-media complex.
>Fat kans of dat, echter -> tenzij je gebeurd jegens gehad event-reconstruction team aan hand en je> kan afford jegens cock snoot at de politico-media complex.
> There is the traffic accident reconstruction site off my web page.
>Aldaar is de verkeer ongeluk reconstructies site af mijn web pagina.
> I saw reference to the most professional software photosho or paint shop of something like that.
>Ik gezien verwijzing jegens de meest vakman software photosho or verf winkel of iets evenals dat.
> I got a copy off the web.
>Ik kreeg exemplaar af de web.
> One of these years I will move to do my accident and if at the same time I did a second of the Diana crash not much for starters.
>1 of deze jaar ik will bewegen jegens deden mijn ongeluk en als at de dezelfde maal ik deden 2 of de Diana ineenstorting niet much voor starter.
> > >>>Note that there is no vehicle present, in Levistre's story, which could >>>be the car of the witnesses Souad M.
>> >>>Aantekening dat aldaar is geen vervoermiddel heden, in Levistre's verhaal, hetwelk kan>>> be de auto of de getuige Souad M.
> and Mohammed M.
>En Mohammed M.
> If we believe >>>Levistre, they weren't there!
>Als we geloofd>>> Levistre, ze weren't niet aldaar!
> On the other hand, if we believe THEM, >>>the Mercedes crashed without any help from anyone - a very convenient >>>version of events, for the authorities, and completely contrary to the >>>testimony of ALL the other witnesses.
>Aan de ander hand, als we geloofd HEN, >>> de Mercedes neergestort zonder enig hulp van iemand - zeer convenient>>> versie of gebeurtenis, voor de autoriteit, en compleet tegengesteld jegens de>>> getuigenis of ALLE de ander getuige.
>>> I am not suggesting that consideration should be limited to only one hypothetically possible series of events.
>>>Ik am niet geopperd dat overweging zou be beperkt jegens slechts 1 hypothetisch mogelijk series of gebeurtenis.
> It appears to me that there are apparently conflicting reports of circumstances.
>Het bleek jegens mij dat aldaar are apparently conflicting verslag of omstandighed.
> Therefore I suggest several parallel hypothetical story lines.
>Daarom ik geopperd several parallel hypothetisch verhaal lijn.
> That calls to mind something that I think Senator Sam Ervin said during the course of the Watergate hearings on Nixon's impeachment.
>Dat telefoongesprek jegens mind iets dat ik dacht senator Sam Ervin gezegd gedurende de course of de Watergate verhoor aan Nixon's impeachment.
> The in the four gospels there are accounts of what was reported to have been written by Pilate on the sign to be placed over Jesus Christ's head on the cross.
>De in de 4 gospels aldaar are accounts of wat was gerapporteerd jegens gehad been geschreven bij Pilate aan de blijk jegens be geplaatst over jesus christus head aan de dwars.
> Senator Sam said that if individuals whose testimoney we so reverence from the written testimony could be so reported as divergent then we need not be dismayed that good people of our own day may be reported as to not have agreed perfectly.
>Senator Sam gezegd dat als individu wiens testimoney we dus reverence van de geschreven getuigenis kan be dus gerapporteerd als divergent dan we behoefte niet be dismayed dat best lieden of onze eigen dag mei be gerapporteerd als jegens niet gehad afgesproken volmaakt.
> >>Hummnn >>> >>>The sequence of events, as Levistre recounts it, is very interesting, >>>because he seems to be saying that the "white car" stayed ahead of the >>>Mercedes and the motor-bike.
>>>Hummnn>>> >>> de opeenvolging of gebeurtenis, als Levistre recounts het, is zeer geďnteresseerd, >>> because hij scheen jegens be gezegd dat de" blanken auto" stayed ahead of de>>> Mercedes en de motor-bike.
> I would think "ahead" of the Merc would be correct but not that the white car stayed ahead of the bike.
>Ik would dacht" ahead" of de Merc would be corrigeerde doch niet dat de blanken auto stayed ahead of de bike.
> Explaination given above.
>Explaination gaf boven.
>>> >>Well, in my SH one possibility that I want to consider is that both >>the white car on the Merc's right hand side and the motorcycle on >>the Merc's left hand side came to a synchronized position along side >>the Merc such as to be able to take symultaneous flash photographs >>into the Merc from both sides at the same time.
>>> >>Bronnen, in mijn SH 1 mogelijkheden dat ik gewild jegens aangezien is dat beide>> de blanken auto aan de Merc's richtig hand kant en de motorfiets aan>> de Merc's verlaat hand kant gekomen jegens gesynchroniseerd positie along kant>> de Merc dergelijk als jegens be able jegens genomen symultaneous bliksemde foto>> into de Merc van beide kant at de dezelfde maal.
> If one is in a very >>heavy law suit one needs at least TWO corroberating withnesses.
>Als 1 is in zeer>> zwaar wet pak 1 behoefte at klein 2 corroberating withnesses.
> And a big pile of paps only seconds behind would be very important also.
>En groot stapels of paps slechts seconds achter would be zeer belangrijk en.
> If somebody hinted at the presence of a blackmail photo they could be assassinated in short order before they could ever get close to a court of law, and I heard a song the other day called "Smuggler's Blues" done in the Eighties by Glenn Frey has some good words.
>Als somebody hinted at de aanwezigheid of chantage foto's ze kan be vermoord in korter orde vóór ze kan eeuwig kreeg afgesloten jegens gerecht of wet, en ik gehoord gezang de ander dag belde" smokkelaar Blues" deden in de Eighties bij Glenn Frey gehad sommige best woord.
>>> >This seems to me to be fanciful in the extreme.
>>> >Dit scheen jegens mij jegens be fanciful in de uiterste.
> On what grounds do you >suggest it?
>Aan wat grond deden je> geopperd het?
>> >>The same scene photographed by two separate photographers at >>exactly the same instant would be IDEAL.
>> >>De dezelfde scčne fotografeerde bij 2 gescheiden fotograaf at>> exact de dezelfde instant would be IDEAAL.
>>> >"Ideal" for what?
>>> >"Ideaal" voor wat?
> Come on Al!
>Gekomen aan Al!
> What are these simultaneous, two-angle >flash-photos supposed to be for?
>Wat are deze simultaan, two-angle> flash-photos vermoed jegens be voor?
> Okay - you've said before that you >think they would have been compromising photos, and that MAF set up the >car-switch and the pursuit in order to obtain them.
>Okay - je gehad gezegd vóór dat je> dacht ze would gehad been compromising foto's, en dat MAF set op de> car-switch en de vervolging in orde jegens behaald hen.
> This is an >interesting idea, because, although it seems most likely to me that MAF >DID make these arrangements, I cannot decide precisely what it was that >he thought was going to happen.
>Dit is > geďnteresseerd begrip, because, ofschoon het scheen meest soortgelijk jegens mij dat MAF> DEDEN gemaakt deze ordening, ik kan niet beslissen precisely wat het was dat> hij dacht was going to gebeurd.
> A compromising photograph.
> compromising foto.
> Exactly in line with MAF's general opinion of John.
>Exact in lijn mede MAF's generaal mening of John.
> Q.
>Q.
> Public, Di, etc. > >Let us say that Diana and Dodi were not sleeping together, she was not >pregnant by him and they were not going to get engaged - or some >combination of these negatives - such that, in order to (what?
>Publiek, Di, enz. > > gelaten ons gezegd dat Diana en Dodi were niet geslapen bijeen, she was niet> zwanger bij hem en ze were niet going to kreeg engageerde - or sommige> combinatie of deze afwijzing - dergelijk dat, in orde jegens( wat?
>) gain >influence over Diana or disgrace her or force her to marry Dodi?
>)gain> invloed over Diana or disgrace haar or kracht haar jegens gehuwd Dodi?
> - the >Al-Fayeds conceived the scheme I would guess that conception of the scheme would have happened far away from MAF.
>- de> Al-Fayeds bedacht de scheme ik would gissing dat conception of de scheme would gehad gebeurd ver voort van MAF.
> If a group were looking for someone to set up some such scheme MAF might have been found to have been a good candidate to approach for the leading role but the script had been written long before and they just needed some one to play the part.
>Als groep were looking for someone jegens set op sommige dergelijk scheme MAF might gehad been gevonden jegens gehad been best kandidaat jegens benaderd voor de geleid rol doch de script gehad been geschreven lang vóór en ze gerecht behoefde sommige 1 jegens gespeeld de deel.
> >of obtaining compromising photographs.
>>of behaald compromising foto.
> A >clever ruse is employed to get rid of some of the escort (but why not >all?
>> slim ruse is gebruiken jegens kreeg rid of sommige of de geleide( doch waarom niet> alle?
>) THE COMPROMISING photo to be used for blackmail to influence Diana not to take a strong public stand on some particular issue from time to time would have been financed by an external consortium, QEII, Chas, Military landmine sales proponents, etc. In order to be of use at selected times the photo could not be public.
>)DE COMPROMISING foto's jegens be aangewend voor chantage jegens invloed Diana niet jegens genomen krachtig publiek gestaan aan sommige bijzonder kwestie van maal jegens maal would gehad been financed bij uiterlijk consortium, QEII, Chas, militair landmine verkoop proponents, enz. in orde jegens be of gebruik at uitgekozen maal de foto's kan niet be publiek.
> If that happened it would have been a one time shot when ever it fell into public hands.
>Als dat gebeurd het would gehad been 1 maal geschoten toen eeuwig het gestort into publiek hand.
> To be worth the expense and effort it had to be kept secret but its circumstance had to be indisputable else any single person threatening exposure of some such would be under extremely high surveillance in moments.
>Jegens be worth de expense en inspanning het gehad jegens be geborgen geheim doch hetis omstandighed gehad jegens be indisputable else enig enkele particulieren dreigde blootstelling of sommige dergelijk would be onder extreem hoge surveillance in moment.
> > the remaining escort follows from the Hotel, against orders, thus >giving the impression that they are up to no good.
>>De bleef geleide gevolgd van de hotel, tegen schikt, aldus> gaf de indruk dat ze are op jegens geen best.
> Henri has been >briefed to flee them - he flees.
>Henri gehad been> briefed jegens gevloden hen - hij gevloden.
> An ambush of pursuers has been arranged >on the cour la Reine - to keep Henri in flight and to give Dodi an >excuse for grabbing Diana (as though protectively) I can't imagine anything but a photograph of a blowjob.
> hinderlaag of volger gehad been geschikt> aan de cour la Reine - jegens geborgen Henri in vlucht en jegens gaf Dodi > verontschuldiging voor grijpen Diana( als ofschoon beschermend) ik kan niet inbeeldde anything doch foto of blowjob.
> Sex is no big thing nowadays.
>Seksualitiet is geen groot ding nowadays.
> In royal family tradition, the past, it may have been able to throw a little influence at an intense moment of public conflict.
>In koninklijk gezin traditie, de verleden, het mei gehad kan geworpen klein invloed at intens moment of publiek conflict.
> There is so much detailed sex on the web that I wouldn't doubt that to find a microscopic photo of a pubic hair would take more than a few minutes.
>Aldaar is dus much gedetailleerd seksualitiet aan de web dat ik wouldn't niet twijfel dat jegens gevonden microscopic foto's of pubic haar would genomen meer than weinig minuut.
> So if any eyebrows were going to be raised maybe a court threatening a loss of Di's finances for breach of contract re: approximately non modest public behavior.
>Dus als enig wenkbrauw were going to be geheven maybe gerecht dreigde verlies of Di's financiewezen voor breuk of contract re: geschat non bescheiden publiek handelswijz.
> So if Di was very cognizant of contract provisions regarding public behavior as a determinant of her divorce settlement then she would have to have exercised the utmost discression.
>Dus als Di was zeer cognizant of contract voorziening betreffende publiek handelswijz als determinant of haar echtscheiding schikking dan she would gehad jegens gehad exercised de uiterste discression.
> But if she was going to find any male support outside of her ex's she would have to at some point show some affection.
>Doch als she was going to gevonden enig mannelijkepersonen ondersteuning outside of haar ex's she would gehad jegens at sommige punt getoond sommige affectie.
> Now where could one find any more hope of privacy than in the tunnel of love in a speeding limosine?
>Nu waar kan 1 gevonden enig meer hoop of privacy than in de tunnel of liefde in speeding limosine?
> But to be effective for black mail the photo would have to appear as immodest public behavior.
>Doch jegens be doeltreffend voor zwart post de foto's would gehad jegens bleek als onbescheiden publiek handelswijz.
> I said PUBLIC.
>Ik gezegd PUBLIEK.
> So on the one hand Diana would have shyed away from any PUBLIC behavior but people interested in obtaining a photo for blackmail would have to make the circumstances of the photo look as public as possible.
>Dus aan de 1 hand Diana would gehad shyed voort van enig PUBLIEK handelswijz doch lieden geďnteresseerd in behaald foto's voor chantage would gehad jegens gemaakt de omstandighed of de foto's blik als publiek als mogelijk.
> TWO photo's from TWO different photographers and surrounding photos from another hundred photographers could be made to look like PUBLIC IMMODESTY while the circumstance of the back seat of a speeding limosine in the tunnel in the middle of the night is about as close to "private" behavior as I can imagine anyone could get on short notice.
>2 foto's van 2 verschillend fotograaf en omringd foto's van another 100 fotograaf kan be gemaakt jegens blik evenals PUBLIEK ONBESCHEIDENHEID terwijl de omstandighed of de terug zitplaats of speeding limosine in de tunnel in de middelst of de nacht is om als afgesloten jegens" besloten" handelswijz als ik kan inbeeldde iemand kan kreeg aan korter kennisgeving.
> >- a car is stationed >at the tunnel-entrance to stop the Mercedes (a very risky proceeding, >from a father's point of view, don't you think?
>>- auto is stationed> at de tunnel-entrance jegens gestopt de Mercedes( zeer riskant proceeding, > van vader punt of zicht, deden niet je dacht?
>) the Mercedes is slowed, >the pursuers catch up, the photographs are taken.
>)De Mercedes is slowed, > de volger gevangen op, de foto are genomen.
>> >Photographs of what?
>> >Foto of wat?
> Diana giving Dodi a blow job.
>Diana gaf Dodi blasen taak.
> What else could even raise an eyebrowe nowadays?
>Wat else kan even geheven eyebrowe nowadays?
> Hell, if you had to sell such a photograph to get a MacDonald's hamburger you would have a lot of competition in the current market.
>Hell, als je gehad jegens verkocht dergelijk foto jegens kreeg MacDonald's hamburger je would gehad boel of concurrentie in de huidig markt.
> > A terrified Diana in Dodi's arms?
>> terrified Diana in Dodi's arm?
> Diana being >raped by Dodi?
>Diana wezen> raped bij Dodi?
> - is that what you're working up to saying?
>- is dat wat je you're arbeiden op jegens gezegd?
> My dear chap!
>Mijn dierbaar chap!
> Who is going to conspire, and pay big money, for something like that?
>Wie is going to samengezworen, en betaald groot geld, voor iets evenals dat?
>Nobody.
>Niemand.
> >Diana crouched down on the floor behind Henri's seat, and Dodi remained >upright - probably viewing the pursuit with anxiety - possibly grappling >with TRJ to prevent him interfering with the driving.
>>Diana crouched down aan de vloer achter Henri's zitplaats, en Dodi bleef> rechtopstaand - waarschijnlijk bezag de vervolging mede angsten - mogelijk grappling> mede TRJ jegens verhinderd hem gehinderd mede de drijft.
> What sign is >there - apart from the fact that neither Diana nor Dodi were wearing >seat-belts - that Dodi was attempting to grapple with Diana?
>Wat blijk is> aldaar - afzonderlijk van de feit dat noch Diana nor Dodi were dragen> seat-belts - dat Dodi was attempting jegens grapple mede Diana?
>> >Again, I say, "photographs of what?
>> >Ervan, ik gezegd, " foto of wat?
>" - precisely - and what were they >for?
>"- precisely - en wat were ze> voor?
> - according to your theory.
>- according to jij theorie.
> A picture of a blow job - for blackmail.
> afbeelding of blasen taak - voor chantage.
>> >Why could these photographs not have been taken with spy-cameras at one >of the Fayed residences Because such a photo would possibly be identified as an invasion of privacy.
>> >Waarom kan deze foto niet gehad been genomen mede spy-cameras at 1> of de Fayed residentie Because dergelijk foto's would mogelijk be geďdentificeerd als inval of privacy.
> It had to look like PUBLIC Immodest Behavior to cause a diminution of Diana's influence in the public media.
>Het gehad jegens blik evenals PUBLIEK onbescheiden handelswijz jegens oorzaak diminution of Diana's invloed in de publiek media.
> >at which Diana stayed?
>>at hetwelk Diana stayed?
> How could it have been >hoped that photographs of an especially compromising nature could have >been obtained at high speed in the Alma Tunnel, rather than on the >Jonikal, at the Ritz or at the rue Arsene?
>Hoe kan het gehad been> gehoopt dat foto of especially compromising natuur kan gehad> been behaald at hoge snelheid in de Alma tunnel, liever than aan de> Jonikal, at de Ritz or at de rue Arsene?
> What on earth is the point?
>Wat aan aarde is de punt?
> Would behavior on the yatch or at the Ritz be considered public or private by Diana.
>Would handelswijz aan de yatch or at de Ritz be aangezien publiek or besloten bij Diana.
> My guess is that Diana would have considered it PUBLIC.
>Mijn gissing is dat Diana would gehad aangezien het PUBLIEK.
>> >One glimmer of a suggestion of a possibility does occur to me, as a >result of examining this idea, however.
>> >1 glimmer of suggestie of mogelijkheden deden voorgekomen jegens mij, als > gevolge of onderzocht dit begrip, echter.
> What if Dodi was having >difficulty getting physical with Diana?
>Wat als Dodi was gehad> moeilijkheden kreeg fysisch mede Diana?
> Did Dad devise an elaborate >ruse to throw them together?
>Deden Dad bedenkt uitvoerig> ruse jegens geworpen hen bijeen?
> Or rather, was he advised to do so by >those who wanted Diana dead NOT DEAD.
>Or liever, was hij geraden jegens deden dus bij> degenen wie gewild Diana dode NIET DODE.
> There is a whole hell of a lot of difference in wanting some one to have less public influence in the public media than in wanting someone to be dead.
>Aldaar is gehele hell of boel of verscheidenheden in gewild sommige 1 jegens gehad klein publiek invloed in de publiek media than in gewild someone jegens be dode.
> >- so that he would implement the scheme >without knowing what it was really for?
>>- so that hij would werktuig de scheme> zonder gekend wat het was werkelijk voor?
> Quite simple.
>Helemaal enkelvoudig.
> A compromising photograph.
> compromising foto.
> >Something of the sort must have >happened, I think - and it's not so incredible if you consider that >MAF's masters may have been pretending to attempt to pull off a Fayed- >Spencer match (with big bucks in it for MAF) for some time - so that >the Machiavellian complexity of engineering the car-switch, the >disposition of the escort, the arrangements for the route and the >programming of Henri Paul, might not have aroused MAF's suspicions.
>>Iets of de sort must gehad> gebeurd, ik dacht - en het it's niet dus ongelofelijk als je aangezien dat> MAF's meester mei gehad been voorgaf jegens attempt jegens trek af Fayed-> Spencer match( mede groot bucks in het voor MAF) voor sommige maal - so that> de Machiavellian ingewikkeldheden of engineering de car-switch, de> aard of de geleide, de ordening voor de route en de> programmering of Henri Paul, might niet gehad aroused MAF's verdenking.
> A photograph would be the most logical thing in the whole world.
> foto would be de meest logisch ding in de gehele wereld.
>No body would be suspicious of anything.
>Geen lichaam would be argwanend of anything.
>> >Other factors, such as sabotaging the S-280's brakes and air-bags, >briefing the escort to monitor the crash but not get involved, etc, >could have been achieved by MAF's backers, over MAF's head, The theft and modification of the vehicle could have been well disguised.
>> >Ander factor, dergelijk als sabotaging de S-280's rem en air-bags, > briefing de geleide jegens controleapparaat de ineenstorting doch niet kreeg meebracht, enz, > kan gehad been achieved bij MAF's backers, over MAF's head, de theft en wijziging of de vervoermiddel kan gehad been bronnen disguised.
> >such that >Siegel and Musa (Etoile Limousines) and Wingfield and Dournot were not >only working for MAF, but for his masters, DIRECTLY.
>>Dergelijk dat> Siegel en Musa( Etoile limousine) en Wingfield en Dournot were niet> slechts arbeiden voor MAF, doch voor zijn meester, DIRECT.
> However, if that were part of the plot, then PLANS TO GET THAT VEHICLE TO THAT PLACE IN TIME WOULD HAVE TO HAVE BEEN ROCK SOLID FOR MONTHS IN ADVANCE.
>Echter, als dat were deel of de perceel, dan PLAN JEGENS KREEG DAT VERVOERMIDDEL JEGENS DAT PLAATS IN MAAL WOULD GEHAD JEGENS GEHAD BEEN BERGSTEEN SOLID VOOR MAAND IN VOORSCHOT.
> There is the clear windows in one train of thought and defective equipment as possibly another.
>Aldaar is de clear raam in 1 trein of dacht en gebrekkig uitrusting als mogelijk another.
>> >Indeed, assuming that MAF did not know that the fatal crash was >intended, those of MAF's employees who MUST have known that a fatal >crash was intended, MUST have been working directly for those who >intentionally engineered it.
>> >Inderdaad, aangenomen dat MAF deden niet gekend dat de onafwendbaar ineenstorting was> bedoelen, degenen of MAF's employee wie MUST gehad gekend dat onafwendbaar> ineenstorting was bedoelen, MUST gehad been arbeiden direct voor degenen wie> opzettelijk engineered het.
>> If a crash after the photo were planned the least people in the area who needed to know was just the driver of the white car.
>>Als ineenstorting achterna de foto's were planned de klein lieden in de areaal wie behoefde jegens gekend was gerecht de bestuurder of de blanken auto.
> Second could have been the photographer on the back of the motorcycle who had to aim a shot into the driver's eyes.
>2 kan gehad been de fotograaf aan de terug of de motorfiets wie gehad jegens gericht geschoten into de bestuurder oog.
> >>>At least, he describes the "white car" >>>passing him, and disappearing westwards, before he begins to describe >>>the motor-bike overtaking the Mercedes and cutting-in in front of it.
>>>>At klein, hij beschreef de" blanken auto" >>> doorgevaren hem, en verdween westwards, vóór hij beginnen jegens beschreef>>> de motor-bike overtaking de Mercedes en cutting-in in front of het.
> >> >>So this gets the locations screwed up and out of sync.
>>> >>Dus dit kreeg de ligging screwed op en out of sync.
>>> >>> >>> The impression given (that the "white car" was a long way ahead of the >>>Mercedes and the motorbike) is probably an illusion created by the >>>difficulty involved in describing the situation; >> >>Also, a witness in a high speed drive has their own road to watch as >>well as looking in the rear view mirror.
>>> >>> >>>De indruk gaf( dat de" blanken auto" was lang weg ahead of de>>> Mercedes en de motorbike) is waarschijnlijk illusie geschapen bij de>>> moeilijkheden meebracht in beschreef de situatie; >> >> en, getuige in hoge snelheid drijft gehad hun eigen road jegens gehoed als>> bronnen als gekeken in de achterkant zicht spiegel.
> So one might have a strobe >>light effect of only seeing a flash of an instant when they happened >>to have the opportunity to look in the mirror.
>Dus 1 might gehad strobe>> licht effect of slechts gezien bliksemde of instant toen ze gebeurd>> jegens gehad de gelegenheden jegens blik in de spiegel.
>>> >>>but there is no >>>escaping the conclusion that the Mercedes did not completely squeeze >>>past the white car, but came alongside it, on its left, in a sliding >>>collision, >> >>My suggestion would be to consider that the Merc was the >>vehicle in the middle of the road, that the white vehicle would >>have been on its right and the motorcycle on its left, three >>abreast.
>>> >>>Doch aldaar is geen>>> gevlochten de conclusie dat de Mercedes deden niet compleet geklemd>>> verleden de blanken auto, doch gekomen alongside het, aan hetis verlaat, in gleden>>> botsing, >> >> mijn suggestie would be jegens aangezien dat de Merc was de>> vervoermiddel in de middelst of de road, dat de blanken vervoermiddel would>> gehad been aan hetis richtig en de motorfiets aan hetis verlaat, 3>> abreast.
>>> >>And that point photoflashes were fired and then the white >>car accelerated >> >>>which impelled the white car forwards, towards Levistre and >>>out of harm's way; >> >>And the motorcycle accelerated >> >>>whereupon the motorbike >> >>accelerated and swerved in front of >>the Mercedes.
>>> >>En dat punt photoflashes were fired en dan de blanken>> auto versneld>> >>> hetwelk impelled de blanken auto nagezonden, towards Levistre en>>> out of kwaad weg; >> >> en de motorfiets versneld>> >>> whereupon de motorbike>> >> versneld en swerved in front of>> de Mercedes.
>>> >>No.
>>> >>Geen.
> That is even wrong.
>Dat is even verkeerd.
> In my SH.
>In mijn SH.
>>> >>Let's try it another way.
>>> >>Gelaten ons geprobeerd het another weg.
> More to the >>"DELIBERATE BUMP OFF" conspiracy >>supposition.
>Meer jegens de>>" OVERGELEGD HOTSEN AF" samenzweringen>> supposition.
>>> >>In that, the motorcycle would have fired >>a series of quick flashes as it accelerated >>in front of the Mercedes.
>>> >>In dat, de motorfiets would gehad fired>> series of gauw bliksemde als het versneld>> in front of de Mercedes.
> The first flash >>would have been into the back seat but >>a second would have been directly into >>the eyes of Henri Paul.
>De 1 bliksemde>> would gehad been into de terug zitplaats doch>> 2 would gehad been direct into>> de oog of Henri Paul.
> Having blinded >>him, it would then accelerate and as soon >>as it was clear the vehicle on the right would >>bump the Mercedes' front into the center >>pilars.
>Gehad verblind>> hem, het would dan versneld en als soon>> als het was clear de vervoermiddel aan de richtig would>> hotsen de Mercedes' front into de center>> pilars.
>>> >>>overtook the slowed Mercedes >>>and (also according to Levistre) cut-in in front of it and produced "a >>>searing burst of light, much brighter than a photo-flash".
>>> >>>overtook de slowed Mercedes>>> en( en according to Levistre) cut-in in front of het en geproduceerd" >>> searing barst of licht, much helder than photo-flash".
>>>> >>>At this point, Levistre, braked and came to a halt near the western end >>>of the tunnel.
>>>> >>>At dit punt, Levistre, remt en gekomen jegens halt(e) dichtbij de westelijk einde>>> of de tunnel.
> >> >>More correctly, NOT "At this point" but at "A POINT" near the >>western end of the tunnel.
>>> >>Meer correct, NIET" At dit punt" doch at" PUNT" dichtbij de>> westelijk einde of de tunnel.
>>> >>>The Mercedes had crashed, and the bikers (like Brenda >>>Wells, Levistre affirms that there were two of them) had stopped by the >>>wreck.
>>> >>>De Mercedes gehad neergestort, en de bikers( evenals Brenda>>> bronnen, Levistre affirms dat aldaar were 2 of hen) gehad gestopt bij de>>> wreck.
> >> >>That does not sound possible to me.
>>> >>Dat deden niet geluid mogelijk jegens mij.
> It may depend upon speed.
>Het mei afgehangen aan snelheid.
>>>Assuming that the whole action was taking place at some >>above average speed then if at least the bike on the left had >>accelerated ahead of the Merc it could not have stopped.
>>>Aangenomen dat de gehele actie was genomen plaats at sommige>> boven gemiddeld snelheid dan als at klein de bike aan de verlaat gehad>> versneld ahead of de Merc het kan niet gehad gestopt.
> If it >>did not stop then it may have passed Livestre and exited the >>tunnel.
>Als het>> deden niet gestopt dan het mei gehad doorgevaren Livestre en exited de>> tunnel.
> Whether a second bike stopped might be considerable.
>Of 2 bike gestopt might be aanmerkelijk.
>>> >>>One of them got off, momentarily, to look into the Mercedes, >>>jumped back on again, and the bike sped off, passing Levistre as it did >>>so.
>>> >>>1 of hen kreeg af, kortstondig, jegens blik into de Mercedes, >>> gesprongen terug aan ervan, en de bike sped af, doorgevaren Levistre als het deden>>> dus.
> Levistre describes the bike as "black" and the two men as "dressed >>>in black with black helmets".
>Levistre beschreef de bike als" zwart" en de 2 man als" gekleed>>> in zwart mede zwart helm".
> The whole thing took just a few seconds.
>De gehele ding genomen gerecht weinig seconds.
>>>> >>>Considerable efforts have been made to discredit Levistre.
>>>> >>>Aanmerkelijk inspanning gehad been gemaakt jegens in diskrediet brengt Levistre.
> It has been >>>said, for example, that his attitude to the press was "hostile" and that >>>he was trying to "gain attention"; but there could be another reason for >>>these attacks on his character - he witnessed a murder!
>Het gehad been>>> gezegd, voor voorbeeld, dat zijn houding jegens de pers was" vijandig" en dat>>> hij was geprobeerd jegens" gain aandacht"; doch aldaar kan be another rede(n) voor>>> deze aanval aan zijn karakter - hij witnessed moord!
> There is no >>>other interpretation you can put on his testimony.
>Aldaar is geen>>> ander interpretatie je kan gezet aan zijn getuigenis.
>>>> >>>Yes, indeed (to answer your question) the lanes were used as a slow-lane >>>and an overtaking lane - ludicrous speed-limit signs notwithstanding!
>>>> >>>Yes, inderdaad( jegens antwoord jij vraag) de lanes were aangewend als slow-lane>>> en overtaking lane - ludicrous speed-limit blijk ondanks!
>>>> >>>Other answers in another post >> >><a href="http://members.home.com/godsbrain">G.O.D.S.B.R.A.I.N.</a><br> > >-- >Steve Reed Alvin H.
>>>> >>>Ander antwoord in another post>> >>< href=" http:// lid. te'huis. com/ godsbrain"> G. O. D. S. B. R. . ik. N.</ >< br> > > --> Steve rieten Alvin H.
> White <a href="http://members.home.com/godsbrain">G.O.D.S.B.R.A.I.N.</a><br>
>Blanken< href=" http:// lid. te'huis. com/ godsbrain"> G. O. D. S. B. R. . ik. N.</ >< br>
Steve Reed
GODS...@HOME.COM writes
>
SNIP
>If there might have been common interest to
>finance a joint project to lessen Diana's
>influence with the media because she was
>percieved to be "stepping on someones toes" ,
>my words, then how might some such plan,
>plot, conspiracy, have been considered
>achievable from a variety of possible participant's
>points of view?
>A photo of Diana giving Dodi a blow job in the
>back seat of a limo would be pretty good.
Perhaps, but why should we imagine that any such scenario was planned?
How would Diana have been persuaded to participate? Why should the
attempt to capture such a scene photographically (and it would be
difficult to portray such a scene clearly under any circumstances
without professional models and studio facilities) be made during a high
speed collision on a public highway? Answer these questions Al - and
I'm with you. As it is, I am completely flummoxed by your idea. It is
one of the most surreal suggestions, in my opinion, which have ever been
seriously put forward, on this subject.
SNIP
>For some paparazzi to "peeping tom" photo
>a divorcee with her boyfriend in private
>was not going to do the job.
But isn't that what you're suggesting? D+D were in the privacy of their
own car - and the "photographers" would have been acting as "peeping
Toms", would they not?
SNIP
>On Wed, 3 May 2000 17:07:26 +0100, Steve Reed
><asr...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> wrote:
>>In article <2ehrgsobh76u0sheo...@4ax.com>,
>>GODS...@HOME.COM writes
>>>>there was "a white car",
>>>>in the middle of the road, behind him.
>>>
>>>So Livestre lied. The white car was not in the middle
>>>of the road, the Mercedes was in the middle of the
>>>road. Why did Livestre lie?
>
>Maybe Livestre did not lie in that particular. One
>needs to be very careful as to "at what instant"
>and did he say the middle of the road or the middle
>of the lane? It was said that he had moved into
>the right lane. If he said the white car was in the
>middle of the [right] lane I would agree.
>>
>>Levistre is not contradicting himself. He saw the white car "au milieu
>>de la chaussee"
>
>So, does "chaussee" come closer to translating as "lane" or on the
>other hand, "road?" Road having two lanes.
Middle of the road, Al. Straddling the two lanes. No doubt about it.
>
>>and was overtaken by it ("elle me double")
>
>But exactly where were the other actors at the exact instant
>that "elle me double?"
>
That's what I'm asking. It is clear enough, however, that the white car
was AHEAD of the Mercedes when the bike overtook the Mercedes.
>>"Then", he
>>says ("puis j'observe [retroviseur] une autre auto toujours au milieu de
>>la route") "I saw [rear-view mirror] another car, also in the middle of
>>the road"
>
>So here we have a "milieu de la route." Does that mean closer the
>lane or the road?
>
It means exactly the same thing, in this context. Actually "le milieu
de la route" is marked by the line of pillars (between the carriageways)
but he can't mean that - he must mean "halfway between the pillars and
the tunnel wall". I'm quite sure of that.
>>("et soudain une grosse moto sur sa gauche qui lui fait une
>>queue de poisson") "and, all of a sudden, a large motor-bike, to the
>>left of it, cutting-in in front of it".
>
>I will take it that AT SOME POINT a large motor-bike,
>comming from the left of it, and then cutting-in in front of it.
>
But WHOSE left are we talking about, Henri Paul's or Levistre's? I think
FL is referring to HIS left - in spontaneous speech, one would always
refer to left and right in this way - which means that the bike overtook
the Mercedes ON THE TUNNEL-WALL side, NOT on the side with the pillars!
>>
>>(another ambiguity is created by the expression "sur sa gauche", which
>>could be translated "to ITS left" [to the right of it, from where
>>Levistre says he was] or "to the left of it" [as seen from Levistre's
>>alleged position] and, since Levistre claims that the Mercedes "was in
>>the middle of the road" at that point, it could be either)
>
>Since I am trying to construct a hypothetical scene where the Merc
>was astraddle the white line that separated the two west bound lanes
>and a photographing motorcycle was to the left side of the Merc
>at the exact instant that the white car was on the right side. . . .
>>
I don't see the need for this, and - even if a flash-photo (or an
appearance of taking a photo) through the clear-windows of the S-280,
was part of the plan - such a configuration would have been impossible
to set up.
The white car's position had the effect of forcing HP to go right or
left - right, into the tunnel wall, or left, towards the reservation,
and, possibly, across it, into the oncoming traffic (they had not quite
reached the pillars, at that point) - or smack-bang into the back of the
white car.
Whichever side HP chose, he would be going into a narrow gap, and, at
best, be sandwiched between the white car and (on the left) the central
kerb and fast approaching pillars, or (on the right) the tunnel-wall.
It is quite inconceivable that the bike could have overtaken ON THE
SIDE HP CHOSE - until the white car had been impelled forward by the
contact, and the Mercedes had moved back into the centre of the
carriageway.
I thought at first that the bike might have overtaken, on the tunnel-
wall side of the white car, while 280 and white car were locked
together, with the 280 up against the central reservation - so that, the
Mercedes and the bike would, in effect, both have passed the white car
at the same moment - but, according to Fabrice (who has examined the
tunnel several times to check out various possibilities) the narrowness
of the carriageway, in itself, makes this unlikely. Thus, I began to
doubt MY "three abreast" scenario (with the white car in the middle) -
to which Levistre's testimony (I now realise) provides an adequate and
convincing alternative - but, as I say, the idea of a "three abreast"
scenario - with the MERCEDES in the middle - never occurred to me
because there is NO WAY, as far as I can see, that it could ever have
happened.
>>"At the same instant, for a fraction of a second, there was a tremendous
>>flash of light, but nothing like the flash of a camera" ("Au meme
>>moment, en une fraction de seconde, un enorme eclair jaillit, mais rien
>>a voir avec le flash d'un appareil-photo")
>>
>
>
>>My point is that the order of events is not completely clear. It could
>>be that the bike cut-in in front of the Mercedes just before the white
>>car passed Levistre - either that, or the bike was further behind the
>>Mercedes, as both vehicles entered the tunnel, than Clifford, Olivier
>>and Thierry imply. I suppose the bike could have braked, just before the
>
>Is there any chance that one of the skid marks, like the single one,
>was the bike?
>
I haven't heard of any - and, if the bike was 30-40 metres behind the
Mercedes, just before the Mercedes reached the white car, and if the
bike began to brake then (or even before that, assuming that the riders
knew that the white car was about to block the road) it would not have
needed to skid.
>>tunnel (to avoid running into a Mercedes/white-car pile-up) and that
>>Levistre might not have been as far along the tunnel as he thought he
>>was.
>
>There is another branch of my lack of understanding and that follows
>along a train of thought that the picture was intended but the
>crash was an accident. In the "accident" hypothesis approximately
>the motorcycle photographer could have accidently fired a half
>metre too far forward and instead of shooting in to the back seat he
>could have accidently hit HP directly in the eyes as Henri Paul looked
>to the left as the motorcycle came along side his side window.
>Then the blinding flash could have caused HP to FLINCH and swerve
>to the right just a little. At that point hitting the rear of the
>accelerating white car. As the white car's rear goes to the right
>its front goes to the left. To correct, the driver throws to the
>right and the rear goes to the left. Essentially tossing the front of
>the Merc into the central columns.
>
I see what you mean, but there is no doubt in my mind that the sliding
collision took place before the bike-overtake/flash. For one thing,
Levistre says so (in effect) - for another Clifford and Olivier say (in
effect) that the bike was several car-lengths behind the Mercedes just
before the sliding collision, and that the flash occurred just before
final impact.
>>Thus, the Mercedes hit the white car, side-to-side, and impelled it
>>forwards, towards Levistre, and was FOLLOWING it, as it passed
>>Levistre's position, and as the bike overtook the Mercedes.
>
>I think that the first, photographing, bike should have been ahead
>of the white car. If the bike and the car essentially accelerated at
>the same instant the bike would outrun the car. I think. Bikes are
>far faster at acceleration that cars. Any disagreements?
>Of course, with two riders and a turbo car ...?
>
But none of the witnesses report a bike IN FRONT of the Mercedes -
except Levistre - and he says that the bike overtook the Mercedes,
momentarily, in the tunnel, after the white car had passed him.
>For one thing, you are supposing then that the white car was ahead of
>the Merc at the instant that the Merc hit the central
>column/pilar/post.
>
Yes!
>That is in accord with my first guess.
>>
It was better than my first guess then!
>>Does that clear things up?
>
>No. It smokes them up. But gives a number of possible occurances
>to consider.
>>>
>>>>Behind that, he says, there was
>>>>"another car" (presumably the Mercedes S- 280) and behind that, a large
>>>>motor-bike.
>
>So my first thought on that is that that is a second bike.
>
Where do you get your "first bike" from? Brenda Wells and Thierry H.
saw "other vehicles, including bikes", closely pursuing on the Albert
Premier but these appear to have stopped or gone off up the slip-road,
before the tunnel, because nobody else saw them (not Olivier, not
Clifford, not Levistre) and they were always BEHIND the Mercedes until
that instant in the Tunnel, reported by Levistre, when one bike
overtook.
>And if we are talking about the left that might be better
>described as a second bike on the left as there might have
>been one or more bikes on the right in addition.
Olivier P and Clifford G did not see them! They describe ONE bike, 30 or
40 metres behind the Mercedes (and the white car in front of the
Mercedes) and that is all!
>>>
>>>Livestre lies again.
>>
>>What do you mean? What evidence is there that Levistre is "lying"?
>
>My supposition.
>>
>>> He clearly saw and may have been a part
>>>of a conspiracy to cover up.
Some cover up! Without Levistre, we have the white car, Merc and bike,
going into the tunnel, in that order, a grinding impact, a flash and a
huge crash. With Levistre, we have (a) the white car staying ahead of
the Mercedes after the grinding impact (b) the bike overtaking the
Mercedes and (c) the flash originating from the bike. No testimony
could be more inconvenient for ANY cover-up. No wonder (seeing what a
huge cover-up there has been) that every attempt has been made to
discredit him!
> So in my supposition he saw it
>>>and he lied about it.
But he describes a murder scenario! In what sense is that a cover-up?!
> Now if we go off on a train of thought to
>>>explore a hypothesis that Livestre was deliberately lying then
>>>I'll have to think about that some more. I have not until the
>>>present considered the possibility that he was deliberately
>>>lying.
>>>
What on earth do you mean by previously accusing him of lying then?
Does this word mean something different in the USA? Like - making a
mistake - or remembering incorrectly? If so, then the language has
undergone a very unfortunate degeneration over there.
>>I have - he could be in the pay of Al-Fayed (or his high-level masters)
>>That's always a possibility; but why should we single him out?
>
>I'm not singling him out. I am theorizing that there may have been
>a whole swarm of conspiring pap's surrounding Diana's car.
>
Yes you are - Levistre's account is corroborated by Olivier P and
Clifford G - are they "lying" too (whatever you mean by this word)?
>>What
>>about any (or ALL) of the other witnesses? I am inclined to go with the
>>majority (who saw closely pursuing vehicles) and focus suspicion on
>>Mohammed and Souad who - alone - say they did not.
>>
>>>If he were deliberately lying and saw the three vehicles
>>>abreast,
>>
Okay. Let's imagine that, on that narrow carriageway, the three
vehicles COULD have been "three abreast" - you still can't get the
Mercedes between the white car and the bike! The Merc goes to the left
of the white car, remember, and is then hard up against the central
reservation! The white car is then pushed forward, by the Mercedes (you
said, just now:
>That is in accord with my first guess.
did you not?)
and the Mercedes moves into the centre of the road BEHIND the white
car. How on earth are you going to construct ANY "three abreast"
configuration now? - let alone a "3-abreast" with the Merc in the
middle! It's impossible! So Levistre could not have seen it! So, if
he's lying (and he may be, of course) it's certainly not THAT he's
concealing!
>> He says he saw them one behind the other - until the bike overtook the
>>Mercedes. Then the bike and the Mercedes were "abreast", but the white
>>car - so he implies - had already overtaken him by then! But why should
>>you suspect this to be a lie?
>
>
>I think you, we, need to be very careful about exactly what instant is
>being described as being related to any single comment.
>>
The precise interval between the white car's passing Levistre and the
bike overtaking the Mercedes is not that important, I think. What
matters is that he describes the two events as being sequential with the
former preceding the latter.
>>> the photo flashes, the motorcycle accelerate,
>>>the car on the right bump the Merc into the central
>>>pilars,
>>
(a) Wrong order! (b) Second contact between Mercedes and white car not
confirmed by sinuous skid-marks! (c) Acceleration of motorcycle does not
occur until after second, or post-flash, braking of motor-cycle and
pause by wreck!
>>You want to hypothesize that the bike-overtake/flash occurred BEFORE the
>>sliding collision? What on earth for?
>
>Well, if the supposition is as two photographing vehicles taking a
>photograph from both sides at the same instant . . . .
>
Why are you so attached to this idea?
>There may also have been two contacts between the two vehicles?
I think not! (The sliding collision consisted of three parts, I think -
1) left-rear impact, breaking tail-light 2) sliding contact with left
flank, 3) coefficient of friction exceeds inertial mass of white car and
transfers momentum of Mercedes to white car, whereupon the white car
travels forward faster than the Mercedes) We might posit that the white-
car-driver then hit his brakes, but this would have stopped both cars
gently - or, if he waited until after separation, a repeat of the
sliding collision, at a lower speed. NO!!! The white-car-driver failed
to crash the Mercedes at the first attempt - he was not going to succeed
in a second attempt - his only course was to get clear and let the
riders execute the fall-back option.
I take the point at which the (S-280's) straight skid-marks end, to be
the point at which the friction between the vehicles was sufficient to
transfer the 280's momentum to the white car.
There is then a gap of just a few metres (about 4m) before the
Mercedes' sinuous skid-marks commence, and proceed, without major change
in direction, to the 13th pillar.
The question which the Procureur's "Final Report" ignores, but which
must be dealt with in the secret "Stephan Report", is as follows: "why
did HP lose control of the Mercedes, at this point?"
I cannot imagine that the white car had anything more to do with the
matter - even if HP had accelerated, and caught up with it, he would
only have struck it and knocked it forward, possibly causing IT to veer
aside and crash - I think that it continued on towards Levistre, as
Levistre says it did, in the middle of the road, leaving a widening gap
between itself and the Mercedes, and that it was into this gap
(corresponding also to the 4m gap between the straight and the sinuous
sets of skid-marks) that the motor-bike performed its "queue de
poisson", discharging a flash of light in the process.
>The mirror thing may not have been considered significant. The
>mirror would not have broken out the tail light. So if the tail light
>was broken would not one suspect a corresponding dent on the
>Merc's right front fender?
>>
The mirror came off during the sliding-collision. The initial bump
(taking out the tail-light) would have been masked by the gross
deformation of the front of the Mercedes, on impact with the pillar.
>In reading this over I can not understand quickly the actions to
>cover up circumstances by police, courts, etc. unless Diana
>bite off and swallowed the tip of Dodi's penis from the force of the
>crash.
>
If I didn't know you better, I would suspect you of trying to make a
joke of the entire matter - worse, I would suspect that you're thinking
was clouded by an adolescent fantasy.
Indeed, I think you are wrong about this specific detail; but I think
it not impossible that, from MAF's point of view, the scare tactics
leading to the car-switch and the chase, might have been intended to
stimulate Diana and Dodi's relationship in some way.
The only other possibility, AFAICS, is that he intended to kill them
both. MAF's biographer, Bowers, so I'm told, paints a very grim picture
of the relationship between father and son, and it is not impossible
that MAF might have been induced - by a combination of threats and
rewards from forces far greater than he - to play a major role in
engineering the crash, knowing full well what the outcome was intended
to be.
For the moment, however, I'm still grappling with the possibility that
he expected something else to happen - perhaps a D+D thrown together by
the shared experience of terror - perhaps a Dodi, empowered by
foreknowledge of part of the plot (the part known to MAF) and better
able to dominate a Diana who was dazed and confused by it. Deciding
between these options - or dismissing them both, in favour of murder,
with MAF as principal accomplice before the fact - is something which
students of the D+D relationship should be able to help with.
The questions are, "how close were they? how intimate was their
relationship? did Diana make Dodi shy, impotent, perhaps? This would
have been a matter of deepest concern both to Dodi and his father. What
sort of game would they - or MAF alone - (or even Dodi alone?) have been
prepared to play in order to move the emotional goal posts? Could the
crash, indeed (as Al has suggested previously) have been no more than
such a game gone wrong? Was it, in fact, an accident, after all?
Well - if the 280's dodgy brakes and unreliable airbags were an accident
- if the white car obstructing the carriageway was an accident - if the
flash of light which blinded Henri Paul was an accident - yes!
Everything else - the Chez Benoit Cancellation, the Unscheduled Return
To The Ritz, The Car-Switch, Substituting HP As Driver, Partial Dropping
Of The Escort, Jumping The Lights, even The Pursuers On The Albert
Premier - could have been an elaborate hoax to scare Diana; but, if so,
why have the authorities and the media made such an effort to divert
suspicion, first to the paparazzi and secondly to an alleged cocktail of
toxins in Henri Paul's blood?
And this is not just the French and British politico-media complex we're
talking about here, but virtually every news-disseminating corporation
in the world. Why should the masters of these corporations spoil a good
story, just for the sake of a petty prank-gone-wrong by one or two
nouveau-riche Egyptians? Well, they wouldn't, would they! The Fayeds
would have been thrown to the mob. There must be more to it. What's
more, judging by MAF's utterances since the crash (and by his part in
entrapping a series of politicians in the last government) it's pretty
clear what that is: an assault on the British establishment by forces
inimical to British nationalism and British independence.
Before this happened, I was in favour of joining the European Union and
"restoring order" in countries like Yugoslavia; but as soon as I
realised that tactics, like the "accidenting" of Diana, were being used
to promote these projects, I began to look at them more critically, and
found (a) that the formation of a super-state would virtually abolish
democratic accountability and (b) that the IMF and NATO's secret
services had been inflaming tensions in Yugoslavia, for years, before
they finally created an excuse to invade.
From that perspective, the view of world politics and modern history
looks intriguingly different; but I digress.
>If some such had happened then that could explain a lot of things,
>But it would also demonstrate that there was no fear in the
>back seat at the time of crash which would be important to
>suggest that there was no demonstrated disagreement with
>Henri Paul's driving performance prior to the crash.
>
Oh, I think there was fear all right! I don't think there was
disagreement with HP's driving - but only because the passengers - or at
least one of them - believed that an assassination-attempt was in
progress, which is why she was discovered hunched up on the floor
between the seats. You can't fall into a position like that, and you
don't assume it, in preference to putting on a seat-belt, unless you are
afraid of being shot at. Looking at photos of Dodi, taken that evening,
however, I think he was as scared as she was, and just as much a victim
of the scheme.
>>> that the first photoflashing motorcycle sped off
>>>past him and out of the tunnel as well as the vehicle that
>>>had bumped the Merc. and then reported that in essence
>>>a followup motorcycle stopped to view into the Merc
>>>and it then resumed to exit the tunnel, etc.
>>>
>>You mean Levistre is concealing the existence of a second motorcycle?
>>True, Thierry H. says he saw "several" motorcycles pursuing the
>>Mercedes, closely, towards the tunnel (he had a view along the cour
>>Albert Premier from the carriageway itself) but Clifford G. and Olivier
>>P (who were positioned to the right [north] of the road and could see no
>>more than the tunnel-entrance) report only " a car in front of the
>>Mercedes and a [one!] powerful motor-cycle, 30 - 40 metres behind.
>
>I think it was Brian Anderson's story that a motorcycle moved to
>pass the Merc on its left as it entered the tunnel, which would
>be exact in accord with my one theory.
No - Anderson (who was in taxi on the "expressway", according to DOP)
says he was overtaken by a Mercedes which was closely followed by two
motorcycles, "one of which seemed to be trying to get in front". His
testimony refers to the chase TO the tunnel, not to what happened IN the
tunnel.
>>
>>Why should we not assume that the other bikes left the cour Albert
>>Premier, at the exit slip-road, leaving the pair on the bike, which
>>Clifford, Olivier and Levistre saw, to proceed into the tunnel for the
>>kill!?
>
>I don't think that the word "kill" is at all proper in a larger view.
>"Photo" would I suggest be a more prevalent term for that point.
I think the use of a blinding flash was intended to suggest photography
but I don't imagine for an instant that photography was taking place. I
think it's possible that MAF thought the ambush would have some
desirable effect on D+D's relationship - and that he was duped into co-
operating, in the assassination, on that basis - but I don't imagine for
an instant that photography played any part, either in the scheme MAF
thought he was involved in, or the scheme he was really involved in
(assuming that there IS a difference) I think the flash or flashes were
intended to be as deadly as they turned out to be, and that they had no
other purpose whatever.
There are one or two glaring discrepancies which signal the presence of
false witnesses - these two qualify. They claim to have been in the
tunnel, just ahead of the Mercedes, and to have seen no other vehicles
at all - even though numerous witnesses saw several vehicles entering
the tunnel, together - including witnesses passing on the other side of
the road. Souad M and Mohammed M are an isolated anomaly!
>That calls to mind something that I think Senator Sam Ervin
>said during the course of the Watergate hearings on Nixon's
>impeachment. The in the four gospels there are accounts of
>what was reported to have been written by Pilate on the sign
>to be placed over Jesus Christ's head on the cross. Senator
>Sam said that if individuals whose testimoney we so reverence
>from the written testimony could be so reported as divergent
>then we need not be dismayed that good people of our own
>day may be reported as to not have agreed perfectly.
>
>>>Hummnn
>>>>
>>>>The sequence of events, as Levistre recounts it, is very interesting,
>>>>because he seems to be saying that the "white car" stayed ahead of the
>>>>Mercedes and the motor-bike.
>
>I would think "ahead" of the Merc would be correct but not that the
>white car stayed ahead of the bike. Explaination given above.
Well that IS what he says - the white car passed him, the bike stopped
briefly and then passed him in its turn. He saw no bike AHEAD of the
white car and neither did anyone else.
>>>
>>>Well, in my SH one possibility that I want to consider is that both
>>>the white car on the Merc's right hand side and the motorcycle on
>>>the Merc's left hand side came to a synchronized position along side
>>>the Merc such as to be able to take symultaneous flash photographs
>>>into the Merc from both sides at the same time. If one is in a very
>>>heavy law suit one needs at least TWO corroberating withnesses.
>
I think this is sheer fantasy.
>And a big pile of paps only seconds behind would be very important
>also. If somebody hinted at the presence of a blackmail photo they
>could be assassinated in short order before they could ever get close
>to a court of law, and I heard a song the other day called "Smuggler's
>Blues" done in the Eighties by Glenn Frey has some good words.
>>>
>>This seems to me to be fanciful in the extreme. On what grounds do you
>>suggest it?
>>
>>>The same scene photographed by two separate photographers at
>>>exactly the same instant would be IDEAL.
>>>
>>"Ideal" for what? Come on Al! What are these simultaneous, two-angle
>>flash-photos supposed to be for? Okay - you've said before that you
>>think they would have been compromising photos, and that MAF set up the
>>car-switch and the pursuit in order to obtain them. This is an
>>interesting idea, because, although it seems most likely to me that MAF
>>DID make these arrangements, I cannot decide precisely what it was that
>>he thought was going to happen.
>
>A compromising photograph. Exactly in line with MAF's general opinion
>of John. Q. Public, Di, etc.
>>
You keep saying that, without any kind of general support. It seems to
be a fixed idea with no foundation in the facts. But why?
>>Let us say that Diana and Dodi were not sleeping together, she was not
>>pregnant by him and they were not going to get engaged - or some
>>combination of these negatives - such that, in order to (what?) gain
>>influence over Diana or disgrace her or force her to marry Dodi? - the
>>Al-Fayeds conceived the scheme
>
>I would guess that conception of the scheme would have happened
>far away from MAF. If a group were looking for someone to set
>up some such scheme MAF might have been found to have been
>a good candidate to approach for the leading role but the script had
>been written long before and they just needed some one to play the
>part.
>
Ah - that's more like it! MAF thought he was part of a scheme to
discredit Diana when in fact he was only part of a scheme to kill her.
Unfortunately, I don't believe that ANYTHING of a compromising nature
could possibly have occurred in that car unless Dodi tried to rape Diana
and there is every indication that nothing of the sort happened.
>>of obtaining compromising photographs. A
>>clever ruse is employed to get rid of some of the escort (but why not
>>all?)
>
>THE COMPROMISING photo to be used for blackmail to influence Diana
>not to take a strong public stand on some particular issue from time
>to time would have been financed by an external consortium, QEII,
>Chas, Military landmine sales proponents, etc.
>
Photo of what? A "blow-job"? It's insane, Al! Utterly insane! How could
Diana be induced to take part in this activity, in this situation? Do
you really imagine that anyone would set up such an elaborate and
dangerous plot simply on the off-chance that she would co-operate? No-
one but a mindless moron - or someone who desperately needed money -
would co-operate. I don't know how you can imagine it - unless you
would rather imagine such things than THINK!
>In order to be of use at selected times the photo could not be
>public. If that happened it would have been a one time shot
>when ever it fell into public hands. To be worth the expense and
>effort it had to be kept secret but its circumstance had to be
>indisputable else any single person threatening exposure of some
>such would be under extremely high surveillance in moments.
>
>> the remaining escort follows from the Hotel, against orders, thus
>>giving the impression that they are up to no good. Henri has been
>>briefed to flee them - he flees. An ambush of pursuers has been arranged
>>on the cour la Reine - to keep Henri in flight and to give Dodi an
>>excuse for grabbing Diana (as though protectively)
>
>I can't imagine anything but a photograph of a blowjob. Sex is no big
>thing nowadays. In royal family tradition, the past, it may have been
>able to throw a little influence at an intense moment of public
>conflict.
>
But people have to want to engage in it - conditions have to be right -
I can hardly imagine any situation LESS conducive to erotic activity
than being pursued at high speed by sinister motorcyclists. You can't be
serious about this. It's potty!
>There is so much detailed sex on the web that I wouldn't doubt that
>to find a microscopic photo of a pubic hair would take more than a
>few minutes. So if any eyebrows were going to be raised maybe
>a court threatening a loss of Di's finances for breach of contract
>re: approximately non modest public behavior.
>
>So if Di was very cognizant of contract provisions regarding public
>behavior as a determinant of her divorce settlement then she
>would have to have exercised the utmost discression. But if she
>was going to find any male support outside of her ex's she would
>have to at some point show some affection.
>
>Now where could one find any more hope of privacy than in the
>tunnel of love in a speeding limosine?
>
Hotly pursued by other vehicles from which they were obviously fleeing!
Oh come on!
>But to be effective for black mail the photo would have to appear
>as immodest public behavior. I said PUBLIC. So on the one hand
>Diana would have shyed away from any PUBLIC behavior but
>people interested in obtaining a photo for blackmail would have to
>make the circumstances of the photo look as public as possible.
>
You can't have it BOTH ways - now, I agree with you, the place and time
are completely unsuitable - which is why the activity you describe is
inconceivable.
>TWO photo's from TWO different photographers and surrounding
>photos from another hundred photographers could be made to
So that's why you need the IMPOSSIBLE "three abreast" scenario and the
unheard of "first motorcyclist" - you have to imagine all this simply to
construct the "blow-job" fantasy. I'm disappointed.
>look like PUBLIC IMMODESTY while the circumstance of the
>back seat of a speeding limosine in the tunnel in the middle of
>the night is about as close to "private" behavior as I can imagine
>anyone could get on short notice.
>
Okay, I see what you mean. Thanks very much.
SNIP
--
Steve Reed
GODS...@home.com
>From GODS...@HOME.COM Wed May 03 15:40:25 2000 Path: news1.
> עישה COM. תיב@ GODSBRAIN מ
> 25: םיעברא: רשע השמח 3 לוכי
>. news1: ליבש 2000
>frmt1.
>. frmt1
>sfba.
>. sfba
>home.
>. תיב
>com!
>! com
>newshub1.
>. newshub1
>home.
>. תיב
>com!
>! com
>news.
>. תושדח
>home.
>. תיב
>com!
>! com
>news1.
>. news1
>frmt1.
>. frmt1
>sfba.
>. sfba
>home.
>. תיב
>com.
>. com
>POSTED!
>! הדמע
>not-for-mail From: GODS...@HOME.COM Newsgroups: alt.
>@ GODSBRAIN: מ not-for-mail
>. alt: Newsgroups COM. תיב
>conspiracy.
>. הינונק
>princess-diana Subject: Re: Di: Paul, Henri, History, 60 Page Autopsy, Etc. Organization: <a href="http://members.home.com/godsbrain">G.O.D.S.B.R.A.I.N.</a><br> Reply-To: GODS...@HOME.COM,GODS...@AOL.COM Message-ID: <suv0hs4b86ldf6kh1...@4ax.com> References: <20000416220330.
>: ןודנה: אשונ princess-diana
>, הירוטסיה, Henri, Paul: Di
>, החיתנ רחאל תוומה ףד םישש
>=" href : < ןוגרא. וכו
>/ com. תיב. רבח:// http
>. R. B. S. D. O. G"> godsbrain
>> br>< .</ N. ינא.
>. תיב@ GODSBRAIN: Reply-To
> COM. AOL@ GODSBRAIN, COM
>: < Message-ID
>@ suv0hs4b86ldf6kh11pg4usgb988mp55km
>: < ןויע> com. 4ax
>. 20000416220330
>18658.
>. 18658
>0000...@ng-cg1.aol.com> <38fa9...@huge.aa.net> <8n1mfss0cu2ou4qhe...@4ax.com> <025220ee.
>> < com. aol. ng-cg1@ 4069
>> < תשר. aa. קנע@ 38fa90de_2
>@ 8n1mfss0cu2ou4qhej2ujs106jhqfrbbol
>. 025220ee> < com. 4ax
>5e23...@usw-ex0104-033.remarq.com> <VHL8$AAWpz$4I...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> <03cfeca4.
>. usw-ex0104-033@ 5e23de39
>$ AAWpz$ VHL8> < com. remarq
>. co. softnet. lastings@ 4IAaS
>. 03cfeca4> < uk
>e454...@usw-ex0105-038.remarq.com> <5AGHurAe...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> <022cd178.
>. usw-ex0105-038@ e454e6ea
>> < com. remarq
>. lastings@ 5AGHurAeP0A5IAT7
>. 022cd178> < uk. co. 022cd178
>
>7c06...@usw-ex0105-037.remarq.com> <0PU0NLBY...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> <2ehrgsobh76u0sheo...@4ax.com> <EwaIiIA+...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.
>. usw-ex0105-037@ 7c06d2cf
>> < com. remarq
>. lastings@ 0PU0NLBYabD5IAaW
>> < uk. co. softnet
>@ 2ehrgsobh76u0sheo8fsoso92h16ood0pr
>+ EwaIiIA> < com. 4ax
>. softnet. lastings@ 6EE5IAXR
> חוכ: X-Newsreader> uk. co
>. ןושאר ןכוס
>7/32.
>. 32/ העבש
>534 MIME-Version: 1.
>. ןושאר: MIME-Version 534
>0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 683 Date: Wed, 03 May 2000 22:40:25 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.
>; טושפ/ טסקט: Content-Type ספא
> us-ascii= charset
>: Content-Transfer-Encoding
> 3, עישה: ךיראת 683: וק 7bit
> GMT 25: םיעברא: 22 2000 לוכי
>. 24: NNTP-Posting-Host
>7.
>. העבש
>83.
>. 83
>23 X-Complaints-To: ab...@home.net X-Trace: news1.
>@ ללעתמ: X-Complaints-To 23
>. news1: X-Trace תשר. תיב
>frmt1.
>. frmt1
>sfba.
>. sfba
>home.
>. תיב
>com 957393625 24.
>. 24 957393625 com
>7.
>. העבש
>83.
>. 83
>23 (Wed, 03 May 2000 15:40:25 PDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 03 May 2000 15:40:25 PDT Xref: newshub1.
> 2000 לוכי 3, עישה( 23
>) PDT 25: םיעברא: רשע השמח
> 3, עישה: NNTP-Posting-Date
>: םיעברא: רשע השמח 2000 לוכי
>. newshub1: Xref PDT 25
>home.
>. תיב
>com alt.
>. alt com
>conspiracy.
>. הינונק
>princess-diana:30031204 -------- </html> OK.
> 30031204: princess-diana
>. רדסב> html</ --------
> What do we call this?
>? הז ארוק ונחנא השוע המ
> The daily replay of the daily revised version of the God's Brain Suppositional Hypothesis.
> ה לש ךוליה רזוח םוי םוי ה
> ה לש הסריג ןקתמ םוי םוי
> Suppositional חומ םיהולא
>. הזתופיה
> Act ______ Scene ________ Having read the below a time or two, or few, some opportunity to explain weighted influence factors in the construction of the daily hypothesis.
> ________ עטק ______ גהנתמ
> וא ןמז תחתמ ה ארוק בייח
> ל תונמדזה המכ, טעמ וא, ינש
> ה ב םרוג עיפשמ לקשמ ריבסמ
>. הזתופיה םוי םוי ה לש הינב
> Since the authorities have had two and a half years with the manpower, peoplepower, staff power, of what was it reported?
> ו ינש בייח בייח תוכמס ה זאמ
>, םדא חוכ ה םע הנש יצח
> המ לש, חוכ תווצ, peoplepower
>? חוודמ הז this is a dummy
> Some 24 full time investigators and million(s) dollar equivalent budgets I am not competing with that.
>( ןוילימ ו רקוח ןמז אלמ 24 המכ
> ינא ביצקת ךרע הווש רלוד) s
> םע הרחתמ אל this is a dummy
>. ש
> The outcome reports of that investigation appear to be: Drunk driver speeds without the care of D+D+TRJ and abruptly turns left into a central column.
> הריקח ש לש חוודמ האצות ה
> התוש: this is a dummy ל עיפומ
>+ D לש גאוד ה ילב תוריהמ גהנ
> ריאשמ הנופ תויםואתפב ו TRJ+ D
>. דומע יזכרמ ךותל
> Simple Road Traffic Accident RTA.
>. RTA הנואת העונת ךרד טושפ
> When and over the time since the creation of alt.
> ה זאמ ןמז ה ךרד לעמ ו יתמ
>. alt לש הריצי
>conspiracy.
>. הינונק
>princess-diana by b.
>. b ידי לע princess-diana
>anana his philosophical position as I read it is to approximately take the position for sake of arguement that Diana was killed as the result of a conspiracy.
> יפכ םוקימ יפוסוליפ ולש anana
> ל this is a dummy הז ארוק ינא
> לש הבוט ל םוקימ ה חקול ךרעב
> Diana ש arguement
> ה יפכ גרוה this is a dummy
>. הינונק לש האצות
> Because it has appeared to me that while times, places, people, and motives have been discussed I have a feeling that there has been less than reasonable consideration of some possibilities.
> ש יתוא ל עיפומ בייח הז יכ
> עינמ ו, םישנא, םוקמ, יפ ןמזב
> ינא ןד this is a dummy בייח
> בייח םש ש שיגרמ בייח
> רשאמ תוחפ this is a dummy
> המכ לש תובשחתה ינויגה
>. תורשפא
> As a consequence of that belief I am trying to construct a suppositional hypothesis that will identify possible, persons, places, things that may be considered as possible.
> ינא הנומא ש לש האצות יפכ
> הנוב ל הסנמ this is a dummy
> ןוצר ש הזתופיה suppositional
> רבד, םוקמ, םדא ןב, ירשפא ההזמ
> לקוש this is a dummy לוכי ש
>. ירשפא יפכ
> The intent is to create multiple fictional tracks such that the most possible/ununderstood may be considered.
> ל this is a dummy הנווכ ה
> ש הזכ לולסמ ינוידב לופכ רצוי
> ununderstood/ ירשפא בור ה
>. לקוש this is a dummy לוכי
> Many of the pieces are for the most part agreed as having been in the area but there is a lot of discrepancy as to the EXACT location at a SPECIFIC INSTANT.
> הכיתח ה לש הברה
> קלח בור ה ל this is a dummy
> בייח יפכ םיכסמ
> לבא רוזא ה ב this is a dummy
> לש הברה this is a dummy םש
> ב םוקימ קיודמ ה ל יפכ הריתס
>. עגר יפיצפס
> My intent is to create this fictional supposition to give, or try to determine, the differences between points of agreement and points of disharmony.
> ל this is a dummy הנווכ ילש
>, ןתונ ל החנה ינוידב הז רצוי
> ןיב לדבה ה, עבוק ל הסנמ וא
> לש הדוקנ ו םכסה לש הדוקנ
>. הינומרה רסוח
> Agreement/Disagreement and Harmony/Disharmony.
>/ תודחא ו תקולחמ/ םכסה
>. הינומרה רסוח
> Concord vs Discord.
>. המכסה יא vs םכסה
> If there might have been common interest to finance a joint project to lessen Diana's influence with the media because she was percieved to be "stepping on someones toes" , my words, then how might some such plan, plot, conspiracy, have been considered achievable from a variety of possible participant's points of view?
> בייח המצוע םש םא
> ל ןיינעמ חיכש this is a dummy
> תיחפמ ל טקיורפ קרפמ הלכלכ
> יכ media ה םע עיפשמ Diana's
> percieved this is a dummy איה
> לע דעצ" this is a dummy ל
>, הלמ ילש" , לגר עבצא someones
>, ןנוכתמ הזכ המכ המצוע בהוא זא
> בייח, הינונק, הלילע
> עוציב רב לקוש this is a dummy
> ףתתשמ ירשפא לש ןווגימ מ
>? ףונ לש הדוקנ
> My typing fingers are not going to stand too long a discussion at this point so I am going to try to speed along.
> this is a dummy עבצא גוס ילש
> ךורא םג דמוע going to אל
> ינא ךכ לכ הדוקנ הז ב ןויד
> הסנמ going to this is a dummy
>. ךרד תוריהמ ל
> My supposition is that if there was a conspiracy it had to be to do something.
> םא ש this is a dummy החנה ילש
> הינונק this is a dummy םש
> ל this is a dummy ל בייח הז
>. והשמ השוע
> A photo of Diana giving Dodi a blow job in the back seat of a limo would be pretty good.
> Dodi ןתונ Diana לש םוליצ
> לש בשומ בג ה ב הדובע ףשונ
> this is a dummy would limo
>. בוט הפי
>For the photo to achieve maximum benefit it had to be secret and to be used as a threat.
> חוור יברימ גישמ ל םוליצ ה ל
> this is a dummy ל בייח הז
> this is a dummy ל ו ידוס
>. םויא יפכ שמתשמ
>The actual publication in mass media would deflate its power.
> media הסמ ב םוסריפ ישממ ה
>. חוכ ולש איצוהל ריווא would
> But it had to have strong and undisputable evidence that it was TRUE if it were ever going to be used.
> ו קזח בייח ל בייח הז לבא
> הז ש תודע undisputable
> הז םא ןוכנ this is a dummy
> םעפ יא this is a dummy
> this is a dummy going to
>. שמתשמ
> For some paparazzi to "peeping tom" photo a divorcee with her boyfriend in private was not going to do the job.
>" tom ץיצהל" ל paparazzi המכ ל
> ב רבח הלש םע השורג םוליצ
> אל this is a dummy יטרפ
>. הדובע ה השוע going to
> So the construct of a whore for money with an oily bedhopper in the back seat of a very expensive limo would be much more philosophically correct for the purpose of a conspiracy to get a photo to use for blackmail in the future but not for actual publication.
> ףסכ ל הנוז לש הנוב ה ךכ לכ
> בג ה ב bedhopper ינמש an םע
> would limo רקי דואמ לש בשומ
> רתוי הברה this is a dummy
> הרטמ ה ל ןוכנ philosophically
> ל םוליצ השענ ל הינונק לש
> אל לבא דיתע ה ב הטיחס ל שמתשמ
>. םוסריפ ישממ ל
> On Wed, 3 May 2000 17:07:26 +0100, Steve Reed <asr...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> wrote: >Path: news1.
> 2000 לוכי השולש, עישה לע
> Steve, 100+ 26: 7: רשע העבש
>. lastings@ asreed< ןומגא
>: > בתוכ> uk. co. softnet
>. news1: ליבש
>frmt1.
>. frmt1
>sfba.
>. sfba
>home.
>. תיב
>com!
>! com
>newshub2.
>. newshub2
>rdc1.
>. rdc1
>sfba.
>. sfba
>home.
>. תיב
>com!
>! com
>newshub1.
>. newshub1
>home.
>. תיב
>com!
>! com
>news.
>. תושדח
>home.
>. תיב
>com!
>! com
>feeder.
>. ןלכא
>via.
>. ךרד
>net!
>! תשר
>diablo.
>. diablo
>theplanet.
>. theplanet
>net!
>! תשר
>news.
>. תושדח
>theplanet.
>. theplanet
>net!
>! תשר
>newspost.
>. newspost
>theplanet.
>. theplanet
>net!
>! תשר
>lastings.
>. lastings
>softnet.
>. softnet
>co.
>. co
>uk!
>! uk
>asreed >From: Steve Reed <asr...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> >Newsgroups: alt.
>< ןומגא Steve: מ> asreed
>. softnet. lastings@ asreed
>. alt: Newsgroups> > uk. co
>conspiracy.
>. הינונק
>princess-diana >Subject: Re: Di: Paul, Henri, History, 60 Page Autopsy, Etc. >Date: Wed, 3 May 2000 17:07:26 +0100 >Organization: Home >Lines: 297 >Message-ID: <EwaIiIA+...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> >References: <20000416201432.
>: ןודנה: אשונ> princess-diana
>, הירוטסיה, Henri, Paul: Di
>, החיתנ רחאל תוומה ףד םישש
> השולש, עישה: ךיראת. > וכו
>+ 26: 7: רשע העבש 2000 לוכי
>> 297: וק> תיב: ןוגרא> 100
>+ EwaIiIA: < Message-ID
>. softnet. lastings@ 6EE5IAXR
>: < ןויע> > uk. co
>. 20000416201432
>18648.
>. 18648
>0000...@ng-cg1.aol.com> > <20000416220330.
>> > < com. aol. ng-cg1@ 4517
>. 20000416220330
>18658.
>. 18658
>0000...@ng-cg1.aol.com> <38fa9...@huge.aa.net> > <8n1mfss0cu2ou4qhe...@4ax.com> > <025220ee.
>> < com. aol. ng-cg1@ 4069
>> > < תשר. aa. קנע@ 38fa90de_2
>@ 8n1mfss0cu2ou4qhej2ujs106jhqfrbbol
>. 025220ee> > < com. 4ax
>5e23...@usw-ex0104-033.remarq.com> > <VHL8$AAWpz$4I...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> > <03cfeca4.
>. usw-ex0104-033@ 5e23de39
>$ AAWpz$ VHL8> > < com. remarq
>. co. softnet. lastings@ 4IAaS
>. 03cfeca4> > < uk
>e454...@usw-ex0105-038.remarq.com> > <5AGHurAe...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> > <022cd178.
>. usw-ex0105-038@ e454e6ea
>> > < com. remarq
>. lastings@ 5AGHurAeP0A5IAT7
>> > < uk. co. softnet
>. 022cd178
>7c06...@usw-ex0105-037.remarq.com> > <0PU0NLBY...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> > <2ehrgsobh76u0sheo...@4ax.com> >Reply-To: Andrew Steven Reed <ar...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> >NNTP-Posting-Host: modem88.
>. usw-ex0105-037@ 7c06d2cf
>> > < com. remarq
>. lastings@ 0PU0NLBYabD5IAaW
>> > < uk. co. softnet
>@ 2ehrgsobh76u0sheo8fsoso92h16ood0pr
> Andrew: Reply-To> > com. 4ax
>@ areed< ןומגא Steven
>> > uk. co. softnet. lastings
>. modem88: NNTP-Posting-Host
>fred.
>. fred
>pol.
>. pol
>co.
>. co
>uk >Mime-Version: 1.
>. ןושאר: Mime-Version> uk
>0 >X-Trace: newsreaderg1.
>. newsreaderg1: X-Trace> ספא
>core.
>. זכרמ
>theplanet.
>. theplanet
>net 957376918 19338 195.
>. 195 19338 957376918 תשר
>92.
>. 92
>7.
>. העבש
>216 (3 May 2000 18:01:58 GMT) >NNTP-Posting-Date: 3 May 2000 18:01:58 GMT >X-Complaints-To: ab...@theplanet.net >X-Newsreader: Turnpike Integrated Version 4.
> 2000 לוכי השולש( 216
>) > GMT 58: 1: רשע הנומש
> לוכי השולש: NNTP-Posting-Date
>> GMT 58: 1: רשע הנומש 2000
>@ ללעתמ: X-Complaints-To
>: X-Newsreader> תשר. theplanet
>. העברא הסריג דחאמ הרגא שיבכ
>02 M <TWkHBtca5wWBvmfWwoLIWQkgFM> >Xref: newshub1.
>< M 2
>> > TWkHBtca5wWBvmfWwoLIWQkgFM
>. newshub1: Xref
>home.
>. תיב
>com alt.
>. alt com
>conspiracy.
>. הינונק
>princess-diana:30031199 > >In article <2ehrgsobh76u0sheo...@4ax.com>, >GODS...@HOME.COM writes >>>there was "a white car", >>>in the middle of the road, behind him.
> ב> > 30031199: princess-diana
>< רמאמ
>@ 2ehrgsobh76u0sheo8fsoso92h16ood0pr
>. תיב@ GODSBRAIN>, > com. 4ax
> םש>>> בתוכ COM
> ןבל " this is a dummy
> ה לש יעצמא ה ב", >>> תינוכמ
>. ותוא ירחא, ךרד
> >> >>So Livestre lied.
>>> >>. בכוש Livestre ךכ לכ
> The white car was not in the middle >>of the road, the Mercedes was in the middle of the >>road.
> this is a dummy תינוכמ ןבל ה
> ה, ךרד ה לש>> יעצמא ה ב אל
> ה ב this is a dummy Mercedes
>. ךרד>> ה לש יעצמא
> Why did Livestre lie?
>? בכוש Livestre השוע עודמ
> Maybe Livestre did not lie in that particular.
> ב בכוש אל השוע Livestre ילוא
>. דחוימ ש
> One needs to be very careful as to "at what instant" and did he say the middle of the road or the middle of the lane?
> this is a dummy ל ךירצ ןושאר
> ו" עגר המ ב" ל יפכ ריהז דואמ
> ה לש יעצמא ה רמוא אוה השוע
>? הטמס ה לש יעצמא ה וא ךרד
> It was said that he had moved into the right lane.
> אוה ש רמוא this is a dummy הז
>. הטמס ןוכנ ה ךותל זיזמ בייח
> If he said the white car was in the middle of the [right] lane I would agree.
> תינוכמ ןבל ה רמוא אוה םא
> לש יעצמא ה ב this is a dummy
> would ינא הטמס] ןוכנ[ ה
>. םיכסמ
>> >Levistre is not contradicting himself.
>> > אל this is a dummy Levistre
>. ומצע רתוס
> He saw the white car "au milieu >de la chaussee" So, does "chaussee" come closer to translating as "lane" or on the other hand, "road?
> au" תינוכמ ןבל ה האור אוה
>, ךכ לכ" chaussee la de> הביבס
> ל בורק אב" chaussee" השוע
> רחא ה לע וא" הטמס" יפכ םגרתמ
>? ךרד, " די
>" Road having two lanes.
>". הטמס ינש בייח ךרד
> >and was overtaken by it ("elle me double") But exactly where were the other actors at the exact instant that "elle me double?
>> גישהל this is a dummy ו
>") לופכ יתוא elle(" הז ידי לע
> הפיא קוידב לבא
> ב ןקחש רחא ה this is a dummy
> יתוא elle" ש עגר קיודמ ה
>? לופכ
>" >"Then", he >says ("puis j'observe [retroviseur] une autre auto toujours au milieu de >la route") "I saw [rear-view mirror] another car, also in the middle of >the road" So here we have a "milieu de la route.
>" >" puis(" רמוא> אוה", זא
> une] retroviseur[ j'observe
> הביבס au toujours וטוא autre
>[ האור ינא") " ךרד la> de
> ו, תינוכמ רחא] יאר rear-view
> ךכ לכ" ךרד ה> לש יעצמא ה ב
> la de הביבס" בייח ונחנא ןאכ
>. ךרד
>" Does that mean closer the lane or the road?
>" ה וא הטמס ה בורק ןבומ ש השוע
>? ךרד
> >("et soudain une grosse moto sur sa gauche qui lui fait une >queue de poisson") "and, all of a sudden, a large motor-bike, to the >left of it, cutting-in in front of it".
>>(" moto grosse une soudain et
> fait lui qui ינמלוג sa sur
> לכ, ו") " poisson de רות> une
> לודג , ימואתפ לש
>, הז לש ריאשמ> ה ל, motor-bike
>". הז in front of cutting-in
> I will take it that AT SOME POINT a large motor-bike, comming from the left of it, and then cutting-in in front of it.
> המכ ב ש הז חקול ןוצר ינא
>, motor-bike לודג הדוקנ
> זא ו, הז לש ריאשמ ה מ comming
>. הז in front of cutting-in
> > >(another ambiguity is created by the expression "sur sa gauche", which >could be translated "to ITS left" [to the right of it, from where >Levistre says he was] or "to the left of it" [as seen from Levistre's >alleged position] and, since Levistre claims that the Mercedes "was in >the middle of the road" at that point, it could be either) Since I am trying to construct a hypothetical scene where the Merc was astraddle the white line that separated the two west bound lanes and a photographing motorcycle was to the left side of the Merc at the exact instant that the white car was on the right side.
>> >( הלופכ תועמשמ רחא
> ה ידי לע רצוי this is a dummy
>> הזיא", ינמלוג sa sur" יוטיב
> ל" םגרתמ this is a dummy לוכי
>, הז לש ןוכנ ה ל" [ ריאשמ ולש
> אוה רמוא Levistre> הפיא מ
> ה ל" וא] this is a dummy
> מ האור יפכ" [ הז לש ריאשמ
>, ו] םוקימ ריהצמ> Levistre's
> ה ש העיבת Levistre זאמ
>> ב this is a dummy" Mercedes
>, הדוקנ ש ב" ךרד ה לש יעצמא ה
>) וא this is a dummy לוכי הז
> הסנמ this is a dummy ינא זאמ
> ה הפיא עטק יטתופיה הנוב ל
> this is a dummy Merc
> ה דרפנ ש וק ןבל ה astraddle
> םלצמ ו הטמס רשקמ ברעמ ינש
> ה ל this is a dummy עונפוא
> קיודמ ה ב Merc ה לש דצ ריאשמ
> תינוכמ ןבל ה ש עגר
> ןוכנ ה לע this is a dummy
>. דצ
> .
>
> .
>
> .
>
>> >"At the same instant, for a fraction of a second, there was a tremendous >flash of light, but nothing like the flash of a camera" ("Au meme >moment, en une fraction de seconde, un enorme eclair jaillit, mais rien >a voir avec le flash d'un appareil-photo") > >My point is that the order of events is not completely clear.
>> >" לש רבש ל, עגר ותוא ה ב
> this is a dummy םש, ינש
> לבא, לק לש הקרבה> םוצע
> לש הקרבה ה בהוא רבד םוש
> en, עגר> meme Au" (" המלצמ
> enorme ם, seconde de רבש une
> > rien mais, jaillit תינזחפ
> d'un הקרבה le avec voir
> ילש") > > appareil-photo
> ה ש this is a dummy הדוקנ
> this is a dummy הרקמ לש הנמזה
>. רורב ירמגל אל
> It could >be that the bike cut-in in front of the Mercedes just before the white >car passed Levistre - either that, or the bike was further behind the >Mercedes, as both vehicles entered the tunnel, than Clifford, Olivier >and Thierry imply.
> ה ש this is a dummy> לוכי הז
> ה in front of cut-in םיינפוא
>> ןבל ה ינפל טושפ Mercedes
>, ש וא - Levistre רבוע תינוכמ
> this is a dummy םיינפוא ה וא
> יפכ, Mercedes> ה ירחא דוע
> רשאמ, הרהנמ ה סנכנ בכר םהינש
> Thierry ו> Olivier, Clifford
>. זמרמ
> I suppose the bike could have braked, just before the Is there any chance that one of the skid marks, like the single one, was the bike?
> בייח לוכי םיינפוא ה םא ינא
> ה ינפל טושפ, םלב
> ש יוכיס לכ םש this is a dummy
> ה בהוא, ןויצ קלחתמ ה לש ןושאר
> ה this is a dummy, ןושאר דיחי
>? םיינפוא
> >tunnel (to avoid running into a Mercedes/white-car pile-up) and that >Levistre might not have been as far along the tunnel as he thought he >was.
>> ךותל ץר ענמנ ל( הרהנמ
>) pile-up white-car/ Mercedes
> בייח אל המצוע Levistre> ש ו
> ךרד קוחר יפכ this is a dummy
>> אוה בשוח אוה יפכ הרהנמ ה
>. this is a dummy
> There is another branch of my lack of understanding and that follows along a train of thought that the picture was intended but the crash was an accident.
> לש ףנע רחא this is a dummy םש
> ךרד בקוע ש ו ןיבמ לש רסח ילש
> הנומת ה ש בשוח לש ףלאמ
> ה לבא ןוכתמ this is a dummy
> an this is a dummy קסרתמ
>. הנואת
> In the "accident" hypothesis approximately the motorcycle photographer could have accidently fired a half metre too far forward and instead of shooting in to the back seat he could have accidently hit HP directly in the eyes as Henri Paul looked to the left as the motorcycle came along side his side window.
> ה ךרעב הזתופיה" הנואת" ה ב
> בייח לוכי םלצ עונפוא
> םג metre יצח שא accidently
> הרוי instead of ו המידק קוחר
> בייח לוכי אוה בשומ בג ה ל ב
> ה ב תורישי HP הכמ accidently
> ה ל לכתסמ Paul Henri יפכ ןיע
> דצ ךרד אב עונפוא ה יפכ ריאשמ
>. ןולח דצ ולש
>Then the blinding flash could have caused HP to FLINCH and swerve to the right just a little.
> בייח לוכי הקרבה רוויע ה זא
> ה ל תוטסל ו תועתריה ל HP םרוג
>. ןטק טושפ ןוכנ
> At that point hitting the rear of the accelerating white car.
> ה לש ירוחא ה הכמ הדוקנ ש ב
>. תינוכמ ןבל ץיאמ
> As the white car's rear goes to the right its front goes to the left.
> ירוחא תינוכמ ןבל ה יפכ
> תיזח ולש ןוכנ ה goes to
>. ריאשמ ה goes to
> To correct, the driver throws to the right and the rear goes to the left.
> ו ןוכנ ה ל קרוז גהנ ה, ןוכנ ל
>. ריאשמ ה goes to ירוחא ה
> Essentially tossing the front of the Merc into the central columns.
> Merc ה לש תיזח ה קרוז רקיעב
>. דומע יזכרמ ה ךותל
> >Thus, the Mercedes hit the white car, side-to-side, and impelled it >forwards, towards Levistre, and was FOLLOWING it, as it passed >Levistre's position, and as the bike overtook the Mercedes.
>> ןבל ה הכמ Mercedes ה, ןכל
> ףחוד ו, side-to-side, תינוכמ
> ו, Levistre ןוויכב, המידק> הז
> להק םיצירעמ this is a dummy
> Levistre's> רבוע הז יפכ, הז
> גישהל םיינפוא ה יפכ ו, םוקימ
>. Mercedes ה
> I think that the first, photographing, bike should have been ahead of the white car.
>, םלצמ, ןושאר ה ש בשוח ינא
> בייח ךירצ םיינפוא
> ה לש המידק this is a dummy
>. תינוכמ ןבל
> If the bike and the car essentially accelerated at the same instant the bike would outrun the car.
> רקיעב תינוכמ ה ו םיינפוא ה םא
> םיינפוא ה עגר ותוא ה ב ץיאמ
> ה ץורל רהמ רתוי would
>. תינוכמ
> I think.
>. בשוח ינא
> Bikes are far faster at acceleration that cars.
> קוחר this is a dummy םיינפוא
>. תינוכמ ש הצואת ב ריהמ
> Any disagreements?
>? תקולחמ לכ
>Of course, with two riders and a turbo car ...?
> ו בכור ינש םע, סרוק לש
>...? תינוכמ וברוט
> For one thing, you are supposing then that the white car was ahead of the Merc at the instant that the Merc hit the central column/pilar/post.
> התא, רבד ןושאר ל
> ןבל ה ש זא םא this is a dummy
> המידק this is a dummy תינוכמ
> Merc ה ש עגר ה ב Merc ה לש
>/ pilar/ דומע יזכרמ ה הכמ
>. הדמע
> That is in accord with my first guess.
> םע המכסה ב this is a dummy ש
>. שוחינ ןושאר ילש
>> >Does that clear things up?
>> >? הלעמל רבד רורב ש השוע
> No.
>. לכ
> It smokes them up.
>. הלעמל םתוא ןשע הז
> But gives a number of possible occurances to consider.
> ירשפא לש רפסמ ןתונ לבא
>. לקוש ל occurances
>>> >>>Behind that, he says, there was >>>"another car" (presumably the Mercedes S- 280) and behind that, a large >>>motor-bike.
>>> >>> םש, רמוא אוה, ש ירחא
> רחא>>>" this is a dummy
> S- Mercedes ה הארנכ" ( תינוכמ
>>>> לודג , ש ירחא ו) 280
>. motor-bike
> So my first thought on that is that that is a second bike.
> ש לע בשוח ןושאר ילש ךכ לכ
> ש ש this is a dummy
> ינש this is a dummy
>. םיינפוא
> And if we are talking about the left that might be better described as a second bike on the left as there might have been one or more bikes on the right in addition.
> this is a dummy ונחנא םא ו
> המצוע ש ריאשמ ה לע רבדמ
> יפכ ראתמ בוט this is a dummy
> יפכ ריאשמ ה לע םיינפוא ינש
> this is a dummy בייח המצוע םש
> ה לע םיינפוא רתוי וא ןושאר
>. הפסוה ב ןוכנ
>>> >>Livestre lies again.
>>> >>. בוש בכוש Livestre
>> >What do you mean?
>> >? ןבומ התא השוע המ
> What evidence is there that Levistre is "lying"?
> ש םש this is a dummy תודע המ
>" this is a dummy Levistre
>"? בכוש
> My supposition.
>. החנה ילש
>> >> He clearly saw and may have been a part >>of a conspiracy to cover up.
>> >> בייח לוכי ו האור שורפב אוה
> לש>> קלח this is a dummy
>. הלעמל הסכמ ל הינונק
> So in my supposition he saw it >>and he lied about it.
> האור אוה החנה ילש ב ךכ לכ
>. הז לע בכוש אוה ו>> הז
> Now if we go off on a train of thought to >>explore a hypothesis that Livestre was deliberately lying then >>I'll have to think about that some more.
> לע מ ךלוה ונחנא םא וישכע
> רקוח>> ל בשוח לש ףלאמ
> Livestre ש הזתופיה
> בכוש הנווכב this is a dummy
> לע בשוח ל בייח I'll ינא>> זא
>. רתוי המכ ש
> I have not until the >>present considered the possibility that he was deliberately >>lying.
> לקוש יחכונ>> ה דע אל בייח ינא
> אוה ש תורשפא ה
>>> הנווכב this is a dummy
>. בכוש
>>> >I have - he could be in the pay of Al-Fayed (or his high-level masters) >That's always a possibility; but why should we single him out?
>>> > לוכי אוה - בייח ינא
> לש םלשמ ה ב this is a dummy
> high-level ולש וא( Al-Fayed
> this is a dummy ש) > ןמוא
> ךירצ עודמ לבא; תורשפא דימת
>? ץוח ותוא דיחי ונחנא
> I'm not singling him out.
> דיחי אל this is a dummy ינא
>. ץוח ותוא
> I am theorizing that there may have been a whole swarm of conspiring pap's surrounding Diana's car.
> ש חינהל this is a dummy ינא
> this is a dummy בייח לוכי םש
> הסייד רושקל לש ליחנ םלש
>. תינוכמ Diana's ףיקמ
> >What >about any (or ALL) of the other witnesses?
>> רחא ה לש) לכ וא( לכ לע> המ
>? דע
> I am inclined to go with the >majority (who saw closely pursuing vehicles) and focus suspicion on >Mohammed and Souad who - alone - say they did not.
> ל עופיש this is a dummy ינא
> דואמ האור ימ( בור> ה םע ךלוה
>> לע דשח דוקימ ו) בכר ףדור
> - דבל - ימ Souad ו Mohammed
>. אל השוע םה רמוא
>> >>If he were deliberately lying and saw the three vehicles >>abreast, > > He says he saw them one behind the other - until the bike overtook the >Mercedes.
>> >> הנווכב this is a dummy אוה םא
>>> בכר השולש ה האור ו בכוש
> אוה רמוא אוה, > > הז דצב הז
> - רחא ה ירחא ןושאר םתוא האור
>> ה גישהל םיינפוא ה דע
>. Mercedes
> Then the bike and the Mercedes were "abreast", but the white >car - so he implies - had already overtaken him by then!
> Mercedes ה ו םיינפוא ה זא
>", הז דצב הז" this is a dummy
> אוה ךכ לכ - תינוכמ> ןבל ה לבא
> ותוא גישהל רבכ בייח - זמרמ
>! זא ידי לע
> But why should >you suspect this to be a lie?
> ל הז דושח התא> ךירצ עודמ לבא
>? בכוש this is a dummy
> I think you, we, need to be very careful about exactly what instant is being described as being related to any single comment.
> ל ךירצ, ונחנא, התא בשוח ינא
> לע ריהז דואמ this is a dummy
> this is a dummy עגר המ קוידב
> יפכ ראתמ this is a dummy
> לכ ל סחימ this is a dummy
>. הרעה דיחי
>> >> the photo flashes, the motorcycle accelerate, >>the car on the right bump the Merc into the central >>pilars, > >You want to hypothesize that the bike-overtake/flash occurred BEFORE the >sliding collision?
>> >> עונפוא ה, הקרבה םוליצ ה
> ןוכנ ה לע תינוכמ ה, >> ץיאמ
>>> יזכרמ ה ךותל Merc ה הטילג
> חינהל ל הצור התא, > > pilars
> הרוק הקרבה/ bike-overtake ה ש
>? תושגנתה קילחמ> ה ינפל
> What on earth for?
>? ל ץראה רודכ לע המ
> Well, if the supposition is as two photographing vehicles taking a photograph from both sides at the same instant .
> החנה ה םא, בוט יכ
> םלצמ ינש יפכ this is a dummy
> ב דצ םהינש מ םלצמ חקול בכר
>. עגר ותוא ה
> .
>
> .
>
> .
>
> There may also have been two contacts between the two vehicles?
> בייח ו לוכי םש
> ןיב רשקתמ ינש this is a dummy
>? בכר ינש ה
>The mirror thing may not have been considered significant.
> בייח אל לוכי רבד יאר ה
> לקוש this is a dummy
>. יתועמשמ
> The mirror would not have broken out the tail light.
> ץוח רבוש בייח אל would יאר ה
>. לק בנז ה
> So if the tail light was broken would not one suspect a corresponding dent on the Merc's right front fender?
> לק בנז ה םא ךכ לכ
> אל would רבוש this is a dummy
> ה לע הכמ בתכתמ דושח ןושאר
>? שוגפ תיזח ןוכנ Merc's
>> In reading this over I can not understand quickly the actions to cover up circumstances by police, courts, etc. unless Diana bite off and swallowed the tip of Dodi's penis from the force of the crash.
>> לוכי ינא ךרד לעמ הז האירק ב
> הסכמ ל הלועפ ה רהמ ןיבמ אל
>, הרטשמ ידי לע הרקמ הלעמל
> ןכ םא אלא. וכו, טפשמ תיב
> לש הצק ה עלוב ו מ תצק Diana
> ה לש חוכ ה מ ןיפ Dodi's
>. קסרתמ
> If some such had happened then that could explain a lot of things, But it would also demonstrate that there was no fear in the back seat at the time of crash which would be important to suggest that there was no demonstrated disagreement with Henri Paul's driving performance prior to the crash.
> ש זא הרוק בייח הזכ המכ םא
> לבא, רבד לש הברה ריבסמ לוכי
> םש ש גיצמ ו would הז
> ה ב דחופ לכ this is a dummy
> הזיא קסרתמ לש ןמז ה ב בשומ בג
> ל בושח this is a dummy would
> לכ this is a dummy םש ש עיצמ
> Paul's Henri םע תקולחמ גיצמ
>. קסרתמ ה ל םדוק הגצה ןנוכ
> >> that the first photoflashing motorcycle sped off >>past him and out of the tunnel as well as the vehicle that >>had bumped the Merc.
>>> photoflashing ןושאר ה ש
> ו ותוא רבע>> מ תוריהמ עונפוא
> ה as well as הרהנמ ה out of
>. Merc ה הטילג בייח>> ש בכר
> and then reported that in essence >>a followup motorcycle stopped to view into the Merc >>and it then resumed to exit the tunnel, etc. >> >You mean Levistre is concealing the existence of a second motorcycle?
> >> תוהמ ב ש חוודמ זא ו
> ףונ ל רצוע עונפוא followup
> ל ךישממ זא הז ו>> Merc ה ךותל
> התא. >> > וכו, הרהנמ ה אצוי
> this is a dummy Levistre ןבומ
> ינש לש םויק ה ריתסמ
>? עונפוא
>>True, Thierry H.
>>. H Thierry, ןוכנ
> says he saw "several" motorcycles pursuing the >Mercedes, closely, towards the tunnel (he had a view along the cour >Albert Premier from the carriageway itself) but Clifford G.
> עונפוא" המכ" האור אוה רמוא
>, דואמ, Mercedes> ה ףדור
> בייח אוה( הרהנמ ה ןוויכב
> Albert> cour ה ךרד ףונ
> carriageway ה מ שאר הלשממ
>. G Clifford לבא) ומצע
> and Olivier >P (who were positioned to the right [north] of the road and could see no >more than the tunnel-entrance) report only " a car in front of the >Mercedes and a [one!
> ימ( P> Olivier ו
> ה ל םוקימ this is a dummy
> לוכי ו ךרד ה לש] ןופצ[ ןוכנ
> ה רשאמ רתוי> לכ האור
> " קר חוודמ) tunnel-entrance
>> ה in front of תינוכמ
>! ןושאר[ ו Mercedes
>] powerful motor-cycle, 30 - 40 metres behind.
>] - םישולש, motor-cycle קזח
>. ירחא metres םיעברא
> I think it was Brian Anderson's story that a motorcycle moved to pass the Merc on its left as it entered the tunnel, which would be exact in accord with my one theory.
> this is a dummy הז בשוח ינא
> ש רופיס Anderson's Brian
> לע Merc ה רבוע ל זיזמ עונפוא
> ה סנכנ הז יפכ ריאשמ ולש
> would הזיא, הרהנמ
> המכסה ב קיודמ this is a dummy
>. הירואת ןושאר ילש םע
>> >Why should we not assume that the other bikes left the cour Albert >Premier, at the exit slip-road, leaving the pair on the bike, which >Clifford, Olivier and Levistre saw, to proceed into the tunnel for the >kill!?
>> > ה ש חינמ אל ונחנא ךירצ עודמ
> cour ה ריאשמ םיינפוא רחא
> אצוי ה ב, שאר הלשממ> Albert
> ה לע גוז ה ריאשמ, slip-road
>, Clifford> הזיא, םיינפוא
> ל, האור Levistre ו Olivier
>> ה ל הרהנמ ה ךותל ךישממ
>!? גרוה
> I don't think that the word "kill" is at all proper in a larger view.
>" הלמ ה ש בשוח אל השוע ינא
> לכ ב this is a dummy" גרוה
>. ףונ לודג ב ןוכנ
>"Photo" would I suggest be a more prevalent term for that point.
>" עיצמ ינא would" םוליצ
> ץופנ רתוי this is a dummy
>. הדוקנ ש ל ןמז
>> >>I would like to see the animation sequences down to the 1 meter >>resolution.
>> >> ה האור ל בהוא would ינא
> ןושאר ה ל הטמל הרדיס היצמינא
>. היצולוזר>> רטמ
> I think the main constant that we can use is the >>physical distance on the road as being traversed by the Merc.
> ונחנא ש עובק ירקיע ה בשוח ינא
> this is a dummy שמתשמ לוכי
> יפכ ךרד ה לע קחרמ יסיפ>> ה
> ידי לע תוצחל this is a dummy
>. Merc ה
> >>So the animation reference frames could be identified by reference >>to the tunnel face as metres + "plus" or - "minus" the tunnel face.
>>> תרגסמ ןויע היצמינא ה ךכ לכ
> ההזמ this is a dummy לוכי
> םינפ הרהנמ ה ל>> ןויע ידי לע
>" - וא" סולפ+ " metres יפכ
>. םינפ הרהנמ ה" סונימ
>>>> >We would all (those of us who really wish to have it explained in >detail, that is) like to see sophisticated event-reconstruction >techniques brought to bear, together with an account of exactly what >data was employed and how it was used.
>>>> > ונתוא לש ולא( לכ would ונחנא
> ריבסמ הז בייח ל הצור תמאב ימ
>) this is a dummy ש, טרפ> ב
> םכחותמ האור ל בהוא
> הקינכט> event-reconstruction
> ריבסמ an םע דחיב, דלוי ל איבמ
> םינותנ> המ קוידב לש
> בהוא ו דיבעמ this is a dummy
>. שמתשמ this is a dummy הז
> Fat chance of that, however - >unless you happen to have an event-reconstruction team on hand and you >can afford to cock a snoot at the politico-media complex.
> ןכ יפ לע ףא, ש לש יוכיס ןמש
> בייח ל הרוק התא ןכ םא אלא> -
> דמצ event-reconstruction an
> לוכי> התא ו די לע
> ב snoot ןיז ל תושרהל ומצעל
>. ךבוסמ politico-media ה
> There is the traffic accident reconstruction site off my web page.
> העונת ה this is a dummy םש
> תשר ילש מ םוקמ רוזחש הנואת
>. ףד
> I saw reference to the most professional software photosho or paint shop of something like that.
> יעוצקמ בור ה ל ןויע האור ינא
> לש תונח עבצ וא photosho הנכות
>. ש בהוא והשמ
> I got a copy off the web.
>. תשר ה מ קיתעמ השענ ינא
> One of these years I will move to do my accident and if at the same time I did a second of the Diana crash not much for starters.
> ןוצר ינא הנש הלא לש ןושאר
> ב םא ו הנואת ילש השוע ל זיזמ
> לש ינש השוע ינא ןמז ותוא ה
> ל הברה אל קסרתמ Diana ה
>. ענתמ
> > >>>Note that there is no vehicle present, in Levistre's story, which could >>>be the car of the witnesses Souad M.
>> >>> לכ this is a dummy םש ש האור
> Levistre's ב, יחכונ בכר
>>>> לוכי הזיא, רופיס
> ה לש תינוכמ ה this is a dummy
>. M Souad דע
> and Mohammed M.
>. M Mohammed ו
> If we believe >>>Levistre, they weren't there!
>, Levistre>>> ןימאמ ונחנא םא
>! םש אל this is a dummy םה
> On the other hand, if we believe THEM, >>>the Mercedes crashed without any help from anyone - a very convenient >>>version of events, for the authorities, and completely contrary to the >>>testimony of ALL the other witnesses.
> ןימאמ ונחנא םא, די רחא ה לע
> קסרתמ Mercedes ה, >>> םתוא
> דואמ - דחא לכ מ רזוע לכ ילב
> ה ל, הרקמ לש הסריג>>> חונ
>>>> ה ל ךופה ירמגל ו, תוכמס
>. דע רחא ה לכ לש תודע
>>> I am not suggesting that consideration should be limited to only one hypothetically possible series of events.
>>> ש עיצמ אל this is a dummy ינא
> this is a dummy ךירצ תובשחתה
> ןושאר קר ל ליבגמ
> לש הרדיס ירשפא hypothetically
>. הרקמ
> It appears to me that there are apparently conflicting reports of circumstances.
> םש ש יתוא ל עיפומ הז
> שגנתמ הארנכ this is a dummy
>. הרקמ לש חוודמ
> Therefore I suggest several parallel hypothetical story lines.
> ליבקמ המכ עיצמ ינא ןכל
>. וק רופיס יטתופיה
> That calls to mind something that I think Senator Sam Ervin said during the course of the Watergate hearings on Nixon's impeachment.
> ינא ש והשמ הבשחמ ל ארוק ש
> רמוא Ervin לאומש רוטנס בשוח
> Watergate ה לש סרוק ה ךשמב
>. המשאה Nixon's לע העימש
> The in the four gospels there are accounts of what was reported to have been written by Pilate on the sign to be placed over Jesus Christ's head on the cross.
> םש בתכ שדוק העברא ה ב ה
> המ לש ריבסמ this is a dummy
> בייח ל חוודמ this is a dummy
> ידי לע בתוכ this is a dummy
> ל םתוח ה לע Pilate
> ךרד לעמ םוקמ this is a dummy
> ה לע שאר ירצונה ושי ושי
>. רבוע
> Senator Sam said that if individuals whose testimoney we so reverence from the written testimony could be so reported as divergent then we need not be dismayed that good people of our own day may be reported as to not have agreed perfectly.
> דיחי םא ש רמוא לאומש רוטנס
> ךכ לכ ונחנא testimoney ימ לש
> לוכי תודע בתוכ ה מ הצרעה
> חוודמ ךכ לכ this is a dummy
> אל ךירצ ונחנא זא קחרתמ יפכ
> בוט ש המיא this is a dummy
> לוכי םוי ךייש ונלש לש םישנא
> ל יפכ חוודמ this is a dummy
>. םלשומ ןפואב םיכסמ בייח אל
> >>Hummnn >>> >>>The sequence of events, as Levistre recounts it, is very interesting, >>>because he seems to be saying that the "white car" stayed ahead of the >>>Mercedes and the motor-bike.
>>> לש הרדיס ה>>> >>> Hummnn
>, הז רפסמ Levistre יפכ, הרקמ
> דואמ this is a dummy
> ל הארנ אוה יכ, >>> ןינעמ
> ןבל" ה ש רמוא this is a dummy
>>>> ה לש המידק ראשנ" תינוכמ
>. motor-bike ה ו Mercedes
> I would think "ahead" of the Merc would be correct but not that the white car stayed ahead of the bike.
> ה לש" המידק" בשוח would ינא
> this is a dummy would Merc
> תינוכמ ןבל ה ש אל לבא ןוכנ
>. םיינפוא ה לש המידק ראשנ
> Explaination given above.
>. לעמ ןתונ Explaination
>>> >>Well, in my SH one possibility that I want to consider is that both >>the white car on the Merc's right hand side and the motorcycle on >>the Merc's left hand side came to a synchronized position along side >>the Merc such as to be able to take symultaneous flash photographs >>into the Merc from both sides at the same time.
>>> >> תורשפא ןושאר SH ילש ב, בוט יכ
> לקוש ל הצור ינא ש
> ה>> םהינש ש this is a dummy
> ןוכנ Merc's ה לע תינוכמ ןבל
> ה>> לע עונפוא ה ו דצ די
> ל אב דצ די ריאשמ Merc's
> Merc ה>> דצ ךרד םוקימ ןמזתמ
> this is a dummy ל יפכ הזכ
> symultaneous חקול ל לגוסמ
> מ Merc ה ךותל>> םלצמ הקרבה
>. ןמז ותוא ה ב דצ םהינש
> If one is in a very >>heavy law suit one needs at least TWO corroberating withnesses.
> ב this is a dummy ןושאר םא
> ןושאר םיאתמ קוח דבכ>> דואמ
> corroberating ינש תוחפ ב ךירצ
>. withnesses
> And a big pile of paps only seconds behind would be very important also.
> קר הסייד לש המירע לודג ו
> would ירחא seconds
>. ו בושח דואמ. ו
>
> If somebody hinted at the presence of a blackmail photo they could be assassinated in short order before they could ever get close to a court of law, and I heard a song the other day called "Smuggler's Blues" done in the Eighties by Glenn Frey has some good words.
> לש תוחכונ ה ב זמר והשימ םא
> לוכי םה םוליצ הטיחס
> רצק ב חצור this is a dummy
> םעפ יא לוכי םה ינפל הנמזה
> לש טפשמ תיב ל בורק השענ
> רחא ה ריש עמוש ינא ו, קוח
> ב השוע" לוחכ חירבמ" ארוק םוי
> Glenn ידי לע תונש םינומשה ה
>. הלמ בוט המכ בייח Frey
>>> >This seems to me to be fanciful in the extreme.
>>> > ל יתוא ל הארנ הז
> ה ב ינוימד this is a dummy
>. ינוציק
> On what grounds do you >suggest it?
> עיצמ> התא השוע סיסב המ לע
>? הז
>> >>The same scene photographed by two separate photographers at >>exactly the same instant would be IDEAL.
>> >> ינש ידי לע םלצמ עטק ותוא ה
> עגר ותוא ה קוידב>> ב םלצ דרפנ
>. ןורקע this is a dummy. ןורקע
>
>>> >"Ideal" for what?
>>> >"? המ ל" ןורקע
> Come on Al!
>! Al לע אב
> What are these simultaneous, two-angle >flash-photos supposed to be for?
> הלא this is a dummy המ
>> two-angle, ינמז וב
> ל רומא flash-photos
>? ל this is a dummy
> Okay - you've said before that you >think they would have been compromising photos, and that MAF set up the >car-switch and the pursuit in order to obtain them.
> ש ינפל רמוא בייח התא - רדסב
> בייח would םה בשוח> התא
> ו, םוליצ הרשפ this is a dummy
>> ה הלעמל עבוק MAF ש
> הנמזה ב קוסיע ה ו car-switch
>. םתוא גישמ ל
> This is an >interesting idea, because, although it seems most likely to me that MAF >DID make these arrangements, I cannot decide precisely what it was that >he thought was going to happen.
> ןינעמ> an this is a dummy הז
> הארנ הז יפ לע ףא, יכ, ןויער
> השוע> MAF ש יתוא ל יופצ בור
> אל לוכי ינא, רודיס הלא השוע
> הז המ קוידב טילחמ
> בשוח אוה> ש this is a dummy
> going to this is a dummy
>. הרוק
> A compromising photograph.
>. םלצמ הרשפ
> Exactly in line with MAF's general opinion of John.
> העד יללכ MAF's םע וק ב קוידב
>. ןתני לש
> Q.
>. Q
> Public, Di, etc. > >Let us say that Diana and Dodi were not sleeping together, she was not >pregnant by him and they were not going to get engaged - or some >combination of these negatives - such that, in order to (what?
> ןתונ. > > וכו, Di, ירוביצ
> Dodi ו Diana ש רמוא ונתוא
>, דחיב ןשי אל this is a dummy
> ןוירב> אל this is a dummy איה
> םה ו ותוא ידי לע
> going to אל this is a dummy
> לש בוליש> המכ וא - סרואמ השענ
>( ל הנמזה ב, ש הזכ - ילילש הלא
>? המ
>) gain >influence over Diana or disgrace her or force her to marry Dodi?
>) Diana ךרד לעמ עיפשמ> חיוורמ
> ל הלש חוכ וא הלש הפרח וא
>? Dodi ןתחתמ
> - the >Al-Fayeds conceived the scheme I would guess that conception of the scheme would have happened far away from MAF.
> תינכות ה ןיבמ Al-Fayeds> ה -
> ה לש הגשה ש שוחינ would ינא
> קוחר הרוק בייח would תינכות
>. MAF מ האלה
> If a group were looking for someone to set up some such scheme MAF might have been found to have been a good candidate to approach for the leading role but the script had been written long before and they just needed some one to play the part.
> this is a dummy הצובק םא
> עבוק ל והשימ looking for
> MAF תינכות הזכ המכ הלעמל
> this is a dummy בייח המצוע
> this is a dummy בייח ל אצומ
> ליבומ ה ל שגנ ל דמעומ בוט
> בייח טירסת ה לבא דיקפת
> ךורא בתוכ this is a dummy
> ןושאר המכ ךירצ טושפ םה ו ינפל
>. קלח ה קחשמ ל
> >of obtaining compromising photographs.
>>. םלצמ הרשפ גישמ לש
> A >clever ruse is employed to get rid of some of the escort (but why not >all?
> הלובחת חקיפ>
> השענ ל דיבעמ this is a dummy
> לבא( הוולמ ה לש המכ לש ררחשמ
>? לכ> אל עודמ
>) THE COMPROMISING photo to be used for blackmail to influence Diana not to take a strong public stand on some particular issue from time to time would have been financed by an external consortium, QEII, Chas, Military landmine sales proponents, etc. In order to be of use at selected times the photo could not be public.
>) ל םוליצ הרשפ ה
> הטיחס ל שמתשמ this is a dummy
> קזח חקול ל אל Diana עיפשמ ל
> דחוימ המכ לע דמוע ירוביצ
> בייח would ןמז ל ןמז מ איצומ
> ידי לע הלכלכ this is a dummy
>, QEII, תורבח דוחא ינוציח an
> תוריכמ landmine אבצ, Chas
> ל הנמזה ב. וכו, דיסח
> ב שמתשמ לש this is a dummy
> אל לוכי םוליצ ה יפ רחבנ
>. ירוביצ this is a dummy
> If that happened it would have been a one time shot when ever it fell into public hands.
> בייח would הז הרוק ש םא
> ןמז ןושאר this is a dummy
> ךותל לפונ הז םעפ יא יתמ הרוי
>. די ירוביצ
> To be worth the expense and effort it had to be kept secret but its circumstance had to be indisputable else any single person threatening exposure of some such would be under extremely high surveillance in moments.
> ה הווש this is a dummy ל
> ל בייח הז ץמאמ ו האצוה
> ידוס קיזחמ this is a dummy
> ל בייח הרקמ ולש לבא
> this is a dummy
> דיחי לכ רחא וילע רערעל ןיאש
> הזכ המכ לש הפישח םיאמ םדא ןב
> תחתמ this is a dummy would
>. עגר ב החגשה הובג רתויב
> > the remaining escort follows from the Hotel, against orders, thus >giving the impression that they are up to no good.
>>, ןולמ ה מ בקוע הוולמ ראשנ ה
> ש םשור ה ןתונ> ןכל, הנמזה דגנ
> לכ ל הלעמל this is a dummy םה
>. בוט
> Henri has been >briefed to flee them - he flees.
>> this is a dummy בייח Henri
>. חרוב אוה - םתוא חרוב ל רצק
> An ambush of pursuers has been arranged >on the cour la Reine - to keep Henri in flight and to give Dodi an >excuse for grabbing Diana (as though protectively) I can't imagine anything but a photograph of a blowjob.
> בייח ףדור לש ברא An
> ה לע> רדסמ this is a dummy
> Henri קיזחמ ל - Reine la cour
>> an Dodi ןתונ ל ו הסיט ב
> יפכ( Diana שפות ל ץורית
> ינא) protectively יפ לע ףא
> םלצמ לבא והשמ ןימדמ אל לוכי
>. blowjob לש
> Sex is no big thing nowadays.
> לודג לכ this is a dummy ןימ
>. םויכ רבד
> In royal family tradition, the past, it may have been able to throw a little influence at an intense moment of public conflict.
>, רבע ה, תרוסמ החפשמ יתוכלמ ב
> ןטק קרוז לוכי בייח לוכי הז
> לש עגר יביסנטניא an ב עיפשמ
>. שגנתמ ירוביצ
> There is so much detailed sex on the web that I wouldn't doubt that to find a microscopic photo of a pubic hair would take more than a few minutes.
> הברה ךכ לכ this is a dummy םש
> ינא ש תשר ה לע ןימ טרפ
> אצומ ל ש קפס אל wouldn't
> לש םוליצ יפוקסורקימ
> חקול would רעיש הוורעה לש
>. הקד טעמ רשאמ רתוי
> So if any eyebrows were going to be raised maybe a court threatening a loss of Di's finances for breach of contract re: approximately non modest public behavior.
> הבג לכ םא ךכ לכ
> going to this is a dummy
> ילוא םירמ this is a dummy
> Di's לש דספה םיאמ טפשמ תיב
>: ןודנה הזוח לש הרפה ל הלכלכ
> ירוביצ עונצ non ךרעב
>. תוגהנתה
> So if Di was very cognizant of contract provisions regarding public behavior as a determinant of her divorce settlement then she would have to have exercised the utmost discression.
> this is a dummy Di םא ךכ לכ
> יבגל יאנת הזוח לש עדומ דואמ
> לש עבוק יפכ תוגהנתה ירוביצ
> would איה זא תולחנתה שרגמ הלש
> ה ליגרת בייח ל בייח
>. discression רתויב לודג
> But if she was going to find any male support outside of her ex's she would have to at some point show some affection.
> this is a dummy איה םא לבא
> ךמות רכז לכ אצומ going to
> would איה רבעשל הלש לש ץוחב
> המכ הארמ הדוקנ המכ ב ל בייח
>. הביח
> Now where could one find any more hope of privacy than in the tunnel of love in a speeding limosine?
> לכ אצומ ןושאר לוכי הפיא וישכע
> ה ב רשאמ תויטרפ לש הווקמ רתוי
> תוריהמ ב בהוא לש הרהנמ
>? limosine
> But to be effective for black mail the photo would have to appear as immodest public behavior.
> ל ליעי this is a dummy ל לבא
> בייח would םוליצ ה ראוד רוחש
> ירוביצ עונצ אל יפכ עיפומ ל
>. תוגהנתה
> I said PUBLIC.
>. ירוביצ רמוא ינא
> So on the one hand Diana would have shyed away from any PUBLIC behavior but people interested in obtaining a photo for blackmail would have to make the circumstances of the photo look as public as possible.
> Diana די ןושאר ה לע ךכ לכ
> לכ מ האלה shyed בייח would
> םישנא לבא תוגהנתה ירוביצ
> הטיחס ל םוליצ גישמ ב ןינעמ
> ה לש הרקמ ה השוע ל בייח would
> יפכ ירוביצ יפכ לכתסמ םוליצ
>. ירשפא
> TWO photo's from TWO different photographers and surrounding photos from another hundred photographers could be made to look like PUBLIC IMMODESTY while the circumstance of the back seat of a speeding limosine in the tunnel in the middle of the night is about as close to "private" behavior as I can imagine anyone could get on short notice.
> ו םלצ הנוש ינש מ םוליצ ינש
> םלצ תואמ רחא מ םוליצ ףיקמ
> ל השוע this is a dummy לוכי
> רדעה תועינצ ירוביצ בהוא לכתסמ
> לש בשומ בג ה לש הרקמ ה ןמזב
> ה ב הרהנמ ה ב limosine תוריהמ
> הליל ה לש יעצמא
> בורק יפכ לע this is a dummy
> לוכי ינא יפכ תוגהנתה" יטרפ" ל
> רצק לע השענ לוכי דחא לכ ןימדמ
>. האור
> >- a car is stationed >at the tunnel-entrance to stop the Mercedes (a very risky proceeding, >from a father's point of view, don't you think?
>> this is a dummy תינוכמ -
> ל tunnel-entrance ה ב> הנחת
> ןכוסמ דואמ ( Mercedes ה רצוע
>, ףונ לש הדוקנ אבא מ, > ךילה
>? בשוח התא אל השוע
>) the Mercedes is slowed, >the pursuers catch up, the photographs are taken.
>) this is a dummy Mercedes ה
> ה, הלעמל ספות ףדור ה, > יטיא
>. חקול this is a dummy םלצמ
>> >Photographs of what?
>> >? המ לש םלצמ
> Diana giving Dodi a blow job.
> ףשונ Dodi ןתונ Diana
>. הדובע
> What else could even raise an eyebrowe nowadays?
> an םירמ וליפא לוכי רחא המ
>? םויכ eyebrowe
> Hell, if you had to sell such a photograph to get a MacDonald's hamburger you would have a lot of competition in the current market.
> רכומ ל בייח התא םא, םונהיג
> השענ ל םלצמ הזכ
> would התא רגרובמה MacDonald's
> ה ב תורחת לש הברה בייח
>. קוש יחכונ
> > A terrified Diana in Dodi's arms?
>>? די Dodi's ב Diana דיחפמ
> Diana being >raped by Dodi?
> סנוא> this is a dummy Diana
>? Dodi ידי לע
> - is that what you're working up to saying?
> התא המ ש this is a dummy -
> ךרד הלועפ this is a dummy
>? רמוא ל הלעמל
> My dear chap!
>! עקב רקי ילש
> Who is going to conspire, and pay big money, for something like that?
> going to this is a dummy ימ
> ל, ףסכ לודג םלשמ ו, רושקל
>? ש בהוא והשמ
>Nobody.
>. אל דחא ףא
> >Diana crouched down on the floor behind Henri's seat, and Dodi remained >upright - probably viewing the pursuit with anxiety - possibly grappling >with TRJ to prevent him interfering with the driving.
>> הפצר ה לע הטמל ףפותשמ Diana
> Dodi ו, בשומ Henri's ירחא
> ה ףונ הארנכ - תופיקז> ראשנ
>> לוקנא ילוא - הדרח םע קוסיע
> ה םע עירפמ ותוא ענומ ל TRJ םע
>. ןנוכ
> What sign is >there - apart from the fact that neither Diana nor Dodi were wearing >seat-belts - that Dodi was attempting to grapple with Diana?
> - םש> this is a dummy םתוח המ
> Diana אל ש הדבוע ה מ דרפנב
> this is a dummy Dodi אל םגו
> Dodi ש - seat-belts> שבול
> לוקנא ל לדתשמ this is a dummy
>? Diana םע
>> >Again, I say, "photographs of what?
>> >? המ לש םלצמ, " רמוא ינא? המ
>
>" - precisely - and what were they >for?
>" המ ו - קוידב -
>? ל> םה this is a dummy
> - according to your theory.
>. הירואת ךלש according to -
> A picture of a blow job - for blackmail.
> ל - הדובע ףשונ לש הנומת
>. הטיחס
>> >Why could these photographs not have been taken with spy-cameras at one >of the Fayed residences Because such a photo would possibly be identified as an invasion of privacy.
>> > בייח אל םלצמ הלא לוכי עודמ
> םע חקול this is a dummy
> ה לש> ןושאר ב spy-cameras
> םוליצ הזכ יכ ןועמ Fayed
> this is a dummy ילוא would
>. תויטרפ לש השילפ an יפכ. תויטרפ
>
> It had to look like PUBLIC Immodest Behavior to cause a diminution of Diana's influence in the public media.
> ירוביצ בהוא לכתסמ ל בייח הז
> םרוג ל תוגהנתה עונצ אל
> ה ב עיפשמ Diana's לש התחפה
>. media ירוביצ
> >at which Diana stayed?
>>? ראשנ Diana הזיא ב
> How could it have been >hoped that photographs of an especially compromising nature could have >been obtained at high speed in the Alma Tunnel, rather than on the >Jonikal, at the Ritz or at the rue Arsene?
> בייח הז לוכי בהוא
> םלצמ ש הווקמ> this is a dummy
> לוכי עבט הרשפ דחוימב an לש
> ב גישמ this is a dummy> בייח
>, הרהנמ Alma ה ב תוריהמ הובג
> ה ב, Jonikal> ה לע רשאמ דואמ
>? Arsene הטרח ה ב וא Ritz
> What on earth is the point?
> ץראה רודכ לע המ
>? הדוקנ ה this is a dummy
> Would behavior on the yatch or at the Ritz be considered public or private by Diana.
> ב וא yatch ה לע תוגהנתה Would
> לקוש this is a dummy Ritz ה
>. Diana ידי לע יטרפ וא. Diana
>
> My guess is that Diana would have considered it PUBLIC.
> ש this is a dummy שוחינ ילש
> הז לקוש בייח would Diana
>. ירוביצ
>> >One glimmer of a suggestion of a possibility does occur to me, as a >result of examining this idea, however.
>> > לש העצה לש בוהבה ןושאר
> יפכ, יתוא ל הרוק השוע תורשפא
>, ןויער הז ןחוב לש האצות>
>. ןכ יפ לע ףא
> What if Dodi was having >difficulty getting physical with Diana?
> this is a dummy Dodi םא המ
> םע יסיפ השענ ישוק> בייח
>? Diana
> Did Dad devise an elaborate >ruse to throw them together?
>> ללכושמ an איצממ אבא השוע
>? דחיב םתוא קרוז ל הלובחת
> Or rather, was he advised to do so by >those who wanted Diana dead NOT DEAD.
> אוה this is a dummy, דואמ וא
>> ידי לע ךכ לכ השוע ל ץעיימ
>. תמ אל תמ Diana הצור ימ ולא
> There is a whole hell of a lot of difference in wanting some one to have less public influence in the public media than in wanting someone to be dead.
> םלש this is a dummy םש
> ב לדבה לש הברה לש םונהיג
> תוחפ בייח ל ןושאר המכ רסח
> media ירוביצ ה ב עיפשמ ירוביצ
> ל והשימ רסח ב רשאמ
>. תמ this is a dummy
> >- so that he would implement the scheme >without knowing what it was really for?
>> ה עצבמ would אוה so that -
> הז המ עדוי ילב> תינכות
>? ל תמאב this is a dummy
> Quite simple.
>. טושפ דואמ
> A compromising photograph.
>. םלצמ הרשפ
> >Something of the sort must have >happened, I think - and it's not so incredible if you consider that >MAF's masters may have been pretending to attempt to pull off a Fayed- >Spencer match (with big bucks in it for MAF) for some time - so that >the Machiavellian complexity of engineering the car-switch, the >disposition of the escort, the arrangements for the route and the >programming of Henri Paul, might not have aroused MAF's suspicions.
>>> בייח בייח ןיממ ה לש והשמ
> הז ו - בשוח ינא, הרוק
> ךכ לכ אל this is a dummy
> MAF's> ש לקוש התא םא ןמאיי אל
> בייח לוכי ןמוא
> ל דימעהל םינפ this is a dummy
>> Fayed- מ ךשומ ל לדתשמ
> ב יבצ לודג םע( רורפג Spencer
> - ןמז המכ ל) MAF ל הז
> Machiavellian ה> so that
>, car-switch ה הסדנה לש ךוביס
> ל רודיס ה, הוולמ ה לש היטנ> ה
> Henri לש תונכת> ה ו ךרד ה
> ררועמ בייח אל המצוע, Paul
>. דשח MAF's
> A photograph would be the most logical thing in the whole world.
> this is a dummy would םלצמ
> םלש ה ב רבד ינויגה בור ה
>. םלוע
>No body would be suspicious of anything.
> this is a dummy would ףוג לכ
>. והשמ לש דושח
>> >Other factors, such as sabotaging the S-280's brakes and air-bags, >briefing the escort to monitor the crash but not get involved, etc, >could have been achieved by MAF's backers, over MAF's head, The theft and modification of the vehicle could have been well disguised.
>> > ה הלבח יפכ הזכ, םרוג רחא
>, > air-bags ו םלב S-280's
> ה רוטינומ ל הוולמ ה ךורדת
>, ללוכ השענ אל לבא קסרתמ
> בייח לוכי, > וכו
> ידי לע גישמ this is a dummy
> MAF's ךרד לעמ, ךמות MAF's
> בכר ה לש יוניש ו הבינג ה, שאר
> this is a dummy בייח לוכי
>. תושפחתה בוט יכ
> >such that >Siegel and Musa (Etoile Limousines) and Wingfield and Dournot were not >only working for MAF, but for his masters, DIRECTLY.
>> Etoile( Musa ו Siegel> ש הזכ
> ו Wingfield ו) ןיזומיל
>> אל this is a dummy Dournot
> ולש ל לבא, MAF ל ךרד הלועפ קר
>. תורישי, ןמוא
> However, if that were part of the plot, then PLANS TO GET THAT VEHICLE TO THAT PLACE IN TIME WOULD HAVE TO HAVE BEEN ROCK SOLID FOR MONTHS IN ADVANCE.
> ש םא, ןכ יפ לע ףא
> ה לש קלח this is a dummy
> בכר ש השענ ל ןנוכתמ זא, הלילע
> ל בייח WOULD ןמז ב םוקמ ש ל
> עלס this is a dummy בייח
>. םידקמ ב שדוח ל ידילוס
> There is the clear windows in one train of thought and defective equipment as possibly another.
> רורב ה this is a dummy םש
> ו בשוח לש ףלאמ ןושאר ב ןולח
>. רחא ילוא יפכ דויצ םוגפ
>> >Indeed, assuming that MAF did not know that the fatal crash was >intended, those of MAF's employees who MUST have known that a fatal >crash was intended, MUST have been working directly for those who >intentionally engineered it.
>> > עדוי אל השוע MAF ש חינמ, םנמא
> קסרתמ ילרוג ה ש
> ולא, ןוכתמ> this is a dummy
> בייח בייח ימ דבוע MAF's לש
> קסרתמ> ילרוג ש עדוי
> בייח, ןוכתמ this is a dummy
> this is a dummy בייח
>> ימ ולא ל תורישי ךרד הלועפ
>. הז סדנהמ הנווכב
>> If a crash after the photo were planned the least people in the area who needed to know was just the driver of the white car.
>> םוליצ ה ירחא קסרתמ םא
> תוחפ ה ןנוכתמ this is a dummy
> עדוי ל ךירצ ימ רוזא ה ב םישנא
> לש גהנ ה טושפ this is a dummy
>. תינוכמ ןבל ה
> Second could have been the photographer on the back of the motorcycle who had to aim a shot into the driver's eyes.
> this is a dummy בייח לוכי ינש
> ימ עונפוא ה לש בג ה לע םלצ ה
> גהנ ה ךותל הרוי הרטמ ל בייח
>. ןיע
> >>>At least, he describes the "white car" >>>passing him, and disappearing westwards, before he begins to describe >>>the motor-bike overtaking the Mercedes and cutting-in in front of it.
>>>> ןבל" ה ראתמ אוה, תוחפ ב
> םלענ ו, ותוא רבוע" >>> תינוכמ
> ל הלחתה אוה ינפל, הברעמ
> ה גישהל motor-bike ה>>> ראתמ
> cutting-in ו Mercedes
>. הז in front of
> >> >>So this gets the locations screwed up and out of sync.
>>> >> גרוב םוקימ ה השענ הז ךכ לכ
>. sync out of ו הלעמל
>>> >>> >>> The impression given (that the "white car" was a long way ahead of the >>>Mercedes and the motorbike) is probably an illusion created by the >>>difficulty involved in describing the situation; >> >>Also, a witness in a high speed drive has their own road to watch as >>well as looking in the rear view mirror.
>>> >>> >>>" תינוכמ ןבל" ה ש( ןתונ םשור ה
> ךרד ךורא this is a dummy
> ה ו Mercedes>>> ה לש המידק
> הארנכ this is a dummy) עונפוא
>>>> ה ידי לע רצוי הילשא an
>; >> >> בצמ ה ראתמ ב ללוכ ישוק
> ןנוכ תוריהמ הובג ב דע , ו
> לכתסמ ל ךרד ךייש םהלש בייח
> ה ב לכתסמ יפכ בוט יכ>> יפכ
>. יאר ףונ ירוחא
> So one might have a strobe >>light effect of only seeing a flash of an instant when they happened >>to have the opportunity to look in the mirror.
> בייח המצוע ןושאר ךכ לכ
> קר לש העפשה לק>> פוקסובורטס
> םה יתמ עגר an לש הקרבה האור
> ל תונמדזה ה בייח ל>> הרוק
>. יאר ה ב לכתסמ
>>> >>>but there is no >>>escaping the conclusion that the Mercedes did not completely squeeze >>>past the white car, but came alongside it, on its left, in a sliding >>>collision, >> >>My suggestion would be to consider that the Merc was the >>vehicle in the middle of the road, that the white vehicle would >>have been on its right and the motorcycle on its left, three >>abreast.
>>> >>>>>> לכ this is a dummy םש לבא
> Mercedes ה ש הנקסמ ה חרוב
> ה רבע>>> טחוס ירמגל אל השוע
> לע, הז דצל אב לבא, תינוכמ ןבל
>>>> קילחמ ב, ריאשמ ולש
> would העצה ילש, >> >> תושגנתה
> ה ש לקוש ל this is a dummy
> בכר>> ה this is a dummy Merc
> ןבל ה ש, ךרד ה לש יעצמא ה ב
> בייח>> would בכר
> ו ןוכנ ולש לע this is a dummy
>, ריאשמ ולש לע עונפוא ה
>. הז דצב הז>> השולש
>>> >>And that point photoflashes were fired and then the white >>car accelerated >> >>>which impelled the white car forwards, towards Levistre and >>>out of harm's way; >> >>And the motorcycle accelerated >> >>>whereupon the motorbike >> >>accelerated and swerved in front of >>the Mercedes.
>>> >> photoflashes הדוקנ ש ו
> ה זא ו שא this is a dummy
> הזיא>> >>> ץיאמ תינוכמ>> ןבל
>, המידק תינוכמ ןבל ה ףחוד
> out of>>> ו Levistre ןוויכב
> עונפוא ה ו; >> >> ךרד קזנ
> ה המ לע>> >>> ץיאמ
> תוטסל ו ץיאמ>> >> עונפוא
>. Mercedes ה>> in front of
>>> >>No.
>>> >>. לכ
> That is even wrong.
> וליפא this is a dummy ש
>. ןוכנ אל
> In my SH.
>. SH ילש ב
>>> >>Let's try it another way.
>>> >>. ךרד רחא הז הסנמ ונתוא ןתונ
> More to the >>"DELIBERATE BUMP OFF" conspiracy >>supposition.
>" מ הטילג ןווכמ>>" ה ל רתוי
>. החנה>> הינונק
>>> >>In that, the motorcycle would have fired >>a series of quick flashes as it accelerated >>in front of the Mercedes.
>>> >>>> שא בייח would עונפוא ה, ש ב
> הז יפכ הקרבה ריהמ לש הרדיס
> ה in front of>> ץיאמ
>. Mercedes
> The first flash >>would have been into the back seat but >>a second would have been directly into >>the eyes of Henri Paul.
> בייח would>> הקרבה ןושאר ה
> בג ה ךותל this is a dummy
> בייח would ינש >> לבא בשומ
>>> ךותל תורישי this is a dummy
>. Paul Henri לש ןיע ה
> Having blinded >>him, it would then accelerate and as soon >>as it was clear the vehicle on the right would >>bump the Mercedes' front into the center >>pilars.
> would הז, ותוא>> רוויע בייח
> הז יפכ>> בורקב יפכ ו ץיאמ זא
> לע בכר ה רורב this is a dummy
> ה הטילג>> would ןוכנ ה
>>> זכרמ ה ךותל תיזח Mercedes'
>. pilars
>>> >>>overtook the slowed Mercedes >>>and (also according to Levistre) cut-in in front of it and produced "a >>>searing burst of light, much brighter than a photo-flash".
>>> >>> ו( ו>>> Mercedes יטיא ה גישהל
> cut-in) Levistre according to
>>>> " רצימ ו הז in front of
> הברה, לק לש ץצופתמ הייווכ
>". photo-flash רשאמ ראומ
>>>> >>>At this point, Levistre, braked and came to a halt near the western end >>>of the tunnel.
>>>> >>> ו םלב, Levistre, הדוקנ הז ב
> יברעמ ה דיל רצוע ל אב
>. הרהנמ ה לש>>> ףוס
> >> >>More correctly, NOT "At this point" but at "A POINT" near the >>western end of the tunnel.
>>> >>" הדוקנ הז ב" אל, ןוכנ רתוי
> יברעמ>> ה דיל" הדוקנ " ב לבא
>. הרהנמ ה לש ףוס
>>> >>>The Mercedes had crashed, and the bikers (like Brenda >>>Wells, Levistre affirms that there were two of them) had stopped by the >>>wreck.
>>> >>> ה ו, קסרתמ בייח Mercedes ה
>, בטיה>>> Brenda בהוא( bikers
> םש ש ריהצמ Levistre
>) םתוא לש ינש this is a dummy
>. סרוה>>> ה ידי לע רצוע בייח
> >> >>That does not sound possible to me.
>>> >>. יתוא ל ירשפא עמשנ אל השוע. יתוא
>
> It may depend upon speed.
>. תוריהמ לע יולת לוכי הז
>>>Assuming that the whole action was taking place at some >>above average speed then if at least the bike on the left had >>accelerated ahead of the Merc it could not have stopped.
>>> הלועפ םלש ה ש חינמ
> ב םוקמ חקול this is a dummy
> םא זא תוריהמ עצוממ לעמ>> המכ
> ריאשמ ה לע םיינפוא ה תוחפ ב
> Merc ה לש המידק ץיאמ>> בייח
>. רצוע בייח אל לוכי הז
> If it >>did not stop then it may have passed Livestre and exited the >>tunnel.
> הז זא רצוע אל השוע>> הז םא
> ו Livestre רבוע בייח לוכי
>. הרהנמ>> ה אצוי
> Whether a second bike stopped might be considerable.
> המצוע רצוע םיינפוא ינש םא
>. בושח this is a dummy
>>> >>>One of them got off, momentarily, to look into the Mercedes, >>>jumped back on again, and the bike sped off, passing Levistre as it did >>>so.
>>> >>> ל, עגרל, מ השענ םתוא לש ןושאר
>, >>> Mercedes ה ךותל לכתסמ
> םיינפוא ה ו, בוש לע בג ץפוק
> יפכ Levistre רבוע, מ תוריהמ
>. ךכ לכ>>> השוע הז
> Levistre describes the bike as "black" and the two men as "dressed >>>in black with black helmets".
>" יפכ םיינפוא ה ראתמ Levistre
>" יפכ שיא ינש ה ו" רוחש
> רוחש םע רוחש ב>>> הלמש
>". הדסק
> The whole thing took just a few seconds.
> טעמ טושפ חקול רבד םלש ה
>. seconds
>>>> >>>Considerable efforts have been made to discredit Levistre.
>>>> >>> בייח ץמאמ בושח
> ל השוע this is a dummy
>. Levistre רערעל ןומא
> It has been >>>said, for example, that his attitude to the press was "hostile" and that >>>he was trying to "gain attention"; but there could be another reason for >>>these attacks on his character - he witnessed a murder!
>>>> this is a dummy בייח הז
> ה ל השיג ולש ש, המגוד ל, רמוא
>" יביוא" this is a dummy ץחול
> this is a dummy אוה>>> ש ו
> לבא"; בל תמושת חיוורמ" ל הסנמ
> רחא this is a dummy לוכי םש
> ולש לע ףקות הלא>>> ל הביס
>! חצר דע אוה - יפוא
> There is no >>>other interpretation you can put on his testimony.
> רחא>>> לכ this is a dummy םש
> ולש לע םש לוכי התא שוריפ
>. תודע
>>>> >>>Yes, indeed (to answer your question) the lanes were used as a slow-lane >>>and an overtaking lane - ludicrous speed-limit signs notwithstanding!
>>>> >>> ה) הלאש ךלש הבושת ל( םנמא, ןכ
> שמתשמ this is a dummy הטמס
> גישהל an ו>>> slow-lane יפכ
> םתוח speed-limit ךחוגמ - הטמס
>! תאז לכב
>>>> >>>Other answers in another post >> >><a href="http://members.home.com/godsbrain">G.O.D.S.B.R.A.I.N.</a><br> > >-- >Steve Reed Alvin H.
>>>> >>> >> >>< הדמע רחא ב הבושת רחא
>/ com. תיב. רבח:// http=" href
>. R. B. S. D. O. G"> godsbrain
>> --> > > br>< .</ N. ינא.
>. H Alvin ןומגא Steve
> White <a href="http://members.home.com/godsbrain">G.O.D.S.B.R.A.I.N.</a><br>
>. רבח:// http=" href < ןבל
>. O. G"> godsbrain/ com. תיב
>>< .</ N. ינא. . R. B. S. D
>> br
Trevjon
roy andrew crabtree <RCRA...@nc.rr.com> wrote in message
news:391117D0...@nc.rr.com...
Judging by the METHOD employed in writing your POSTS, would it be too wild a
GUESS, to assume that you, MR ROY CRABTREE, at some time in you CAREER, have
been employed by THE READERS DIGEST?
kather...@my-deja.com
GODS...@HOME.COM,GODS...@AOL.COM wrote:
> </html>
[snip]
> >> In reading this over I can not understand quickly the actions to
cover up circumstances by police, courts, etc. unless Diana bite off
and swallowed the tip of Dodi's penis from the force of the crash.
You cannot be serious, Alvin. This is absolutely preposterous. It is
ludicruos! It is an insult to Diana's dignity. This is not the first
time I've seen this hyposthesis of yours, either. However, the last
time you presented it, it was much more vulgar.
Sometimes I think we are no better than the journalists and paparazzi
who haunted Diana while alive. This type of speculation brings shame
and ridicule upon any serious investigative journalists researching
Diana's death. What is the purpose of this, Alvin? I hope you have a
better reason than perversion.
[snip]
Katherine
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
GODS...@home.com
>From GODS...@HOME.COM Wed May 03 15:40:25 2000 Path: news1.
>El GODSBRAIN@ HEJM. COM Wed maj 3 15: 40: 25 2000 Path: news1.
>frmt1.
>frmt1.
>sfba.
>sfba.
>home.
>Hejm.
>com!
>com!
>newshub1.
>newshub1.
>home.
>Hejm.
>com!
>com!
>news.
>news.
>home.
>Hejm.
>com!
>com!
>news1.
>news1.
>frmt1.
>frmt1.
>sfba.
>sfba.
>home.
>Hejm.
>com.
>com.
>POSTED!
>FOST!
>not-for-mail From: GODS...@HOME.COM Newsgroups: alt.
>not-for-mail el: GODSBRAIN@ HEJM. COM Newsgroups: alt.
>conspiracy.
>conspiracy.
>princess-diana Subject: Re: Di: Paul, Henri, History, 60 Page Autopsy, Etc. Organization: <a href="http://members.home.com/godsbrain">G.O.D.S.B.R.A.I.N.</a><br> Reply-To: GODS...@HOME.COM,GODS...@AOL.COM Message-ID: <suv0hs4b86ldf6kh1...@4ax.com> References: <20000416220330.
>princess-diana subjekt: Re: Di: Paul, Henri, histori, 60 pagx Autopsy, ktp. Organization: < a href=" http:// members. hejm. com/ godsbrain"> G. O. D. S. B. R. a. mi. N.</ a>< br> Reply-To: GODSBRAIN@ HEJM. COM, GODSBRAIN@ AOL. COM Message-ID: < suv0hs4b86ldf6kh11pg4usgb988mp55km@ 4ax. com> References: < 20000416220330.
>18658.
>18658.
>0000...@ng-cg1.aol.com> <38fa9...@huge.aa.net> <8n1mfss0cu2ou4qhe...@4ax.com> <025220ee.
>4069@ ng-cg1. aol. com> < 38fa90de_2@ huge. aa. ret> < 8n1mfss0cu2ou4qhej2ujs106jhqfrbbol@ 4ax. com> < 025220ee.
>5e23...@usw-ex0104-033.remarq.com> <VHL8$AAWpz$4I...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> <03cfeca4.
>5e23de39@ usw-ex0104-033. remarq. com> < VHL8$ AAWpz$ 4IAaS@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> < 03cfeca4.
>e454...@usw-ex0105-038.remarq.com> <5AGHurAe...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> <022cd178.
>e454e6ea@ usw-ex0105-038. remarq. com> < 5AGHurAeP0A5IAT7@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> < 022cd178.
>7c06...@usw-ex0105-037.remarq.com> <0PU0NLBY...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> <2ehrgsobh76u0sheo...@4ax.com> <EwaIiIA+...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.
>7c06d2cf@ usw-ex0105-037. remarq. com> < 0PU0NLBYabD5IAaW@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> < 2ehrgsobh76u0sheo8fsoso92h16ood0pr@ 4ax. com> < EwaIiIA+ 6EE5IAXR@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> X-Newsreader: Forte agent 1.
>7/32.
>7/ 32.
>534 MIME-Version: 1.
>534 MIME-Version: 1.
>0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 683 Date: Wed, 03 May 2000 22:40:25 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.
>0 Content-Type: tekst/ plain; charset= us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit lini: 683 daktil: Wed, 3 maj 2000 22: 40: 25 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.
>7.
>7.
>83.
>83.
>23 X-Complaints-To: ab...@home.net X-Trace: news1.
>23 X-Complaints-To: abuse@ hejm. ret X-Trace: news1.
>frmt1.
>frmt1.
>sfba.
>sfba.
>home.
>Hejm.
>com 957393625 24.
>com 957393625 24.
>7.
>7.
>83.
>83.
>23 (Wed, 03 May 2000 15:40:25 PDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 03 May 2000 15:40:25 PDT Xref: newshub1.
>23( Wed, 3 maj 2000 15: 40: 25 PDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 3 maj 2000 15: 40: 25 PDT Xref: newshub1.
>home.
>Hejm.
>com alt.
>com alt.
>conspiracy.
>conspiracy.
>princess-diana:30031204 -------- </html> OK.
>princess-diana: 30031204 --------</ html> OK.
> What do we call this?
>Ki do ni vok this?
> The daily replay of the daily revised version of the God's Brain Suppositional Hypothesis.
>Des daily replay da des daily revised version da des di cerb Suppositional Hypothesis.
> Act ______ Scene ________ Having read the below a time or two, or few, some opportunity to explain weighted influence factors in the construction of the daily hypothesis.
>Ag ______ scen ________ hav leg des below a temp aux 2, aux few, kelk opportunity al eksplik weighted influ factors en des construction da des daily hypothesis.
> Since the authorities have had two and a half years with the manpower, peoplepower, staff power, of what was it reported?
>Ekde des auxtoritat hav hav 2 kaj a half jar kun des manpower, peoplepower, stab potenc, da ki est gxi raport?
> Some 24 full time investigators and million(s) dollar equivalent budgets I am not competing with that.
>Kelk 24 plen temp investigators kaj 1000000( s) dolar ekvivalent budgxet mi est not kondur kun ke.
> The outcome reports of that investigation appear to be: Drunk driver speeds without the care of D+D+TRJ and abruptly turns left into a central column.
>Des outcome raport da ke investigation aper al est: drink driver speeds sen des zorg da D+ D+ TRJ kaj abruptly torn las into a central kolon.
> Simple Road Traffic Accident RTA.
>Simpl Road trafik akcident RTA.
> When and over the time since the creation of alt.
>Kiam kaj over des temp ekde des creation da alt.
>conspiracy.
>conspiracy.
>princess-diana by b.
>princess-diana per b.
>anana his philosophical position as I read it is to approximately take the position for sake of arguement that Diana was killed as the result of a conspiracy.
>anana his philosophical pozici as mi leg gxi est al approximately pren des pozici por sake da arguement ke Diana est killed as des rezult da a conspiracy.
> Because it has appeared to me that while times, places, people, and motives have been discussed I have a feeling that there has been less than reasonable consideration of some possibilities.
>Because gxi hav aper al me ke while temp, ej, popol, kaj motiv hav est diskut mi hav a felt ke tie hav est malplej than reasonable consideration da kelk possibilities.
> As a consequence of that belief I am trying to construct a suppositional hypothesis that will identify possible, persons, places, things that may be considered as possible.
>As a consequence da ke belief mi est pen al konstru a suppositional hypothesis ke testament identify possible, an, ej, ajx ke maj est konsider as possible.
> The intent is to create multiple fictional tracks such that the most possible/ununderstood may be considered.
>Des intent est al kre obl fictional tracks such ke des plej possible/ ununderstood maj est konsider.
> Many of the pieces are for the most part agreed as having been in the area but there is a lot of discrepancy as to the EXACT location at a SPECIFIC INSTANT.
>Many da des pec est por des plej part agreed as hav est en des are sed tie est a lot da discrepancy as al des EXACT location je a SPECIF INSTANT.
> My intent is to create this fictional supposition to give, or try to determine, the differences between points of agreement and points of disharmony.
>My intent est al kre this fictional supposition al don, aux pen al determin, des differences inter pint da agreement kaj pint da disharmony.
> Agreement/Disagreement and Harmony/Disharmony.
>Agreement/ Disagreement kaj harmoni/ Disharmony.
> Concord vs Discord.
>Concord vs Discord.
> If there might have been common interest to finance a joint project to lessen Diana's influence with the media because she was percieved to be "stepping on someones toes" , my words, then how might some such plan, plot, conspiracy, have been considered achievable from a variety of possible participant's points of view?
>Se tie might hav est komun interes al financ a artik projekt al lessen Diana's influ kun des media because sxi est percieved al est" pasx sur someones toes" , my vort, tiam kiel might kelk such plan, plot, conspiracy, hav est konsider achievable el a variety da possible participant's pint da view?
> My typing fingers are not going to stand too long a discussion at this point so I am going to try to speed along.
>My tajp fingr est not going to bud tro long a discussion je this pint tial mi est going to pen al speed along.
> My supposition is that if there was a conspiracy it had to be to do something.
>My supposition est ke se tie est a conspiracy gxi hav al est al do io.
> A photo of Diana giving Dodi a blow job in the back seat of a limo would be pretty good.
>A photo da Diana don Dodi a blov job en des dors seat da a limo would est pretty bon.
>For the photo to achieve maximum benefit it had to be secret and to be used as a threat.
>Por des photo al achieve maksimum benefit gxi hav al est sekret kaj al est uz as a threat.
>The actual publication in mass media would deflate its power.
>Des real publication en amas media would deflate its potenc.
> But it had to have strong and undisputable evidence that it was TRUE if it were ever going to be used.
>Sed gxi hav al hav fort kaj undisputable evidence ke gxi est PRAV se gxi est ever going to est uz.
> For some paparazzi to "peeping tom" photo a divorcee with her boyfriend in private was not going to do the job.
>Por kelk paparazzi al" peeping tom" photo a divorcee kun her boyfriend en privat est not going to do des job.
> So the construct of a whore for money with an oily bedhopper in the back seat of a very expensive limo would be much more philosophically correct for the purpose of a conspiracy to get a photo to use for blackmail in the future but not for actual publication.
>Tial des konstru da a whore por mon kun an oily bedhopper en des dors seat da a tre expensive limo would est mult pli philosophically gxust por des purpose da a conspiracy al get a photo al uz por blackmail en des future sed not por real publication.
> On Wed, 3 May 2000 17:07:26 +0100, Steve Reed <asr...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> wrote: >Path: news1.
>Sur Wed, 3 maj 2000 17: 7: 26+ 100, Steve Reed< asreed@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> skrib: > Path: news1.
>frmt1.
>frmt1.
>sfba.
>sfba.
>home.
>Hejm.
>com!
>com!
>newshub2.
>newshub2.
>rdc1.
>rdc1.
>sfba.
>sfba.
>home.
>Hejm.
>com!
>com!
>newshub1.
>newshub1.
>home.
>Hejm.
>com!
>com!
>news.
>news.
>home.
>Hejm.
>com!
>com!
>feeder.
>feeder.
>via.
>via.
>net!
>Ret!
>diablo.
>diablo.
>theplanet.
>theplanet.
>net!
>Ret!
>news.
>news.
>theplanet.
>theplanet.
>net!
>Ret!
>newspost.
>newspost.
>theplanet.
>theplanet.
>net!
>Ret!
>lastings.
>lastings.
>softnet.
>softnet.
>co.
>co.
>uk!
>uk!
>asreed >From: Steve Reed <asr...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> >Newsgroups: alt.
>asreed> el: Steve Reed< asreed@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> > Newsgroups: alt.
>conspiracy.
>conspiracy.
>princess-diana >Subject: Re: Di: Paul, Henri, History, 60 Page Autopsy, Etc. >Date: Wed, 3 May 2000 17:07:26 +0100 >Organization: Home >Lines: 297 >Message-ID: <EwaIiIA+...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> >References: <20000416201432.
>princess-diana> subjekt: Re: Di: Paul, Henri, histori, 60 pagx Autopsy, ktp. > daktil: Wed, 3 maj 2000 17: 7: 26+ 100> Organization: hejm> lini: 297> Message-ID: < EwaIiIA+ 6EE5IAXR@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> > References: < 20000416201432.
>18648.
>18648.
>0000...@ng-cg1.aol.com> > <20000416220330.
>4517@ ng-cg1. aol. com> > < 20000416220330.
>18658.
>18658.
>0000...@ng-cg1.aol.com> <38fa9...@huge.aa.net> > <8n1mfss0cu2ou4qhe...@4ax.com> > <025220ee.
>4069@ ng-cg1. aol. com> < 38fa90de_2@ huge. aa. ret> > < 8n1mfss0cu2ou4qhej2ujs106jhqfrbbol@ 4ax. com> > < 025220ee.
>5e23...@usw-ex0104-033.remarq.com> > <VHL8$AAWpz$4I...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> > <03cfeca4.
>5e23de39@ usw-ex0104-033. remarq. com> > < VHL8$ AAWpz$ 4IAaS@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> > < 03cfeca4.
>e454...@usw-ex0105-038.remarq.com> > <5AGHurAe...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> > <022cd178.
>e454e6ea@ usw-ex0105-038. remarq. com> > < 5AGHurAeP0A5IAT7@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> > < 022cd178.
>7c06...@usw-ex0105-037.remarq.com> > <0PU0NLBY...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> > <2ehrgsobh76u0sheo...@4ax.com> >Reply-To: Andrew Steven Reed <ar...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> >NNTP-Posting-Host: modem88.
>7c06d2cf@ usw-ex0105-037. remarq. com> > < 0PU0NLBYabD5IAaW@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> > < 2ehrgsobh76u0sheo8fsoso92h16ood0pr@ 4ax. com> > Reply-To: Andrew Steven Reed< areed@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> > NNTP-Posting-Host: modem88.
>fred.
>fred.
>pol.
>pol.
>co.
>co.
>uk >Mime-Version: 1.
>uk> Mime-Version: 1.
>0 >X-Trace: newsreaderg1.
>0> X-Trace: newsreaderg1.
>core.
>core.
>theplanet.
>theplanet.
>net 957376918 19338 195.
>Ret 957376918 19338 195.
>92.
>92.
>7.
>7.
>216 (3 May 2000 18:01:58 GMT) >NNTP-Posting-Date: 3 May 2000 18:01:58 GMT >X-Complaints-To: ab...@theplanet.net >X-Newsreader: Turnpike Integrated Version 4.
>216( 3 maj 2000 18: 1: 58 GMT) > NNTP-Posting-Date: 3 maj 2000 18: 1: 58 GMT> X-Complaints-To: abuse@ theplanet. ret> X-Newsreader: Turnpike Integrated Version 4.
>02 M <TWkHBtca5wWBvmfWwoLIWQkgFM> >Xref: newshub1.
>2 M< TWkHBtca5wWBvmfWwoLIWQkgFM> > Xref: newshub1.
>home.
>Hejm.
>com alt.
>com alt.
>conspiracy.
>conspiracy.
>princess-diana:30031199 > >In article <2ehrgsobh76u0sheo...@4ax.com>, >GODS...@HOME.COM writes >>>there was "a white car", >>>in the middle of the road, behind him.
>princess-diana: 30031199> > en artikol< 2ehrgsobh76u0sheo8fsoso92h16ood0pr@ 4ax. com>, > GODSBRAIN@ HEJM. COM skrib>>> tie est" a blank auxt", >>> en des mez da des road, behind him.
> >> >>So Livestre lied.
>>> >>Tial Livestre mensog.
> The white car was not in the middle >>of the road, the Mercedes was in the middle of the >>road.
>Des blank auxt est not en des mez>> da des road, des Mercedes est en des mez da des>> road.
> Why did Livestre lie?
>Kial did Livestre mensog?
> Maybe Livestre did not lie in that particular.
>Maybe Livestre did not mensog en ke particular.
> One needs to be very careful as to "at what instant" and did he say the middle of the road or the middle of the lane?
>1 bezon al est tre careful as al" je ki instant" kaj did li dir des mez da des road aux des mez da des lane?
> It was said that he had moved into the right lane.
>Gxi est dir ke li hav mov into des dekstr lane.
> If he said the white car was in the middle of the [right] lane I would agree.
>Se li dir des blank auxt est en des mez da des[ dekstr] lane mi would agree.
>> >Levistre is not contradicting himself.
>> >Levistre est not contradicting himself.
> He saw the white car "au milieu >de la chaussee" So, does "chaussee" come closer to translating as "lane" or on the other hand, "road?
>Li seg des blank auxt" au milieu> de la chaussee" tial, does" chaussee" ven closer al traduk as" lane" aux sur des ali man, " road?
>" Road having two lanes.
>"Road hav 2 lanes.
> >and was overtaken by it ("elle me double") But exactly where were the other actors at the exact instant that "elle me double?
>>Kaj est overtaken per gxi(" elle me double") sed exactly kie est des ali aktor je des exact instant ke" elle me double?
>" >"Then", he >says ("puis j'observe [retroviseur] une autre auto toujours au milieu de >la route") "I saw [rear-view mirror] another car, also in the middle of >the road" So here we have a "milieu de la route.
>" >"Tiam", li> dir(" puis j'observe[ retroviseur] une autre auto toujours au milieu de> la route") " mi seg[ rear-view spegul] another auxt, kaj en des mez da> des road" tial here ni hav a" milieu de la route.
>" Does that mean closer the lane or the road?
>"Does ke mean closer des lane aux des road?
> >("et soudain une grosse moto sur sa gauche qui lui fait une >queue de poisson") "and, all of a sudden, a large motor-bike, to the >left of it, cutting-in in front of it".
>>("et soudain une grosse moto sur sa gauche qui lui fait une> queue de poisson") " kaj, all da a subit, a large motor-bike, al des> las da gxi, cutting-in in front of gxi".
> I will take it that AT SOME POINT a large motor-bike, comming from the left of it, and then cutting-in in front of it.
>Mi testament pren gxi ke JE KELK PINT a large motor-bike, comming el des las da gxi, kaj tiam cutting-in in front of gxi.
> > >(another ambiguity is created by the expression "sur sa gauche", which >could be translated "to ITS left" [to the right of it, from where >Levistre says he was] or "to the left of it" [as seen from Levistre's >alleged position] and, since Levistre claims that the Mercedes "was in >the middle of the road" at that point, it could be either) Since I am trying to construct a hypothetical scene where the Merc was astraddle the white line that separated the two west bound lanes and a photographing motorcycle was to the left side of the Merc at the exact instant that the white car was on the right side.
>> >(another ambiguity est kre per des mien" sur sa gauche", which> could est traduk" al ITS las" [ al des dekstr da gxi, el kie> Levistre dir li est] aux" al des las da gxi" [ as seg el Levistre's> alleged pozici] kaj, ekde Levistre pretend ke des Mercedes" est en> des mez da des road" je ke pint, gxi could est either) ekde mi est pen al konstru a hypothetical scen kie des Merc est astraddle des blank lini ke separated des 2 okcident bind lanes kaj a fot motorcycle est al des las flank da des Merc je des exact instant ke des blank auxt est sur des dekstr flank.
> .
>
> .
>
> .
>
>> >"At the same instant, for a fraction of a second, there was a tremendous >flash of light, but nothing like the flash of a camera" ("Au meme >moment, en une fraction de seconde, un enorme eclair jaillit, mais rien >a voir avec le flash d'un appareil-photo") > >My point is that the order of events is not completely clear.
>> >"Je des sam instant, por a frakci da a 2, tie est a tremendous> flash da light, sed nothing like des flash da a camera" (" Au meme> moment, en une frakci de seconde, un enorme eclair jaillit, mais rien> a voir avec le flash d'un appareil-photo") > > My pint est ke des mend da events est not completely klar.
> It could >be that the bike cut-in in front of the Mercedes just before the white >car passed Levistre - either that, or the bike was further behind the >Mercedes, as both vehicles entered the tunnel, than Clifford, Olivier >and Thierry imply.
>Gxi could> est ke des bike cut-in in front of des Mercedes just antaux des blank> auxt pas Levistre - either ke, aux des bike est plu behind des> Mercedes, as ambaux vehicles entered des tunnel, than Clifford, Olivier> kaj Thierry implic.
> I suppose the bike could have braked, just before the Is there any chance that one of the skid marks, like the single one, was the bike?
>Mi se des bike could hav brems, just antaux des est tie any sxanc ke 1 da des skid mark, like des single 1, est des bike?
> >tunnel (to avoid running into a Mercedes/white-car pile-up) and that >Levistre might not have been as far along the tunnel as he thought he >was.
>>tunnel( al evit kur into a Mercedes/ white-car pile-up) kaj ke> Levistre might not hav est as far along des tunnel as li opini li> est.
> There is another branch of my lack of understanding and that follows along a train of thought that the picture was intended but the crash was an accident.
>Tie est another brancx da my lack da kompren kaj ke sekv along a dres da opini ke des bild est intenc sed des crash est an akcident.
> In the "accident" hypothesis approximately the motorcycle photographer could have accidently fired a half metre too far forward and instead of shooting in to the back seat he could have accidently hit HP directly in the eyes as Henri Paul looked to the left as the motorcycle came along side his side window.
>En des" akcident" hypothesis approximately des motorcycle photographer could hav accidently fajr a half metre tro far forward kaj instead of paf en al des dors seat li could hav accidently hit HP directly en des okul as Henri Paul jen al des las as des motorcycle ven along flank his flank fenestr.
>Then the blinding flash could have caused HP to FLINCH and swerve to the right just a little.
>Tiam des blind flash could hav ig HP al FLINCH kaj swerve al des dekstr just a malplej.
> At that point hitting the rear of the accelerating white car.
>Je ke pint hitting des rear da des akcel blank auxt.
> As the white car's rear goes to the right its front goes to the left.
>As des blank auxt rear goes to des dekstr its front goes to des las.
> To correct, the driver throws to the right and the rear goes to the left.
>Al gxust, des driver jxet al des dekstr kaj des rear goes to des las.
> Essentially tossing the front of the Merc into the central columns.
>Essentially tossing des front da des Merc into des central kolon.
> >Thus, the Mercedes hit the white car, side-to-side, and impelled it >forwards, towards Levistre, and was FOLLOWING it, as it passed >Levistre's position, and as the bike overtook the Mercedes.
>>Tiel, des Mercedes hit des blank auxt, side-to-side, kaj impelled gxi> forwards, towards Levistre, kaj est SEKV gxi, as gxi pas> Levistre's pozici, kaj as des bike overtook des Mercedes.
> I think that the first, photographing, bike should have been ahead of the white car.
>Mi opini ke des 1, fot, bike should hav est ahead da des blank auxt.
> If the bike and the car essentially accelerated at the same instant the bike would outrun the car.
>Se des bike kaj des auxt essentially akcel je des sam instant des bike would outrun des auxt.
> I think.
>Mi opini.
> Bikes are far faster at acceleration that cars.
>Bikes est far fast je acceleration ke auxt.
> Any disagreements?
>Any disagreements?
>Of course, with two riders and a turbo car ...?
>Da kurs, kun 2 riders kaj a turbo auxt...?
> For one thing, you are supposing then that the white car was ahead of the Merc at the instant that the Merc hit the central column/pilar/post.
>Por 1 ajx, vi est se tiam ke des blank auxt est ahead da des Merc je des instant ke des Merc hit des central kolon/ pilar/ fost.
> That is in accord with my first guess.
>Ke est en accord kun my 1 diven.
>> >Does that clear things up?
>> >Does ke klar ajx up?
> No.
>Ne.
> It smokes them up.
>Gxi fum them up.
> But gives a number of possible occurances to consider.
>Sed don a nombr da possible occurances al konsider.
>>> >>>Behind that, he says, there was >>>"another car" (presumably the Mercedes S- 280) and behind that, a large >>>motor-bike.
>>> >>>Behind ke, li dir, tie est>>>" another auxt" ( presumably des Mercedes S- 280) kaj behind ke, a large>>> motor-bike.
> So my first thought on that is that that is a second bike.
>Tial my 1 opini sur ke est ke ke est a 2 bike.
> And if we are talking about the left that might be better described as a second bike on the left as there might have been one or more bikes on the right in addition.
>Kaj se ni est talking pri des las ke might est bon described as a 2 bike sur des las as tie might hav est 1 aux pli bikes sur des dekstr en adici.
>>> >>Livestre lies again.
>>> >>Livestre mensog re.
>> >What do you mean?
>> >Ki do vi mean?
> What evidence is there that Levistre is "lying"?
>Ki evidence est tie ke Levistre est" mensog"?
> My supposition.
>My supposition.
>> >> He clearly saw and may have been a part >>of a conspiracy to cover up.
>> >>Li clearly seg kaj maj hav est a part>> da a conspiracy al kovr up.
> So in my supposition he saw it >>and he lied about it.
>Tial en my supposition li seg gxi>> kaj li mensog pri gxi.
> Now if we go off on a train of thought to >>explore a hypothesis that Livestre was deliberately lying then >>I'll have to think about that some more.
>Nun se ni ir off sur a dres da opini al>> esplor a hypothesis ke Livestre est deliberately mensog tiam>> mi I'll hav al opini pri ke kelk pli.
> I have not until the >>present considered the possibility that he was deliberately >>lying.
>Mi hav not gxis des>> aktual konsider des possibility ke li est deliberately>> mensog.
>>> >I have - he could be in the pay of Al-Fayed (or his high-level masters) >That's always a possibility; but why should we single him out?
>>> >Mi hav - li could est en des pag da Al-Fayed( aux his high-level mastr) > ke est cxiam a possibility; sed kial should ni single him out?
> I'm not singling him out.
>Mi est not singling him out.
> I am theorizing that there may have been a whole swarm of conspiring pap's surrounding Diana's car.
>Mi est theorizing ke tie maj hav est a whole swarm da konspir pap's surrounding Diana's auxt.
> >What >about any (or ALL) of the other witnesses?
>>Ki> pri any( aux ALL) da des ali witnesses?
> I am inclined to go with the >majority (who saw closely pursuing vehicles) and focus suspicion on >Mohammed and Souad who - alone - say they did not.
>Mi est inklin al ir kun des> majority( who seg closely pursuing vehicles) kaj focus suspicion sur> Mohammed kaj Souad who - sol - dir ili did not.
>> >>If he were deliberately lying and saw the three vehicles >>abreast, > > He says he saw them one behind the other - until the bike overtook the >Mercedes.
>> >>Se li est deliberately mensog kaj seg des 3 vehicles>> abreast, > > li dir li seg them 1 behind des ali - gxis des bike overtook des> Mercedes.
> Then the bike and the Mercedes were "abreast", but the white >car - so he implies - had already overtaken him by then!
>Tiam des bike kaj des Mercedes est" abreast", sed des blank> auxt - tial li implic - hav jam overtaken him per tiam!
> But why should >you suspect this to be a lie?
>Sed kial should> vi suspekt this al est a mensog?
> I think you, we, need to be very careful about exactly what instant is being described as being related to any single comment.
>Mi opini vi, ni, bezon al est tre careful pri exactly ki instant est est described as est rakont al any single comment.
>> >> the photo flashes, the motorcycle accelerate, >>the car on the right bump the Merc into the central >>pilars, > >You want to hypothesize that the bike-overtake/flash occurred BEFORE the >sliding collision?
>> >>Des photo flashes, des motorcycle akcel, >> des auxt sur des dekstr gxib des Merc into des central>> pilars, > > vi want al hypothesize ke des bike-overtake/ flash occurred ANTAUX des> sliding collision?
> What on earth for?
>Ki sur ter por?
> Well, if the supposition is as two photographing vehicles taking a photograph from both sides at the same instant .
>Nu, se des supposition est as 2 fot vehicles pren a fot el ambaux flank je des sam instant.
> .
>
> .
>
> .
>
> There may also have been two contacts between the two vehicles?
>Tie maj kaj hav est 2 kontakt inter des 2 vehicles?
>The mirror thing may not have been considered significant.
>Des spegul ajx maj not hav est konsider significant.
> The mirror would not have broken out the tail light.
>Des spegul would not hav romp out des vost light.
> So if the tail light was broken would not one suspect a corresponding dent on the Merc's right front fender?
>Tial se des vost light est romp would not 1 suspekt a korespond dent sur des Merc's dekstr front fender?
>> In reading this over I can not understand quickly the actions to cover up circumstances by police, courts, etc. unless Diana bite off and swallowed the tip of Dodi's penis from the force of the crash.
>>En leg this over mi can not kompren quickly des actions al kovr up cirkonstanc per polic, kort, ktp. unless Diana bit off kaj glut des tip da Dodi's penis el des force da des crash.
> If some such had happened then that could explain a lot of things, But it would also demonstrate that there was no fear in the back seat at the time of crash which would be important to suggest that there was no demonstrated disagreement with Henri Paul's driving performance prior to the crash.
>Se kelk such hav okaz tiam ke could eksplik a lot da ajx, sed gxi would kaj demonstrate ke tie est ne tim en des dors seat je des temp da crash which would est grav al sugest ke tie est ne demonstrated disagreement kun Henri Paul's driv performance prior al des crash.
> >> that the first photoflashing motorcycle sped off >>past him and out of the tunnel as well as the vehicle that >>had bumped the Merc.
>>>Ke des 1 photoflashing motorcycle sped off>> preter him kaj out of des tunnel as well as des vehicle ke>> hav gxib des Merc.
> and then reported that in essence >>a followup motorcycle stopped to view into the Merc >>and it then resumed to exit the tunnel, etc. >> >You mean Levistre is concealing the existence of a second motorcycle?
>Kaj tiam raport ke en esenc>> a followup motorcycle stop al view into des Merc>> kaj gxi tiam resumed al exit des tunnel, ktp. >> > vi mean Levistre est concealing des existence da a 2 motorcycle?
>>True, Thierry H.
>>Prav, Thierry H.
> says he saw "several" motorcycles pursuing the >Mercedes, closely, towards the tunnel (he had a view along the cour >Albert Premier from the carriageway itself) but Clifford G.
>Dir li seg" several" motorcycles pursuing des> Mercedes, closely, towards des tunnel( li hav a view along des cour> Albert Premier el des carriageway itself) sed Clifford G.
> and Olivier >P (who were positioned to the right [north] of the road and could see no >more than the tunnel-entrance) report only " a car in front of the >Mercedes and a [one!
>Kaj Olivier> P( who est pozici al des dekstr[ nord] da des road kaj could seg ne> pli than des tunnel-entrance) raport nur" a auxt in front of des> Mercedes kaj a[ 1!
>] powerful motor-cycle, 30 - 40 metres behind.
>]powerful motor-cycle, 30 - 40 metres behind.
> I think it was Brian Anderson's story that a motorcycle moved to pass the Merc on its left as it entered the tunnel, which would be exact in accord with my one theory.
>Mi opini gxi est Brian Anderson's fabel ke a motorcycle mov al pas des Merc sur its las as gxi entered des tunnel, which would est exact en accord kun my 1 ism.
>> >Why should we not assume that the other bikes left the cour Albert >Premier, at the exit slip-road, leaving the pair on the bike, which >Clifford, Olivier and Levistre saw, to proceed into the tunnel for the >kill!?
>> >Kial should ni not assume ke des ali bikes las des cour Albert> Premier, je des exit slip-road, las des par sur des bike, which> Clifford, Olivier kaj Levistre seg, al proced into des tunnel por des> kill!?
> I don't think that the word "kill" is at all proper in a larger view.
>Mi don't don't opini ke des vort" kill" est je all proper en a larger view.
>"Photo" would I suggest be a more prevalent term for that point.
>"Photo" would mi sugest est a pli prevalent kondicx por ke pint.
>> >>I would like to see the animation sequences down to the 1 meter >>resolution.
>> >>Mi would like al seg des animation sequences down al des 1 metr>> resolution.
> I think the main constant that we can use is the >>physical distance on the road as being traversed by the Merc.
>Mi opini des main konstant ke ni can uz est des>> physical distanc sur des road as est traversed per des Merc.
> >>So the animation reference frames could be identified by reference >>to the tunnel face as metres + "plus" or - "minus" the tunnel face.
>>>Tial des animation reference kadr could est identified per reference>> al des tunnel vizagx as metres+ " plus" aux -" minus" des tunnel vizagx.
>>>> >We would all (those of us who really wish to have it explained in >detail, that is) like to see sophisticated event-reconstruction >techniques brought to bear, together with an account of exactly what >data was employed and how it was used.
>>>> >Ni would all( those da us who really wish al hav gxi eksplik en> detal, ke est) like al seg sophisticated event-reconstruction> techniques brought al bor, together kun an kont da exactly ki> data est employed kaj kiel gxi est uz.
> Fat chance of that, however - >unless you happen to have an event-reconstruction team on hand and you >can afford to cock a snoot at the politico-media complex.
>Fat sxanc da ke, tamen -> unless vi okaz al hav an event-reconstruction team sur man kaj vi> can afford al cock a snoot je des politico-media kompleks.
> There is the traffic accident reconstruction site off my web page.
>Tie est des trafik akcident reconstruction situ off my web pagx.
> I saw reference to the most professional software photosho or paint shop of something like that.
>Mi seg reference al des plej professional software photosho aux pentr butik da io like ke.
> I got a copy off the web.
>Mi got a ekzempler off des web.
> One of these years I will move to do my accident and if at the same time I did a second of the Diana crash not much for starters.
>1 da these jar mi testament mov al do my akcident kaj se je des sam temp mi did a 2 da des Diana crash not mult por starters.
> > >>>Note that there is no vehicle present, in Levistre's story, which could >>>be the car of the witnesses Souad M.
>> >>>Not ke tie est ne vehicle aktual, en Levistre's fabel, which could>>> est des auxt da des witnesses Souad M.
> and Mohammed M.
>Kaj Mohammed M.
> If we believe >>>Levistre, they weren't there!
>Se ni kred>>> Levistre, ili est weren't tie!
> On the other hand, if we believe THEM, >>>the Mercedes crashed without any help from anyone - a very convenient >>>version of events, for the authorities, and completely contrary to the >>>testimony of ALL the other witnesses.
>Sur des ali man, se ni kred THEM, >>> des Mercedes crashed sen any help el anyone - a tre convenient>>> version da events, por des auxtoritat, kaj completely contrary al des>>> testimony da ALL des ali witnesses.
>>> I am not suggesting that consideration should be limited to only one hypothetically possible series of events.
>>>Mi est not sugest ke consideration should est lim al nur 1 hypothetically possible seri da events.
> It appears to me that there are apparently conflicting reports of circumstances.
>Gxi aper al me ke tie est apparently conflicting raport da cirkonstanc.
> Therefore I suggest several parallel hypothetical story lines.
>Do mi sugest several parallel hypothetical fabel lini.
> That calls to mind something that I think Senator Sam Ervin said during the course of the Watergate hearings on Nixon's impeachment.
>Ke vok al mens io ke mi opini Senator Sam Ervin dir dum des kurs da des Watergate hearings sur Nixon's impeachment.
> The in the four gospels there are accounts of what was reported to have been written by Pilate on the sign to be placed over Jesus Christ's head on the cross.
>Des en des 4 gospels tie est kont da ki est raport al hav est skrib per Pilate sur des sign al est ej over Jesus Christ's kap sur des kruc.
> Senator Sam said that if individuals whose testimoney we so reverence from the written testimony could be so reported as divergent then we need not be dismayed that good people of our own day may be reported as to not have agreed perfectly.
>Senator Sam dir ke se individu whose testimoney ni tial reverence el des skrib testimony could est tial raport as divergent tiam ni bezon not est konstern ke bon popol da our own tag maj est raport as al not hav agreed perfectly.
> >>Hummnn >>> >>>The sequence of events, as Levistre recounts it, is very interesting, >>>because he seems to be saying that the "white car" stayed ahead of the >>>Mercedes and the motor-bike.
>>>Hummnn>>> >>> des sequence da events, as Levistre recounts gxi, est tre interes, >>> because li seems al est dir ke des" blank auxt" rest ahead da des>>> Mercedes kaj des motor-bike.
> I would think "ahead" of the Merc would be correct but not that the white car stayed ahead of the bike.
>Mi would opini" ahead" da des Merc would est gxust sed not ke des blank auxt rest ahead da des bike.
> Explaination given above.
>Explaination don super.
>>> >>Well, in my SH one possibility that I want to consider is that both >>the white car on the Merc's right hand side and the motorcycle on >>the Merc's left hand side came to a synchronized position along side >>the Merc such as to be able to take symultaneous flash photographs >>into the Merc from both sides at the same time.
>>> >>Nu, en my SH 1 possibility ke mi want al konsider est ke ambaux>> des blank auxt sur des Merc's dekstr man flank kaj des motorcycle sur>> des Merc's las man flank ven al a synchronized pozici along flank>> des Merc such as al est able al pren symultaneous flash fot>> into des Merc el ambaux flank je des sam temp.
> If one is in a very >>heavy law suit one needs at least TWO corroberating withnesses.
>Se 1 est en a tre>> heavy jur konven 1 bezon je malplej 2 corroberating withnesses.
> And a big pile of paps only seconds behind would be very important also.
>Kaj a grand pile da paps nur seconds behind would est tre grav kaj.
> If somebody hinted at the presence of a blackmail photo they could be assassinated in short order before they could ever get close to a court of law, and I heard a song the other day called "Smuggler's Blues" done in the Eighties by Glenn Frey has some good words.
>Se somebody hinted je des presence da a blackmail photo ili could est assassinated en short mend antaux ili could ever get close al a kort da jur, kaj mi auxd a song des ali tag vok" Smuggler's blu" done en des Eighties per Glenn Frey hav kelk bon vort.
>>> >This seems to me to be fanciful in the extreme.
>>> >This seems al me al est fanciful en des ekstrem.
> On what grounds do you >suggest it?
>Sur ki grounds do vi> sugest gxi?
>> >>The same scene photographed by two separate photographers at >>exactly the same instant would be IDEAL.
>> >>Des sam scen fot per 2 separate photographers je>> exactly des sam instant would est IDEAL.
>>> >"Ideal" for what?
>>> >"Ideal" por ki?
> Come on Al!
>Ven sur Al!
> What are these simultaneous, two-angle >flash-photos supposed to be for?
>Ki est these simultaneous, two-angle> flash-photos supoz al est por?
> Okay - you've said before that you >think they would have been compromising photos, and that MAF set up the >car-switch and the pursuit in order to obtain them.
>Okay - vi hav dir antaux ke vi> opini ili would hav est compromising photos, kaj ke MAF set up des> car-switch kaj des pursuit en mend al obtain them.
> This is an >interesting idea, because, although it seems most likely to me that MAF >DID make these arrangements, I cannot decide precisely what it was that >he thought was going to happen.
>This est an> interes ide, because, kvankam gxi seems plej likely al me ke MAF> DID far these arrangements, mi cannot cannot decid precisely ki gxi est ke> li opini est going to okaz.
> A compromising photograph.
>A compromising fot.
> Exactly in line with MAF's general opinion of John.
>Exactly en lini kun MAF's general opinion da John.
> Q.
>Q.
> Public, Di, etc. > >Let us say that Diana and Dodi were not sleeping together, she was not >pregnant by him and they were not going to get engaged - or some >combination of these negatives - such that, in order to (what?
>Publik, Di, ktp. > > Let us dir ke Diana kaj Dodi est not dorm together, sxi est not> graved per him kaj ili est not going to get engaged - aux kelk> combination da these negatives - such ke, en mend al( ki?
>) gain >influence over Diana or disgrace her or force her to marry Dodi?
>)Gajn> influ over Diana aux disgrace her aux force her al marry Dodi?
> - the >Al-Fayeds conceived the scheme I would guess that conception of the scheme would have happened far away from MAF.
>- des> Al-Fayeds conceived des scheme mi would diven ke conception da des scheme would hav okaz far for el MAF.
> If a group were looking for someone to set up some such scheme MAF might have been found to have been a good candidate to approach for the leading role but the script had been written long before and they just needed some one to play the part.
>Se a grup est looking for someone al set up kelk such scheme MAF might hav est trov al hav est a bon kandidat al approach por des konduk rol sed des script hav est skrib long antaux kaj ili just bezon kelk 1 al lud des part.
> >of obtaining compromising photographs.
>>Da obtaining compromising fot.
> A >clever ruse is employed to get rid of some of the escort (but why not >all?
>A> clever ruse est employed al get rid da kelk da des eskort( sed kial not> all?
>) THE COMPROMISING photo to be used for blackmail to influence Diana not to take a strong public stand on some particular issue from time to time would have been financed by an external consortium, QEII, Chas, Military landmine sales proponents, etc. In order to be of use at selected times the photo could not be public.
>)DES COMPROMISING photo al est uz por blackmail al influ Diana not al pren a fort publik bud sur kelk particular issue el temp al temp would hav est financ per an external consortium, QEII, Chas, Military landmine sales proponents, ktp. en mend al est da uz je selected temp des photo could not est publik.
> If that happened it would have been a one time shot when ever it fell into public hands.
>Se ke okaz gxi would hav est a 1 temp paf kiam ever gxi fal into publik man.
> To be worth the expense and effort it had to be kept secret but its circumstance had to be indisputable else any single person threatening exposure of some such would be under extremely high surveillance in moments.
>Al est valor des expense kaj effort gxi hav al est kept sekret sed its cirkonstanc hav al est indisputable else any single an minac exposure da kelk such would est sub extremely alt surveillance en moment.
> > the remaining escort follows from the Hotel, against orders, thus >giving the impression that they are up to no good.
>>Des ceter eskort sekv el des hotel, kontraux mend, tiel> don des impres ke ili est up al ne bon.
> Henri has been >briefed to flee them - he flees.
>Henri hav est> briefed al flee them - li flees.
> An ambush of pursuers has been arranged >on the cour la Reine - to keep Henri in flight and to give Dodi an >excuse for grabbing Diana (as though protectively) I can't imagine anything but a photograph of a blowjob.
>An ambush da pursuers hav est arangx> sur des cour la Reine - al keep Henri en flight kaj al don Dodi an> pretekst por grabbing Diana( as kvankam protectively) mi can't can't imag anything sed a fot da a blowjob.
> Sex is no big thing nowadays.
>Seks est ne grand ajx nowadays.
> In royal family tradition, the past, it may have been able to throw a little influence at an intense moment of public conflict.
>En royal famili tradici, des preter, gxi maj hav been able to jxet a malplej influ je an intense moment da publik conflict.
> There is so much detailed sex on the web that I wouldn't doubt that to find a microscopic photo of a pubic hair would take more than a few minutes.
>Tie est tial mult detal seks sur des web ke mi wouldn't wouldn't dub ke al trov a microscopic photo da a pubic har would pren pli than a few minut.
> So if any eyebrows were going to be raised maybe a court threatening a loss of Di's finances for breach of contract re: approximately non modest public behavior.
>Tial se any brov est going to est raised maybe a kort minac a loss da Di's financ por brecx da kontrakt re: approximately non modest publik behavior.
> So if Di was very cognizant of contract provisions regarding public behavior as a determinant of her divorce settlement then she would have to have exercised the utmost discression.
>Tial se Di est tre cognizant da kontrakt provisions regarding publik behavior as a determinant da her divorce settlement tiam sxi would hav al hav ekzerc des utmost discression.
> But if she was going to find any male support outside of her ex's she would have to at some point show some affection.
>Sed se sxi est going to trov any vir support ekster da her eks sxi would hav al je kelk pint montr kelk affection.
> Now where could one find any more hope of privacy than in the tunnel of love in a speeding limosine?
>Nun kie could 1 trov any pli esper da privacy than en des tunnel da am en a speeding limosine?
> But to be effective for black mail the photo would have to appear as immodest public behavior.
>Sed al est effective por nigr posxt des photo would hav al aper as immodest publik behavior.
> I said PUBLIC.
>Mi dir PUBLIK.
> So on the one hand Diana would have shyed away from any PUBLIC behavior but people interested in obtaining a photo for blackmail would have to make the circumstances of the photo look as public as possible.
>Tial sur des 1 man Diana would hav shyed for el any PUBLIK behavior sed popol interes en obtaining a photo por blackmail would hav al far des cirkonstanc da des photo jen as publik as possible.
> TWO photo's from TWO different photographers and surrounding photos from another hundred photographers could be made to look like PUBLIC IMMODESTY while the circumstance of the back seat of a speeding limosine in the tunnel in the middle of the night is about as close to "private" behavior as I can imagine anyone could get on short notice.
>2 photo's el 2 different photographers kaj surrounding photos el another 100 photographers could est far al jen like PUBLIK IMMODESTY while des cirkonstanc da des dors seat da a speeding limosine en des tunnel en des mez da des nokt est pri as close al" privat" behavior as mi can imag anyone could get sur short aviz.
> >- a car is stationed >at the tunnel-entrance to stop the Mercedes (a very risky proceeding, >from a father's point of view, don't you think?
>>- a auxt est staci> je des tunnel-entrance al stop des Mercedes( a tre risky proced, > el a patr pint da view, don't don't vi opini?
>) the Mercedes is slowed, >the pursuers catch up, the photographs are taken.
>)Des Mercedes est slowed, > des pursuers kapt up, des fot est pren.
>> >Photographs of what?
>> >Fot da ki?
> Diana giving Dodi a blow job.
>Diana don Dodi a blov job.
> What else could even raise an eyebrowe nowadays?
>Ki else could eben raise an eyebrowe nowadays?
> Hell, if you had to sell such a photograph to get a MacDonald's hamburger you would have a lot of competition in the current market.
>Infer, se vi hav al vend such a fot al get a MacDonald's hamburger vi would hav a lot da competition en des current merkat.
> > A terrified Diana in Dodi's arms?
>>A terrified Diana en Dodi's arm?
> Diana being >raped by Dodi?
>Diana est> raped per Dodi?
> - is that what you're working up to saying?
>- est ke ki vi est working up al dir?
> My dear chap!
>My kar chap!
> Who is going to conspire, and pay big money, for something like that?
>Who est going to konspir, kaj pag grand mon, por io like ke?
>Nobody.
>Nobody.
> >Diana crouched down on the floor behind Henri's seat, and Dodi remained >upright - probably viewing the pursuit with anxiety - possibly grappling >with TRJ to prevent him interfering with the driving.
>>Diana crouched down sur des etagx behind Henri's seat, kaj Dodi ceter> upright - probably viewing des pursuit kun anxiety - possibly grappling> kun TRJ al prevent him interfering kun des driv.
> What sign is >there - apart from the fact that neither Diana nor Dodi were wearing >seat-belts - that Dodi was attempting to grapple with Diana?
>Ki sign est> tie - apart el des fakt ke nek Diana nor Dodi est wearing> seat-belts - ke Dodi est prov al grapple kun Diana?
>> >Again, I say, "photographs of what?
>> >Re, mi dir, " fot da ki?
>" - precisely - and what were they >for?
>"- precisely - kaj ki est ili> por?
> - according to your theory.
>- according to your ism.
> A picture of a blow job - for blackmail.
>A bild da a blov job - por blackmail.
>> >Why could these photographs not have been taken with spy-cameras at one >of the Fayed residences Because such a photo would possibly be identified as an invasion of privacy.
>> >Kial could these fot not hav est pren kun spy-cameras je 1> da des Fayed residences Because such a photo would possibly est identified as an invasion da privacy.
> It had to look like PUBLIC Immodest Behavior to cause a diminution of Diana's influence in the public media.
>Gxi hav al jen like PUBLIK Immodest Behavior al ig a diminution da Diana's influ en des publik media.
> >at which Diana stayed?
>>Je which Diana rest?
> How could it have been >hoped that photographs of an especially compromising nature could have >been obtained at high speed in the Alma Tunnel, rather than on the >Jonikal, at the Ritz or at the rue Arsene?
>Kiel could gxi hav est> esper ke fot da an especially compromising natur could hav> est obtained je alt speed en des Alma Tunnel, rather than sur des> Jonikal, je des Ritz aux je des rue Arsene?
> What on earth is the point?
>Ki sur ter est des pint?
> Would behavior on the yatch or at the Ritz be considered public or private by Diana.
>Would behavior sur des yatch aux je des Ritz est konsider publik aux privat per Diana.
> My guess is that Diana would have considered it PUBLIC.
>My diven est ke Diana would hav konsider gxi PUBLIK.
>> >One glimmer of a suggestion of a possibility does occur to me, as a >result of examining this idea, however.
>> >1 glimmer da a suggestion da a possibility does occur al me, as a> rezult da ekzamen this ide, tamen.
> What if Dodi was having >difficulty getting physical with Diana?
>Ki se Dodi est hav> difficulty getting physical kun Diana?
> Did Dad devise an elaborate >ruse to throw them together?
>Did pacxj devise an elaborate> ruse al jxet them together?
> Or rather, was he advised to do so by >those who wanted Diana dead NOT DEAD.
>Aux rather, est li advised al do tial per> those who wanted Diana dead NOT DEAD.
> There is a whole hell of a lot of difference in wanting some one to have less public influence in the public media than in wanting someone to be dead.
>Tie est a whole infer da a lot da difference en wanting kelk 1 al hav malplej publik influ en des publik media than en wanting someone al est dead.
> >- so that he would implement the scheme >without knowing what it was really for?
>>- so that li would implement des scheme> sen kon ki gxi est really por?
> Quite simple.
>Quite simpl.
> A compromising photograph.
>A compromising fot.
> >Something of the sort must have >happened, I think - and it's not so incredible if you consider that >MAF's masters may have been pretending to attempt to pull off a Fayed- >Spencer match (with big bucks in it for MAF) for some time - so that >the Machiavellian complexity of engineering the car-switch, the >disposition of the escort, the arrangements for the route and the >programming of Henri Paul, might not have aroused MAF's suspicions.
>>Io da des sort dev hav> okaz, mi opini - kaj gxi est not tial incredible se vi konsider ke> MAF's mastr maj hav est pretending al prov al tir off a Fayed-> Spencer alumet( kun grand bucks en gxi por MAF) por kelk temp - so that> des Machiavellian complexity da ingxenier des car-switch, des> disposition da des eskort, des arrangements por des route kaj des> program da Henri Paul, might not hav aroused MAF's suspicions.
> A photograph would be the most logical thing in the whole world.
>A fot would est des plej logical ajx en des whole mond.
>No body would be suspicious of anything.
>Ne korp would est suspicious da anything.
>> >Other factors, such as sabotaging the S-280's brakes and air-bags, >briefing the escort to monitor the crash but not get involved, etc, >could have been achieved by MAF's backers, over MAF's head, The theft and modification of the vehicle could have been well disguised.
>> >Ali factors, such as sabotaging des S-280's brems kaj air-bags, > briefing des eskort al monitor des crash sed not get involved, ktp, > could hav est achieved per MAF's backers, over MAF's kap, des theft kaj modification da des vehicle could hav est nu disguised.
> >such that >Siegel and Musa (Etoile Limousines) and Wingfield and Dournot were not >only working for MAF, but for his masters, DIRECTLY.
>>such ke> Siegel kaj Musa( Etoile Limousines) kaj Wingfield kaj Dournot est not> nur working por MAF, sed por his mastr, DIRECTLY.
> However, if that were part of the plot, then PLANS TO GET THAT VEHICLE TO THAT PLACE IN TIME WOULD HAVE TO HAVE BEEN ROCK SOLID FOR MONTHS IN ADVANCE.
>Tamen, se ke est part da des plot, tiam PLAN AL GET KE VEHICLE AL KE EJ EN TEMP WOULD HAV AL HAV EST ROK SOLID POR MONAT EN ADVANCE.
> There is the clear windows in one train of thought and defective equipment as possibly another.
>Tie est des klar fenestr en 1 dres da opini kaj defective equipment as possibly another.
>> >Indeed, assuming that MAF did not know that the fatal crash was >intended, those of MAF's employees who MUST have known that a fatal >crash was intended, MUST have been working directly for those who >intentionally engineered it.
>> >Ja, assuming ke MAF did not kon ke des fatal crash est> intenc, those da MAF's employees who DEV hav kon ke a fatal> crash est intenc, DEV hav est working directly por those who> intentionally ingxenier gxi.
>> If a crash after the photo were planned the least people in the area who needed to know was just the driver of the white car.
>>Se a crash post des photo est plan des malplej popol en des are who bezon al kon est just des driver da des blank auxt.
> Second could have been the photographer on the back of the motorcycle who had to aim a shot into the driver's eyes.
>2 could hav est des photographer sur des dors da des motorcycle who hav al cel a paf into des driver's okul.
> >>>At least, he describes the "white car" >>>passing him, and disappearing westwards, before he begins to describe >>>the motor-bike overtaking the Mercedes and cutting-in in front of it.
>>>>Je malplej, li describes des" blank auxt" >>> pas him, kaj disappearing westwards, antaux li komenc al describe>>> des motor-bike overtaking des Mercedes kaj cutting-in in front of gxi.
> >> >>So this gets the locations screwed up and out of sync.
>>> >>Tial this gets des locations sxrauxb up kaj out of sync.
>>> >>> >>> The impression given (that the "white car" was a long way ahead of the >>>Mercedes and the motorbike) is probably an illusion created by the >>>difficulty involved in describing the situation; >> >>Also, a witness in a high speed drive has their own road to watch as >>well as looking in the rear view mirror.
>>> >>> >>>Des impres don( ke des" blank auxt" est a long voj ahead da des>>> Mercedes kaj des motorbike) est probably an iluzi kre per des>>> difficulty involved en describing des situaci; >> >> kaj, a witness en a alt speed driv hav their own road al watch as>> nu as jen en des rear view spegul.
> So one might have a strobe >>light effect of only seeing a flash of an instant when they happened >>to have the opportunity to look in the mirror.
>Tial 1 might hav a strobe>> light efik da nur seg a flash da an instant kiam ili okaz>> al hav des opportunity al jen en des spegul.
>>> >>>but there is no >>>escaping the conclusion that the Mercedes did not completely squeeze >>>past the white car, but came alongside it, on its left, in a sliding >>>collision, >> >>My suggestion would be to consider that the Merc was the >>vehicle in the middle of the road, that the white vehicle would >>have been on its right and the motorcycle on its left, three >>abreast.
>>> >>>Sed tie est ne>>> escaping des conclusion ke des Mercedes did not completely squeeze>>> preter des blank auxt, sed ven alongside gxi, sur its las, en a sliding>>> collision, >> >> My suggestion would est al konsider ke des Merc est des>> vehicle en des mez da des road, ke des blank vehicle would>> hav est sur its dekstr kaj des motorcycle sur its las, 3>> abreast.
>>> >>And that point photoflashes were fired and then the white >>car accelerated >> >>>which impelled the white car forwards, towards Levistre and >>>out of harm's way; >> >>And the motorcycle accelerated >> >>>whereupon the motorbike >> >>accelerated and swerved in front of >>the Mercedes.
>>> >>Kaj ke pint photoflashes est fajr kaj tiam des blank>> auxt akcel>> >>> which impelled des blank auxt forwards, towards Levistre kaj>>> out of harm's voj; >> >> kaj des motorcycle akcel>> >>> whereupon des motorbike>> >> akcel kaj swerved in front of>> des Mercedes.
>>> >>No.
>>> >>Ne.
> That is even wrong.
>Ke est eben wrong.
> In my SH.
>En my SH.
>>> >>Let's try it another way.
>>> >>Let's Let's pen gxi another voj.
> More to the >>"DELIBERATE BUMP OFF" conspiracy >>supposition.
>Pli al des>>" DELIBERATE GXIB OFF" conspiracy>> supposition.
>>> >>In that, the motorcycle would have fired >>a series of quick flashes as it accelerated >>in front of the Mercedes.
>>> >>En ke, des motorcycle would hav fajr>> a seri da quick flashes as gxi akcel>> in front of des Mercedes.
> The first flash >>would have been into the back seat but >>a second would have been directly into >>the eyes of Henri Paul.
>Des 1 flash>> would hav est into des dors seat sed>> a 2 would hav est directly into>> des okul da Henri Paul.
> Having blinded >>him, it would then accelerate and as soon >>as it was clear the vehicle on the right would >>bump the Mercedes' front into the center >>pilars.
>Hav blind>> him, gxi would tiam akcel kaj as baldaux>> as gxi est klar des vehicle sur des dekstr would>> gxib des Mercedes' front into des centr>> pilars.
>>> >>>overtook the slowed Mercedes >>>and (also according to Levistre) cut-in in front of it and produced "a >>>searing burst of light, much brighter than a photo-flash".
>>> >>>overtook des slowed Mercedes>>> kaj( kaj according to Levistre) cut-in in front of gxi kaj produkt" a>>> searing krev da light, mult bril than a photo-flash".
>>>> >>>At this point, Levistre, braked and came to a halt near the western end >>>of the tunnel.
>>>> >>>Je this pint, Levistre, brems kaj ven al a halt cxi des western end>>> da des tunnel.
> >> >>More correctly, NOT "At this point" but at "A POINT" near the >>western end of the tunnel.
>>> >>Pli correctly, NOT" je this pint" sed je" a PINT" cxi des>> western end da des tunnel.
>>> >>>The Mercedes had crashed, and the bikers (like Brenda >>>Wells, Levistre affirms that there were two of them) had stopped by the >>>wreck.
>>> >>>Des Mercedes hav crashed, kaj des bikers( like Brenda>>> nu, Levistre affirms ke tie est 2 da them) hav stop per des>>> wreck.
> >> >>That does not sound possible to me.
>>> >>Ke does not son possible al me.
> It may depend upon speed.
>Gxi maj depend sur speed.
>>>Assuming that the whole action was taking place at some >>above average speed then if at least the bike on the left had >>accelerated ahead of the Merc it could not have stopped.
>>>Assuming ke des whole action est pren ej je kelk>> super average speed tiam se je malplej des bike sur des las hav>> akcel ahead da des Merc gxi could not hav stop.
> If it >>did not stop then it may have passed Livestre and exited the >>tunnel.
>Se gxi>> did not stop tiam gxi maj hav pas Livestre kaj exited des>> tunnel.
> Whether a second bike stopped might be considerable.
>Cxu a 2 bike stop might est considerable.
>>> >>>One of them got off, momentarily, to look into the Mercedes, >>>jumped back on again, and the bike sped off, passing Levistre as it did >>>so.
>>> >>>1 da them got off, momentarily, al jen into des Mercedes, >>> salt dors sur re, kaj des bike sped off, pas Levistre as gxi did>>> tial.
> Levistre describes the bike as "black" and the two men as "dressed >>>in black with black helmets".
>Levistre describes des bike as" nigr" kaj des 2 hom as" dressed>>> en nigr kun nigr kask".
> The whole thing took just a few seconds.
>Des whole ajx pren just a few seconds.
>>>> >>>Considerable efforts have been made to discredit Levistre.
>>>> >>>Considerable efforts hav est far al discredit Levistre.
> It has been >>>said, for example, that his attitude to the press was "hostile" and that >>>he was trying to "gain attention"; but there could be another reason for >>>these attacks on his character - he witnessed a murder!
>Gxi hav est>>> dir, por ekzempl, ke his attitude al des prem est" hostile" kaj ke>>> li est pen al" gajn attention"; sed tie could est another raci por>>> these atak sur his karakter - li witnessed a murd!
> There is no >>>other interpretation you can put on his testimony.
>Tie est ne>>> ali interpretation vi can put sur his testimony.
>>>> >>>Yes, indeed (to answer your question) the lanes were used as a slow-lane >>>and an overtaking lane - ludicrous speed-limit signs notwithstanding!
>>>> >>>Yes, ja( al respond your question) des lanes est uz as a slow-lane>>> kaj an overtaking lane - ludicrous speed-limit sign malgraux!
>>>> >>>Other answers in another post >> >><a href="http://members.home.com/godsbrain">G.O.D.S.B.R.A.I.N.</a><br> > >-- >Steve Reed Alvin H.
>>>> >>>Ali respond en another fost>> >>< a href=" http:// members. hejm. com/ godsbrain"> G. O. D. S. B. R. a. mi. N.</ a>< br> > > --> Steve Reed Alvin H.
> White <a href="http://members.home.com/godsbrain">G.O.D.S.B.R.A.I.N.</a><br>
>Blank< a href=" http:// members. hejm. com/ godsbrain"> G. O. D. S. B. R. a. mi. N.</ a>< br>
GODS...@home.com
>From GODS...@HOME.COM Wed May 03 15:40:25 2000 Path: news1.
>Desde GODSBRAIN@ HOGAR. COM Wed mayo 3 15: 40: 25 2000 senda: news1.
>frmt1.
>frmt1.
>sfba.
>sfba.
>home.
>Hogar.
>com!
>com!
>newshub1.
>newshub1.
>home.
>Hogar.
>com!
>com!
>news.
>news.
>home.
>Hogar.
>com!
>com!
>news1.
>news1.
>frmt1.
>frmt1.
>sfba.
>sfba.
>home.
>Hogar.
>com.
>com.
>POSTED!
>POSTED!
>not-for-mail From: GODS...@HOME.COM Newsgroups: alt.
>not-for-mail desde: GODSBRAIN@ HOGAR. COM Newsgroups: alt.
>conspiracy.
>Conspiraciones.
>princess-diana Subject: Re: Di: Paul, Henri, History, 60 Page Autopsy, Etc. Organization: <a href="http://members.home.com/godsbrain">G.O.D.S.B.R.A.I.N.</a><br> Reply-To: GODS...@HOME.COM,GODS...@AOL.COM Message-ID: <suv0hs4b86ldf6kh1...@4ax.com> References: <20000416220330.
>princess-diana asunto: Re: Di: Paul, Henri, historia, 60 página Autopsy, etc. organizaciones: < como href=" http:// miembro. hogar. com/ godsbrain"> G. O. D. S. B. R. como. yo. N.</ como>< br> Reply-To: GODSBRAIN@ HOGAR. COM, GODSBRAIN@ AOL. COM Message-ID: < suv0hs4b86ldf6kh11pg4usgb988mp55km@ 4ax. com> menciones: < 20000416220330.
>18658.
>18658.
>0000...@ng-cg1.aol.com> <38fa9...@huge.aa.net> <8n1mfss0cu2ou4qhe...@4ax.com> <025220ee.
>4069@ ng-cg1. aol. com> < 38fa90de_2@ huge. aa. net> < 8n1mfss0cu2ou4qhej2ujs106jhqfrbbol@ 4ax. com> < 025220ee.
>5e23...@usw-ex0104-033.remarq.com> <VHL8$AAWpz$4I...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> <03cfeca4.
>5e23de39@ usw-ex0104-033. remarq. com> < VHL8$ AAWpz$ 4IAaS@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> < 03cfeca4.
>e454...@usw-ex0105-038.remarq.com> <5AGHurAe...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> <022cd178.
>e454e6ea@ usw-ex0105-038. remarq. com> < 5AGHurAeP0A5IAT7@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> < 022cd178.
>7c06...@usw-ex0105-037.remarq.com> <0PU0NLBY...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> <2ehrgsobh76u0sheo...@4ax.com> <EwaIiIA+...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.
>7c06d2cf@ usw-ex0105-037. remarq. com> < 0PU0NLBYabD5IAaW@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> < 2ehrgsobh76u0sheo8fsoso92h16ood0pr@ 4ax. com> < EwaIiIA+ 6EE5IAXR@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> X-Newsreader: Forte agente 1.
>7/32.
>7/ 32.
>534 MIME-Version: 1.
>534 MIME-Version: 1.
>0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 683 Date: Wed, 03 May 2000 22:40:25 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.
>0 Content-Type: text/ llano; charset= us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit línea: 683 fecha: Wed, 3 mayo 2000 22: 40: 25 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.
>7.
>7.
>83.
>83.
>23 X-Complaints-To: ab...@home.net X-Trace: news1.
>23 X-Complaints-To: abuso@ hogar. net X-Trace: news1.
>frmt1.
>frmt1.
>sfba.
>sfba.
>home.
>Hogar.
>com 957393625 24.
>com 957393625 24.
>7.
>7.
>83.
>83.
>23 (Wed, 03 May 2000 15:40:25 PDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 03 May 2000 15:40:25 PDT Xref: newshub1.
>23( Wed, 3 mayo 2000 15: 40: 25 PDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 3 mayo 2000 15: 40: 25 PDT Xref: newshub1.
>home.
>Hogar.
>com alt.
>com alt.
>conspiracy.
>Conspiraciones.
>princess-diana:30031204 -------- </html> OK.
>princess-diana: 30031204 --------</ html> OK.
> What do we call this?
>Qué hacemos nosotras llamada esta?
> The daily replay of the daily revised version of the God's Brain Suppositional Hypothesis.
>El cotidiana replay de el cotidiana revisa versiones de el dios cerebro Suppositional hipótesis.
> Act ______ Scene ________ Having read the below a time or two, or few, some opportunity to explain weighted influence factors in the construction of the daily hypothesis.
>Acto ______ escena ________ ha lea el below como tiempo o 2, o few, alguna oportunidad a aclara weighted influencia factor en el construcciones de el cotidiana hipótesis.
> Since the authorities have had two and a half years with the manpower, peoplepower, staff power, of what was it reported?
>Since el autoridad ha ha 2 e como medio año con el manpower, peoplepower, staff poder, de qué was ello reporta?
> Some 24 full time investigators and million(s) dollar equivalent budgets I am not competing with that.
>Alguna 24 llena tiempo investigators e 1000000( s) dólar equivalente presupuesto yo am no competimos con aquel.
> The outcome reports of that investigation appear to be: Drunk driver speeds without the care of D+D+TRJ and abruptly turns left into a central column.
>El outcome informe de aquel investigaciones aparece a be: beba conductor speeds sin el cuidado de D+ D+ TRJ e abruptamente giro dejo into como central columna.
> Simple Road Traffic Accident RTA.
>Sencilla camino tráfico accidente RTA.
> When and over the time since the creation of alt.
>Cuando e sobre el tiempo since el creaciones de alt.
>conspiracy.
>Conspiraciones.
>princess-diana by b.
>princess-diana por b.
>anana his philosophical position as I read it is to approximately take the position for sake of arguement that Diana was killed as the result of a conspiracy.
>anana his filosófica posiciones como yo lea ello is a aproximadamente lleva el posiciones for sake de arguement aquel Diana was matamos como el resulta de como conspiraciones.
> Because it has appeared to me that while times, places, people, and motives have been discussed I have a feeling that there has been less than reasonable consideration of some possibilities.
>Because ello ha aparece a me aquel mientras tiempo, lugar, gente, e motivo ha been dialoga yo ha como sentimos aquel ahí ha been menos than razonable consideraciones de alguna posibilidad.
> As a consequence of that belief I am trying to construct a suppositional hypothesis that will identify possible, persons, places, things that may be considered as possible.
>Como como consecuencia de aquel creencia yo am trata a construimos como suppositional hipótesis aquel voluntades identifica posible, persona, lugar, cosa aquel mayo be considera como posible.
> The intent is to create multiple fictional tracks such that the most possible/ununderstood may be considered.
>El intento is a crea multiplicador fictional pista tal aquel el most posible/ ununderstood mayo be considera.
> Many of the pieces are for the most part agreed as having been in the area but there is a lot of discrepancy as to the EXACT location at a SPECIFIC INSTANT.
>Muchas de el pedazo are for el most parte acordamos como ha been en el área pero ahí is como lote de discrepancia como a el EXACTA localidad at como ESPECÍFICA INSTANT.
> My intent is to create this fictional supposition to give, or try to determine, the differences between points of agreement and points of disharmony.
>Mi intento is a crea esta fictional suposiciones a da, o trata a determina, el differences entre punto de acuerdo e punto de disharmony.
> Agreement/Disagreement and Harmony/Disharmony.
>Acuerdo/ desacuerdo e armonía/ Disharmony.
> Concord vs Discord.
>Concord vs disonancia.
> If there might have been common interest to finance a joint project to lessen Diana's influence with the media because she was percieved to be "stepping on someones toes" , my words, then how might some such plan, plot, conspiracy, have been considered achievable from a variety of possible participant's points of view?
>Si ahí might ha been comunes aficiones a financia como coyuntura proyecto a lessen Diana's influencia con el media because ella was percieved a be" stepping on someones toes" , mi palabra, entonces cómo might alguna tal plan, trace, conspiraciones, ha been considera achievable desde como variedad de posible participante punto de vista?
> My typing fingers are not going to stand too long a discussion at this point so I am going to try to speed along.
>Mi mecanografió dedo are no going to stand too larga como discusiones at esta punto tan yo am going to trata a speed along.
> My supposition is that if there was a conspiracy it had to be to do something.
>Mi suposiciones is aquel si ahí was como conspiraciones ello ha a be a hacemos algo.
> A photo of Diana giving Dodi a blow job in the back seat of a limo would be pretty good.
>Como photo de Diana da Dodi como golpe job en el dorso sede de como limo would be bonita benéfica.
>For the photo to achieve maximum benefit it had to be secret and to be used as a threat.
>For el photo a arrojó máxima beneficio ello ha a be secreto e a be usado como como amenaza.
>The actual publication in mass media would deflate its power.
>El actual publicaciones en masa media would desinfla su poder.
> But it had to have strong and undisputable evidence that it was TRUE if it were ever going to be used.
>Pero ello ha a ha fuerte e undisputable evidencia aquel ello was CIERTA si ello were ever going to be usado.
> For some paparazzi to "peeping tom" photo a divorcee with her boyfriend in private was not going to do the job.
>For alguna paparazzi a" peeping tom" photo como divorcee con her boyfriend en privada was no going to hacemos el job.
> So the construct of a whore for money with an oily bedhopper in the back seat of a very expensive limo would be much more philosophically correct for the purpose of a conspiracy to get a photo to use for blackmail in the future but not for actual publication.
>Tan el construimos de como puta for dinero con an aceitosa bedhopper en el dorso sede de como muy expensive limo would be mucha más filosóficamente corregido for el propósito de como conspiraciones a saca como photo a uso for chantaje en el futura pero no for actual publicaciones.
> On Wed, 3 May 2000 17:07:26 +0100, Steve Reed <asr...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> wrote: >Path: news1.
>On Wed, 3 mayo 2000 17: 7: 26+ 100, Steve Reed< asreed@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> escriba: > senda: news1.
>frmt1.
>frmt1.
>sfba.
>sfba.
>home.
>Hogar.
>com!
>com!
>newshub2.
>newshub2.
>rdc1.
>rdc1.
>sfba.
>sfba.
>home.
>Hogar.
>com!
>com!
>newshub1.
>newshub1.
>home.
>Hogar.
>com!
>com!
>news.
>news.
>home.
>Hogar.
>com!
>com!
>feeder.
>feeder.
>via.
>via.
>net!
>net!
>diablo.
>diablo.
>theplanet.
>theplanet.
>net!
>net!
>news.
>news.
>theplanet.
>theplanet.
>net!
>net!
>newspost.
>newspost.
>theplanet.
>theplanet.
>net!
>net!
>lastings.
>lastings.
>softnet.
>softnet.
>co.
>co.
>uk!
>uk!
>asreed >From: Steve Reed <asr...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> >Newsgroups: alt.
>asreed> desde: Steve Reed< asreed@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> > Newsgroups: alt.
>conspiracy.
>Conspiraciones.
>princess-diana >Subject: Re: Di: Paul, Henri, History, 60 Page Autopsy, Etc. >Date: Wed, 3 May 2000 17:07:26 +0100 >Organization: Home >Lines: 297 >Message-ID: <EwaIiIA+...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> >References: <20000416201432.
>princess-diana> asunto: Re: Di: Paul, Henri, historia, 60 página Autopsy, etc. > fecha: Wed, 3 mayo 2000 17: 7: 26+ 100> organizaciones: hogar> línea: 297> Message-ID: < EwaIiIA+ 6EE5IAXR@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> > menciones: < 20000416201432.
>18648.
>18648.
>0000...@ng-cg1.aol.com> > <20000416220330.
>4517@ ng-cg1. aol. com> > < 20000416220330.
>18658.
>18658.
>0000...@ng-cg1.aol.com> <38fa9...@huge.aa.net> > <8n1mfss0cu2ou4qhe...@4ax.com> > <025220ee.
>4069@ ng-cg1. aol. com> < 38fa90de_2@ huge. aa. net> > < 8n1mfss0cu2ou4qhej2ujs106jhqfrbbol@ 4ax. com> > < 025220ee.
>5e23...@usw-ex0104-033.remarq.com> > <VHL8$AAWpz$4I...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> > <03cfeca4.
>5e23de39@ usw-ex0104-033. remarq. com> > < VHL8$ AAWpz$ 4IAaS@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> > < 03cfeca4.
>e454...@usw-ex0105-038.remarq.com> > <5AGHurAe...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> > <022cd178.
>e454e6ea@ usw-ex0105-038. remarq. com> > < 5AGHurAeP0A5IAT7@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> > < 022cd178.
>7c06...@usw-ex0105-037.remarq.com> > <0PU0NLBY...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> > <2ehrgsobh76u0sheo...@4ax.com> >Reply-To: Andrew Steven Reed <ar...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> >NNTP-Posting-Host: modem88.
>7c06d2cf@ usw-ex0105-037. remarq. com> > < 0PU0NLBYabD5IAaW@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> > < 2ehrgsobh76u0sheo8fsoso92h16ood0pr@ 4ax. com> > Reply-To: Andrew Steven Reed< areed@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> > NNTP-Posting-Host: modem88.
>fred.
>fred.
>pol.
>pol.
>co.
>co.
>uk >Mime-Version: 1.
>uk> Mime-Version: 1.
>0 >X-Trace: newsreaderg1.
>0> X-Trace: newsreaderg1.
>core.
>Núcleo.
>theplanet.
>theplanet.
>net 957376918 19338 195.
>net 957376918 19338 195.
>92.
>92.
>7.
>7.
>216 (3 May 2000 18:01:58 GMT) >NNTP-Posting-Date: 3 May 2000 18:01:58 GMT >X-Complaints-To: ab...@theplanet.net >X-Newsreader: Turnpike Integrated Version 4.
>216( 3 mayo 2000 18: 1: 58 GMT) > NNTP-Posting-Date: 3 mayo 2000 18: 1: 58 GMT> X-Complaints-To: abuso@ theplanet. net> X-Newsreader: Turnpike integra versiones 4.
>02 M <TWkHBtca5wWBvmfWwoLIWQkgFM> >Xref: newshub1.
>2 M< TWkHBtca5wWBvmfWwoLIWQkgFM> > Xref: newshub1.
>home.
>Hogar.
>com alt.
>com alt.
>conspiracy.
>Conspiraciones.
>princess-diana:30031199 > >In article <2ehrgsobh76u0sheo...@4ax.com>, >GODS...@HOME.COM writes >>>there was "a white car", >>>in the middle of the road, behind him.
>princess-diana: 30031199> > en articulo< 2ehrgsobh76u0sheo8fsoso92h16ood0pr@ 4ax. com>, > GODSBRAIN@ HOGAR. COM escriba>>> ahí was" como blanca carro", >>> en el middle de el camino, atrás le.
> >> >>So Livestre lied.
>>> >>Tan Livestre acostamos.
> The white car was not in the middle >>of the road, the Mercedes was in the middle of the >>road.
>El blanca carro was no en el middle>> de el camino, el Mercedes was en el middle de el>> camino.
> Why did Livestre lie?
>Why hacemos Livestre acostamos?
> Maybe Livestre did not lie in that particular.
>Quizá Livestre hacemos no acostamos en aquel particular.
> One needs to be very careful as to "at what instant" and did he say the middle of the road or the middle of the lane?
>1 falto a be muy cuidadosa como a" at qué instant" e hacemos él decimos el middle de el camino o el middle de el lane?
> It was said that he had moved into the right lane.
>Ello was decimos aquel él ha conmovemos into el derecha lane.
> If he said the white car was in the middle of the [right] lane I would agree.
>Si él decimos el blanca carro was en el middle de el[ derecha] lane yo would acordamos.
>> >Levistre is not contradicting himself.
>> >Levistre is no contradecimos himself.
> He saw the white car "au milieu >de la chaussee" So, does "chaussee" come closer to translating as "lane" or on the other hand, "road?
>Él sierran el blanca carro" au milieu> de la chaussee" tan, hacemos" chaussee" venga afines a traduje como" lane" o on el otra mano, " camino?
>" Road having two lanes.
>"Camino ha 2 lanes.
> >and was overtaken by it ("elle me double") But exactly where were the other actors at the exact instant that "elle me double?
>>E was overtaken por ello(" elle me doble") pero exactamente adonde were el otra actor at el exacta instant aquel" elle me doble?
>" >"Then", he >says ("puis j'observe [retroviseur] une autre auto toujours au milieu de >la route") "I saw [rear-view mirror] another car, also in the middle of >the road" So here we have a "milieu de la route.
>" >"Entonces", él> decimos(" puis j'observe[ retroviseur] une autre auto toujours au milieu de> la ruta") " yo sierran[ rear-view espejo] another carro, e en el middle de> el camino" tan acá nosotras ha como" milieu de la ruta.
>" Does that mean closer the lane or the road?
>"Hacemos aquel menguada afines el lane o el camino?
> >("et soudain une grosse moto sur sa gauche qui lui fait une >queue de poisson") "and, all of a sudden, a large motor-bike, to the >left of it, cutting-in in front of it".
>>("et soudain une grosse moto sur sa gauche qui lui fait une> cola de poisson") " e, toda de como repentina, como large motor-bike, a el> dejo de ello, cutting-in in front of ello".
> I will take it that AT SOME POINT a large motor-bike, comming from the left of it, and then cutting-in in front of it.
>Yo voluntades lleva ello aquel AT ALGUNA PUNTO como large motor-bike, comming desde el dejo de ello, e entonces cutting-in in front of ello.
> > >(another ambiguity is created by the expression "sur sa gauche", which >could be translated "to ITS left" [to the right of it, from where >Levistre says he was] or "to the left of it" [as seen from Levistre's >alleged position] and, since Levistre claims that the Mercedes "was in >the middle of the road" at that point, it could be either) Since I am trying to construct a hypothetical scene where the Merc was astraddle the white line that separated the two west bound lanes and a photographing motorcycle was to the left side of the Merc at the exact instant that the white car was on the right side.
>> >(another ambiguedad is crea por el expresiones" sur sa gauche", cual> podrá be traduje" a SU dejo" [ a el derecha de ello, desde adonde> Levistre decimos él was] o" a el dejo de ello" [ como sierran desde Levistre's> alleged posiciones] e, since Levistre reclama aquel el Mercedes" was en> el middle de el camino" at aquel punto, ello podrá be either) Since yo am trata a construimos como hipotética escena adonde el Merc was astraddle el blanca línea aquel separa el 2 oeste encuaderna lanes e como photographing motorcycle was a el dejo lado de el Merc at el exacta instant aquel el blanca carro was on el derecha lado.
> .
>
> .
>
> .
>
>> >"At the same instant, for a fraction of a second, there was a tremendous >flash of light, but nothing like the flash of a camera" ("Au meme >moment, en une fraction de seconde, un enorme eclair jaillit, mais rien >a voir avec le flash d'un appareil-photo") > >My point is that the order of events is not completely clear.
>> >"At el mismo instant, for como fracciones de como 2, ahí was como tremenda> flash de farol, pero nada like el flash de como cámara" (" Au meme> momento, en une fracciones de seconde, un enorme eclair jaillit, mais rien> como voir avec le flash d'un appareil-photo") > > mi punto is aquel el orden de evento is no completamente clara.
> It could >be that the bike cut-in in front of the Mercedes just before the white >car passed Levistre - either that, or the bike was further behind the >Mercedes, as both vehicles entered the tunnel, than Clifford, Olivier >and Thierry imply.
>Ello podrá> be aquel el bike cut-in in front of el Mercedes justa ante el blanca> carro pasa Levistre - either aquel, o el bike was ulterior atrás el> Mercedes, como ambas vehículo enterrando el túnel, than Clifford, Olivier> e Thierry imply.
> I suppose the bike could have braked, just before the Is there any chance that one of the skid marks, like the single one, was the bike?
>Yo si el bike podrá ha enfrena, justa ante el Is ahí cualquier casualidad aquel 1 de el resbala marca, like el solo 1, was el bike?
> >tunnel (to avoid running into a Mercedes/white-car pile-up) and that >Levistre might not have been as far along the tunnel as he thought he >was.
>>Túnel( a evita corra into como Mercedes/ white-car pile-up) e aquel> Levistre might no ha been como lejos along el túnel como él pensamos él> was.
> There is another branch of my lack of understanding and that follows along a train of thought that the picture was intended but the crash was an accident.
>Ahí is another bifurcaciones de mi carece de entendemos e aquel perseguieron along como tren de pensamos aquel el picture was intenta pero el choque was an accidente.
> In the "accident" hypothesis approximately the motorcycle photographer could have accidently fired a half metre too far forward and instead of shooting in to the back seat he could have accidently hit HP directly in the eyes as Henri Paul looked to the left as the motorcycle came along side his side window.
>En el" accidente" hipótesis aproximadamente el motorcycle fotógrafo podrá ha accidently fired como medio metre too lejos forward e instead of dispara en a el dorso sede él podrá ha accidently hit HP directamente en el ojo como Henri Paul mira a el dejo como el motorcycle venga along lado his lado ventana.
>Then the blinding flash could have caused HP to FLINCH and swerve to the right just a little.
>Entonces el blinding flash podrá ha causada HP a FLINCH e swerve a el derecha justa como chica.
> At that point hitting the rear of the accelerating white car.
>At aquel punto hitting el trasera de el acelera blanca carro.
> As the white car's rear goes to the right its front goes to the left.
>Como el blanca carro trasera goes to el derecha su frente goes to el dejo.
> To correct, the driver throws to the right and the rear goes to the left.
>A corregido, el conductor echa a el derecha e el trasera goes to el dejo.
> Essentially tossing the front of the Merc into the central columns.
>Esencialmente tossing el frente de el Merc into el central columna.
> >Thus, the Mercedes hit the white car, side-to-side, and impelled it >forwards, towards Levistre, and was FOLLOWING it, as it passed >Levistre's position, and as the bike overtook the Mercedes.
>>Así, el Mercedes hit el blanca carro, side-to-side, e impelled ello> forwards, towards Levistre, e was SIGUIENTE ello, como ello pasa> Levistre's posiciones, e como el bike overtook el Mercedes.
> I think that the first, photographing, bike should have been ahead of the white car.
>Yo pensamos aquel el 1, photographing, bike should ha been adelante de el blanca carro.
> If the bike and the car essentially accelerated at the same instant the bike would outrun the car.
>Si el bike e el carro esencialmente acelera at el mismo instant el bike would outrun el carro.
> I think.
>Yo pensamos.
> Bikes are far faster at acceleration that cars.
>Bikes are lejos veloces at aceleraciones aquel carro.
> Any disagreements?
>Cualquier desacuerdo?
>Of course, with two riders and a turbo car ...?
>De curso, con 2 riders e como turbo carro...?
> For one thing, you are supposing then that the white car was ahead of the Merc at the instant that the Merc hit the central column/pilar/post.
>For 1 cosa, te are si entonces aquel el blanca carro was adelante de el Merc at el instant aquel el Merc hit el central columna/ pilar/ post.
> That is in accord with my first guess.
>Aquel is en accord con mi 1 adivina.
>> >Does that clear things up?
>> >Hacemos aquel clara cosa up?
> No.
>Ningun.
> It smokes them up.
>Ello humo les up.
> But gives a number of possible occurances to consider.
>Pero da como número de posible occurances a considera.
>>> >>>Behind that, he says, there was >>>"another car" (presumably the Mercedes S- 280) and behind that, a large >>>motor-bike.
>>> >>>Atrás aquel, él decimos, ahí was>>>" another carro" ( presumiblemente el Mercedes S- 280) e atrás aquel, como large>>> motor-bike.
> So my first thought on that is that that is a second bike.
>Tan mi 1 pensamos on aquel is aquel aquel is como 2 bike.
> And if we are talking about the left that might be better described as a second bike on the left as there might have been one or more bikes on the right in addition.
>E si nosotras are habla about el dejo aquel might be benéfica describa como como 2 bike on el dejo como ahí might ha been 1 o más bikes on el derecha en adiciones.
>>> >>Livestre lies again.
>>> >>Livestre acostamos nuevamente.
>> >What do you mean?
>> >Qué hacemos te menguada?
> What evidence is there that Levistre is "lying"?
>Qué evidencia is ahí aquel Levistre is" acostamos"?
> My supposition.
>Mi suposiciones.
>> >> He clearly saw and may have been a part >>of a conspiracy to cover up.
>> >>Él claramente sierran e mayo ha been como parte>> de como conspiraciones a cubierta up.
> So in my supposition he saw it >>and he lied about it.
>Tan en mi suposiciones él sierran ello>> e él acostamos about ello.
> Now if we go off on a train of thought to >>explore a hypothesis that Livestre was deliberately lying then >>I'll have to think about that some more.
>Ahora si nosotras ido off on como tren de pensamos a>> explora como hipótesis aquel Livestre was deliberadamente acostamos entonces>> yo I'll ha a pensamos about aquel alguna más.
> I have not until the >>present considered the possibility that he was deliberately >>lying.
>Yo ha no hasta el>> actualidad considera el posibilidad aquel él was deliberadamente>> acostamos.
>>> >I have - he could be in the pay of Al-Fayed (or his high-level masters) >That's always a possibility; but why should we single him out?
>>> >Yo ha - él podrá be en el embolsa de Al-Fayed( o his high-level maestro) > aquel That's siempre como posibilidad; pero why should nosotras solo le afuera?
> I'm not singling him out.
>Yo I'm no singling le afuera.
> I am theorizing that there may have been a whole swarm of conspiring pap's surrounding Diana's car.
>Yo am theorizing aquel ahí mayo ha been como íntegra enjambre de conspira pap's rodeamos Diana's carro.
> >What >about any (or ALL) of the other witnesses?
>>Qué> about cualquier( o TODA) de el otra testigo?
> I am inclined to go with the >majority (who saw closely pursuing vehicles) and focus suspicion on >Mohammed and Souad who - alone - say they did not.
>Yo am inclina a ido con el> mayoría( quien sierran estrechamente pursuing vehículo) e foco sospecha on> Mohammed e Souad quien - solo - decimos ellas hacemos no.
>> >>If he were deliberately lying and saw the three vehicles >>abreast, > > He says he saw them one behind the other - until the bike overtook the >Mercedes.
>> >>Si él were deliberadamente acostamos e sierran el 3 vehículo>> abreast, > > él decimos él sierran les 1 atrás el otra - hasta el bike overtook el> Mercedes.
> Then the bike and the Mercedes were "abreast", but the white >car - so he implies - had already overtaken him by then!
>Entonces el bike e el Mercedes were" abreast", pero el blanca> carro - tan él implies - ha already overtaken le por entonces!
> But why should >you suspect this to be a lie?
>Pero why should> te sospechoso esta a be como acostamos?
> I think you, we, need to be very careful about exactly what instant is being described as being related to any single comment.
>Yo pensamos te, nosotras, falto a be muy cuidadosa about exactamente qué instant is ser describa como ser recontamos a cualquier solo comentario.
>> >> the photo flashes, the motorcycle accelerate, >>the car on the right bump the Merc into the central >>pilars, > >You want to hypothesize that the bike-overtake/flash occurred BEFORE the >sliding collision?
>> >>El photo flashes, el motorcycle acelera, >> el carro on el derecha bump el Merc into el central>> pilars, > > te queremos a hypothesize aquel el bike-overtake/ flash acaece ANTE el> sliding colisiones?
> What on earth for?
>Qué on earth for?
> Well, if the supposition is as two photographing vehicles taking a photograph from both sides at the same instant .
>Bien, si el suposiciones is como 2 photographing vehículo lleva como foto desde ambas lado at el mismo instant.
> .
>
> .
>
> .
>
> There may also have been two contacts between the two vehicles?
>Ahí mayo e ha been 2 contacto entre el 2 vehículo?
>The mirror thing may not have been considered significant.
>El espejo cosa mayo no ha been considera significante.
> The mirror would not have broken out the tail light.
>El espejo would no ha quebramos afuera el tail farol.
> So if the tail light was broken would not one suspect a corresponding dent on the Merc's right front fender?
>Tan si el tail farol was quebramos would no 1 sospechoso como corresponda dent on el Merc's derecha frente fender?
>> In reading this over I can not understand quickly the actions to cover up circumstances by police, courts, etc. unless Diana bite off and swallowed the tip of Dodi's penis from the force of the crash.
>>En lectura esta sobre yo podrá no entendemos aprisa el acciones a cubierta up circunstancia por policía, courts, etc. unless Diana mordemos off e swallowed el punta de Dodi's penis desde el fuerza de el choque.
> If some such had happened then that could explain a lot of things, But it would also demonstrate that there was no fear in the back seat at the time of crash which would be important to suggest that there was no demonstrated disagreement with Henri Paul's driving performance prior to the crash.
>Si alguna tal ha acontece entonces aquel podrá aclara como lote de cosa, pero ello would e demostramos aquel ahí was ningun ansia en el dorso sede at el tiempo de choque cual would be importante a sugerimos aquel ahí was ningun demostramos desacuerdo con Henri Paul's driving actuaciones prior a el choque.
> >> that the first photoflashing motorcycle sped off >>past him and out of the tunnel as well as the vehicle that >>had bumped the Merc.
>>>Aquel el 1 photoflashing motorcycle sped off>> antepasada le e out of el túnel as well as el vehículo aquel>> ha bumped el Merc.
> and then reported that in essence >>a followup motorcycle stopped to view into the Merc >>and it then resumed to exit the tunnel, etc. >> >You mean Levistre is concealing the existence of a second motorcycle?
>E entonces reporta aquel en esencia>> como followup motorcycle para a vista into el Merc>> e ello entonces recomencé a salida el túnel, etc. >> > te menguada Levistre is concealing el existencia de como 2 motorcycle?
>>True, Thierry H.
>>Cierta, Thierry H.
> says he saw "several" motorcycles pursuing the >Mercedes, closely, towards the tunnel (he had a view along the cour >Albert Premier from the carriageway itself) but Clifford G.
>Decimos él sierran" several" motorcycles pursuing el> Mercedes, estrechamente, towards el túnel( él ha como vista along el cour> Albert Premier desde el carriageway itself) pero Clifford G.
> and Olivier >P (who were positioned to the right [north] of the road and could see no >more than the tunnel-entrance) report only " a car in front of the >Mercedes and a [one!
>E Olivier> P( quien were positioned a el derecha[ norte] de el camino e podrá sierran ningun> más than el tunnel-entrance) informe nomás" como carro in front of el> Mercedes e como[ 1!
>] powerful motor-cycle, 30 - 40 metres behind.
>]Potente motor-cycle, 30 - 40 metres atrás.
> I think it was Brian Anderson's story that a motorcycle moved to pass the Merc on its left as it entered the tunnel, which would be exact in accord with my one theory.
>Yo pensamos ello was Brian Anderson's cuento aquel como motorcycle conmovemos a pasa el Merc on su dejo como ello enterrando el túnel, cual would be exacta en accord con mi 1 teoría.
>> >Why should we not assume that the other bikes left the cour Albert >Premier, at the exit slip-road, leaving the pair on the bike, which >Clifford, Olivier and Levistre saw, to proceed into the tunnel for the >kill!?
>> >Why should nosotras no asuma aquel el otra bikes dejo el cour Albert> Premier, at el salida slip-road, dejo el par on el bike, cual> Clifford, Olivier e Levistre sierran, a proceda into el túnel for el> matamos!?
> I don't think that the word "kill" is at all proper in a larger view.
>Yo hacemos no pensamos aquel el palabra" matamos" is at toda proper en como larger vista.
>"Photo" would I suggest be a more prevalent term for that point.
>"Photo" would yo sugerimos be como más prevaleciente término for aquel punto.
>> >>I would like to see the animation sequences down to the 1 meter >>resolution.
>> >>Yo would like a sierran el animaciones secuencia abajo a el 1 metro>> resoluciones.
> I think the main constant that we can use is the >>physical distance on the road as being traversed by the Merc.
>Yo pensamos el main constante aquel nosotras podrá uso is el>> física distancia on el camino como ser traversed por el Merc.
> >>So the animation reference frames could be identified by reference >>to the tunnel face as metres + "plus" or - "minus" the tunnel face.
>>>Tan el animaciones menciones marco podrá be identifica por menciones>> a el túnel cara como metres+ " plus" o -" minus" el túnel cara.
>>>> >We would all (those of us who really wish to have it explained in >detail, that is) like to see sophisticated event-reconstruction >techniques brought to bear, together with an account of exactly what >data was employed and how it was used.
>>>> >Nosotras would toda( aquellas de nos quien realmente wish a ha ello aclara en> detalle, aquel is) like a sierran sofisticada event-reconstruction> tecnica trae a aburra, junta con an cuenta de exactamente qué> dato was destinado e cómo ello was usado.
> Fat chance of that, however - >unless you happen to have an event-reconstruction team on hand and you >can afford to cock a snoot at the politico-media complex.
>Gorda casualidad de aquel, empero -> unless te acontece a ha an event-reconstruction team on mano e te> podrá afford a cock como snoot at el politico-media complejo.
> There is the traffic accident reconstruction site off my web page.
>Ahí is el tráfico accidente reconstrucciones sitio off mi web página.
> I saw reference to the most professional software photosho or paint shop of something like that.
>Yo sierran menciones a el most profesional software photosho o pintura tienda de algo like aquel.
> I got a copy off the web.
>Yo saca como copia off el web.
> One of these years I will move to do my accident and if at the same time I did a second of the Diana crash not much for starters.
>1 de estas año yo voluntades conmovemos a hacemos mi accidente e si at el mismo tiempo yo hacemos como 2 de el Diana choque no mucha for starters.
> > >>>Note that there is no vehicle present, in Levistre's story, which could >>>be the car of the witnesses Souad M.
>> >>>Nota aquel ahí is ningun vehículo actualidad, en Levistre's cuento, cual podrá>>> be el carro de el testigo Souad M.
> and Mohammed M.
>E Mohammed M.
> If we believe >>>Levistre, they weren't there!
>Si nosotras crea>>> Levistre, ellas weren't no ahí!
> On the other hand, if we believe THEM, >>>the Mercedes crashed without any help from anyone - a very convenient >>>version of events, for the authorities, and completely contrary to the >>>testimony of ALL the other witnesses.
>On el otra mano, si nosotras crea LES, >>> el Mercedes crashed sin cualquier auxilio desde cualesquier - como muy conveniente>>> versiones de evento, for el autoridad, e completamente contrario a el>>> testimonio de TODA el otra testigo.
>>> I am not suggesting that consideration should be limited to only one hypothetically possible series of events.
>>>Yo am no sugerimos aquel consideraciones should be limita a nomás 1 hipotéticamente posible series de evento.
> It appears to me that there are apparently conflicting reports of circumstances.
>Ello aparece a me aquel ahí are aparentemente conflicting informe de circunstancia.
> Therefore I suggest several parallel hypothetical story lines.
>Entonces yo sugerimos several paralelo hipotética cuento línea.
> That calls to mind something that I think Senator Sam Ervin said during the course of the Watergate hearings on Nixon's impeachment.
>Aquel llamada a mente algo aquel yo pensamos senador Sam Ervin decimos durante el curso de el Watergate oído on Nixon's impeachment.
> The in the four gospels there are accounts of what was reported to have been written by Pilate on the sign to be placed over Jesus Christ's head on the cross.
>El en el 4 gospels ahí are cuenta de qué was reporta a ha been escriba por Pilate on el señas a be coloca sobre jesús Christ's cabeza on el cruces.
> Senator Sam said that if individuals whose testimoney we so reverence from the written testimony could be so reported as divergent then we need not be dismayed that good people of our own day may be reported as to not have agreed perfectly.
>Senador Sam decimos aquel si fulano cuya testimoney nosotras tan reverencia desde el escriba testimonio podrá be tan reporta como divergente entonces nosotras falto no be desmaya aquel benéfica gente de nuestra propia día mayo be reporta como a no ha acordamos perfectamente.
> >>Hummnn >>> >>>The sequence of events, as Levistre recounts it, is very interesting, >>>because he seems to be saying that the "white car" stayed ahead of the >>>Mercedes and the motor-bike.
>>>Hummnn>>> >>> el secuencia de evento, como Levistre recounts ello, is muy interesa, >>> because él seems a be decimos aquel el" blanca carro" stayed adelante de el>>> Mercedes e el motor-bike.
> I would think "ahead" of the Merc would be correct but not that the white car stayed ahead of the bike.
>Yo would pensamos" adelante" de el Merc would be corregido pero no aquel el blanca carro stayed adelante de el bike.
> Explaination given above.
>Explaination da encima.
>>> >>Well, in my SH one possibility that I want to consider is that both >>the white car on the Merc's right hand side and the motorcycle on >>the Merc's left hand side came to a synchronized position along side >>the Merc such as to be able to take symultaneous flash photographs >>into the Merc from both sides at the same time.
>>> >>Bien, en mi SH 1 posibilidad aquel yo queremos a considera is aquel ambas>> el blanca carro on el Merc's derecha mano lado e el motorcycle on>> el Merc's dejo mano lado venga a como sincronice posiciones along lado>> el Merc tal como a be hábil a lleva symultaneous flash foto>> into el Merc desde ambas lado at el mismo tiempo.
> If one is in a very >>heavy law suit one needs at least TWO corroberating withnesses.
>Si 1 is en como muy>> gravosa ley traje 1 falto at menos 2 corroberating withnesses.
> And a big pile of paps only seconds behind would be very important also.
>E como gran almorranas de paps nomás seconds atrás would be muy importante e.
> If somebody hinted at the presence of a blackmail photo they could be assassinated in short order before they could ever get close to a court of law, and I heard a song the other day called "Smuggler's Blues" done in the Eighties by Glenn Frey has some good words.
>Si alguien hinted at el presencia de como chantaje photo ellas podrá be asesina en corta orden ante ellas podrá ever saca cerramos a como court de ley, e yo oiga como canciones el otra día llamamos" contrabandista Blues" hacemos en el Eighties por Glenn Frey ha alguna benéfica palabra.
>>> >This seems to me to be fanciful in the extreme.
>>> >Esta seems a me a be fanciful en el extrema.
> On what grounds do you >suggest it?
>On qué terreno hacemos te> sugerimos ello?
>> >>The same scene photographed by two separate photographers at >>exactly the same instant would be IDEAL.
>> >>El mismo escena photographed por 2 separa fotógrafo at>> exactamente el mismo instant would be IDEAL.
>>> >"Ideal" for what?
>>> >"Ideal" for qué?
> Come on Al!
>Venga on Al!
> What are these simultaneous, two-angle >flash-photos supposed to be for?
>Qué are estas simultánea, two-angle> flash-photos supone a be for?
> Okay - you've said before that you >think they would have been compromising photos, and that MAF set up the >car-switch and the pursuit in order to obtain them.
>Okay - te ha decimos ante aquel te> pensamos ellas would ha been compromising photos, e aquel MAF asentamos up el> car-switch e el pursuit en orden a conseguimos les.
> This is an >interesting idea, because, although it seems most likely to me that MAF >DID make these arrangements, I cannot decide precisely what it was that >he thought was going to happen.
>Esta is an> interesa idea, because, aunque ello seems most likely a me aquel MAF> HACEMOS hace estas arreglo, yo podrá no decida precisamente qué ello was aquel> él pensamos was going to acontece.
> A compromising photograph.
>Como compromising foto.
> Exactly in line with MAF's general opinion of John.
>Exactamente en línea con MAF's general opiniones de John.
> Q.
>Q.
> Public, Di, etc. > >Let us say that Diana and Dodi were not sleeping together, she was not >pregnant by him and they were not going to get engaged - or some >combination of these negatives - such that, in order to (what?
>Público, Di, etc. > > deja nos decimos aquel Diana e Dodi were no dormido junta, ella was no> embarazada por le e ellas were no going to saca engrana - o alguna> combinaciones de estas negativo - tal aquel, en orden a( qué?
>) gain >influence over Diana or disgrace her or force her to marry Dodi?
>)gain> influencia sobre Diana o desgracia her o fuerza her a casamos Dodi?
> - the >Al-Fayeds conceived the scheme I would guess that conception of the scheme would have happened far away from MAF.
>- el> Al-Fayeds concebimos el esquema yo would adivina aquel concepciones de el esquema would ha acontece lejos away desde MAF.
> If a group were looking for someone to set up some such scheme MAF might have been found to have been a good candidate to approach for the leading role but the script had been written long before and they just needed some one to play the part.
>Si como conjunto were looking for someone a asentamos up alguna tal esquema MAF might ha been encontramos a ha been como benéfica candidate a acercamiento for el leading role pero el script ha been escriba larga ante e ellas justa falto alguna 1 a juega el parte.
> >of obtaining compromising photographs.
>>De conseguimos compromising foto.
> A >clever ruse is employed to get rid of some of the escort (but why not >all?
>Como> mañera ruse is destinado a saca rid de alguna de el escolta( pero why no> toda?
>) THE COMPROMISING photo to be used for blackmail to influence Diana not to take a strong public stand on some particular issue from time to time would have been financed by an external consortium, QEII, Chas, Military landmine sales proponents, etc. In order to be of use at selected times the photo could not be public.
>)EL COMPROMISING photo a be usado for chantaje a influencia Diana no a lleva como fuerte público stand on alguna particular issue desde tiempo a tiempo would ha been financia por an externa consorcio, QEII, Chas, militar landmine venta proponents, etc. en orden a be de uso at selecciona tiempo el photo podrá no be público.
> If that happened it would have been a one time shot when ever it fell into public hands.
>Si aquel acontece ello would ha been como 1 tiempo dispara cuando ever ello cae into público mano.
> To be worth the expense and effort it had to be kept secret but its circumstance had to be indisputable else any single person threatening exposure of some such would be under extremely high surveillance in moments.
>A be valía el expensa e esfuerzo ello ha a be guarda secreto pero su circunstancia ha a be indiscutible else cualquier solo persona amenace exposure de alguna tal would be bajo extremadamente alta surveillance en momento.
> > the remaining escort follows from the Hotel, against orders, thus >giving the impression that they are up to no good.
>>El demás escolta perseguieron desde el hotel, contra ordena, así> da el impresiones aquel ellas are up a ningun benéfica.
> Henri has been >briefed to flee them - he flees.
>Henri ha been> briefed a fugo les - él fugo.
> An ambush of pursuers has been arranged >on the cour la Reine - to keep Henri in flight and to give Dodi an >excuse for grabbing Diana (as though protectively) I can't imagine anything but a photograph of a blowjob.
>An emboscada de perseguidor ha been arregla> on el cour la Reine - a guarda Henri en fuga e a da Dodi an> disculpa for grabbing Diana( como aunque protectively) yo podrá no imagina anything pero como foto de como blowjob.
> Sex is no big thing nowadays.
>Sexo is ningun gran cosa nowadays.
> In royal family tradition, the past, it may have been able to throw a little influence at an intense moment of public conflict.
>En royal familia tradiciones, el antepasada, ello mayo ha podrá echa como chica influencia at an intensa momento de público conflicto.
> There is so much detailed sex on the web that I wouldn't doubt that to find a microscopic photo of a pubic hair would take more than a few minutes.
>Ahí is tan mucha detalla sexo on el web aquel yo wouldn't no duda aquel a encontramos como microscópica photo de como pubic cabello would lleva más than como few minuto.
> So if any eyebrows were going to be raised maybe a court threatening a loss of Di's finances for breach of contract re: approximately non modest public behavior.
>Tan si cualquier ceja were going to be levanta quizá como court amenace como pérdida de Di's financia for breach de contrato re: aproximadamente non modesta público comportamiento.
> So if Di was very cognizant of contract provisions regarding public behavior as a determinant of her divorce settlement then she would have to have exercised the utmost discression.
>Tan si Di was muy cognizant de contrato provisiones regarding público comportamiento como como determinante de her divorcio settlement entonces ella would ha a ha ejerce el utmost discression.
> But if she was going to find any male support outside of her ex's she would have to at some point show some affection.
>Pero si ella was going to encontramos cualquier macho apoyo outside de her ex ella would ha a at alguna punto mostramos alguna affecciones.
> Now where could one find any more hope of privacy than in the tunnel of love in a speeding limosine?
>Ahora adonde podrá 1 encontramos cualquier más esperanza de privacy than en el túnel de amor en como speeding limosine?
> But to be effective for black mail the photo would have to appear as immodest public behavior.
>Pero a be efectiva for negra correo el photo would ha a aparece como deshonesta público comportamiento.
> I said PUBLIC.
>Yo decimos PÚBLICO.
> So on the one hand Diana would have shyed away from any PUBLIC behavior but people interested in obtaining a photo for blackmail would have to make the circumstances of the photo look as public as possible.
>Tan on el 1 mano Diana would ha shyed away desde cualquier PÚBLICO comportamiento pero gente interesa en conseguimos como photo for chantaje would ha a hace el circunstancia de el photo mirada como público como posible.
> TWO photo's from TWO different photographers and surrounding photos from another hundred photographers could be made to look like PUBLIC IMMODESTY while the circumstance of the back seat of a speeding limosine in the tunnel in the middle of the night is about as close to "private" behavior as I can imagine anyone could get on short notice.
>2 photo's desde 2 diferente fotógrafo e rodeamos photos desde another 100 fotógrafo podrá be hace a mirada like PÚBLICO IMMODESTY mientras el circunstancia de el dorso sede de como speeding limosine en el túnel en el middle de el noche is about como cerramos a" privada" comportamiento como yo podrá imagina cualesquier podrá saca on corta noticia.
> >- a car is stationed >at the tunnel-entrance to stop the Mercedes (a very risky proceeding, >from a father's point of view, don't you think?
>>- como carro is estaciona> at el tunnel-entrance a parada el Mercedes( como muy arriesgada proceda, > desde como padre punto de vista, hacemos no te pensamos?
>) the Mercedes is slowed, >the pursuers catch up, the photographs are taken.
>)El Mercedes is slowed, > el perseguidor coge up, el foto are lleva.
>> >Photographs of what?
>> >Foto de qué?
> Diana giving Dodi a blow job.
>Diana da Dodi como golpe job.
> What else could even raise an eyebrowe nowadays?
>Qué else podrá aun levanta an eyebrowe nowadays?
> Hell, if you had to sell such a photograph to get a MacDonald's hamburger you would have a lot of competition in the current market.
>Hell, si te ha a venda tal como foto a saca como MacDonald's hamburger te would ha como lote de competition en el corriente mercado.
> > A terrified Diana in Dodi's arms?
>>Como aterrorizada Diana en Dodi's brazo?
> Diana being >raped by Dodi?
>Diana ser> raped por Dodi?
> - is that what you're working up to saying?
>- is aquel qué te you're obra up a decimos?
> My dear chap!
>Mi cara chap!
> Who is going to conspire, and pay big money, for something like that?
>Quien is going to conspira, e embolsa gran dinero, for algo like aquel?
>Nobody.
>Nadie.
> >Diana crouched down on the floor behind Henri's seat, and Dodi remained >upright - probably viewing the pursuit with anxiety - possibly grappling >with TRJ to prevent him interfering with the driving.
>>Diana crouched abajo on el piso atrás Henri's sede, e Dodi demás> erguida - probablemente viewing el pursuit con ansias - posiblemente grappling> con TRJ a impedimos le interferimos con el driving.
> What sign is >there - apart from the fact that neither Diana nor Dodi were wearing >seat-belts - that Dodi was attempting to grapple with Diana?
>Qué señas is> ahí - aparte desde el hecho aquel ni Diana nor Dodi were porta> seat-belts - aquel Dodi was attempting a grapple con Diana?
>> >Again, I say, "photographs of what?
>> >Nuevamente, yo decimos, " foto de qué?
>" - precisely - and what were they >for?
>"- precisamente - e qué were ellas> for?
> - according to your theory.
>- according to tu teoría.
> A picture of a blow job - for blackmail.
>Como picture de como golpe job - for chantaje.
>> >Why could these photographs not have been taken with spy-cameras at one >of the Fayed residences Because such a photo would possibly be identified as an invasion of privacy.
>> >Why podrá estas foto no ha been lleva con spy-cameras at 1> de el Fayed residencia Because tal como photo would posiblemente be identifica como an invasiones de privacy.
> It had to look like PUBLIC Immodest Behavior to cause a diminution of Diana's influence in the public media.
>Ello ha a mirada like PÚBLICO deshonesta comportamiento a causa como diminution de Diana's influencia en el público media.
> >at which Diana stayed?
>>at cual Diana stayed?
> How could it have been >hoped that photographs of an especially compromising nature could have >been obtained at high speed in the Alma Tunnel, rather than on the >Jonikal, at the Ritz or at the rue Arsene?
>Cómo podrá ello ha been> hoped aquel foto de an máxime compromising naturaleza podrá ha> been conseguimos at alta speed en el Alma túnel, rather than on el> Jonikal, at el Ritz o at el rue Arsene?
> What on earth is the point?
>Qué on earth is el punto?
> Would behavior on the yatch or at the Ritz be considered public or private by Diana.
>Would comportamiento on el yatch o at el Ritz be considera público o privada por Diana.
> My guess is that Diana would have considered it PUBLIC.
>Mi adivina is aquel Diana would ha considera ello PÚBLICO.
>> >One glimmer of a suggestion of a possibility does occur to me, as a >result of examining this idea, however.
>> >1 glimmer de como sugerencia de como posibilidad hacemos acaece a me, como como> resulta de examina esta idea, empero.
> What if Dodi was having >difficulty getting physical with Diana?
>Qué si Dodi was ha> dificultad saca física con Diana?
> Did Dad devise an elaborate >ruse to throw them together?
>Hacemos Dad devise an elaborate> ruse a echa les junta?
> Or rather, was he advised to do so by >those who wanted Diana dead NOT DEAD.
>O rather, was él aconseja a hacemos tan por> aquellas quien queremos Diana muerto NO MUERTO.
> There is a whole hell of a lot of difference in wanting some one to have less public influence in the public media than in wanting someone to be dead.
>Ahí is como íntegra hell de como lote de difference en queremos alguna 1 a ha menos público influencia en el público media than en queremos someone a be muerto.
> >- so that he would implement the scheme >without knowing what it was really for?
>>- so that él would implementa el esquema> sin conoce qué ello was realmente for?
> Quite simple.
>Quite sencilla.
> A compromising photograph.
>Como compromising foto.
> >Something of the sort must have >happened, I think - and it's not so incredible if you consider that >MAF's masters may have been pretending to attempt to pull off a Fayed- >Spencer match (with big bucks in it for MAF) for some time - so that >the Machiavellian complexity of engineering the car-switch, the >disposition of the escort, the arrangements for the route and the >programming of Henri Paul, might not have aroused MAF's suspicions.
>>Algo de el sort must ha> acontece, yo pensamos - e ello it's no tan increíble si te considera aquel> MAF's maestro mayo ha been disimula a attempt a jala off como Fayed-> Spencer match( con gran bucks en ello for MAF) for alguna tiempo - so that> el Machiavellian complejidad de ingeniería el car-switch, el> disposition de el escolta, el arreglo for el ruta e el> programaciones de Henri Paul, might no ha aroused MAF's sospecha.
> A photograph would be the most logical thing in the whole world.
>Como foto would be el most lógica cosa en el íntegra mundo.
>No body would be suspicious of anything.
>Ningun cuerpo would be recelosa de anything.
>> >Other factors, such as sabotaging the S-280's brakes and air-bags, >briefing the escort to monitor the crash but not get involved, etc, >could have been achieved by MAF's backers, over MAF's head, The theft and modification of the vehicle could have been well disguised.
>> >Otra factor, tal como sabotaging el S-280's freno e air-bags, > briefing el escolta a monitor el choque pero no saca envolvemos, etc, > podrá ha been arrojó por MAF's backers, sobre MAF's cabeza, el theft e modification de el vehículo podrá ha been bien disguised.
> >such that >Siegel and Musa (Etoile Limousines) and Wingfield and Dournot were not >only working for MAF, but for his masters, DIRECTLY.
>>Tal aquel> Siegel e Musa( Etoile Limousines) e Wingfield e Dournot were no> nomás obra for MAF, pero for his maestro, DIRECTAMENTE.
> However, if that were part of the plot, then PLANS TO GET THAT VEHICLE TO THAT PLACE IN TIME WOULD HAVE TO HAVE BEEN ROCK SOLID FOR MONTHS IN ADVANCE.
>Empero, si aquel were parte de el trace, entonces PLAN A SACA AQUEL VEHÍCULO A AQUEL LUGAR EN TIEMPO WOULD HA A HA BEEN PEÑA MACIZA FOR MES EN ADELANTO.
> There is the clear windows in one train of thought and defective equipment as possibly another.
>Ahí is el clara ventana en 1 tren de pensamos e defectuosa equipo como posiblemente another.
>> >Indeed, assuming that MAF did not know that the fatal crash was >intended, those of MAF's employees who MUST have known that a fatal >crash was intended, MUST have been working directly for those who >intentionally engineered it.
>> >Indeed, asuma aquel MAF hacemos no conoce aquel el fatal choque was> intenta, aquellas de MAF's empleado quien MUST ha conoce aquel como fatal> choque was intenta, MUST ha been obra directamente for aquellas quien> intencionalmente engineered ello.
>> If a crash after the photo were planned the least people in the area who needed to know was just the driver of the white car.
>>Si como choque después el photo were planifica el menos gente en el área quien falto a conoce was justa el conductor de el blanca carro.
> Second could have been the photographer on the back of the motorcycle who had to aim a shot into the driver's eyes.
>2 podrá ha been el fotógrafo on el dorso de el motorcycle quien ha a puntería como dispara into el conductor ojo.
> >>>At least, he describes the "white car" >>>passing him, and disappearing westwards, before he begins to describe >>>the motor-bike overtaking the Mercedes and cutting-in in front of it.
>>>>At menos, él describa el" blanca carro" >>> pasa le, e desaparece westwards, ante él comenzamos a describa>>> el motor-bike overtaking el Mercedes e cutting-in in front of ello.
> >> >>So this gets the locations screwed up and out of sync.
>>> >>Tan esta saca el localidad atornilla up e out of sync.
>>> >>> >>> The impression given (that the "white car" was a long way ahead of the >>>Mercedes and the motorbike) is probably an illusion created by the >>>difficulty involved in describing the situation; >> >>Also, a witness in a high speed drive has their own road to watch as >>well as looking in the rear view mirror.
>>> >>> >>>El impresiones da( aquel el" blanca carro" was como larga way adelante de el>>> Mercedes e el motorbike) is probablemente an ilusión crea por el>>> dificultad envolvemos en describa el situaciones; >> >> e, como testigo en como alta speed drive ha sus propia camino a reloj como>> bien como mira en el trasera vista espejo.
> So one might have a strobe >>light effect of only seeing a flash of an instant when they happened >>to have the opportunity to look in the mirror.
>Tan 1 might ha como strobe>> farol efecto de nomás sierran como flash de an instant cuando ellas acontece>> a ha el oportunidad a mirada en el espejo.
>>> >>>but there is no >>>escaping the conclusion that the Mercedes did not completely squeeze >>>past the white car, but came alongside it, on its left, in a sliding >>>collision, >> >>My suggestion would be to consider that the Merc was the >>vehicle in the middle of the road, that the white vehicle would >>have been on its right and the motorcycle on its left, three >>abreast.
>>> >>>Pero ahí is ningun>>> escapa el conclusiones aquel el Mercedes hacemos no completamente squeeze>>> antepasada el blanca carro, pero venga alongside ello, on su dejo, en como sliding>>> colisiones, >> >> mi sugerencia would be a considera aquel el Merc was el>> vehículo en el middle de el camino, aquel el blanca vehículo would>> ha been on su derecha e el motorcycle on su dejo, 3>> abreast.
>>> >>And that point photoflashes were fired and then the white >>car accelerated >> >>>which impelled the white car forwards, towards Levistre and >>>out of harm's way; >> >>And the motorcycle accelerated >> >>>whereupon the motorbike >> >>accelerated and swerved in front of >>the Mercedes.
>>> >>E aquel punto photoflashes were fired e entonces el blanca>> carro acelera>> >>> cual impelled el blanca carro forwards, towards Levistre e>>> out of perjuicio way; >> >> e el motorcycle acelera>> >>> whereupon el motorbike>> >> acelera e swerved in front of>> el Mercedes.
>>> >>No.
>>> >>Ningun.
> That is even wrong.
>Aquel is aun wrong.
> In my SH.
>En mi SH.
>>> >>Let's try it another way.
>>> >>Deja nos trata ello another way.
> More to the >>"DELIBERATE BUMP OFF" conspiracy >>supposition.
>Más a el>>" DELIBERA BUMP OFF" conspiraciones>> suposiciones.
>>> >>In that, the motorcycle would have fired >>a series of quick flashes as it accelerated >>in front of the Mercedes.
>>> >>En aquel, el motorcycle would ha fired>> como series de quick flashes como ello acelera>> in front of el Mercedes.
> The first flash >>would have been into the back seat but >>a second would have been directly into >>the eyes of Henri Paul.
>El 1 flash>> would ha been into el dorso sede pero>> como 2 would ha been directamente into>> el ojo de Henri Paul.
> Having blinded >>him, it would then accelerate and as soon >>as it was clear the vehicle on the right would >>bump the Mercedes' front into the center >>pilars.
>Ha blinded>> le, ello would entonces acelera e como pronto>> como ello was clara el vehículo on el derecha would>> bump el Mercedes' frente into el centrales>> pilars.
>>> >>>overtook the slowed Mercedes >>>and (also according to Levistre) cut-in in front of it and produced "a >>>searing burst of light, much brighter than a photo-flash".
>>> >>>overtook el slowed Mercedes>>> e( e according to Levistre) cut-in in front of ello e fabrica" como>>> searing reventamos de farol, mucha brighter than como photo-flash".
>>>> >>>At this point, Levistre, braked and came to a halt near the western end >>>of the tunnel.
>>>> >>>At esta punto, Levistre, enfrena e venga a como halt cerca el occidental fin>>> de el túnel.
> >> >>More correctly, NOT "At this point" but at "A POINT" near the >>western end of the tunnel.
>>> >>Más correctamente, NO" At esta punto" pero at" como PUNTO" cerca el>> occidental fin de el túnel.
>>> >>>The Mercedes had crashed, and the bikers (like Brenda >>>Wells, Levistre affirms that there were two of them) had stopped by the >>>wreck.
>>> >>>El Mercedes ha crashed, e el bikers( like Brenda>>> pozos, Levistre affirms aquel ahí were 2 de les) ha para por el>>> wreck.
> >> >>That does not sound possible to me.
>>> >>Aquel hacemos no sonido posible a me.
> It may depend upon speed.
>Ello mayo dependa upon speed.
>>>Assuming that the whole action was taking place at some >>above average speed then if at least the bike on the left had >>accelerated ahead of the Merc it could not have stopped.
>>>Asuma aquel el íntegra acciones was lleva lugar at alguna>> encima promedio speed entonces si at menos el bike on el dejo ha>> acelera adelante de el Merc ello podrá no ha para.
> If it >>did not stop then it may have passed Livestre and exited the >>tunnel.
>Si ello>> hacemos no parada entonces ello mayo ha pasa Livestre e exited el>> túnel.
> Whether a second bike stopped might be considerable.
>Sea como 2 bike para might be considerable.
>>> >>>One of them got off, momentarily, to look into the Mercedes, >>>jumped back on again, and the bike sped off, passing Levistre as it did >>>so.
>>> >>>1 de les saca off, momentáneamente, a mirada into el Mercedes, >>> saltó dorso on nuevamente, e el bike sped off, pasa Levistre como ello hacemos>>> tan.
> Levistre describes the bike as "black" and the two men as "dressed >>>in black with black helmets".
>Levistre describa el bike como" negra" e el 2 hombre como" vestimos>>> en negra con negra casco".
> The whole thing took just a few seconds.
>El íntegra cosa lleva justa como few seconds.
>>>> >>>Considerable efforts have been made to discredit Levistre.
>>>> >>>Considerable esfuerzo ha been hace a desacredita Levistre.
> It has been >>>said, for example, that his attitude to the press was "hostile" and that >>>he was trying to "gain attention"; but there could be another reason for >>>these attacks on his character - he witnessed a murder!
>Ello ha been>>> decimos, for ejemplo, aquel his actitud a el prensa was" hostil" e aquel>>> él was trata a" gain atenciones"; pero ahí podrá be another razones for>>> estas ataque on his carácter - él atestigua como asesinato!
> There is no >>>other interpretation you can put on his testimony.
>Ahí is ningun>>> otra interpretaciones te podrá meta on his testimonio.
>>>> >>>Yes, indeed (to answer your question) the lanes were used as a slow-lane >>>and an overtaking lane - ludicrous speed-limit signs notwithstanding!
>>>> >>>Yes, indeed( a contestaciones tu cuestiones) el lanes were usado como como slow-lane>>> e an overtaking lane - lúdicra speed-limit señas notwithstanding!
>>>> >>>Other answers in another post >> >><a href="http://members.home.com/godsbrain">G.O.D.S.B.R.A.I.N.</a><br> > >-- >Steve Reed Alvin H.
>>>> >>>Otra contestaciones en another post>> >>< como href=" http:// miembro. hogar. com/ godsbrain"> G. O. D. S. B. R. como. yo. N.</ como>< br> > > --> Steve Reed Alvin H.
> White <a href="http://members.home.com/godsbrain">G.O.D.S.B.R.A.I.N.</a><br>
>Blanca< como href=" http:// miembro. hogar. com/ godsbrain"> G. O. D. S. B. R. como. yo. N.</ como>< br>
kather...@my-deja.com
Andrew Steven Reed <ar...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <suv0hs4b86ldf6kh1...@4ax.com>,
> GODS...@HOME.COM writes
[snip]
>
> The only other possibility, AFAICS, is that he intended to kill them
> both. MAF's biographer, Bowers, so I'm told, paints a very grim
picture
> of the relationship between father and son, and it is not impossible
> that MAF might have been induced - by a combination of threats and
> rewards from forces far greater than he - to play a major role in
> engineering the crash, knowing full well what the outcome was intended
> to be.
Are you simply hypothesizing that MAF had a role in setting up
the "accident" knowing full well his son would die as well, or do you
really believe it's possible he did? What type of reward could be worth
that? Certainly not British citizenship. I haven't read the biography,
but is the relationship painted between father and son really all
*that* grim? It is an interesting theory.
[snip]
> The questions are, "how close were they? how intimate was their
> relationship? did Diana make Dodi shy, impotent, perhaps? This would
> have been a matter of deepest concern both to Dodi and his father.
What
> sort of game would they - or MAF alone - (or even Dodi alone?) have
been
> prepared to play in order to move the emotional goal posts? Could the
> crash, indeed (as Al has suggested previously) have been no more than
> such a game gone wrong? Was it, in fact, an accident, after all?
I have trouble believing that their relationship had grown serious
(however, lately, I am reconsidering the possibility). I think it's
possible Dodi was trying to move it along more quickly at his father's
behest, or even to impress his father. I don't see any evidence to
suggest there was some road game constructed to sway Diana in any way.
I do think it was possible Dodi was trying to impress Diana with his
ability to outrun and outsmart the paparazzi who brought her such
misery.
I have also considered the possibility that Henri Paul was trying to
impress Diana and get his picture in the papers. More so, I have
considered the possiblity that Henri Paul committed suicide, if we are
to believe he was on antidepressants and he was an alcoholic who had
broken up with his girlfriend.
[snip]
> Oh, I think there was fear all right! I don't think there was
> disagreement with HP's driving - but only because the passengers - or
at
> least one of them - believed that an assassination-attempt was in
> progress, which is why she was discovered hunched up on the floor
> between the seats. You can't fall into a position like that, and you
> don't assume it, in preference to putting on a seat-belt, unless you
are
> afraid of being shot at.
What is so hard to believe about Diana having been thrown into that
position by the impact of the crash? She wasn't described as being in a
natural, hunched-up position. One leg was jammed under the front seat
and the other was on top of the back seat. Not exactly a comfortable,
crouching position.
GODS...@home.com
>From GODS...@HOME.COM Wed May 03 15:40:25 2000 Path: news1.
>С GODSBRAIN@ ДОМ. COM жениться май 3 15: 40: 25 2000 тропинка: news1.
>frmt1.
>frmt1.
>sfba.
>sfba.
>home.
>Дом.
>com!
>com!
>newshub1.
>newshub1.
>home.
>Дом.
>com!
>com!
>news.
>news.
>home.
>Дом.
>com!
>com!
>news1.
>news1.
>frmt1.
>frmt1.
>sfba.
>sfba.
>home.
>Дом.
>com.
>com.
>POSTED!
>ВЫВЕШИВАТЬ!
>not-for-mail From: GODS...@HOME.COM Newsgroups: alt.
>not-for-mail с: GODSBRAIN@ ДОМ. COM Newsgroups: alt.
>conspiracy.
>Заговор.
>princess-diana Subject: Re: Di: Paul, Henri, History, 60 Page Autopsy, Etc. Organization: <a href="http://members.home.com/godsbrain">G.O.D.S.B.R.A.I.N.</a><br> Reply-To: GODS...@HOME.COM,GODS...@AOL.COM Message-ID: <suv0hs4b86ldf6kh1...@4ax.com> References: <20000416220330.
>princess-diana предмет: Re: Дай: Пол, Henri, история, 60 страница аутопси, Etc. организация: < href=" http:// член. дом. com/ godsbrain"> G. O. D. S. B. R. . я. N.</ >< br> Reply-To: GODSBRAIN@ ДОМ. COM, GODSBRAIN@ AOL. COM Message-ID: < suv0hs4b86ldf6kh11pg4usgb988mp55km@ 4ax. com> ссылка: < 20000416220330.
>18658.
>18658.
>0000...@ng-cg1.aol.com> <38fa9...@huge.aa.net> <8n1mfss0cu2ou4qhe...@4ax.com> <025220ee.
>4069@ ng-cg1. aol. com> < 38fa90de_2@ огромный. aa. общий> < 8n1mfss0cu2ou4qhej2ujs106jhqfrbbol@ 4ax. com> < 025220ee.
>5e23...@usw-ex0104-033.remarq.com> <VHL8$AAWpz$4I...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> <03cfeca4.
>5e23de39@ usw-ex0104-033. remarq. com> < VHL8$ AAWpz$ 4IAaS@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> < 03cfeca4.
>e454...@usw-ex0105-038.remarq.com> <5AGHurAe...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> <022cd178.
>e454e6ea@ usw-ex0105-038. remarq. com> < 5AGHurAeP0A5IAT7@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> < 022cd178.
>7c06...@usw-ex0105-037.remarq.com> <0PU0NLBY...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> <2ehrgsobh76u0sheo...@4ax.com> <EwaIiIA+...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.
>7c06d2cf@ usw-ex0105-037. remarq. com> < 0PU0NLBYabD5IAaW@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> < 2ehrgsobh76u0sheo8fsoso92h16ood0pr@ 4ax. com> < EwaIiIA+ 6EE5IAXR@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> X-Newsreader: Forte агент 1.
>7/32.
>7/ 32.
>534 MIME-Version: 1.
>534 MIME-Version: 1.
>0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 683 Date: Wed, 03 May 2000 22:40:25 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.
>0 Content-Type: текст/ равнина; charset= us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit стих: 683 дата: жениться, 3 май 2000 22: 40: 25 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.
>7.
>7.
>83.
>83.
>23 X-Complaints-To: ab...@home.net X-Trace: news1.
>23 X-Complaints-To: брань@ дом. общий X-Trace: news1.
>frmt1.
>frmt1.
>sfba.
>sfba.
>home.
>Дом.
>com 957393625 24.
>com 957393625 24.
>7.
>7.
>83.
>83.
>23 (Wed, 03 May 2000 15:40:25 PDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 03 May 2000 15:40:25 PDT Xref: newshub1.
>23( жениться, 3 май 2000 15: 40: 25 PDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: жениться, 3 май 2000 15: 40: 25 PDT Xref: newshub1.
>home.
>Дом.
>com alt.
>com alt.
>conspiracy.
>Заговор.
>princess-diana:30031204 -------- </html> OK.
>princess-diana: 30031204 --------</ html> OK.
> What do we call this?
>Какой? делать we крик this?
> The daily replay of the daily revised version of the God's Brain Suppositional Hypothesis.
> ежедневный переигровка of ежедневный проверять вариант of бог мозги Suppositional гипотеза.
> Act ______ Scene ________ Having read the below a time or two, or few, some opportunity to explain weighted influence factors in the construction of the daily hypothesis.
>Дело ______ место ________ иметь читать под врем or 2, or немногие, некий возможность на объяснять утяжелять влияние фактор влияние строительство of ежедневный гипотеза.
> Since the authorities have had two and a half years with the manpower, peoplepower, staff power, of what was it reported?
>Since власть иметь иметь 2 с половина год with manpower, peoplepower, посох сила, of какой? was it сообщать?
> Some 24 full time investigators and million(s) dollar equivalent budgets I am not competing with that.
>Некий 24 полный врем следователь с 1000000( s) доллар эквивалент бюджет я am not состязаться with негодование.
> The outcome reports of that investigation appear to be: Drunk driver speeds without the care of D+D+TRJ and abruptly turns left into a central column.
> результат доклад of негодование расследование появляться на be: пить водитель проноситься кроме забота of D+ D+ TRJ с abruptly оборот уходить сгибание телефонистка колонна.
> Simple Road Traffic Accident RTA.
>Беднота дорога движение катастрофа RTA.
> When and over the time since the creation of alt.
>When с за врем since созидание of alt.
>conspiracy.
>Заговор.
>princess-diana by b.
>princess-diana около b.
>anana his philosophical position as I read it is to approximately take the position for sake of arguement that Diana was killed as the result of a conspiracy.
>anana his философский положение as я читать it is на approximately захватывать положение срок sake of arguement негодование Даэна was убивать as результат of заговор.
> Because it has appeared to me that while times, places, people, and motives have been discussed I have a feeling that there has been less than reasonable consideration of some possibilities.
>Because it иметь появляться на me негодование время врем, место, народ, с повод иметь been обсуждать я иметь трогать негодование there иметь been меньший кроме разумный рассмотрение of некий возможность.
> As a consequence of that belief I am trying to construct a suppositional hypothesis that will identify possible, persons, places, things that may be considered as possible.
>As следствие of негодование вера я am пытаться на строить suppositional гипотеза негодование Уилл отождествлять возможное, личность, место, тинг негодование май be рассматривать as возможное.
> The intent is to create multiple fictional tracks such that the most possible/ununderstood may be considered.
> намерение is на создавать составной вымышленный след такой негодование наибольший возможное/ ununderstood май be рассматривать.
> Many of the pieces are for the most part agreed as having been in the area but there is a lot of discrepancy as to the EXACT location at a SPECIFIC INSTANT.
>Многие of кусок are срок наибольший часть одобрять as иметь been влияние площадь а there is Лот of несоответствие as на EXACT локаци около СПЕЦИАЛЬНОЕ МГНОВЕНИЕ.
> My intent is to create this fictional supposition to give, or try to determine, the differences between points of agreement and points of disharmony.
>My намерение is на создавать this вымышленный предположение на давать, or попытка на определять, разница посреди точка of соглашение с точка of дисгармония.
> Agreement/Disagreement and Harmony/Disharmony.
>Соглашение/ различие с гармония/ дисгармония.
> Concord vs Discord.
>Конкорд vs разногласие.
> If there might have been common interest to finance a joint project to lessen Diana's influence with the media because she was percieved to be "stepping on someones toes" , my words, then how might some such plan, plot, conspiracy, have been considered achievable from a variety of possible participant's points of view?
>Раз there могущество иметь been община интерес на финансы соединение проект на уменьшать Diana's влияние with media because she was percieved на be" шагать в someones носок" , my слово, тогда how могущество некий такой план, заговор, заговор, иметь been рассматривать достижимый с разнообразие of возможное участник точка of вид?
> My typing fingers are not going to stand too long a discussion at this point so I am going to try to speed along.
>My писать палец are not going to стоять too лонга обсуждение около this точка so я am going to попытка на проноситься по.
> My supposition is that if there was a conspiracy it had to be to do something.
>My предположение is негодование раз there was заговор it иметь на be на делать something.
> A photo of Diana giving Dodi a blow job in the back seat of a limo would be pretty good.
> фотография of Даэна давать Dodi дуть Джоб влияние спина место of limo желание be прелесть лучший.
>For the photo to achieve maximum benefit it had to be secret and to be used as a threat.
>Срок фотография на достигать максимум преимущество it иметь на be секрет с на be употреблять as угроза.
>The actual publication in mass media would deflate its power.
> подлинный произведение влияние массовый media желание выкачивать its сила.
> But it had to have strong and undisputable evidence that it was TRUE if it were ever going to be used.
>А it иметь на иметь сильный с undisputable основание негодование it was ИСТИНА раз it were ever going to be употреблять.
> For some paparazzi to "peeping tom" photo a divorcee with her boyfriend in private was not going to do the job.
>Срок некий paparazzi на" заглядывать Том" фотография divorcee with her возлюбленный влияние рядовой was not going to делать Джоб.
> So the construct of a whore for money with an oily bedhopper in the back seat of a very expensive limo would be much more philosophically correct for the purpose of a conspiracy to get a photo to use for blackmail in the future but not for actual publication.
>So строить of шлюха срок кредит with an масляный bedhopper влияние спина место of настоящий дорогой limo желание be много more philosophically исправлять срок цель of заговор на доставать фотография на употребление срок шантаж влияние будущий а not срок подлинный произведение.
> On Wed, 3 May 2000 17:07:26 +0100, Steve Reed <asr...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> wrote: >Path: news1.
>В жениться, 3 май 2000 17: 7: 26+ 100, Стив тростник< asreed@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> писать: > тропинка: news1.
>frmt1.
>frmt1.
>sfba.
>sfba.
>home.
>Дом.
>com!
>com!
>newshub2.
>newshub2.
>rdc1.
>rdc1.
>sfba.
>sfba.
>home.
>Дом.
>com!
>com!
>newshub1.
>newshub1.
>home.
>Дом.
>com!
>com!
>news.
>news.
>home.
>Дом.
>com!
>com!
>feeder.
>Едок.
>via.
>Через.
>net!
>Общий!
>diablo.
>diablo.
>theplanet.
>theplanet.
>net!
>Общий!
>news.
>news.
>theplanet.
>theplanet.
>net!
>Общий!
>newspost.
>newspost.
>theplanet.
>theplanet.
>net!
>Общий!
>lastings.
>lastings.
>softnet.
>softnet.
>co.
>co.
>uk!
>uk!
>asreed >From: Steve Reed <asr...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> >Newsgroups: alt.
>asreed> с: Стив тростник< asreed@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> > Newsgroups: alt.
>conspiracy.
>Заговор.
>princess-diana >Subject: Re: Di: Paul, Henri, History, 60 Page Autopsy, Etc. >Date: Wed, 3 May 2000 17:07:26 +0100 >Organization: Home >Lines: 297 >Message-ID: <EwaIiIA+...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> >References: <20000416201432.
>princess-diana> предмет: Re: Дай: Пол, Henri, история, 60 страница аутопси, Etc. > дата: жениться, 3 май 2000 17: 7: 26+ 100> организация: дом> стих: 297> Message-ID: < EwaIiIA+ 6EE5IAXR@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> > ссылка: < 20000416201432.
>18648.
>18648.
>0000...@ng-cg1.aol.com> > <20000416220330.
>4517@ ng-cg1. aol. com> > < 20000416220330.
>18658.
>18658.
>0000...@ng-cg1.aol.com> <38fa9...@huge.aa.net> > <8n1mfss0cu2ou4qhe...@4ax.com> > <025220ee.
>4069@ ng-cg1. aol. com> < 38fa90de_2@ огромный. aa. общий> > < 8n1mfss0cu2ou4qhej2ujs106jhqfrbbol@ 4ax. com> > < 025220ee.
>5e23...@usw-ex0104-033.remarq.com> > <VHL8$AAWpz$4I...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> > <03cfeca4.
>5e23de39@ usw-ex0104-033. remarq. com> > < VHL8$ AAWpz$ 4IAaS@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> > < 03cfeca4.
>e454...@usw-ex0105-038.remarq.com> > <5AGHurAe...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> > <022cd178.
>e454e6ea@ usw-ex0105-038. remarq. com> > < 5AGHurAeP0A5IAT7@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> > < 022cd178.
>7c06...@usw-ex0105-037.remarq.com> > <0PU0NLBY...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> > <2ehrgsobh76u0sheo...@4ax.com> >Reply-To: Andrew Steven Reed <ar...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> >NNTP-Posting-Host: modem88.
>7c06d2cf@ usw-ex0105-037. remarq. com> > < 0PU0NLBYabD5IAaW@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> > < 2ehrgsobh76u0sheo8fsoso92h16ood0pr@ 4ax. com> > Reply-To: Эндрю Steven тростник< areed@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> > NNTP-Posting-Host: modem88.
>fred.
>Фред.
>pol.
>pol.
>co.
>co.
>uk >Mime-Version: 1.
>uk> Mime-Version: 1.
>0 >X-Trace: newsreaderg1.
>0> X-Trace: newsreaderg1.
>core.
>Сердцевина.
>theplanet.
>theplanet.
>net 957376918 19338 195.
>Общий 957376918 19338 195.
>92.
>92.
>7.
>7.
>216 (3 May 2000 18:01:58 GMT) >NNTP-Posting-Date: 3 May 2000 18:01:58 GMT >X-Complaints-To: ab...@theplanet.net >X-Newsreader: Turnpike Integrated Version 4.
>216( 3 май 2000 18: 1: 58 GMT) > NNTP-Posting-Date: 3 май 2000 18: 1: 58 GMT> X-Complaints-To: брань@ theplanet. общий> X-Newsreader: шлагбаум интегрировать вариант 4.
>02 M <TWkHBtca5wWBvmfWwoLIWQkgFM> >Xref: newshub1.
>2 M< TWkHBtca5wWBvmfWwoLIWQkgFM> > Xref: newshub1.
>home.
>Дом.
>com alt.
>com alt.
>conspiracy.
>Заговор.
>princess-diana:30031199 > >In article <2ehrgsobh76u0sheo...@4ax.com>, >GODS...@HOME.COM writes >>>there was "a white car", >>>in the middle of the road, behind him.
>princess-diana: 30031199> > влияние предмет< 2ehrgsobh76u0sheo8fsoso92h16ood0pr@ 4ax. com>, > GODSBRAIN@ ДОМ. COM писать>>> there was" белизна автомобиль", >>> влияние средний of дорога, спина him.
> >> >>So Livestre lied.
>>> >>So Livestre класть.
> The white car was not in the middle >>of the road, the Mercedes was in the middle of the >>road.
> белизна автомобиль was not влияние средний>> of дорога, Mercedes was влияние средний of >> дорога.
> Why did Livestre lie?
>Причина делать Livestre класть?
> Maybe Livestre did not lie in that particular.
>Maybe Livestre делать not класть влияние негодование частность.
> One needs to be very careful as to "at what instant" and did he say the middle of the road or the middle of the lane?
>1 надобность на be настоящий заботливый as на" около какой? мгновение" с делать he говорить средний of дорога or средний of дорожка?
> It was said that he had moved into the right lane.
>It was говорить негодование he иметь двигать сгибание правый дорожка.
> If he said the white car was in the middle of the [right] lane I would agree.
>Раз he говорить белизна автомобиль was влияние средний of [ правый] дорожка я желание одобрять.
>> >Levistre is not contradicting himself.
>> >Levistre is not противоречить himself.
> He saw the white car "au milieu >de la chaussee" So, does "chaussee" come closer to translating as "lane" or on the other hand, "road?
>He пилить белизна автомобиль" au окружение> de л chaussee" So, делать" chaussee" приезжать закрытый на переводить as" дорожка" or в еще рука, " дорога?
>" Road having two lanes.
>"Дорога иметь 2 дорожка.
> >and was overtaken by it ("elle me double") But exactly where were the other actors at the exact instant that "elle me double?
>>С was догонять около it(" elle me двойной") а exactly where were еще актер около exact мгновение негодование" elle me двойной?
>" >"Then", he >says ("puis j'observe [retroviseur] une autre auto toujours au milieu de >la route") "I saw [rear-view mirror] another car, also in the middle of >the road" So here we have a "milieu de la route.
>" >"Тогда", he> говорить(" puis j'observe[ retroviseur] une autre авто toujours au окружение de> л маршрут") " я пилить[ rear-view зеркало] другой автомобиль, с влияние средний of> дорога" So here we иметь " окружение de л маршрут.
>" Does that mean closer the lane or the road?
>"Делать негодование середина закрытый дорожка or дорога?
> >("et soudain une grosse moto sur sa gauche qui lui fait une >queue de poisson") "and, all of a sudden, a large motor-bike, to the >left of it, cutting-in in front of it".
>>("et soudain une grosse moto sur sa неуклюжий qui lui fait une> коса de poisson") " с, весь of внезапный, большой motor-bike, на > уходить of it, cutting-in in front of it".
> I will take it that AT SOME POINT a large motor-bike, comming from the left of it, and then cutting-in in front of it.
>Я Уилл захватывать it негодование ОКОЛО НЕКИЙ ТОЧКА большой motor-bike, comming с уходить of it, с тогда cutting-in in front of it.
> > >(another ambiguity is created by the expression "sur sa gauche", which >could be translated "to ITS left" [to the right of it, from where >Levistre says he was] or "to the left of it" [as seen from Levistre's >alleged position] and, since Levistre claims that the Mercedes "was in >the middle of the road" at that point, it could be either) Since I am trying to construct a hypothetical scene where the Merc was astraddle the white line that separated the two west bound lanes and a photographing motorcycle was to the left side of the Merc at the exact instant that the white car was on the right side.
>> >(Другой неясность is создавать около выражение" sur sa неуклюжий", какой> консервировать be переводить" на ITS уходить" [ на правый of it, с where> Levistre говорить he was] or" на уходить of it" [ as пилить с Levistre's> утверждать положение] с, since Levistre требование негодование Mercedes" was влияние> средний of дорога" около негодование точка, it консервировать be любой) Since я am пытаться на строить hypothetical место where Merc was astraddle белизна стих негодование отделять 2 запад вязать дорожка с фотографировать мотоциклет was на уходить стенка of Merc около exact мгновение негодование белизна автомобиль was в правый стенка.
> .
>
> .
>
> .
>
>> >"At the same instant, for a fraction of a second, there was a tremendous >flash of light, but nothing like the flash of a camera" ("Au meme >moment, en une fraction de seconde, un enorme eclair jaillit, mais rien >a voir avec le flash d'un appareil-photo") > >My point is that the order of events is not completely clear.
>> >"Около однообразный мгновение, срок дробь of 2, there was огромный> вспышка of зажигать, а пустяк любить вспышка of фотоаппарат" (" Au meme> момент, en une дробь de seconde, un enorme эклер jaillit, mais rien> voir avec le вспышка d'un appareil-photo") > > My точка is негодование порядок of событие is not completely очищать.
> It could >be that the bike cut-in in front of the Mercedes just before the white >car passed Levistre - either that, or the bike was further behind the >Mercedes, as both vehicles entered the tunnel, than Clifford, Olivier >and Thierry imply.
>It консервировать> be негодование рой cut-in in front of Mercedes справедливый раньше белизна> автомобиль идти Levistre - любой негодование, or рой was дальний спина > Mercedes, as оба автомобиль входить тоннель, кроме Клиффорд, Olivier> с Thierry подразумевать.
> I suppose the bike could have braked, just before the Is there any chance that one of the skid marks, like the single one, was the bike?
>Я раз рой консервировать иметь тормозить, справедливый раньше Is there никакой случайность негодование 1 of подставка Марк, любить единственный 1, was рой?
> >tunnel (to avoid running into a Mercedes/white-car pile-up) and that >Levistre might not have been as far along the tunnel as he thought he >was.
>>Тоннель( на избегать бежать сгибание Mercedes/ white-car pile-up) с негодование> Levistre могущество not иметь been as дальний по тоннель as he думать he> was.
> There is another branch of my lack of understanding and that follows along a train of thought that the picture was intended but the crash was an accident.
>There is другой ветка of my недостаток of понимать с негодование следовать по поезд of думать негодование картина was намереваться а грохот was an катастрофа.
> In the "accident" hypothesis approximately the motorcycle photographer could have accidently fired a half metre too far forward and instead of shooting in to the back seat he could have accidently hit HP directly in the eyes as Henri Paul looked to the left as the motorcycle came along side his side window.
>Влияние " катастрофа" гипотеза approximately мотоциклет фотограф консервировать иметь accidently зажигать половина метр too дальний нападающий с instead of стрелять влияние на спина место he консервировать иметь accidently ударять HP directly влияние глаз as Henri Пол смотреть на уходить as мотоциклет приезжать по стенка his стенка окно.
>Then the blinding flash could have caused HP to FLINCH and swerve to the right just a little.
>Тогда ослеплять вспышка консервировать иметь вызывать HP на ОТСТУПАТЬ с отклонение на правый справедливый маленький.
> At that point hitting the rear of the accelerating white car.
>Около негодование точка ударять тыл of ускорять белизна автомобиль.
> As the white car's rear goes to the right its front goes to the left.
>As белизна автомобиль тыл goes to правый its перед goes to уходить.
> To correct, the driver throws to the right and the rear goes to the left.
>На исправлять, водитель сучить на правый с тыл goes to уходить.
> Essentially tossing the front of the Merc into the central columns.
>Essentially бросать перед of Merc сгибание телефонистка колонна.
> >Thus, the Mercedes hit the white car, side-to-side, and impelled it >forwards, towards Levistre, and was FOLLOWING it, as it passed >Levistre's position, and as the bike overtook the Mercedes.
>>Thus, Mercedes ударять белизна автомобиль, side-to-side, с побуждать it> нападающий, на Levistre, с was ПОСЛЕДОВАТЕЛИ it, as it идти> Levistre's положение, с as рой догонять Mercedes.
> I think that the first, photographing, bike should have been ahead of the white car.
>Я думать негодование 1, фотографировать, рой should иметь been ahead of белизна автомобиль.
> If the bike and the car essentially accelerated at the same instant the bike would outrun the car.
>Раз рой с автомобиль essentially ускорять около однообразный мгновение рой желание опередить автомобиль.
> I think.
>Я думать.
> Bikes are far faster at acceleration that cars.
>Рой are дальний прочный около ускорение негодование автомобиль.
> Any disagreements?
>Никакой различие?
>Of course, with two riders and a turbo car ...?
>Of курс, with 2 всадник с turbo автомобиль...?
> For one thing, you are supposing then that the white car was ahead of the Merc at the instant that the Merc hit the central column/pilar/post.
>Срок 1 тинг, you are раз тогда негодование белизна автомобиль was ahead of Merc около мгновение негодование Merc ударять телефонистка колонна/ pilar/ столб.
> That is in accord with my first guess.
>Негодование is влияние согласие with my 1 догадка.
>> >Does that clear things up?
>> >Делать негодование очищать тинг растущий?
> No.
>Никакой.
> It smokes them up.
>It дым them растущий.
> But gives a number of possible occurances to consider.
>А давать число of возможное occurances на рассматривать.
>>> >>>Behind that, he says, there was >>>"another car" (presumably the Mercedes S- 280) and behind that, a large >>>motor-bike.
>>> >>>Спина негодование, he говорить, there was>>>" другой автомобиль" ( presumably Mercedes S- 280) с спина негодование, большой>>> motor-bike.
> So my first thought on that is that that is a second bike.
>So my 1 думать в негодование is негодование негодование is 2 рой.
> And if we are talking about the left that might be better described as a second bike on the left as there might have been one or more bikes on the right in addition.
>С раз we are разговаривать кругом уходить негодование могущество be лучший описывать as 2 рой в уходить as there могущество иметь been 1 or more рой в правый влияние addition.
>>> >>Livestre lies again.
>>> >>Livestre класть again.
>> >What do you mean?
>> >Какой? делать you середина?
> What evidence is there that Levistre is "lying"?
>Какой? основание is there негодование Levistre is" класть"?
> My supposition.
>My предположение.
>> >> He clearly saw and may have been a part >>of a conspiracy to cover up.
>> >>He clearly пилить с май иметь been часть>> of заговор на крышка растущий.
> So in my supposition he saw it >>and he lied about it.
>So влияние my предположение he пилить it>> с he класть кругом it.
> Now if we go off on a train of thought to >>explore a hypothesis that Livestre was deliberately lying then >>I'll have to think about that some more.
>Когда раз we идти дальний в поезд of думать на>> исследовать гипотеза негодование Livestre was deliberately класть тогда>> я I'll иметь на думать кругом негодование некий more.
> I have not until the >>present considered the possibility that he was deliberately >>lying.
>Я иметь not момент >> настоящее рассматривать возможность негодование he was deliberately>> класть.
>>> >I have - he could be in the pay of Al-Fayed (or his high-level masters) >That's always a possibility; but why should we single him out?
>>> >Я иметь - he консервировать be влияние платить of Al-Fayed( or his high-level хозяин) > негодование That's always возможность; а причина should we единственный him оппозици?
> I'm not singling him out.
>Я I'm not определять him оппозици.
> I am theorizing that there may have been a whole swarm of conspiring pap's surrounding Diana's car.
>Я am theorizing негодование there май иметь been целый рой of сговариваться сосок окружать Diana's автомобиль.
> >What >about any (or ALL) of the other witnesses?
>>Какой?> кругом никакой( or ВЕСЬ) of еще свидетель?
> I am inclined to go with the >majority (who saw closely pursuing vehicles) and focus suspicion on >Mohammed and Souad who - alone - say they did not.
>Я am наклонять на идти with > большинство( who пилить closely преследовать автомобиль) с фокус подозрение в> Мухаммед с Souad who - наедине - говорить they делать not.
>> >>If he were deliberately lying and saw the three vehicles >>abreast, > > He says he saw them one behind the other - until the bike overtook the >Mercedes.
>> >>Раз he were deliberately класть с пилить 3 автомобиль>> abreast, > > He говорить he пилить them 1 спина еще - момент рой догонять > Mercedes.
> Then the bike and the Mercedes were "abreast", but the white >car - so he implies - had already overtaken him by then!
>Тогда рой с Mercedes were" abreast", а белизна> автомобиль - so he подразумевать - иметь already догонять him около тогда!
> But why should >you suspect this to be a lie?
>А причина should> you подозревать this на be класть?
> I think you, we, need to be very careful about exactly what instant is being described as being related to any single comment.
>Я думать you, we, надобность на be настоящий заботливый кругом exactly какой? мгновение is существование описывать as существование рассказывать на никакой единственный комментарий.
>> >> the photo flashes, the motorcycle accelerate, >>the car on the right bump the Merc into the central >>pilars, > >You want to hypothesize that the bike-overtake/flash occurred BEFORE the >sliding collision?
>> >> фотография вспышка, мотоциклет ускорять, >> автомобиль в правый столкновение Merc сгибание телефонистка>> pilars, > > You недостаток на строить негодование bike-overtake/ вспышка случаться РАНЬШЕ > скользить столкновение?
> What on earth for?
>Какой? в земля срок?
> Well, if the supposition is as two photographing vehicles taking a photograph from both sides at the same instant .
>Колодец, раз предположение is as 2 фотографировать автомобиль захватывать фотографи с оба стенка около однообразный мгновение.
> .
>
> .
>
> .
>
> There may also have been two contacts between the two vehicles?
>There май с иметь been 2 соприкосновение посреди 2 автомобиль?
>The mirror thing may not have been considered significant.
> зеркало тинг май not иметь been рассматривать знаменательный.
> The mirror would not have broken out the tail light.
> зеркало желание not иметь ломать оппозици хвост зажигать.
> So if the tail light was broken would not one suspect a corresponding dent on the Merc's right front fender?
>So раз хвост зажигать was ломать желание not 1 подозревать corresponding выбоина в Merc's правый перед fender?
>> In reading this over I can not understand quickly the actions to cover up circumstances by police, courts, etc. unless Diana bite off and swallowed the tip of Dodi's penis from the force of the crash.
>>Влияние Рединг this за я консервировать not понимать quickly действие на крышка растущий обстоятельства около полици, суд, etc. unless Даэна взнуздывать дальний с глотать конец of Dodi's пенис с сила of грохот.
> If some such had happened then that could explain a lot of things, But it would also demonstrate that there was no fear in the back seat at the time of crash which would be important to suggest that there was no demonstrated disagreement with Henri Paul's driving performance prior to the crash.
>Раз некий такой иметь случаться тогда негодование консервировать объяснять Лот of тинг, а it желание с демонстрировать негодование there was никакой страх влияние спина место около врем of грохот какой желание be важный на предлагать негодование there was никакой демонстрировать различие with Henri Пол водить выполнение прежний на грохот.
> >> that the first photoflashing motorcycle sped off >>past him and out of the tunnel as well as the vehicle that >>had bumped the Merc.
>>>Негодование 1 photoflashing мотоциклет проноситься дальний>> прошлый him с out of тоннель as well as автомобиль негодование>> иметь ударяться Merc.
> and then reported that in essence >>a followup motorcycle stopped to view into the Merc >>and it then resumed to exit the tunnel, etc. >> >You mean Levistre is concealing the existence of a second motorcycle?
>С тогда сообщать негодование влияние сущность>> followup мотоциклет останавливать на вид сгибание Merc>> с it тогда получать на выход тоннель, etc. >> > You середина Levistre is прятать существование of 2 мотоциклет?
>>True, Thierry H.
>>Истина, Thierry H.
> says he saw "several" motorcycles pursuing the >Mercedes, closely, towards the tunnel (he had a view along the cour >Albert Premier from the carriageway itself) but Clifford G.
>Говорить he пилить" несколько" мотоциклет преследовать > Mercedes, closely, на тоннель( he иметь вид по cour> Алберт глава с carriageway itself) а Клиффорд G.
> and Olivier >P (who were positioned to the right [north] of the road and could see no >more than the tunnel-entrance) report only " a car in front of the >Mercedes and a [one!
>С Olivier> P( who were ставить на правый[ север] of дорога с консервировать пилить никакой> more кроме tunnel-entrance) доклад единственный" автомобиль in front of > Mercedes с [ 1!
>] powerful motor-cycle, 30 - 40 metres behind.
>]Сильный motor-cycle, 30 - 40 метр спина.
> I think it was Brian Anderson's story that a motorcycle moved to pass the Merc on its left as it entered the tunnel, which would be exact in accord with my one theory.
>Я думать it was Брайен Anderson's повесть негодование мотоциклет двигать на проход Merc в its уходить as it входить тоннель, какой желание be exact влияние согласие with my 1 теори.
>> >Why should we not assume that the other bikes left the cour Albert >Premier, at the exit slip-road, leaving the pair on the bike, which >Clifford, Olivier and Levistre saw, to proceed into the tunnel for the >kill!?
>> >Причина should we not принимать негодование еще рой уходить cour Алберт> глава, около выход slip-road, уходить пара в рой, какой> Клиффорд, Olivier с Levistre пилить, на продолжать сгибание тоннель срок > убивать!?
> I don't think that the word "kill" is at all proper in a larger view.
>Я делать don't думать негодование слово" убивать" is около весь присущий влияние большой вид.
>"Photo" would I suggest be a more prevalent term for that point.
>"Фотография" желание я предлагать be more распространенный период срок негодование точка.
>> >>I would like to see the animation sequences down to the 1 meter >>resolution.
>> >>Я желание любить на пилить оживление последовательность Даун на 1 счетчик>> решительность.
> I think the main constant that we can use is the >>physical distance on the road as being traversed by the Merc.
>Я думать основной постоянная негодование we консервировать употребление is >> медосмотр расстояние в дорога as существование пересекать около Merc.
> >>So the animation reference frames could be identified by reference >>to the tunnel face as metres + "plus" or - "minus" the tunnel face.
>>>So оживление ссылка каркас консервировать be отождествлять около ссылка>> на тоннель лицо as метр+ " плюс" or -" минус" тоннель лицо.
>>>> >We would all (those of us who really wish to have it explained in >detail, that is) like to see sophisticated event-reconstruction >techniques brought to bear, together with an account of exactly what >data was employed and how it was used.
>>>> >We желание весь( those of us who really желание на иметь it объяснять влияние> деталь, негодование is) любить на пилить естественности event-reconstruction> техника приносить на сверлить, together with an счет of exactly какой?> данное was нанимать с how it was употреблять.
> Fat chance of that, however - >unless you happen to have an event-reconstruction team on hand and you >can afford to cock a snoot at the politico-media complex.
>Жирный случайность of негодование, однако -> unless you случаться на иметь an event-reconstruction команда в рука с you> консервировать предоставлять на петух snoot около politico-media комплекс.
> There is the traffic accident reconstruction site off my web page.
>There is движение катастрофа перестройка местоположение дальний my ткань страница.
> I saw reference to the most professional software photosho or paint shop of something like that.
>Я пилить ссылка на наибольший профессионал software photosho or краска лавка of something любить негодование.
> I got a copy off the web.
>Я доставать экземпляр дальний ткань.
> One of these years I will move to do my accident and if at the same time I did a second of the Diana crash not much for starters.
>1 of these год я Уилл движение на делать my катастрофа с раз около однообразный врем я делать 2 of Даэна грохот not много срок стартер.
> > >>>Note that there is no vehicle present, in Levistre's story, which could >>>be the car of the witnesses Souad M.
>> >>>Заметка негодование there is никакой автомобиль настоящее, влияние Levistre's повесть, какой консервировать>>> be автомобиль of свидетель Souad M.
> and Mohammed M.
>С Мухаммед M.
> If we believe >>>Levistre, they weren't there!
>Раз we верить>>> Levistre, they weren't weren't there!
> On the other hand, if we believe THEM, >>>the Mercedes crashed without any help from anyone - a very convenient >>>version of events, for the authorities, and completely contrary to the >>>testimony of ALL the other witnesses.
>В еще рука, раз we верить THEM, >>> Mercedes падать кроме никакой помощь с anyone - настоящий удобный>>> вариант of событие, срок власть, с completely обратное на >>> предмет of ВЕСЬ еще свидетель.
>>> I am not suggesting that consideration should be limited to only one hypothetically possible series of events.
>>>Я am not предлагать негодование рассмотрение should be ограничивать на единственный 1 hypothetically возможное series of событие.
> It appears to me that there are apparently conflicting reports of circumstances.
>It появляться на me негодование there are apparently противоречить доклад of обстоятельства.
> Therefore I suggest several parallel hypothetical story lines.
>Therefore я предлагать несколько параллель hypothetical повесть стих.
> That calls to mind something that I think Senator Sam Ervin said during the course of the Watergate hearings on Nixon's impeachment.
>Негодование крик на ум something негодование я думать сенатор ЗУР Ervin говорить during курс of Watergate слух в Nixon's сомнение.
> The in the four gospels there are accounts of what was reported to have been written by Pilate on the sign to be placed over Jesus Christ's head on the cross.
> влияние 4 евангелие there are счет of какой? was сообщать на иметь been писать около Pilate в признак на be ставить за Иисус Христос голова в крест.
> Senator Sam said that if individuals whose testimoney we so reverence from the written testimony could be so reported as divergent then we need not be dismayed that good people of our own day may be reported as to not have agreed perfectly.
>Сенатор ЗУР говорить негодование раз личность whose testimoney we so почитание с писать предмет консервировать be so сообщать as расходящийс тогда we надобность not be встревожить негодование лучший народ of our принадлежащий день май be сообщать as на not иметь одобрять perfectly.
> >>Hummnn >>> >>>The sequence of events, as Levistre recounts it, is very interesting, >>>because he seems to be saying that the "white car" stayed ahead of the >>>Mercedes and the motor-bike.
>>>Hummnn>>> >>> последовательность of событие, as Levistre рассказывать it, is настоящий интересовать, >>> because he казаться на be говорить негодование " белизна автомобиль" оставаться ahead of >>> Mercedes с motor-bike.
> I would think "ahead" of the Merc would be correct but not that the white car stayed ahead of the bike.
>Я желание думать" ahead" of Merc желание be исправлять а not негодование белизна автомобиль оставаться ahead of рой.
> Explaination given above.
>Explaination давать выше.
>>> >>Well, in my SH one possibility that I want to consider is that both >>the white car on the Merc's right hand side and the motorcycle on >>the Merc's left hand side came to a synchronized position along side >>the Merc such as to be able to take symultaneous flash photographs >>into the Merc from both sides at the same time.
>>> >>Колодец, влияние my SH 1 возможность негодование я недостаток на рассматривать is негодование оба>> белизна автомобиль в Merc's правый рука стенка с мотоциклет в>> Merc's уходить рука стенка приезжать на синхронизироваться положение по стенка>> Merc такой as на be способный на захватывать symultaneous вспышка фотографи>> сгибание Merc с оба стенка около однообразный врем.
> If one is in a very >>heavy law suit one needs at least TWO corroberating withnesses.
>Раз 1 is влияние настоящий>> тяжелый закон костюм 1 надобность около наименьший 2 corroberating withnesses.
> And a big pile of paps only seconds behind would be very important also.
>С большой свая of сосок единственный seconds спина желание be настоящий важный с.
> If somebody hinted at the presence of a blackmail photo they could be assassinated in short order before they could ever get close to a court of law, and I heard a song the other day called "Smuggler's Blues" done in the Eighties by Glenn Frey has some good words.
>Раз somebody намекать около присутствие of шантаж фотография they консервировать be подрывать влияние суть порядок раньше they консервировать ever доставать территория на суд of закон, с я слышать песн еще день кричать" контрабандист синька" делать влияние Eighties около Glenn Frey иметь некий лучший слово.
>>> >This seems to me to be fanciful in the extreme.
>>> >This казаться на me на be капризный влияние крайность.
> On what grounds do you >suggest it?
>В какой? земля делать you> предлагать it?
>> >>The same scene photographed by two separate photographers at >>exactly the same instant would be IDEAL.
>> >> однообразный место фотографировать около 2 блузки фотограф около>> exactly однообразный мгновение желание be ИДЕАЛ.
>>> >"Ideal" for what?
>>> >"Идеал" срок какой??
> Come on Al!
>Приезжать в Эл!
> What are these simultaneous, two-angle >flash-photos supposed to be for?
>Какой? are these одновременный, two-angle> flash-photos полагать на be срок?
> Okay - you've said before that you >think they would have been compromising photos, and that MAF set up the >car-switch and the pursuit in order to obtain them.
>Okay - you've иметь говорить раньше негодование you> думать they желание иметь been компрометировать фотография, с негодование MAF ставить растущий > car-switch с преследование влияние порядок на получать them.
> This is an >interesting idea, because, although it seems most likely to me that MAF >DID make these arrangements, I cannot decide precisely what it was that >he thought was going to happen.
>This is an> интересовать идея, because, что it казаться наибольший возможный на me негодование MAF> ДЕЛАТЬ делать these расстановка, я консервировать cannot решать precisely какой? it was негодование> he думать was going to случаться.
> A compromising photograph.
> компрометировать фотографи.
> Exactly in line with MAF's general opinion of John.
>Exactly влияние стих with MAF's генерал мнение of Джон.
> Q.
>Q.
> Public, Di, etc. > >Let us say that Diana and Dodi were not sleeping together, she was not >pregnant by him and they were not going to get engaged - or some >combination of these negatives - such that, in order to (what?
>Народ, Дай, etc. > > пускать us говорить негодование Даэна с Dodi were not спать together, she was not> беременна около him с they were not going to доставать нанимать - or некий> сочетание of these несогласие - такой негодование, влияние порядок на( какой??
>) gain >influence over Diana or disgrace her or force her to marry Dodi?
>)Заработок> влияние за Даэна or позор her or сила her на marry Dodi?
> - the >Al-Fayeds conceived the scheme I would guess that conception of the scheme would have happened far away from MAF.
>- > Al-Fayeds постигать план я желание догадка негодование понимание of план желание иметь случаться дальний отсутствующий с MAF.
> If a group were looking for someone to set up some such scheme MAF might have been found to have been a good candidate to approach for the leading role but the script had been written long before and they just needed some one to play the part.
>Раз группа were looking for someone на ставить растущий некий такой план MAF могущество иметь been находить на иметь been лучший кандидат на приближение срок вести role а почерк иметь been писать лонга раньше с they справедливый нуждаться некий 1 на игра часть.
> >of obtaining compromising photographs.
>>of получать компрометировать фотографи.
> A >clever ruse is employed to get rid of some of the escort (but why not >all?
>> умный хитрость is нанимать на доставать освобождать of некий of охрана( а причина not> весь?
>) THE COMPROMISING photo to be used for blackmail to influence Diana not to take a strong public stand on some particular issue from time to time would have been financed by an external consortium, QEII, Chas, Military landmine sales proponents, etc. In order to be of use at selected times the photo could not be public.
>) КОМПРОМЕТИРОВАТЬ фотография на be употреблять срок шантаж на влияние Даэна not на захватывать сильный народ стоять в некий частность выпуск с врем на врем желание иметь been финансировать около an наружная консорциум, QEII, Chas, войска фугас продажа лицо, etc. влияние порядок на be of употребление около отбирать врем фотография консервировать not be народ.
> If that happened it would have been a one time shot when ever it fell into public hands.
>Раз негодование случаться it желание иметь been 1 врем стрелять when ever it падать сгибание народ рука.
> To be worth the expense and effort it had to be kept secret but its circumstance had to be indisputable else any single person threatening exposure of some such would be under extremely high surveillance in moments.
>На be ценность расход с усилие it иметь на be держать секрет а its обстоятельства иметь на be неоспоримый else никакой единственный личность угрожать выставление of некий такой желание be под extremely максимум надзор влияние момент.
> > the remaining escort follows from the Hotel, against orders, thus >giving the impression that they are up to no good.
>> оставаться охрана следовать с гостиница, против приказывать, thus> давать впечатление негодование they are растущий на никакой лучший.
> Henri has been >briefed to flee them - he flees.
>Henri иметь been> резюмировать на бежать them - he бежать.
> An ambush of pursuers has been arranged >on the cour la Reine - to keep Henri in flight and to give Dodi an >excuse for grabbing Diana (as though protectively) I can't imagine anything but a photograph of a blowjob.
>An засада of преследователь иметь been систематизировать> в cour л Reine - на держать Henri влияние полет с на давать Dodi an> извинение срок хватать Даэна( as что protectively) я консервировать can't воображать anything а фотографи of blowjob.
> Sex is no big thing nowadays.
>Пол is никакой большой тинг nowadays.
> In royal family tradition, the past, it may have been able to throw a little influence at an intense moment of public conflict.
>Влияние королевский семья традиция, прошлый, it май иметь консервировать сучить маленький влияние около an сильный момент of народ конфликт.
> There is so much detailed sex on the web that I wouldn't doubt that to find a microscopic photo of a pubic hair would take more than a few minutes.
>There is so много входить пол в ткань негодование я желание wouldn't сомнение негодование на находить микроскопический фотография of лобковый волосы желание захватывать more кроме немногие минута.
> So if any eyebrows were going to be raised maybe a court threatening a loss of Di's finances for breach of contract re: approximately non modest public behavior.
>So раз никакой бровь were going to be поднимать maybe суд угрожать потеря of Di's финансы срок пролом of договор re: approximately non скромный народ поведение.
> So if Di was very cognizant of contract provisions regarding public behavior as a determinant of her divorce settlement then she would have to have exercised the utmost discression.
>So раз Дай was настоящий знающий of договор снабжение относительно народ поведение as детерминант of her развод оседание тогда she желание иметь на иметь упражнять большее discression.
> But if she was going to find any male support outside of her ex's she would have to at some point show some affection.
>А раз she was going to находить никакой Мале поддержка вне of her ex's she желание иметь на около некий точка показывать некий привязанность.
> Now where could one find any more hope of privacy than in the tunnel of love in a speeding limosine?
>Когда where консервировать 1 находить никакой more Хоуп of уединение кроме влияние тоннель of любовь влияние проноситься limosine?
> But to be effective for black mail the photo would have to appear as immodest public behavior.
>А на be действительный срок чернота почта фотография желание иметь на появляться as нескромный народ поведение.
> I said PUBLIC.
>Я говорить НАРОД.
> So on the one hand Diana would have shyed away from any PUBLIC behavior but people interested in obtaining a photo for blackmail would have to make the circumstances of the photo look as public as possible.
>So в 1 рука Даэна желание иметь shyed отсутствующий с никакой НАРОД поведение а народ интересовать влияние получать фотография срок шантаж желание иметь на делать обстоятельства of фотография взгляд as народ as возможное.
> TWO photo's from TWO different photographers and surrounding photos from another hundred photographers could be made to look like PUBLIC IMMODESTY while the circumstance of the back seat of a speeding limosine in the tunnel in the middle of the night is about as close to "private" behavior as I can imagine anyone could get on short notice.
>2 фотография с 2 различный фотограф с окружать фотография с другой 100 фотограф консервировать be делать на взгляд любить НАРОД НЕСКРОМНОСТЬ время обстоятельства of спина место of проноситься limosine влияние тоннель влияние средний of ночь is кругом as территория на" рядовой" поведение as я консервировать воображать anyone консервировать доставать в суть извещение.
> >- a car is stationed >at the tunnel-entrance to stop the Mercedes (a very risky proceeding, >from a father's point of view, don't you think?
>>- автомобиль is помещать> около tunnel-entrance на остановка Mercedes( настоящий рискованный поведение, > с отец точка of вид, делать don't you думать?
>) the Mercedes is slowed, >the pursuers catch up, the photographs are taken.
>) Mercedes is замедлять, > преследователь поймать растущий, фотографи are захватывать.
>> >Photographs of what?
>> >Фотографи of какой??
> Diana giving Dodi a blow job.
>Даэна давать Dodi дуть Джоб.
> What else could even raise an eyebrowe nowadays?
>Какой? else консервировать вечер повышение an eyebrowe nowadays?
> Hell, if you had to sell such a photograph to get a MacDonald's hamburger you would have a lot of competition in the current market.
>Ад, раз you иметь на продать такой фотографи на доставать MacDonald's гамбургер you желание иметь Лот of соревнование влияние течение рынок.
> > A terrified Diana in Dodi's arms?
>> ужасать Даэна влияние Dodi's рука?
> Diana being >raped by Dodi?
>Даэна существование> изнасиловать около Dodi?
> - is that what you're working up to saying?
>- is негодование какой? you're you're работа растущий на говорить?
> My dear chap!
>My дорогой малый!
> Who is going to conspire, and pay big money, for something like that?
>Who is going to сговариваться, с платить большой кредит, срок something любить негодование?
>Nobody.
>Ничтожество.
> >Diana crouched down on the floor behind Henri's seat, and Dodi remained >upright - probably viewing the pursuit with anxiety - possibly grappling >with TRJ to prevent him interfering with the driving.
>>Даэна присесть Даун в пол спина Henri's место, с Dodi оставаться> стойка - probably осматривать преследование with тревога - possibly сцепиться> with TRJ на предотвращать him мешать with водить.
> What sign is >there - apart from the fact that neither Diana nor Dodi were wearing >seat-belts - that Dodi was attempting to grapple with Diana?
>Какой? признак is> there - apart с факт негодование никакой Даэна nor Dodi were носить> seat-belts - негодование Dodi was пытаться на сцепиться with Даэна?
>> >Again, I say, "photographs of what?
>> >Again, я говорить, " фотографи of какой??
>" - precisely - and what were they >for?
>"- precisely - с какой? were they> срок?
> - according to your theory.
>- according to your теори.
> A picture of a blow job - for blackmail.
> картина of дуть Джоб - срок шантаж.
>> >Why could these photographs not have been taken with spy-cameras at one >of the Fayed residences Because such a photo would possibly be identified as an invasion of privacy.
>> >Причина консервировать these фотографи not иметь been захватывать with spy-cameras около 1> of Fayed проживание Because такой фотография желание possibly be отождествлять as an вторжение of уединение.
> It had to look like PUBLIC Immodest Behavior to cause a diminution of Diana's influence in the public media.
>It иметь на взгляд любить НАРОД нескромный поведение на причина уменьшение of Diana's влияние влияние народ media.
> >at which Diana stayed?
>>Около какой Даэна оставаться?
> How could it have been >hoped that photographs of an especially compromising nature could have >been obtained at high speed in the Alma Tunnel, rather than on the >Jonikal, at the Ritz or at the rue Arsene?
>How консервировать it иметь been> надеятьс негодование фотографи of an especially компрометировать природа консервировать иметь> been получать около максимум проноситься влияние Alma тоннель, rather кроме в > Jonikal, около Ritz or около сожалеть Arsene?
> What on earth is the point?
>Какой? в земля is точка?
> Would behavior on the yatch or at the Ritz be considered public or private by Diana.
>Желание поведение в yatch or около Ritz be рассматривать народ or рядовой около Даэна.
> My guess is that Diana would have considered it PUBLIC.
>My догадка is негодование Даэна желание иметь рассматривать it НАРОД.
>> >One glimmer of a suggestion of a possibility does occur to me, as a >result of examining this idea, however.
>> >1 мерцание of предложение of возможность делать случаться на me, as > результат of рассматривать this идея, однако.
> What if Dodi was having >difficulty getting physical with Diana?
>Какой? раз Dodi was иметь> трудность доставать медосмотр with Даэна?
> Did Dad devise an elaborate >ruse to throw them together?
>Делать Dad придумывать an детально> хитрость на сучить them together?
> Or rather, was he advised to do so by >those who wanted Diana dead NOT DEAD.
>Or rather, was he советовать на делать so около> those who хотеть Даэна мертвые NOT МЕРТВЫЕ.
> There is a whole hell of a lot of difference in wanting some one to have less public influence in the public media than in wanting someone to be dead.
>There is целый ад of Лот of разница влияние хотеть некий 1 на иметь меньший народ влияние влияние народ media кроме влияние хотеть someone на be мертвые.
> >- so that he would implement the scheme >without knowing what it was really for?
>>- so that he желание орудие план> кроме знать какой? it was really срок?
> Quite simple.
>Quite беднота.
> A compromising photograph.
> компрометировать фотографи.
> >Something of the sort must have >happened, I think - and it's not so incredible if you consider that >MAF's masters may have been pretending to attempt to pull off a Fayed- >Spencer match (with big bucks in it for MAF) for some time - so that >the Machiavellian complexity of engineering the car-switch, the >disposition of the escort, the arrangements for the route and the >programming of Henri Paul, might not have aroused MAF's suspicions.
>>Something of вид необходимость иметь> случаться, я думать - с it's it's not so неправдоподобный раз you рассматривать негодование> MAF's хозяин май иметь been притворяться на попытка на тяга дальний Fayed-> Spencer спичка( with большой кролика влияние it срок MAF) срок некий врем - so that> макиавеллиевский сложность of техника car-switch, > характер of охрана, расстановка срок маршрут с > планировать of Henri Пол, могущество not иметь будить MAF's подозрение.
> A photograph would be the most logical thing in the whole world.
> фотографи желание be наибольший логический тинг влияние целый мир.
>No body would be suspicious of anything.
>Никакой тело желание be подозрительный of anything.
>> >Other factors, such as sabotaging the S-280's brakes and air-bags, >briefing the escort to monitor the crash but not get involved, etc, >could have been achieved by MAF's backers, over MAF's head, The theft and modification of the vehicle could have been well disguised.
>> >Еще фактор, такой as саботировать S-280's тормоз с air-bags, > инструктаж охрана на староста грохот а not доставать включать, etc, > консервировать иметь been достигать около MAF's backers, за MAF's голова, воровство с модификация of автомобиль консервировать иметь been колодец маскировать.
> >such that >Siegel and Musa (Etoile Limousines) and Wingfield and Dournot were not >only working for MAF, but for his masters, DIRECTLY.
>>Такой негодование> Siegel с Musa( Etoile лимузин) с Wingfield с Dournot were not> единственный работа срок MAF, а срок his хозяин, DIRECTLY.
> However, if that were part of the plot, then PLANS TO GET THAT VEHICLE TO THAT PLACE IN TIME WOULD HAVE TO HAVE BEEN ROCK SOLID FOR MONTHS IN ADVANCE.
>Однако, раз негодование were часть of заговор, тогда ПЛАН НА ДОСТАВАТЬ НЕГОДОВАНИЕ АВТОМОБИЛЬ НА НЕГОДОВАНИЕ МЕСТО ВЛИЯНИЕ ВРЕМ ЖЕЛАНИЕ ИМЕТЬ НА ИМЕТЬ BEEN ГИБРАЛТАР ТЕЛО СРОК МЕСЯЦ ВЛИЯНИЕ ПРОДВИЖЕНИЕ.
> There is the clear windows in one train of thought and defective equipment as possibly another.
>There is очищать окно влияние 1 поезд of думать с неполный оборудование as possibly другой.
>> >Indeed, assuming that MAF did not know that the fatal crash was >intended, those of MAF's employees who MUST have known that a fatal >crash was intended, MUST have been working directly for those who >intentionally engineered it.
>> >Indeed, принимать негодование MAF делать not знать негодование fatal грохот was> намереваться, those of MAF's рабочий who НЕОБХОДИМОСТЬ иметь знать негодование fatal> грохот was намереваться, НЕОБХОДИМОСТЬ иметь been работа directly срок those who> intentionally создавать it.
>> If a crash after the photo were planned the least people in the area who needed to know was just the driver of the white car.
>>Раз грохот через фотография were планировать наименьший народ влияние площадь who нуждаться на знать was справедливый водитель of белизна автомобиль.
> Second could have been the photographer on the back of the motorcycle who had to aim a shot into the driver's eyes.
>2 консервировать иметь been фотограф в спина of мотоциклет who иметь на цель стрелять сгибание водитель глаз.
> >>>At least, he describes the "white car" >>>passing him, and disappearing westwards, before he begins to describe >>>the motor-bike overtaking the Mercedes and cutting-in in front of it.
>>>>Около наименьший, he описывать " белизна автомобиль" >>> прохождение him, с исчезать westwards, раньше he начинать на описывать>>> motor-bike догонять Mercedes с cutting-in in front of it.
> >> >>So this gets the locations screwed up and out of sync.
>>> >>So this доставать локаци привинчивать растущий с out of sync.
>>> >>> >>> The impression given (that the "white car" was a long way ahead of the >>>Mercedes and the motorbike) is probably an illusion created by the >>>difficulty involved in describing the situation; >> >>Also, a witness in a high speed drive has their own road to watch as >>well as looking in the rear view mirror.
>>> >>> >>> впечатление давать( негодование " белизна автомобиль" was лонга путь ahead of >>> Mercedes с motorbike) is probably an иллюзи создавать около >>> трудность включать влияние описывать ситуация; >> >> с, свидетель влияние максимум проноситься водить иметь their принадлежащий дорога на часы as>> колодец as смотреть влияние тыл вид зеркало.
> So one might have a strobe >>light effect of only seeing a flash of an instant when they happened >>to have the opportunity to look in the mirror.
>So 1 могущество иметь strobe>> зажигать результат of единственный пилить вспышка of an мгновение when they случаться>> на иметь возможность на взгляд влияние зеркало.
>>> >>>but there is no >>>escaping the conclusion that the Mercedes did not completely squeeze >>>past the white car, but came alongside it, on its left, in a sliding >>>collision, >> >>My suggestion would be to consider that the Merc was the >>vehicle in the middle of the road, that the white vehicle would >>have been on its right and the motorcycle on its left, three >>abreast.
>>> >>>А there is никакой>>> бежать окончание негодование Mercedes делать not completely сжатие>>> прошлый белизна автомобиль, а приезжать alongside it, в its уходить, влияние скользить>>> столкновение, >> >> My предложение желание be на рассматривать негодование Merc was >> автомобиль влияние средний of дорога, негодование белизна автомобиль желание>> иметь been в its правый с мотоциклет в its уходить, 3>> abreast.
>>> >>And that point photoflashes were fired and then the white >>car accelerated >> >>>which impelled the white car forwards, towards Levistre and >>>out of harm's way; >> >>And the motorcycle accelerated >> >>>whereupon the motorbike >> >>accelerated and swerved in front of >>the Mercedes.
>>> >>С негодование точка photoflashes were зажигать с тогда белизна>> автомобиль ускорять>> >>> какой побуждать белизна автомобиль нападающий, на Levistre с>>> out of вред путь; >> >> с мотоциклет ускорять>> >>> whereupon motorbike>> >> ускорять с отклоняться in front of>> Mercedes.
>>> >>No.
>>> >>Никакой.
> That is even wrong.
>Негодование is вечер вред.
> In my SH.
>Влияние my SH.
>>> >>Let's try it another way.
>>> >>Пускать Let's попытка it другой путь.
> More to the >>"DELIBERATE BUMP OFF" conspiracy >>supposition.
>More на >>" РАЗМЫШЛЯТЬ СТОЛКНОВЕНИЕ ДАЛЬНИЙ" заговор>> предположение.
>>> >>In that, the motorcycle would have fired >>a series of quick flashes as it accelerated >>in front of the Mercedes.
>>> >>Влияние негодование, мотоциклет желание иметь зажигать>> series of быстрый вспышка as it ускорять>> in front of Mercedes.
> The first flash >>would have been into the back seat but >>a second would have been directly into >>the eyes of Henri Paul.
> 1 вспышка>> желание иметь been сгибание спина место а>> 2 желание иметь been directly сгибание>> глаз of Henri Пол.
> Having blinded >>him, it would then accelerate and as soon >>as it was clear the vehicle on the right would >>bump the Mercedes' front into the center >>pilars.
>Иметь ослеплять>> him, it желание тогда ускорять с as soon>> as it was очищать автомобиль в правый желание>> столкновение Mercedes' перед сгибание center>> pilars.
>>> >>>overtook the slowed Mercedes >>>and (also according to Levistre) cut-in in front of it and produced "a >>>searing burst of light, much brighter than a photo-flash".
>>> >>>Догонять замедлять Mercedes>>> с( с according to Levistre) cut-in in front of it с предъявлять" >>> сушить взрыв of зажигать, много яркий кроме photo-flash".
>>>> >>>At this point, Levistre, braked and came to a halt near the western end >>>of the tunnel.
>>>> >>>Около this точка, Levistre, тормозить с приезжать на остановка возле вестерн конец>>> of тоннель.
> >> >>More correctly, NOT "At this point" but at "A POINT" near the >>western end of the tunnel.
>>> >>More correctly, NOT" около this точка" а около" ТОЧКА" возле >> вестерн конец of тоннель.
>>> >>>The Mercedes had crashed, and the bikers (like Brenda >>>Wells, Levistre affirms that there were two of them) had stopped by the >>>wreck.
>>> >>> Mercedes иметь падать, с bikers( любить Бренда>>> колодец, Levistre подтверждать негодование there were 2 of them) иметь останавливать около >>> крушение.
> >> >>That does not sound possible to me.
>>> >>Негодование делать not Зунд возможное на me.
> It may depend upon speed.
>It май зависеть в проноситься.
>>>Assuming that the whole action was taking place at some >>above average speed then if at least the bike on the left had >>accelerated ahead of the Merc it could not have stopped.
>>>Принимать негодование целый действие was захватывать место около некий>> выше среднее проноситься тогда раз около наименьший рой в уходить иметь>> ускорять ahead of Merc it консервировать not иметь останавливать.
> If it >>did not stop then it may have passed Livestre and exited the >>tunnel.
>Раз it>> делать not остановка тогда it май иметь идти Livestre с уходит >> тоннель.
> Whether a second bike stopped might be considerable.
>Whether 2 рой останавливать могущество be значительный.
>>> >>>One of them got off, momentarily, to look into the Mercedes, >>>jumped back on again, and the bike sped off, passing Levistre as it did >>>so.
>>> >>>1 of them доставать дальний, momentarily, на взгляд сгибание Mercedes, >>> прыгать спина в again, с рой проноситься дальний, прохождение Levistre as it делать>>> so.
> Levistre describes the bike as "black" and the two men as "dressed >>>in black with black helmets".
>Levistre описывать рой as" чернота" с 2 мужчина as" одевать>>> влияние чернота with чернота шлем".
> The whole thing took just a few seconds.
> целый тинг захватывать справедливый немногие seconds.
>>>> >>>Considerable efforts have been made to discredit Levistre.
>>>> >>>Значительный усилие иметь been делать на недоверие Levistre.
> It has been >>>said, for example, that his attitude to the press was "hostile" and that >>>he was trying to "gain attention"; but there could be another reason for >>>these attacks on his character - he witnessed a murder!
>It иметь been>>> говорить, срок пример, негодование his позиция на надавливание was" неприятельский" с негодование>>> he was пытаться на" заработок внимание"; а there консервировать be другой причина срок>>> these нападение в his характер - he очевидцем убийство!
> There is no >>>other interpretation you can put on his testimony.
>There is никакой>>> еще толкование you консервировать класть в his предмет.
>>>> >>>Yes, indeed (to answer your question) the lanes were used as a slow-lane >>>and an overtaking lane - ludicrous speed-limit signs notwithstanding!
>>>> >>>Yes, indeed( на ответ your вопрос) дорожка were употреблять as slow-lane>>> с an догонять дорожка - смехотворный speed-limit признак notwithstanding!
>>>> >>>Other answers in another post >> >><a href="http://members.home.com/godsbrain">G.O.D.S.B.R.A.I.N.</a><br> > >-- >Steve Reed Alvin H.
>>>> >>>Еще ответ влияние другой столб>> >>< href=" http:// член. дом. com/ godsbrain"> G. O. D. S. B. R. . я. N.</ >< br> > > --> Стив тростник Alvin H.
> White <a href="http://members.home.com/godsbrain">G.O.D.S.B.R.A.I.N.</a><br>
>Белизна< href=" http:// член. дом. com/ godsbrain"> G. O. D. S. B. R. . я. N.</ >< br>
GODS...@home.com
On Thu, 4 May 2000 23:16:29 +0100, Steve Reed
<asr...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> wrote:
>But WHOSE left are we talking about, Henri Paul's or Levistre's?
If Levistre was looking in his rear view mirror his left and
Paul's left would be the same.
GODS...@home.com
>From GODS...@HOME.COM Wed May 03 15:40:25 2000 Path: news1.
>Bóng GODSBRAIN@ CHO ű. COM cŻ+i nhau chˇc 3 15: 40: 25 2000 con =ŻŚng: news1.
>frmt1.
>frmt1.
>sfba.
>sfba.
>home.
>ChŚ +.
>com!
>com!
>newshub1.
>newshub1.
>home.
>ChŚ +.
>com!
>com!
>news.
>news.
>home.
>ChŚ +.
>com!
>com!
>news1.
>news1.
>frmt1.
>frmt1.
>sfba.
>sfba.
>home.
>ChŚ +.
>com.
>com.
>POSTED!
>BĹ TR-!
>not-for-mail From: GODS...@HOME.COM Newsgroups: alt.
>not-for-mail bóng: GODSBRAIN@ CHO ű. COM Newsgroups: alt.
>conspiracy.
>-m mŻu.
>princess-diana Subject: Re: Di: Paul, Henri, History, 60 Page Autopsy, Etc. Organization: <a href="http://members.home.com/godsbrain">G.O.D.S.B.R.A.I.N.</a><br> Reply-To: GODS...@HOME.COM,GODS...@AOL.COM Message-ID: <suv0hs4b86ldf6kh1...@4ax.com> References: <20000416220330.
>princess-diana chn ngľ: Re: Di: Paul, Henri, l+ch s+, 60 trang phTp, Etc. są tŚ ch-c: < chiŹc href=" http:// bŚ phşn cna c+ thź. chŚ +. com/ godsbrain"> G. O. D. S. B. R. chiŹc. I. N.</ chiŹc>< br> Reply-To: GODSBRAIN@ CHO ű. COM, GODSBRAIN@ AOL. COM Message-ID: < suv0hs4b86ldf6kh11pg4usgb988mp55km@ 4ax. com> gińy gi+i thiŤu: < 20000416220330.
>18658.
>18658.
>0000...@ng-cg1.aol.com> <38fa9...@huge.aa.net> <8n1mfss0cu2ou4qhe...@4ax.com> <025220ee.
>4069@ ng-cg1. aol. com> < 38fa90de_2@ khŚng lŚ. aa. thąc> < 8n1mfss0cu2ou4qhej2ujs106jhqfrbbol@ 4ax. com> < 025220ee.
>5e23...@usw-ex0104-033.remarq.com> <VHL8$AAWpz$4I...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> <03cfeca4.
>5e23de39@ usw-ex0104-033. remarq. com> < VHL8$ AAWpz$ 4IAaS@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> < 03cfeca4.
>e454...@usw-ex0105-038.remarq.com> <5AGHurAe...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> <022cd178.
>e454e6ea@ usw-ex0105-038. remarq. com> < 5AGHurAeP0A5IAT7@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> < 022cd178.
>7c06...@usw-ex0105-037.remarq.com> <0PU0NLBY...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> <2ehrgsobh76u0sheo...@4ax.com> <EwaIiIA+...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.
>7c06d2cf@ usw-ex0105-037. remarq. com> < 0PU0NLBYabD5IAaW@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> < 2ehrgsobh76u0sheo8fsoso92h16ood0pr@ 4ax. com> < EwaIiIA+ 6EE5IAXR@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> X-Newsreader: Forte chn =iźm 1.
>7/32.
>7/ 32.
>534 MIME-Version: 1.
>534 MIME-Version: 1.
>0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 683 Date: Wed, 03 May 2000 22:40:25 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.
>0 Content-Type: bai kh=a/ -Śng bóng; charset= us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit bşc: 683 k-: cŻ+i nhau, 3 chˇc 2000 22: 40: 25 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.
>7.
>7.
>83.
>83.
>23 X-Complaints-To: ab...@home.net X-Trace: news1.
>23 X-Complaints-To: hn t°c@ chŚ +. thąc X-Trace: news1.
>frmt1.
>frmt1.
>sfba.
>sfba.
>home.
>ChŚ +.
>com 957393625 24.
>com 957393625 24.
>7.
>7.
>83.
>83.
>23 (Wed, 03 May 2000 15:40:25 PDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 03 May 2000 15:40:25 PDT Xref: newshub1.
>23( cŻ+i nhau, 3 chˇc 2000 15: 40: 25 PDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: cŻ+i nhau, 3 chˇc 2000 15: 40: 25 PDT Xref: newshub1.
>home.
>ChŚ +.
>com alt.
>com alt.
>conspiracy.
>-m mŻu.
>princess-diana:30031204 -------- </html> OK.
>princess-diana: 30031204 --------</ html> OK.
> What do we call this?
>G8 bay biŤn we lŚi kOu g i this?
> The daily replay of the daily revised version of the God's Brain Suppositional Hypothesis.
>Con hóng ngay replay bóng con hóng ngay duyŤt l+i bai d+ch bóng con chˇ trŚi npo Suppositional giS thuyŹt.
> Act ______ Scene ________ Having read the below a time or two, or few, some opportunity to explain weighted influence factors in the construction of the daily hypothesis.
>Ch-ng thŻ ______ cSnh ________ bít biŹt =ŻŚc con dŻ+i chiŹc c+ hŚi hay la 2, hay la kh(ng nhi˝u, ch+ng c+ hŚi cho giSi nghea weighted ngŻŚi c= thŹ ląc nhGn tť bóng con cńu trˇc cGu bóng con hóng ngay giS thuyŹt.
> Since the authorities have had two and a half years with the manpower, peoplepower, staff power, of what was it reported?
>B+i chŻng con chuyOn gia bít bít 2 cˇng chiŹc ba mŻ+i phˇt nsm bóng con manpower, peoplepower, ba toong chfnh quy˝n, bóng g8 b+ it bßo?
> Some 24 full time investigators and million(s) dollar equivalent budgets I am not competing with that.
>Ch+ng 24 chan ch-a c+ hŚi investigators cˇng 1000000( s) -Śng =( la t+ .. ngGn que I b+ kh(ng c+nh tranh bóng la.
> The outcome reports of that investigation appear to be: Drunk driver speeds without the care of D+D+TRJ and abruptly turns left into a central column.
>Con hşu quS biOn bSn bóng la investigation c= vd cho b+: hˇt ngŻŚi cŃm mßy ch+y nhanh kh(ng con są chsm chˇ bóng D+ D+ TRJ cˇng abruptly chŚ ngoút b÷ h=a ra chiŹc chfnh cŚt.
> Simple Road Traffic Accident RTA.
>B8nh d+ con =ŻŚng viŤc bu(n bßn cßi kh(ng chn yŹu RTA.
> When and over the time since the creation of alt.
>Khi ma cˇng h+n con c+ hŚi b+i chŻng con są sßng t+o bóng alt.
>conspiracy.
>-m mŻu.
>princess-diana by b.
>princess-diana bóng b.
>anana his philosophical position as I read it is to approximately take the position for sake of arguement that Diana was killed as the result of a conspiracy.
>anana .... nha triŹt h c chŚ cßi ma I biŹt =ŻŚc it b+ cho approximately bít con chŚ b+i v8 lŚi fch bóng arguement la Diana b+ giŹt cßi ma con kŹt quS bóng chiŹc -m mŻu.
> Because it has appeared to me that while times, places, people, and motives have been discussed I have a feeling that there has been less than reasonable consideration of some possibilities.
>B+i v8 it bít c= vd cho me la ch+ng nao c=n c+ hŚi, chŚ, ba con, cˇng c+ bít b+ ban cpi I bít chiŹc cSm thńy la chŚ ńy bít b+ bT h+n h+n biŹt lż phSi c+ bóng ch+ng są c= thź.
> As a consequence of that belief I am trying to construct a suppositional hypothesis that will identify possible, persons, places, things that may be considered as possible.
>Cßi ma chiŹc hşu quS bóng la l=ng tin I b+ cť gíng cho dąng chiŹc suppositional giS thuyŹt la chˇc thŻ coi nhŻ nhau c= thź ..., 1 ngŻŚi, chŚ, chuyŤn la chˇc b+ coi nhŻ cßi ma c= thź ....
> The intent is to create multiple fictional tracks such that the most possible/ununderstood may be considered.
>Con m°c =fch b+ cho gGy ra bŚi fictional dńu nhŻ lo+i == la con hŃu hŹt c= thź .../ ununderstood chˇc b+ coi nhŻ.
> Many of the pieces are for the most part agreed as having been in the area but there is a lot of discrepancy as to the EXACT location at a SPECIFIC INSTANT.
>Lím bóng con c°c b+ b+i v8 con hŃu hŹt bŚ phşn h=a thuşn cßi ma bít b+ bóng con 1 diŤn tfch nhŻng chŚ ńy b+ chiŹc l( bóng są tŻ+ng phSn cßi ma cho con CH-NH X-C są xßc =+nh v+ trf nhím vao chiŹc DŚT KHO-T CHĹC L-T.
> My intent is to create this fictional supposition to give, or try to determine, the differences between points of agreement and points of disharmony.
>My m°c =fch b+ cho gGy ra this fictional giS thuyŹt cho biŹu, hay la s+ th+ cho lam cho c= quyŹt tGm, con mťi bńt h=a giľa chńm bóng giao kFo cˇng chńm bóng są bńt =Śng.
> Agreement/Disagreement and Harmony/Disharmony.
>Giao kFo/ są bńt h=a cˇng h=a Gm/ są bńt =Śng.
> Concord vs Discord.
>Są h=a hŚp vs są bńt h=a.
> If there might have been common interest to finance a joint project to lessen Diana's influence with the media because she was percieved to be "stepping on someones toes" , my words, then how might some such plan, plot, conspiracy, have been considered achievable from a variety of possible participant's points of view?
>Chsng chŚ ńy ląc bít b+ bpi =ńt c(ng lŚi fch cho tai chfnh chiŹc chŚ nťi dą ßn cho bT =i Diana's ngŻŚi c= thŹ ląc bóng con media b+i v8 she b+ percieved cho b+" bŻ+c bóng someones mvi" , my khŞu hiŤu, thŹ th8 b+i v8 ląc ch+ng nhŻ lo+i == dan bai, cťt truyŤn, -m mŻu, bít b+ coi nhŻ c= thź thąc hiŤn =ŻŚc bóng chiŹc m+ bóng c= thź ... dą vao chńm bóng cßch nh8n?
> My typing fingers are not going to stand too long a discussion at this point so I am going to try to speed along.
>My -ßnh mßy ng=n tay b+ kh(ng going to bít =-ng cvng thŚi gian lGu chiŹc viŤc ban cpi nhím vao this chńm thŹ I b+ going to s+ th+ cho ch+y nhanh d c theo.
> My supposition is that if there was a conspiracy it had to be to do something.
>My giS thuyŹt b+ la chsng chŚ ńy b+ chiŹc -m mŻu it bít cho b+ cho bay biŤn something.
> A photo of Diana giving Dodi a blow job in the back seat of a limo would be pretty good.
>ChiŹc photo bóng Diana biŹu Dodi chiŹc b+ cuťn =i c( g viŤc bóng con lˇi l+i v˝ phfa sau chŚ bóng chiŹc limo would b+ bT xinh cna t(i gi÷i.
>For the photo to achieve maximum benefit it had to be secret and to be used as a threat.
>B+i v8 con photo cho gianh =ŻŚc cao nhńt lŚi it bít cho b+ bf mşt cˇng cho b+ c= th=i quen cßi ma chiŹc są =e d a.
>The actual publication in mass media would deflate its power.
>Con c= thşt sßch bßo xuńt bSn bóng khťi media would lam xŹp cna cßi == chfnh quy˝n.
> But it had to have strong and undisputable evidence that it was TRUE if it were ever going to be used.
>NhŻng it bít cho bít b˝n cˇng undisputable bóng ch-ng la it b+ CH-N CH-NH chsng it b+ bao giŚ going to b+ c= th=i quen.
> For some paparazzi to "peeping tom" photo a divorcee with her boyfriend in private was not going to do the job.
>B+i v8 ch+ng paparazzi cho" hT nh8n tom" photo chiŹc divorcee bóng her boyfriend bóng binh nh8 b+ kh(ng going to bay biŤn con c( g viŤc.
> So the construct of a whore for money with an oily bedhopper in the back seat of a very expensive limo would be much more philosophically correct for the purpose of a conspiracy to get a photo to use for blackmail in the future but not for actual publication.
>ThŹ con dąng bóng chiŹc gßi =iŹm b+i v8 ti˝n bóng chiŹc c= dŃu bedhopper bóng con lˇi l+i v˝ phfa sau chŚ bóng chiŹc chfnh xa hoa limo would b+ lím h+n philosophically s+a b+i v8 con chn =+nh bóng chiŹc -m mŻu cho b+ chiŹc photo cho cßch dˇng b+i v8 b+ lam ti˝n bóng con tŻ+ng lai nhŻng kh(ng b+i v8 c= thşt sßch bßo xuńt bSn.
> On Wed, 3 May 2000 17:07:26 +0100, Steve Reed <asr...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> wrote: >Path: news1.
>Bóng cŻ+i nhau, 3 chˇc 2000 17: 7: 26+ 100, Steve lau< asreed@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> giao d+ch thŻ t+: > con =ŻŚng: news1.
>frmt1.
>frmt1.
>sfba.
>sfba.
>home.
>ChŚ +.
>com!
>com!
>newshub2.
>newshub2.
>rdc1.
>rdc1.
>sfba.
>sfba.
>home.
>ChŚ +.
>com!
>com!
>newshub1.
>newshub1.
>home.
>ChŚ +.
>com!
>com!
>news.
>news.
>home.
>ChŚ +.
>com!
>com!
>feeder.
>BŃu sľa.
>via.
>Qua.
>net!
>Thąc!
>diablo.
>diablo.
>theplanet.
>theplanet.
>net!
>Thąc!
>news.
>news.
>theplanet.
>theplanet.
>net!
>Thąc!
>newspost.
>newspost.
>theplanet.
>theplanet.
>net!
>Thąc!
>lastings.
>lastings.
>softnet.
>softnet.
>co.
>co.
>uk!
>uk!
>asreed >From: Steve Reed <asr...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> >Newsgroups: alt.
>asreed> bóng: Steve lau< asreed@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> > Newsgroups: alt.
>conspiracy.
>-m mŻu.
>princess-diana >Subject: Re: Di: Paul, Henri, History, 60 Page Autopsy, Etc. >Date: Wed, 3 May 2000 17:07:26 +0100 >Organization: Home >Lines: 297 >Message-ID: <EwaIiIA+...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> >References: <20000416201432.
>princess-diana> chn ngľ: Re: Di: Paul, Henri, l+ch s+, 60 trang phTp, Etc. > k-: cŻ+i nhau, 3 chˇc 2000 17: 7: 26+ 100> są tŚ ch-c: chŚ +> bşc: 297> Message-ID: < EwaIiIA+ 6EE5IAXR@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> > gińy gi+i thiŤu: < 20000416201432.
>18648.
>18648.
>0000...@ng-cg1.aol.com> > <20000416220330.
>4517@ ng-cg1. aol. com> > < 20000416220330.
>18658.
>18658.
>0000...@ng-cg1.aol.com> <38fa9...@huge.aa.net> > <8n1mfss0cu2ou4qhe...@4ax.com> > <025220ee.
>4069@ ng-cg1. aol. com> < 38fa90de_2@ khŚng lŚ. aa. thąc> > < 8n1mfss0cu2ou4qhej2ujs106jhqfrbbol@ 4ax. com> > < 025220ee.
>5e23...@usw-ex0104-033.remarq.com> > <VHL8$AAWpz$4I...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> > <03cfeca4.
>5e23de39@ usw-ex0104-033. remarq. com> > < VHL8$ AAWpz$ 4IAaS@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> > < 03cfeca4.
>e454...@usw-ex0105-038.remarq.com> > <5AGHurAe...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> > <022cd178.
>e454e6ea@ usw-ex0105-038. remarq. com> > < 5AGHurAeP0A5IAT7@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> > < 022cd178.
>7c06...@usw-ex0105-037.remarq.com> > <0PU0NLBY...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> > <2ehrgsobh76u0sheo...@4ax.com> >Reply-To: Andrew Steven Reed <ar...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> >NNTP-Posting-Host: modem88.
>7c06d2cf@ usw-ex0105-037. remarq. com> > < 0PU0NLBYabD5IAaW@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> > < 2ehrgsobh76u0sheo8fsoso92h16ood0pr@ 4ax. com> > Reply-To: Andrew Steven lau< areed@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> > NNTP-Posting-Host: modem88.
>fred.
>fred.
>pol.
>pol.
>co.
>co.
>uk >Mime-Version: 1.
>uk> Mime-Version: 1.
>0 >X-Trace: newsreaderg1.
>0> X-Trace: newsreaderg1.
>core.
>HŚt.
>theplanet.
>theplanet.
>net 957376918 19338 195.
>Thąc 957376918 19338 195.
>92.
>92.
>7.
>7.
>216 (3 May 2000 18:01:58 GMT) >NNTP-Posting-Date: 3 May 2000 18:01:58 GMT >X-Complaints-To: ab...@theplanet.net >X-Newsreader: Turnpike Integrated Version 4.
>216( 3 chˇc 2000 18: 1: 58 GMT) > NNTP-Posting-Date: 3 chˇc 2000 18: 1: 58 GMT> X-Complaints-To: hn t°c@ theplanet. thąc> X-Newsreader: Turnpike liOn hŚp bai d+ch 4.
>02 M <TWkHBtca5wWBvmfWwoLIWQkgFM> >Xref: newshub1.
>2 M< TWkHBtca5wWBvmfWwoLIWQkgFM> > Xref: newshub1.
>home.
>ChŚ +.
>com alt.
>com alt.
>conspiracy.
>-m mŻu.
>princess-diana:30031199 > >In article <2ehrgsobh76u0sheo...@4ax.com>, >GODS...@HOME.COM writes >>>there was "a white car", >>>in the middle of the road, behind him.
>princess-diana: 30031199> > bóng bai bßo< 2ehrgsobh76u0sheo8fsoso92h16ood0pr@ 4ax. com>, > GODSBRAIN@ CHO ű. COM giao d+ch thŻ t+>>> chŚ ńy b+" chiŹc bŚt tríng toa", >>> bóng con trung gian bóng con con =ŻŚng, kTm him.
> >> >>So Livestre lied.
>>> >>ThŹ Livestre nóm.
> The white car was not in the middle >>of the road, the Mercedes was in the middle of the >>road.
>Con bŚt tríng toa b+ kh(ng bóng con trung gian>> bóng con con =ŻŚng, con Mercedes b+ bóng con trung gian bóng con>> con =ŻŚng.
> Why did Livestre lie?
>T+i sao bay biŤn Livestre nóm?
> Maybe Livestre did not lie in that particular.
>C= lż Livestre bay biŤn kh(ng nóm bóng la 1 -úc biŤt.
> One needs to be very careful as to "at what instant" and did he say the middle of the road or the middle of the lane?
>1 lˇc ho+n n+n cho b+ chfnh chu =ßo cßi ma cho" nhím vao g8 chťc lßt" cˇng bay biŤn he n=i con trung gian bóng con con =ŻŚng hay la con trung gian bóng con ng) hdm?
> It was said that he had moved into the right lane.
>It b+ n=i la he bít chuyźn h=a ra con cŃn phSi c= ng) hdm.
> If he said the white car was in the middle of the [right] lane I would agree.
>Chsng he n=i con bŚt tríng toa b+ bóng con trung gian bóng con[ cŃn phSi c=] ng) hdm I would h=a thuşn.
>> >Levistre is not contradicting himself.
>> >Levistre b+ kh(ng mGu thutn v+i chfnh anh ta.
> He saw the white car "au milieu >de la chaussee" So, does "chaussee" come closer to translating as "lane" or on the other hand, "road?
>He chsm lo con bŚt tríng toa" au milieu> de la chaussee" thŹ, bay biŤn" chaussee" t+i bf h+i cho biŹn thanh cßi ma" ng) hdm" hay la bóng con khßc "mŚt tay", " con =ŻŚng?
>" Road having two lanes.
>"Con =ŻŚng bít 2 ng) hdm.
> >and was overtaken by it ("elle me double") But exactly where were the other actors at the exact instant that "elle me double?
>>Cˇng b+ xSy ra bńt th8nh l8nh bóng it(" elle me gńp =(i") nhŻng exactly n+i ma b+ con khßc diĄn viOn kTp nhím vao con chfnh xßc chťc lßt la" elle me gńp =(i?
>" >"Then", he >says ("puis j'observe [retroviseur] une autre auto toujours au milieu de >la route") "I saw [rear-view mirror] another car, also in the middle of >the road" So here we have a "milieu de la route.
>" >"ThŹ th8", he> n=i(" puis j'observe[ retroviseur] une autre xe h+i toujours au milieu de> la tuyŹn =ŻŚng") " I chsm lo[ rear-view gŻ+ng] khßc toa, cˇng bóng con trung gian bóng> con con =ŻŚng" thŹ + chŚ nay we bít chiŹc" milieu de la tuyŹn =ŻŚng.
>" Does that mean closer the lane or the road?
>"Bay biŤn la c= nghea la bf h+i con ng) hdm hay la con con =ŻŚng?
> >("et soudain une grosse moto sur sa gauche qui lui fait une >queue de poisson") "and, all of a sudden, a large motor-bike, to the >left of it, cutting-in in front of it".
>>("et soudain une grosse moto sur sa gauche qui lui fait une> lam c+ de poisson") " cˇng, m i bóng chiŹc bńt th8nh l8nh, chiŹc rŚng l+n motor-bike, cho con> b÷ bóng it, cutting-in in front of it".
> I will take it that AT SOME POINT a large motor-bike, comming from the left of it, and then cutting-in in front of it.
>I chˇc thŻ bít it la NHüM V+O CH+NG CHäM chiŹc rŚng l+n motor-bike, comming bóng con b÷ bóng it, cˇng thŹ th8 cutting-in in front of it.
> > >(another ambiguity is created by the expression "sur sa gauche", which >could be translated "to ITS left" [to the right of it, from where >Levistre says he was] or "to the left of it" [as seen from Levistre's >alleged position] and, since Levistre claims that the Mercedes "was in >the middle of the road" at that point, it could be either) Since I am trying to construct a hypothetical scene where the Merc was astraddle the white line that separated the two west bound lanes and a photographing motorcycle was to the left side of the Merc at the exact instant that the white car was on the right side.
>> >(Khßc chľ b+ gGy ra bóng con gi ng" sur sa gauche", ai> biŹt b+ biŹn thanh" cho CŁA C-I -+ b÷" [ cho con cŃn phSi c= bóng it, bóng n+i ma> Levistre n=i he b+] hay la" cho con b÷ bóng it" [ cßi ma chsm lo bóng Levistre's> dtn ch-ng chŚ] cˇng, b+i chŻng Levistre quy˝n yOu sßch la con Mercedes" b+ bóng> con trung gian bóng con con =ŻŚng" nhím vao la chńm, it biŹt b+ hoúc) b+i chŻng I b+ cť gíng cho dąng chiŹc hypothetical cSnh n+i ma con Merc b+ astraddle con bŚt tríng bşc la separated con 2 v˝ phfa tGy buŚc ng) hdm cˇng chiŹc ch°p Snh cho motorcycle b+ cho con b÷ b˝ bóng con Merc nhím vao con chfnh xßc chťc lßt la con bŚt tríng toa b+ bóng con cŃn phSi c= b˝.
> .
>
> .
>
> .
>
>> >"At the same instant, for a fraction of a second, there was a tremendous >flash of light, but nothing like the flash of a camera" ("Au meme >moment, en une fraction de seconde, un enorme eclair jaillit, mais rien >a voir avec le flash d'un appareil-photo") > >My point is that the order of events is not completely clear.
>> >"Nhím vao con cˇng mŚt chťc lßt, b+i v8 chiŹc phGn sť bóng chiŹc 2, chŚ ńy b+ chiŹc dľ dŚi> tia l=e bóng bít l+a, nhŻng kh(ng b+i v8 con tia l=e bóng chiŹc mßy quay phim" (" Au meme> chťc, en une phGn sť de seconde, un enorme eclair jaillit, mais rien> chiŹc voir avec le tia l=e d'un appareil-photo") > > My chńm b+ la con bşc bóng są kiŤn b+ kh(ng completely chuŚn.
> It could >be that the bike cut-in in front of the Mercedes just before the white >car passed Levistre - either that, or the bike was further behind the >Mercedes, as both vehicles entered the tunnel, than Clifford, Olivier >and Thierry imply.
>It biŹt> b+ la con bike cut-in in front of con Mercedes chfnh c=n h+n con bŚt tríng> toa biŹn =i Levistre - hoúc la, hay la con bike b+ h+n nľa kTm con> Mercedes, cßi ma cS hai phŻ+ng tiŤn truy˝n bß ghi con -ŻŚng hŃm, h+n Clifford, Olivier> cˇng Thierry bao ham ˛.
> I suppose the bike could have braked, just before the Is there any chance that one of the skid marks, like the single one, was the bike?
>I chsng con bike biŹt bít dt, chfnh c=n h+n con b+ chŚ ńy bńt c- c+ hŚi la 1 bóng con canh dńu, b+i v8 con chn mŚt 1, b+ con bike?
> >tunnel (to avoid running into a Mercedes/white-car pile-up) and that >Levistre might not have been as far along the tunnel as he thought he >was.
>>-ŻŚng hŃm( cho trßnh cho ch+y h=a ra chiŹc Mercedes/ white-car pile-up) cˇng la> Levistre ląc kh(ng bít b+ cßi ma xa d c theo con -ŻŚng hŃm cßi ma he cho la he> b+.
> There is another branch of my lack of understanding and that follows along a train of thought that the picture was intended but the crash was an accident.
>ChŚ ńy b+ khßc chi bóng my są thiŹu bóng hiźu cˇng la kŹ theo d c theo chiŹc chuŚi bóng cho la la con b-c tranh b+ c= ˛ muťn nhŻng con są phß sSn b+ chiŹc cßi kh(ng chn yŹu.
> In the "accident" hypothesis approximately the motorcycle photographer could have accidently fired a half metre too far forward and instead of shooting in to the back seat he could have accidently hit HP directly in the eyes as Henri Paul looked to the left as the motorcycle came along side his side window.
>Bóng con" cßi kh(ng chn yŹu" giS thuyŹt approximately con motorcycle photographer biŹt bít accidently bín chiŹc ba mŻ+i phˇt mTt cvng xa ti˝n =+o cˇng instead of bín bóng cho con lˇi l+i v˝ phfa sau chŚ he biŹt bít accidently ngtu nhiOn t8m thńy HP lşp t-c bóng con lŚ cßi ma Henri Paul chˇ ˛ cho con b÷ cßi ma con motorcycle t+i d c theo b˝ .... b˝ c+a kfnh.
>Then the blinding flash could have caused HP to FLINCH and swerve to the right just a little.
>ThŹ th8 con lam mˇ qußng tia l=e biŹt bít bSo HP cho LUI B+ňC cˇng lam chŤch cho con cŃn phSi c= chfnh chiŹc bT.
> At that point hitting the rear of the accelerating white car.
>Nhím vao la chńm ngtu nhiOn t8m thńy con bŚ phşn =óng sau bóng con bŻ+c mau h+n bŚt tríng toa.
> As the white car's rear goes to the right its front goes to the left.
>Cßi ma con bŚt tríng toa bŚ phşn =óng sau goes to con cŃn phSi c= cna cßi == mút goes to con b÷.
> To correct, the driver throws to the right and the rear goes to the left.
>Cho s+a, con ngŻŚi cŃm mßy lao cho con cŃn phSi c= cˇng con bŚ phşn =óng sau goes to con b÷.
> Essentially tossing the front of the Merc into the central columns.
>BSn chńt ch=ng chanh con mút bóng con Merc h=a ra con chfnh cŚt.
> >Thus, the Mercedes hit the white car, side-to-side, and impelled it >forwards, towards Levistre, and was FOLLOWING it, as it passed >Levistre's position, and as the bike overtook the Mercedes.
>>NhŻ thŹ, con Mercedes ngtu nhiOn t8m thńy con bŚt tríng toa, side-to-side, cˇng bít buŚc it> ti˝n =+o, hŻ+ng v˝ Levistre, cˇng b+ Kč THEO it, cßi ma it biŹn =i> Levistre's chŚ, cˇng cßi ma con bike xSy ra bńt th8nh l8nh con Mercedes.
> I think that the first, photographing, bike should have been ahead of the white car.
>I cho la la con 1, ch°p Snh cho, bike should bít b+ lOn trŻ+c bóng con bŚt tríng toa.
> If the bike and the car essentially accelerated at the same instant the bike would outrun the car.
>Chsng con bike cˇng con toa bSn chńt bŻ+c mau h+n nhím vao con cˇng mŚt chťc lßt con bike would vŻŚt lOn trŻ+c con toa.
> I think.
>I cho la.
> Bikes are far faster at acceleration that cars.
>Bikes b+ xa b˝n nhím vao gia tťc la toa.
> Any disagreements?
>Bńt c- są bńt h=a?
>Of course, with two riders and a turbo car ...?
>Bóng chi˝u hŻ+ng, bóng 2 ngŻŚi cŻŚi ngąa cˇng chiŹc turbo toa...?
> For one thing, you are supposing then that the white car was ahead of the Merc at the instant that the Merc hit the central column/pilar/post.
>B+i v8 1 chuyŤn, you b+ chsng thŹ th8 la con bŚt tríng toa b+ lOn trŻ+c bóng con Merc nhím vao con chťc lßt la con Merc ngtu nhiOn t8m thńy con chfnh cŚt/ pilar/ bŻu =iŤn.
> That is in accord with my first guess.
>La b+ bóng h=a Ż+c bóng my 1 są ph÷ng =oßn.
>> >Does that clear things up?
>> >Bay biŤn la chuŚn chuyŤn lOn?
> No.
>Kh(ng.
> It smokes them up.
>It h+i thuťc them lOn.
> But gives a number of possible occurances to consider.
>NhŻng biŹu chiŹc sť bóng c= thź ... occurances cho coi nhŻ.
>>> >>>Behind that, he says, there was >>>"another car" (presumably the Mercedes S- 280) and behind that, a large >>>motor-bike.
>>> >>>KTm la, he n=i, chŚ ńy b+>>>" khßc toa" ( presumably con Mercedes S- 280) cˇng kTm la, chiŹc rŚng l+n>>> motor-bike.
> So my first thought on that is that that is a second bike.
>ThŹ my 1 cho la bóng la b+ la la b+ chiŹc 2 bike.
> And if we are talking about the left that might be better described as a second bike on the left as there might have been one or more bikes on the right in addition.
>Cˇng chsng we b+ ban tßn about con b÷ la ląc b+ gi÷i diĄn tS cßi ma chiŹc 2 bike bóng con b÷ cßi ma chŚ ńy ląc bít b+ 1 hay la h+n bikes bóng con cŃn phSi c= bóng phŃn thOm.
>>> >>Livestre lies again.
>>> >>Livestre nóm lŃn nľa.
>> >What do you mean?
>> >G8 bay biŤn you c= nghea la?
> What evidence is there that Levistre is "lying"?
>G8 bóng ch-ng b+ chŚ ńy la Levistre b+" nóm"?
> My supposition.
>My giS thuyŹt.
>> >> He clearly saw and may have been a part >>of a conspiracy to cover up.
>> >>He r) rang chsm lo cˇng chˇc bít b+ chiŹc bŚ phşn>> bóng chiŹc -m mŻu cho chŚ nˇp lOn.
> So in my supposition he saw it >>and he lied about it.
>ThŹ bóng my giS thuyŹt he chsm lo it>> cˇng he nóm about it.
> Now if we go off on a train of thought to >>explore a hypothesis that Livestre was deliberately lying then >>I'll have to think about that some more.
>B+i chŻng chsng we chńm d-t cßch bóng chiŹc chuŚi bóng cho la cho>> khSo sßt tn mn chiŹc giS thuyŹt la Livestre b+ deliberately nóm thŹ th8>> I'll nhńt =+nh bít cho cho la about la ch+ng h+n.
> I have not until the >>present considered the possibility that he was deliberately >>lying.
>I bít kh(ng cho =Źn con>> bGy giŚ coi nhŻ con są c= thź la he b+ deliberately>> nóm.
>>> >I have - he could be in the pay of Al-Fayed (or his high-level masters) >That's always a possibility; but why should we single him out?
>>> >I bít - he biŹt b+ bóng con danh cho bóng Al-Fayed( hay la .... high-level chn) > la b+ bao giŚ cvng chiŹc są c= thź; nhŻng t+i sao should we chn mŚt him cho =o vßn?
> I'm not singling him out.
>I'm b+ kh(ng singling him cho =o vßn.
> I am theorizing that there may have been a whole swarm of conspiring pap's surrounding Diana's car.
>I b+ theorizing la chŚ ńy chˇc bít b+ chiŹc b8nh an v( są bŃy bóng chung s-c pap's bao quanh Diana's toa.
> >What >about any (or ALL) of the other witnesses?
>>G8> about bńt c-( hay la MÜI) bóng con khßc bóng ch-ng?
> I am inclined to go with the >majority (who saw closely pursuing vehicles) and focus suspicion on >Mohammed and Souad who - alone - say they did not.
>I b+ c= chi˝u hŻ+ng cho chńm d-t bóng con> ham thiŹu tß( ai chsm lo closely mŻu cŃu phŻ+ng tiŤn truy˝n bß) cˇng tiOu =iźm chˇt bóng> Mohammed cˇng Souad ai - chn c= - n=i they bay biŤn kh(ng.
>> >>If he were deliberately lying and saw the three vehicles >>abreast, > > He says he saw them one behind the other - until the bike overtook the >Mercedes.
>> >>Chsng he b+ deliberately nóm cˇng chsm lo con 3 phŻ+ng tiŤn truy˝n bß>> bOn c+nh, > > He n=i he chsm lo them 1 kTm con khßc - cho =Źn con bike xSy ra bńt th8nh l8nh con> Mercedes.
> Then the bike and the Mercedes were "abreast", but the white >car - so he implies - had already overtaken him by then!
>ThŹ th8 con bike cˇng con Mercedes b+" bOn c+nh", nhŻng con bŚt tríng> toa - thŹ he bao ham ˛ - bít rŚi xSy ra bńt th8nh l8nh him bóng thŹ th8!
> But why should >you suspect this to be a lie?
>NhŻng t+i sao should> you ngŻŚi b+ t8nh nghi this cho b+ chiŹc nóm?
> I think you, we, need to be very careful about exactly what instant is being described as being related to any single comment.
>I cho la you, we, lˇc ho+n n+n cho b+ chfnh chu =ßo about exactly g8 chťc lßt b+ b+ diĄn tS cßi ma b+ c= h v+i cho bńt c- chn mŚt lŚi b8nh luşn.
>> >> the photo flashes, the motorcycle accelerate, >>the car on the right bump the Merc into the central >>pilars, > >You want to hypothesize that the bike-overtake/flash occurred BEFORE the >sliding collision?
>> >>Con photo tia l=e, con motorcycle bŻ+c mau h+n, >> con toa bóng con cŃn phSi c= chŚ sŻng bŻ+u con Merc h=a ra con chfnh>> pilars, > > You cßi cŃn thiŹt cho giS thuyŹt la con bike-overtake/ tia l=e nSy ra C-N HON con> b÷ są va ch+m?
> What on earth for?
>G8 bóng dGy =ńt b+i v8?
> Well, if the supposition is as two photographing vehicles taking a photograph from both sides at the same instant .
>Chfnh =ßng, chsng con giS thuyŹt b+ cßi ma 2 ch°p Snh cho phŻ+ng tiŤn truy˝n bß bít chiŹc b-c Snh bóng cS hai b˝ nhím vao con cˇng mŚt chťc lßt.
> .
>
> .
>
> .
>
> There may also have been two contacts between the two vehicles?
>ChŚ ńy chˇc cˇng bít b+ 2 są giao d+ch giľa con 2 phŻ+ng tiŤn truy˝n bß?
>The mirror thing may not have been considered significant.
>Con gŻ+ng chuyŤn chˇc kh(ng bít b+ coi nhŻ c= tfnh chńt gŚi ˛.
> The mirror would not have broken out the tail light.
>Con gŻ+ng would kh(ng bít cít cho =o vßn con mút sńp bít l+a.
> So if the tail light was broken would not one suspect a corresponding dent on the Merc's right front fender?
>ThŹ chsng con mút sńp bít l+a b+ cít would kh(ng 1 ngŻŚi b+ t8nh nghi chiŹc giao thiŤp bóng thŻ t+ dent bóng con Merc's cŃn phSi c= mút b-c chín cna l= sŻ+i?
>> In reading this over I can not understand quickly the actions to cover up circumstances by police, courts, etc. unless Diana bite off and swallowed the tip of Dodi's penis from the force of the crash.
>>Bóng są = c this h+n I biŹt kh(ng hiźu mau con bŚ mßy cho chŚ nˇp lOn hoan cSnh bóng cSnh sßt, buŚi chŃu, etc. nŹu kh(ng Diana bít vao cßch cˇng swallowed con ch=p bóng Dodi's penis bóng con hiŤu ląc bóng con są phß sSn.
> If some such had happened then that could explain a lot of things, But it would also demonstrate that there was no fear in the back seat at the time of crash which would be important to suggest that there was no demonstrated disagreement with Henri Paul's driving performance prior to the crash.
>Chsng ch+ng nhŻ lo+i == bít ngtu nhiOn xSy ra thŹ th8 la biŹt giSi nghea chiŹc l( bóng chuyŤn, nhŻng it would cˇng biźu t8nh la chŚ ńy b+ kh(ng są e sŚ bóng con lˇi l+i v˝ phfa sau chŚ nhím vao con c+ hŚi bóng są phß sSn ai would b+ quan tr ng cho gŚi la chŚ ńy b+ kh(ng biźu t8nh są bńt h=a bóng Henri Paul's b+t cuŚc biźu diĄn trŻ+c cho con są phß sSn.
> >> that the first photoflashing motorcycle sped off >>past him and out of the tunnel as well as the vehicle that >>had bumped the Merc.
>>>La con 1 photoflashing motorcycle ch+y nhanh cßch>> h+n him cˇng out of con -ŻŚng hŃm as well as con phŻ+ng tiŤn truy˝n bß la>> bít va m+nh con Merc.
> and then reported that in essence >>a followup motorcycle stopped to view into the Merc >>and it then resumed to exit the tunnel, etc. >> >You mean Levistre is concealing the existence of a second motorcycle?
>Cˇng thŹ th8 bßo la bóng bSn chńt>> chiŹc followup motorcycle b+t l+i cho cßch nh8n h=a ra con Merc>> cˇng it thŹ th8 chiŹm l+i cho są ra con -ŻŚng hŃm, etc. >> > You c= nghea la Levistre b+ che =şy con cuŚc sťng bóng chiŹc 2 motorcycle?
>>True, Thierry H.
>>ChGn chfnh, Thierry H.
> says he saw "several" motorcycles pursuing the >Mercedes, closely, towards the tunnel (he had a view along the cour >Albert Premier from the carriageway itself) but Clifford G.
>N=i he chsm lo" cß nhGn" motorcycles mŻu cŃu con> Mercedes, closely, hŻ+ng v˝ con -ŻŚng hŃm( he bít chiŹc cßch nh8n d c theo con cour> Albert thn tŻ+ng bóng con carriageway bSn thGn cßi == ...) nhŻng Clifford G.
> and Olivier >P (who were positioned to the right [north] of the road and could see no >more than the tunnel-entrance) report only " a car in front of the >Mercedes and a [one!
>Cˇng Olivier> P( ai b+ xßc =+nh v+ trf cna cho con cŃn phSi c=[ v˝ phfa bíc] bóng con con =ŻŚng cˇng biŹt chsm lo kh(ng> h+n h+n con tunnel-entrance) biOn bSn chn" chiŹc toa in front of con> Mercedes cˇng chiŹc[ 1!
>] powerful motor-cycle, 30 - 40 metres behind.
>]C= quy˝n ląc l+n motor-cycle, 30 - 40 mTt kTm.
> I think it was Brian Anderson's story that a motorcycle moved to pass the Merc on its left as it entered the tunnel, which would be exact in accord with my one theory.
>I cho la it b+ Brian Anderson's chuyŤn la chiŹc motorcycle chuyźn cho gińy phTp con Merc bóng cna cßi == b÷ cßi ma it ghi con -ŻŚng hŃm, ai would b+ chfnh xßc bóng h=a Ż+c bóng my 1 h c tuyŹt.
>> >Why should we not assume that the other bikes left the cour Albert >Premier, at the exit slip-road, leaving the pair on the bike, which >Clifford, Olivier and Levistre saw, to proceed into the tunnel for the >kill!?
>> >T+i sao should we kh(ng chiŹm lńy la con khßc bikes b÷ con cour Albert> thn tŻ+ng, nhím vao con są ra slip-road, b÷ con chiŹc bóng con bike, ai> Clifford, Olivier cˇng Levistre chsm lo, cho tiŹn lOn h=a ra con -ŻŚng hŃm b+i v8 con> giŹt!?
> I don't think that the word "kill" is at all proper in a larger view.
>I bay biŤn kh(ng cho la la con khŞu hiŤu" giŹt" b+ nhím vao m i chfnh xßc bóng chiŹc rŚng l+n cßch nh8n.
>"Photo" would I suggest be a more prevalent term for that point.
>"Photo" would I gŚi b+ chiŹc h+n th+nh hanh giß b+i v8 la chńm.
>> >>I would like to see the animation sequences down to the 1 meter >>resolution.
>> >>I would b+i v8 cho chsm lo con cao h-ng cSnh xuťng cho con 1 cßi =o>> ngh+ quyŹt.
> I think the main constant that we can use is the >>physical distance on the road as being traversed by the Merc.
>I cho la con chfnh bńt biŹn la we biŹt cßch dˇng b+ con>> c+ thź khoSng cßch bóng con con =ŻŚng cßi ma b+ nóm vít ngang qua bóng con Merc.
> >>So the animation reference frames could be identified by reference >>to the tunnel face as metres + "plus" or - "minus" the tunnel face.
>>>ThŹ con cao h-ng gińy gi+i thiŤu cńu trˇc biŹt b+ coi nhŻ nhau bóng gińy gi+i thiŤu>> cho con -ŻŚng hŃm mút cßi ma mTt+ " cŚng v+i" hay la -" kh(ng c=n" con -ŻŚng hŃm mút.
>>>> >We would all (those of us who really wish to have it explained in >detail, that is) like to see sophisticated event-reconstruction >techniques brought to bear, together with an account of exactly what >data was employed and how it was used.
>>>> >We would m i( those bóng chˇng m8nh ai thşt lŚi chˇc cho bít it giSi nghea bóng> chi tiŹt, la b+) b+i v8 cho chsm lo giS m+o event-reconstruction> kŚ thuşt cŃm l+i cho ch+u, cˇng bóng chiŹc bai tŻŚng thuşt bóng exactly g8> bóng c+ b+ dˇng cˇng b+i v8 it b+ c= th=i quen.
> Fat chance of that, however - >unless you happen to have an event-reconstruction team on hand and you >can afford to cock a snoot at the politico-media complex.
>BTo c+ hŚi bóng la, tuy nhiOn -> nŹu kh(ng you ngtu nhiOn xSy ra cho bít chiŹc event-reconstruction cŚ bóng "mŚt tay" cˇng you> biŹt cho cho con trťng chiŹc snoot nhím vao con politico-media ph-c hŚp.
> There is the traffic accident reconstruction site off my web page.
>ChŚ ńy b+ con viŤc bu(n bßn cßi kh(ng chn yŹu reconstruction chŚ cßch my m+ng trang.
> I saw reference to the most professional software photosho or paint shop of something like that.
>I chsm lo gińy gi+i thiŤu cho con hŃu hŹt ngŻŚi chuyOn nghiŤp software photosho hay la phńn c+a hiŤu bóng something b+i v8 la.
> I got a copy off the web.
>I b+ chiŹc bSn cßch con m+ng.
> One of these years I will move to do my accident and if at the same time I did a second of the Diana crash not much for starters.
>1 bóng these nsm I chˇc thŻ biŤn phßp cho bay biŤn my cßi kh(ng chn yŹu cˇng chsng nhím vao con cˇng mŚt c+ hŚi I bay biŤn chiŹc 2 bóng con Diana są phß sSn kh(ng lím b+i v8 bŚ phşn kh+i =Śng.
> > >>>Note that there is no vehicle present, in Levistre's story, which could >>>be the car of the witnesses Souad M.
>> >>>B-c thŻ ngín la chŚ ńy b+ kh(ng phŻ+ng tiŤn truy˝n bß bGy giŚ, bóng Levistre's chuyŤn, ai biŹt>>> b+ con toa bóng con bóng ch-ng Souad M.
> and Mohammed M.
>Cˇng Mohammed M.
> If we believe >>>Levistre, they weren't there!
>Chsng we tin>>> Levistre, they b+ kh(ng chŚ ńy!
> On the other hand, if we believe THEM, >>>the Mercedes crashed without any help from anyone - a very convenient >>>version of events, for the authorities, and completely contrary to the >>>testimony of ALL the other witnesses.
>Bóng con khßc "mŚt tay", chsng we tin THEM, >>> con Mercedes b+ phß sSn kh(ng bńt c- phŃn =Ża mŚi bóng anyone - chiŹc chfnh thuşn tiŤn>>> bai d+ch bóng są kiŤn, b+i v8 con chuyOn gia, cˇng completely są trßi l+i cho con>>> bóng ch-ng bóng MÜI con khßc bóng ch-ng.
>>> I am not suggesting that consideration should be limited to only one hypothetically possible series of events.
>>>I b+ kh(ng gŚi la c+ should b+ gi+i h+n cho chn 1 hypothetically c= thź ... series bóng są kiŤn.
> It appears to me that there are apparently conflicting reports of circumstances.
>It c= vd cho me la chŚ ńy b+ apparently mGu thutn biOn bSn bóng hoan cSnh.
> Therefore I suggest several parallel hypothetical story lines.
>B+ vşy I gŚi cß nhGn giťng hypothetical chuyŤn bşc.
> That calls to mind something that I think Senator Sam Ervin said during the course of the Watergate hearings on Nixon's impeachment.
>La lŚi kOu g i cho k˛ -c something la I cho la thŻŚng ngh+ se Sam Ervin n=i trong khi con chi˝u hŻ+ng bóng con Watergate są nghe bóng Nixon's impeachment.
> The in the four gospels there are accounts of what was reported to have been written by Pilate on the sign to be placed over Jesus Christ's head on the cross.
>Con bóng con 4 cŞm nang chŚ ńy b+ bai tŻŚng thuşt bóng g8 b+ bßo cho bít b+ giao d+ch thŻ t+ bóng Pilate bóng con dńu cho b+ síp =út h+n Jesus chˇa giO-su ch=p bóng con cGy thßnh hgß.
> Senator Sam said that if individuals whose testimoney we so reverence from the written testimony could be so reported as divergent then we need not be dismayed that good people of our own day may be reported as to not have agreed perfectly.
>ThŻŚng ngh+ se Sam n=i la chsng individuals cna ai? testimoney we thŹ l=ng sˇng kfnh bóng con giao d+ch thŻ t+ bóng ch-ng biŹt b+ thŹ bßo cßi ma nhŻ chľ divergence thŹ th8 we lˇc ho+n n+n kh(ng b+ lam chßn nSn la gi÷i ba con bóng cna chˇng m8nh cna chfnh m8nh ban ngay chˇc b+ bßo cßi ma cho kh(ng bít h=a thuşn perfectly.
> >>Hummnn >>> >>>The sequence of events, as Levistre recounts it, is very interesting, >>>because he seems to be saying that the "white car" stayed ahead of the >>>Mercedes and the motor-bike.
>>>Hummnn>>> >>> con cSnh bóng są kiŤn, cßi ma Levistre kź l+i chi tiŹt it, b+ chfnh lam cho chˇ ˛, >>> b+i v8 he coi bŚ cho b+ n=i la con" bŚt tríng toa" chún lOn trŻ+c bóng con>>> Mercedes cˇng con motor-bike.
> I would think "ahead" of the Merc would be correct but not that the white car stayed ahead of the bike.
>I would cho la" lOn trŻ+c" bóng con Merc would b+ s+a nhŻng kh(ng la con bŚt tríng toa chún lOn trŻ+c bóng con bike.
> Explaination given above.
>Explaination biŹu cao h+n.
>>> >>Well, in my SH one possibility that I want to consider is that both >>the white car on the Merc's right hand side and the motorcycle on >>the Merc's left hand side came to a synchronized position along side >>the Merc such as to be able to take symultaneous flash photographs >>into the Merc from both sides at the same time.
>>> >>Chfnh =ßng, bóng my SH 1 są c= thź la I cßi cŃn thiŹt cho coi nhŻ b+ la cS hai>> con bŚt tríng toa bóng con Merc's cŃn phSi c= "mŚt tay" b˝ cˇng con motorcycle bóng>> con Merc's b÷ "mŚt tay" b˝ t+i cho chiŹc cho chn cˇng mŚt giŚ chŚ d c theo b˝>> con Merc nhŻ lo+i == cßi ma cho b+ c= nsng ląc cho bít symultaneous tia l=e b-c Snh>> h=a ra con Merc bóng cS hai b˝ nhím vao con cˇng mŚt c+ hŚi.
> If one is in a very >>heavy law suit one needs at least TWO corroberating withnesses.
>Chsng 1 b+ bóng chiŹc chfnh>> bŚi luşt bŚ complO 1 lˇc ho+n n+n nhím vao kTm nhńt 2 corroberating withnesses.
> And a big pile of paps only seconds behind would be very important also.
>Cˇng chiŹc huOnh hoang chŚng bóng paps chn seconds kTm would b+ chfnh quan tr ng cˇng.
> If somebody hinted at the presence of a blackmail photo they could be assassinated in short order before they could ever get close to a court of law, and I heard a song the other day called "Smuggler's Blues" done in the Eighties by Glenn Frey has some good words.
>Chsng somebody n=i b=ng gi= nhím vao con są c= mút bóng chiŹc b+ lam ti˝n photo they biŹt b+ hanh thfch. bóng chn thńy viŤc trŻ+c mít bşc c=n h+n they biŹt bao giŚ b+ phŃn cuťi cho chiŹc buŚi chŃu bóng luşt, cˇng I nghe chiŹc bai hßt con khßc ban ngay d+ng l+i" ngŻŚi bu(n lşu biźn cS" bay biŤn bóng con Eighties bóng Glenn Frey bít ch+ng gi÷i khŞu hiŤu.
>>> >This seems to me to be fanciful in the extreme.
>>> >This coi bŚ cho me cho b+ bńt thŻŚng bóng con biŤn phßp cąc =oan.
> On what grounds do you >suggest it?
>Bóng g8 bpi =ńt bay biŤn you> gŚi it?
>> >>The same scene photographed by two separate photographers at >>exactly the same instant would be IDEAL.
>> >>Con cˇng mŚt cSnh ch°p Snh cho bóng 2 riOng rż photographers nhím vao>> exactly con cˇng mŚt chťc lßt would b+ LŚ T+űNG.
>>> >"Ideal" for what?
>>> >"L˛ tŻ+ng" b+i v8 g8?
> Come on Al!
>T+i bóng Al!
> What are these simultaneous, two-angle >flash-photos supposed to be for?
>G8 b+ these cˇng mŚt lˇc., two-angle> flash-photos cho róng cho b+ b+i v8?
> Okay - you've said before that you >think they would have been compromising photos, and that MAF set up the >car-switch and the pursuit in order to obtain them.
>Ok tťt - you've bít n=i c=n h+n la you> cho la they would bít b+ 1 dan xŹp photos, cˇng la MAF bť trf lOn con> car-switch cˇng con pursuit bóng bşc cho gianh =ŻŚc them.
> This is an >interesting idea, because, although it seems most likely to me that MAF >DID make these arrangements, I cannot decide precisely what it was that >he thought was going to happen.
>This b+ chiŹc> lam cho chˇ ˛ khßi nhiŤm, b+i v8, dˇ it coi bŚ hŃu hŹt chíc cho me la MAF> B+Y BIÄN bít phSi these są dan xŹp, I biŹt kh(ng giSi quyŹt chfnh xßc g8 it b+ la> he cho la b+ going to ngtu nhiOn xSy ra.
> A compromising photograph.
>ChiŹc 1 dan xŹp b-c Snh.
> Exactly in line with MAF's general opinion of John.
>Exactly bóng bşc bóng MAF's chung dŻ luşn bóng John.
> Q.
>Q.
> Public, Di, etc. > >Let us say that Diana and Dodi were not sleeping together, she was not >pregnant by him and they were not going to get engaged - or some >combination of these negatives - such that, in order to (what?
>C(ng chˇng, Di, etc. > > cho phTp chˇng m8nh n=i la Diana cˇng Dodi b+ kh(ng c= =n cŚ ngn cho cˇng, she b+ kh(ng> c= mang bóng him cˇng they b+ kh(ng going to b+ cam kŹt - hay la ch+ng> hŚp chńt bóng these "kh(ng" ... - nhŻ lo+i == la, bóng bşc cho( g8?
>) gain >influence over Diana or disgrace her or force her to marry Dodi?
>)Cna kiŹm =ŻŚc> ngŻŚi c= thŹ ląc h+n Diana hay la są hŚ thŹn her hay la hiŤu ląc her cho cho kŹt h(n v+i ... Dodi?
> - the >Al-Fayeds conceived the scheme I would guess that conception of the scheme would have happened far away from MAF.
>- con> Al-Fayeds c= mang con kŹ ho+ch I would są ph÷ng =oßn la nhşn th-c bóng con kŹ ho+ch would bít ngtu nhiOn xSy ra xa biŹn =i bóng MAF.
> If a group were looking for someone to set up some such scheme MAF might have been found to have been a good candidate to approach for the leading role but the script had been written long before and they just needed some one to play the part.
>Chsng chiŹc nh=m b+ looking for someone cho bť trf lOn ch+ng nhŻ lo+i == kŹ ho+ch MAF ląc bít b+ nhşn thńy cho bít b+ chiŹc gi÷i ngŻŚi dą thi cho lťi vao b+i v8 con chn huy vai nhŻng con bSn phßt thanh bít b+ giao d+ch thŻ t+ thŚi gian lGu c=n h+n cˇng they chfnh cŃn ch+ng 1 cho cßch ch+i con bŚ phşn.
> >of obtaining compromising photographs.
>>Bóng gianh =ŻŚc 1 dan xŹp b-c Snh.
> A >clever ruse is employed to get rid of some of the escort (but why not >all?
>ChiŹc> gi÷i mŻu kŹ b+ dˇng cho b+ giSi thoßt bóng ch+ng bóng con nguŻŚi bSo vŤ( nhŻng t+i sao kh(ng> m i?
>) THE COMPROMISING photo to be used for blackmail to influence Diana not to take a strong public stand on some particular issue from time to time would have been financed by an external consortium, QEII, Chas, Military landmine sales proponents, etc. In order to be of use at selected times the photo could not be public.
>)CON 1 D+N XčP photo cho b+ c= th=i quen b+i v8 b+ lam ti˝n cho ngŻŚi c= thŹ ląc Diana kh(ng cho bít chiŹc b˝n c(ng chˇng bít =-ng bóng ch+ng 1 -úc biŤt cßi =ŻŚc phßt hanh bóng c+ hŚi cho c+ hŚi would bít b+ financed bóng chiŹc bOn ngoai consortium, QEII, Chas, quGn są landmine cuŚc bßn =ńu giß proponents, etc. bóng bşc cho b+ bóng cßch dˇng nhím vao selected c+ hŚi con photo biŹt kh(ng b+ c(ng chˇng.
> If that happened it would have been a one time shot when ever it fell into public hands.
>Chsng la ngtu nhiOn xSy ra it would bít b+ chiŹc 1 c+ hŚi bín khi ma bao giŚ it b+ r+i vao h=a ra c(ng chˇng "mŚt tay".
> To be worth the expense and effort it had to be kept secret but its circumstance had to be indisputable else any single person threatening exposure of some such would be under extremely high surveillance in moments.
>Cho b+ giß con c(ng tßc phf cˇng są cť gíng it bít cho b+ 2 giľ bf mşt nhŻng cna cßi == hoan cSnh bít cho b+ chíc chín khßc bńt c- chn mŚt 1 ngŻŚi -e do+ hŻ+ng bóng ch+ng nhŻ lo+i == would b+ chŻa =Ńy cąc =Ś cao gißm th+ bóng chťc.
> > the remaining escort follows from the Hotel, against orders, thus >giving the impression that they are up to no good.
>>Con c=n l+i nguŻŚi bSo vŤ kŹ theo bóng con khßch s+n, chťng l+i g i, nhŻ thŹ> biŹu con bSn in la they b+ lOn cho kh(ng gi÷i.
> Henri has been >briefed to flee them - he flees.
>Henri bít b+> briefed cho b÷ trťn them - he b÷ trťn.
> An ambush of pursuers has been arranged >on the cour la Reine - to keep Henri in flight and to give Dodi an >excuse for grabbing Diana (as though protectively) I can't imagine anything but a photograph of a blowjob.
>ChiŹc cuŚc mai ph°c bóng pursuers bít b+ chuŞn b+> bóng con cour la Reine - cho 2 giľ Henri bóng chuyŹn bay cˇng cho biŹu Dodi chiŹc> lŚi bao chľa b+i v8 grabbing Diana( cßi ma dˇ protectively) I biŹt kh(ng h8nh dung anything nhŻng chiŹc b-c Snh bóng chiŹc blowjob.
> Sex is no big thing nowadays.
>Gi+i b+ kh(ng huOnh hoang chuyŤn ngay nay.
> In royal family tradition, the past, it may have been able to throw a little influence at an intense moment of public conflict.
>Bóng hoang gia d=ng cŚ lŤ, con h+n, it chˇc bít biŹt lao chiŹc bT ngŻŚi c= thŹ ląc nhím vao chiŹc c= cŻŚng =Ś l+n chťc bóng c(ng chˇng są va ch+m.
> There is so much detailed sex on the web that I wouldn't doubt that to find a microscopic photo of a pubic hair would take more than a few minutes.
>ChŚ ńy b+ thŹ lím detailed gi+i bóng con m+ng la I wouldn't kh(ng są do dą la cho nhşn thńy chiŹc kfnh hiźn vi photo bóng chiŹc pubic l(ng would bít h+n h+n chiŹc kh(ng nhi˝u biOn bSn.
> So if any eyebrows were going to be raised maybe a court threatening a loss of Di's finances for breach of contract re: approximately non modest public behavior.
>ThŹ chsng bńt c- l(ng may b+ going to b+ chńm d-t c= lż chiŹc buŚi chŃu -e do+ chiŹc są b÷ phf bóng Di's tai chfnh b+i v8 lŚ hŚng bóng giao kFo re: approximately non c= m-c =Ś c(ng chˇng cßch cŻ x+.
> So if Di was very cognizant of contract provisions regarding public behavior as a determinant of her divorce settlement then she would have to have exercised the utmost discression.
>ThŹ chsng Di b+ chfnh biŹt bóng giao kFo lŻ+ng thąc cung cńp v˝ phŃn c(ng chˇng cßch cŻ x+ cßi ma chiŹc determinant bóng her są ly d+ khu =+nh cŻ thŹ th8 she would bít cho bít lam con cąc =iźm discression.
> But if she was going to find any male support outside of her ex's she would have to at some point show some affection.
>NhŻng chsng she b+ going to nhşn thńy bńt c- con trai cŚt chťng bOn ngoai bóng her ex's she would bít cho nhím vao ch+ng chńm bSo ch+ng bŤnh.
> Now where could one find any more hope of privacy than in the tunnel of love in a speeding limosine?
>B+i chŻng n+i ma biŹt 1 nhşn thńy bńt c- h+n hy v ng bóng kfn =ßo h+n bóng con -ŻŚng hŃm bóng ngŻŚi yOu bóng chiŹc ch+y nhanh limosine?
> But to be effective for black mail the photo would have to appear as immodest public behavior.
>NhŻng cho b+ c= hiŤu ląc b+i v8 mau =en bŻu kiŤn con photo would bít cho c= vd cßi ma bńt nhp c(ng chˇng cßch cŻ x+.
> I said PUBLIC.
>I n=i C+NG CH+NG.
> So on the one hand Diana would have shyed away from any PUBLIC behavior but people interested in obtaining a photo for blackmail would have to make the circumstances of the photo look as public as possible.
>ThŹ bóng con 1 "mŚt tay" Diana would bít shyed biŹn =i bóng bńt c- C+NG CH+NG cßch cŻ x+ nhŻng ba con lam cho chˇ ˛ bóng gianh =ŻŚc chiŹc photo b+i v8 b+ lam ti˝n would bít cho bít phSi con hoan cSnh bóng con photo cßi d=m cßi ma c(ng chˇng cßi ma c= thź ....
> TWO photo's from TWO different photographers and surrounding photos from another hundred photographers could be made to look like PUBLIC IMMODESTY while the circumstance of the back seat of a speeding limosine in the tunnel in the middle of the night is about as close to "private" behavior as I can imagine anyone could get on short notice.
>2 photo's bóng 2 khßc photographers cˇng bao quanh photos bóng khßc 100 photographers biŹt b+ bít phSi cho cßi d=m b+i v8 C+NG CH+NG IMMODESTY ch+ng nao c=n con hoan cSnh bóng con lˇi l+i v˝ phfa sau chŚ bóng chiŹc ch+y nhanh limosine bóng con -ŻŚng hŃm bóng con trung gian bóng con cSnh tťi tsm b+ about cßi ma phŃn cuťi cho" binh nh8" cßch cŻ x+ cßi ma I biŹt h8nh dung anyone biŹt b+ bóng chn thńy viŤc trŻ+c mít są bßo trŻ+c.
> >- a car is stationed >at the tunnel-entrance to stop the Mercedes (a very risky proceeding, >from a father's point of view, don't you think?
>>- chiŹc toa b+ -út vao v+ trf> nhím vao con tunnel-entrance cho 3 chŚ =Ś con Mercedes( chiŹc chfnh risky biOn bSn, > bóng chiŹc father's chńm bóng cßch nh8n, bay biŤn kh(ng you cho la?
>) the Mercedes is slowed, >the pursuers catch up, the photographs are taken.
>)Con Mercedes b+ lam chşm l+i, > con pursuers bít lOn, con b-c Snh b+ bít.
>> >Photographs of what?
>> >B-c Snh bóng g8?
> Diana giving Dodi a blow job.
>Diana biŹu Dodi chiŹc b+ cuťn =i c( g viŤc.
> What else could even raise an eyebrowe nowadays?
>G8 khßc biŹt c=n chńm d-t chiŹc eyebrowe ngay nay?
> Hell, if you had to sell such a photograph to get a MacDonald's hamburger you would have a lot of competition in the current market.
>Qu+, chsng you bít cho bßn nhŻ lo+i == chiŹc b-c Snh cho b+ chiŹc MacDonald's hamburger you would bít chiŹc l( bóng cuŚc thi =ńu bóng con chi˝u hŻ+ng chŚ.
> > A terrified Diana in Dodi's arms?
>>ChiŹc lam khiŹp sŚ Diana bóng Dodi's binh chnng?
> Diana being >raped by Dodi?
>Diana b+> raped bóng Dodi?
> - is that what you're working up to saying?
>- b+ la g8 you're b+ bít lam viŤc lOn cho n=i?
> My dear chap!
>My thGn gp!
> Who is going to conspire, and pay big money, for something like that?
>Ai b+ going to chung s-c, cˇng danh cho huOnh hoang ti˝n, b+i v8 something b+i v8 la?
>Nobody.
>Kh(ng ai.
> >Diana crouched down on the floor behind Henri's seat, and Dodi remained >upright - probably viewing the pursuit with anxiety - possibly grappling >with TRJ to prevent him interfering with the driving.
>>Diana cˇi m8nh xuťng bóng con san kTm Henri's chŚ, cˇng Dodi c=n l+i> thŚng =-ng - probably nghe v˝ con pursuit bóng l=ng khao khßc - c= lż gh8> bóng TRJ cho ngsn cSn him can thiŤp bóng con b+t.
> What sign is >there - apart from the fact that neither Diana nor Dodi were wearing >seat-belts - that Dodi was attempting to grapple with Diana?
>G8 dńu b+> chŚ ńy - ngoai .. bóng con są kiŤn la cvng kh(ng Diana nor Dodi b+ b+ dˇng h÷ng> seat-belts - la Dodi b+ cť gíng cho gh8 bóng Diana?
>> >Again, I say, "photographs of what?
>> >LŃn nľa, I n=i, " b-c Snh bóng g8?
>" - precisely - and what were they >for?
>"- chfnh xßc - cˇng g8 b+ they> b+i v8?
> - according to your theory.
>- according to ; cna may h c tuyŹt.
> A picture of a blow job - for blackmail.
>ChiŹc b-c tranh bóng chiŹc b+ cuťn =i c( g viŤc - b+i v8 b+ lam ti˝n.
>> >Why could these photographs not have been taken with spy-cameras at one >of the Fayed residences Because such a photo would possibly be identified as an invasion of privacy.
>> >T+i sao biŹt these b-c Snh kh(ng bít b+ bít bóng spy-cameras nhím vao 1> bóng con Fayed chŚ + b+i v8 nhŻ lo+i == chiŹc photo would c= lż b+ coi nhŻ nhau cßi ma chiŹc są xGm chiŹm bóng kfn =ßo.
> It had to look like PUBLIC Immodest Behavior to cause a diminution of Diana's influence in the public media.
>It bít cho cßi d=m b+i v8 C+NG CH+NG bńt nhp cßch cŻ x+ cho c+ chiŹc h+ b+t bóng Diana's ngŻŚi c= thŹ ląc bóng con c(ng chˇng media.
> >at which Diana stayed?
>>Nhím vao ai Diana chún?
> How could it have been >hoped that photographs of an especially compromising nature could have >been obtained at high speed in the Alma Tunnel, rather than on the >Jonikal, at the Ritz or at the rue Arsene?
>B+i v8 biŹt it bít b+> hy v ng la b-c Snh bóng chiŹc nhńt la 1 dan xŹp bSn chńt biŹt bít> b+ gianh =ŻŚc nhím vao cao ch+y nhanh bóng con Alma -ŻŚng hŃm, c= ch- h+n bóng con> Jonikal, nhím vao con Ritz hay la nhím vao con rue Arsene?
> What on earth is the point?
>G8 bóng dGy =ńt b+ con chńm?
> Would behavior on the yatch or at the Ritz be considered public or private by Diana.
>Would cßch cŻ x+ bóng con yatch hay la nhím vao con Ritz b+ coi nhŻ c(ng chˇng hay la binh nh8 bóng Diana.
> My guess is that Diana would have considered it PUBLIC.
>My są ph÷ng =oßn b+ la Diana would bít coi nhŻ it C+NG CH+NG.
>> >One glimmer of a suggestion of a possibility does occur to me, as a >result of examining this idea, however.
>> >1 ng n l+a chşp chŚn bóng chiŹc są gŚi ˛ bóng chiŹc są c= thź bay biŤn nSy ra cho me, cßi ma chiŹc> kŹt quS bóng h÷i thi this khßi nhiŤm, tuy nhiOn.
> What if Dodi was having >difficulty getting physical with Diana?
>G8 chsng Dodi b+ bít> są kh= khsn b+ c+ thź bóng Diana?
> Did Dad devise an elaborate >ruse to throw them together?
>Bay biŤn ba devise chiŹc lam c(ng phu> mŻu kŹ cho lao them cˇng?
> Or rather, was he advised to do so by >those who wanted Diana dead NOT DEAD.
>Hay la c= ch-, b+ he h÷i ˛ kiŹn cho bay biŤn thŹ bóng> those ai cŃn Diana chŹt KH+NG CHčT.
> There is a whole hell of a lot of difference in wanting some one to have less public influence in the public media than in wanting someone to be dead.
>ChŚ ńy b+ chiŹc b8nh an v( są qu+ bóng chiŹc l( bóng mťi bńt h=a bóng cŃn ch+ng 1 cho bít bT h+n c(ng chˇng ngŻŚi c= thŹ ląc bóng con c(ng chˇng media h+n bóng cŃn someone cho b+ chŹt.
> >- so that he would implement the scheme >without knowing what it was really for?
>>- so that he would c(ng c° con kŹ ho+ch> kh(ng biŹt g8 it b+ thşt b+i v8?
> Quite simple.
>Hoan toan b8nh d+.
> A compromising photograph.
>ChiŹc 1 dan xŹp b-c Snh.
> >Something of the sort must have >happened, I think - and it's not so incredible if you consider that >MAF's masters may have been pretending to attempt to pull off a Fayed- >Spencer match (with big bucks in it for MAF) for some time - so that >the Machiavellian complexity of engineering the car-switch, the >disposition of the escort, the arrangements for the route and the >programming of Henri Paul, might not have aroused MAF's suspicions.
>>Something bóng con h+ng nOn bít> ngtu nhiOn xSy ra, I cho la - cˇng it's b+ kh(ng thŹ kh(ng thź tin =ŻŚc chsng you coi nhŻ la> MAF's chn chˇc bít b+ giS bŚ cho są cť gíng cho cßi gişt cßch chiŹc Fayed-> Spencer cuŚc thi =ńu( bóng huOnh hoang con hopng bóng it b+i v8 MAF) b+i v8 ch+ng c+ hŚi - so that> con Machiavellian complexity bóng kŚ thuşt con car-switch, con> khuynh hŻ+ng bóng con nguŻŚi bSo vŤ, con są dan xŹp b+i v8 con tuyŹn =ŻŚng cˇng con> -út chŻ+ng tr8nh bóng Henri Paul, ląc kh(ng bít gŚi MAF's chˇt.
> A photograph would be the most logical thing in the whole world.
>ChiŹc b-c Snh would b+ con hŃu hŹt hŚp l˛ chuyŤn bóng con b8nh an v( są cuŚc =Śi.
>No body would be suspicious of anything.
>Kh(ng ban would b+ hay nghi ngŚ bóng anything.
>> >Other factors, such as sabotaging the S-280's brakes and air-bags, >briefing the escort to monitor the crash but not get involved, etc, >could have been achieved by MAF's backers, over MAF's head, The theft and modification of the vehicle could have been well disguised.
>> >Khßc nhGn tť, nhŻ lo+i == cßi ma phß ho+i con S-280's cßi hpm cˇng air-bags, > chn th+ con nguŻŚi bSo vŤ cho monitor con są phß sSn nhŻng kh(ng b+ kTo theo, etc, > biŹt bít b+ gianh =ŻŚc bóng MAF's backers, h+n MAF's ch=p, con są sn cíp cˇng modification bóng con phŻ+ng tiŤn truy˝n bß biŹt bít b+ chfnh =ßng che gińu.
> >such that >Siegel and Musa (Etoile Limousines) and Wingfield and Dournot were not >only working for MAF, but for his masters, DIRECTLY.
>>NhŻ lo+i == la> Siegel cˇng Musa( Etoile Limousines) cˇng Wingfield cˇng Dournot b+ kh(ng> chn bít lam viŤc b+i v8 MAF, nhŻng b+i v8 .... chn, LçP TŚC.
> However, if that were part of the plot, then PLANS TO GET THAT VEHICLE TO THAT PLACE IN TIME WOULD HAVE TO HAVE BEEN ROCK SOLID FOR MONTHS IN ADVANCE.
>Tuy nhiOn, chsng la b+ bŚ phşn bóng con cťt truyŤn, thŹ th8 D+N B+I CHO B˙ L+ PH+ONG TIÄN TRUYďN B- CHO L+ CHO BéNG CO HOI WOULD BüT CHO BüT B˙ L+C -U -+A CHäT RüN BűI VŚ TH-NG BéNG SŚ TIčN BO.
> There is the clear windows in one train of thought and defective equipment as possibly another.
>ChŚ ńy b+ con chuŚn c+a kfnh bóng 1 chuŚi bóng cho la cˇng c= nhŻŚc =iźm d°ng c° cßi ma c= lż khßc.
>> >Indeed, assuming that MAF did not know that the fatal crash was >intended, those of MAF's employees who MUST have known that a fatal >crash was intended, MUST have been working directly for those who >intentionally engineered it.
>> >QuS thąc, chiŹm lńy la MAF bay biŤn kh(ng biŹt la con chf t+ są phß sSn b+> c= ˛ muťn, those bóng MAF's ngŻŚi lam ai N-N bít biŹt la chiŹc chf t+> są phß sSn b+ c= ˛ muťn, N-N bít b+ bít lam viŤc lşp t-c b+i v8 those ai> intentionally engineered it.
>> If a crash after the photo were planned the least people in the area who needed to know was just the driver of the white car.
>>Chsng chiŹc są phß sSn bńt chńp con photo b+ dą kiŹn con kTm nhńt ba con bóng con 1 diŤn tfch ai cŃn cho biŹt b+ chfnh con ngŻŚi cŃm mßy bóng con bŚt tríng toa.
> Second could have been the photographer on the back of the motorcycle who had to aim a shot into the driver's eyes.
>2 biŹt bít b+ con photographer bóng con lˇi l+i v˝ phfa sau bóng con motorcycle ai bít cho m°c tiOu chiŹc bín h=a ra con ngŻŚi cŃm mßy lŚ.
> >>>At least, he describes the "white car" >>>passing him, and disappearing westwards, before he begins to describe >>>the motor-bike overtaking the Mercedes and cutting-in in front of it.
>>>>Nhím vao kTm nhńt, he diĄn tS con" bŚt tríng toa" >>> biŹn =i him, cˇng biŹn mńt v˝ hŻ+ng tGy, c=n h+n he bít =Ńu cho diĄn tS>>> con motor-bike xSy ra bńt th8nh l8nh con Mercedes cˇng cutting-in in front of it.
> >> >>So this gets the locations screwed up and out of sync.
>>> >>ThŹ this b+ con są xßc =+nh v+ trf bít vao bóng =anh vft lOn cˇng out of sync.
>>> >>> >>> The impression given (that the "white car" was a long way ahead of the >>>Mercedes and the motorbike) is probably an illusion created by the >>>difficulty involved in describing the situation; >> >>Also, a witness in a high speed drive has their own road to watch as >>well as looking in the rear view mirror.
>>> >>> >>>Con bSn in biŹu( la con" bŚt tríng toa" b+ chiŹc thŚi gian lGu biŤn phßp lOn trŻ+c bóng con>>> Mercedes cˇng con motorbike) b+ probably chiŹc -o tŻ+ng gGy ra bóng con>>> są kh= khsn kTo theo bóng diĄn tS con chŚ lam; >> >> cˇng, chiŹc bóng ch-ng bóng chiŹc cao ch+y nhanh b+t bít cna chˇng cna chfnh m8nh con =ŻŚng cho buŚi th-c =Om cßi ma>> chfnh =ßng cßi ma chˇ ˛ bóng con bŚ phşn =óng sau cßch nh8n gŻ+ng.
> So one might have a strobe >>light effect of only seeing a flash of an instant when they happened >>to have the opportunity to look in the mirror.
>ThŹ 1 ląc bít chiŹc strobe>> bít l+a hiŤu ląc bóng chn chsm lo chiŹc tia l=e bóng chiŹc chťc lßt khi ma they ngtu nhiOn xSy ra>> cho bít con c+ hŚi cho cßi d=m bóng con gŻ+ng.
>>> >>>but there is no >>>escaping the conclusion that the Mercedes did not completely squeeze >>>past the white car, but came alongside it, on its left, in a sliding >>>collision, >> >>My suggestion would be to consider that the Merc was the >>vehicle in the middle of the road, that the white vehicle would >>have been on its right and the motorcycle on its left, three >>abreast.
>>> >>>NhŻng chŚ ńy b+ kh(ng>>> thoßt con są chńm d-t la con Mercedes bay biŤn kh(ng completely są siŹt>>> h+n con bŚt tríng toa, nhŻng t+i d c theo it, bóng cna cßi == b÷, bóng chiŹc b÷>>> są va ch+m, >> >> My są gŚi ˛ would b+ cho coi nhŻ la con Merc b+ con>> phŻ+ng tiŤn truy˝n bß bóng con trung gian bóng con con =ŻŚng, la con bŚt tríng phŻ+ng tiŤn truy˝n bß would>> bít b+ bóng cna cßi == cŃn phSi c= cˇng con motorcycle bóng cna cßi == b÷, 3>> bOn c+nh.
>>> >>And that point photoflashes were fired and then the white >>car accelerated >> >>>which impelled the white car forwards, towards Levistre and >>>out of harm's way; >> >>And the motorcycle accelerated >> >>>whereupon the motorbike >> >>accelerated and swerved in front of >>the Mercedes.
>>> >>Cˇng la chńm photoflashes b+ bín cˇng thŹ th8 con bŚt tríng>> toa bŻ+c mau h+n>> >>> ai bít buŚc con bŚt tríng toa ti˝n =+o, hŻ+ng v˝ Levistre cˇng>>> out of cßi h+i biŤn phßp; >> >> cˇng con motorcycle bŻ+c mau h+n>> >>> whereupon con motorbike>> >> bŻ+c mau h+n cˇng lam chŤch in front of>> con Mercedes.
>>> >>No.
>>> >>Kh(ng.
> That is even wrong.
>La b+ c=n mút xńu.
> In my SH.
>Bóng my SH.
>>> >>Let's try it another way.
>>> >>Cho phTp chˇng m8nh s+ th+ it khßc biŤn phßp.
> More to the >>"DELIBERATE BUMP OFF" conspiracy >>supposition.
>H+n cho con>>" B+N BAC KY L+ŚNG CHO S+NG B+ňU C-CH" -m mŻu>> giS thuyŹt.
>>> >>In that, the motorcycle would have fired >>a series of quick flashes as it accelerated >>in front of the Mercedes.
>>> >>Bóng la, con motorcycle would bít bín>> chiŹc series bóng dĄ tia l=e cßi ma it bŻ+c mau h+n>> in front of con Mercedes.
> The first flash >>would have been into the back seat but >>a second would have been directly into >>the eyes of Henri Paul.
>Con 1 tia l=e>> would bít b+ h=a ra con lˇi l+i v˝ phfa sau chŚ nhŻng>> chiŹc 2 would bít b+ lşp t-c h=a ra>> con lŚ bóng Henri Paul.
> Having blinded >>him, it would then accelerate and as soon >>as it was clear the vehicle on the right would >>bump the Mercedes' front into the center >>pilars.
>Bít lam mˇ qußng>> him, it would thŹ th8 bŻ+c mau h+n cˇng cßi ma chŚng bao lGu nľa>> cßi ma it b+ chuŚn con phŻ+ng tiŤn truy˝n bß bóng con cŃn phSi c= would>> chŚ sŻng bŻ+u con Mercedes' mút h=a ra con chuy˝n>> pilars.
>>> >>>overtook the slowed Mercedes >>>and (also according to Levistre) cut-in in front of it and produced "a >>>searing burst of light, much brighter than a photo-flash".
>>> >>>XSy ra bńt th8nh l8nh con lam chşm l+i Mercedes>>> cˇng( cˇng according to Levistre) cut-in in front of it cˇng chŹ t+o" chiŹc>>> searing są bˇng lOn bóng bít l+a, lím lanh lŚi h+n chiŹc photo-flash".
>>>> >>>At this point, Levistre, braked and came to a halt near the western end >>>of the tunnel.
>>>> >>>Nhím vao this chńm, Levistre, dt cˇng t+i cho chiŹc są t+m d+ng l+i gŃn con ngŻŚi phŻ+ng tGy gi+i h+n>>> bóng con -ŻŚng hŃm.
> >> >>More correctly, NOT "At this point" but at "A POINT" near the >>western end of the tunnel.
>>> >>H+n correctly, KH+NG" nhím vao this chńm" nhŻng nhím vao" chiŹc CHäM" gŃn con>> ngŻŚi phŻ+ng tGy gi+i h+n bóng con -ŻŚng hŃm.
>>> >>>The Mercedes had crashed, and the bikers (like Brenda >>>Wells, Levistre affirms that there were two of them) had stopped by the >>>wreck.
>>> >>>Con Mercedes bít b+ phß sSn, cˇng con bikers( b+i v8 Brenda>>> giŹng, Levistre khíng =+nh la chŚ ńy b+ 2 bóng them) bít b+t l+i bóng con>>> ngŻŚi suy nhŻŚc.
> >> >>That does not sound possible to me.
>>> >>La bay biŤn kh(ng tiŹng =Śng c= thź ... cho me.
> It may depend upon speed.
>It chˇc dąa vao bóng ch+y nhanh.
>>>Assuming that the whole action was taking place at some >>above average speed then if at least the bike on the left had >>accelerated ahead of the Merc it could not have stopped.
>>>ChiŹm lńy la con b8nh an v( są bŚ mßy b+ bít chŚ nhím vao ch+ng>> cao h+n sť trung b8nh ch+y nhanh thŹ th8 chsng nhím vao kTm nhńt con bike bóng con b÷ bít>> bŻ+c mau h+n lOn trŻ+c bóng con Merc it biŹt kh(ng bít b+t l+i.
> If it >>did not stop then it may have passed Livestre and exited the >>tunnel.
>Chsng it>> bay biŤn kh(ng 3 chŚ =Ś thŹ th8 it chˇc bít biŹn =i Livestre cˇng exited con>> -ŻŚng hŃm.
> Whether a second bike stopped might be considerable.
>Chsng chiŹc 2 bike b+t l+i ląc b+ c= thŹ ląc.
>>> >>>One of them got off, momentarily, to look into the Mercedes, >>>jumped back on again, and the bike sped off, passing Levistre as it did >>>so.
>>> >>>1 bóng them b+ cßch, momentarily, cho cßi d=m h=a ra con Mercedes, >>> bít nhSy lˇi l+i v˝ phfa sau bóng lŃn nľa, cˇng con bike ch+y nhanh cßch, biŹn =i Levistre cßi ma it bay biŤn>>> thŹ.
> Levistre describes the bike as "black" and the two men as "dressed >>>in black with black helmets".
>Levistre diĄn tS con bike cßi ma" mau =en" cˇng con 2 chŚng cßi ma" bay biŤn>>> bóng mau =en bóng mau =en mv".
> The whole thing took just a few seconds.
>Con b8nh an v( są chuyŤn bít chfnh chiŹc kh(ng nhi˝u seconds.
>>>> >>>Considerable efforts have been made to discredit Levistre.
>>>> >>>C= thŹ ląc są cť gíng bít b+ bít phSi cho kh(ng tin Levistre.
> It has been >>>said, for example, that his attitude to the press was "hostile" and that >>>he was trying to "gain attention"; but there could be another reason for >>>these attacks on his character - he witnessed a murder!
>It bít b+>>> n=i, b+i v8 gŻ+ng, la .... dßng dńp cho con bßo chf b+" chťng =ťi" cˇng la>>> he b+ cť gíng cho" cna kiŹm =ŻŚc są chu =ßo"; nhŻng chŚ ńy biŹt b+ khßc lż b+i v8>>> these c+n bóng .... chľ - he ch-ng kiŹn chiŹc są giŹt ngŻŚi!
> There is no >>>other interpretation you can put on his testimony.
>ChŚ ńy b+ kh(ng>>> khßc interpretation you biŹt buŚc vao bóng .... bóng ch-ng.
>>>> >>>Yes, indeed (to answer your question) the lanes were used as a slow-lane >>>and an overtaking lane - ludicrous speed-limit signs notwithstanding!
>>>> >>>Yes, quS thąc( cho trS lŚi ; cna may cGu h÷i) con ng) hdm b+ c= th=i quen cßi ma chiŹc slow-lane>>> cˇng chiŹc xSy ra bńt th8nh l8nh ng) hdm - ludicrous tťc ląc cao nhńt dńu dˇ!
>>>> >>>Other answers in another post >> >><a href="http://members.home.com/godsbrain">G.O.D.S.B.R.A.I.N.</a><br> > >-- >Steve Reed Alvin H.
>>>> >>>Khßc trS lŚi bóng khßc bŻu =iŤn>> >>< chiŹc href=" http:// bŚ phşn cna c+ thź. chŚ +. com/ godsbrain"> G. O. D. S. B. R. chiŹc. I. N.</ chiŹc>< br> > > --> Steve lau Alvin H.
> White <a href="http://members.home.com/godsbrain">G.O.D.S.B.R.A.I.N.</a><br>
>BŚt tríng< chiŹc href=" http:// bŚ phşn cna c+ thź. chŚ +. com/ godsbrain"> G. O. D. S. B. R. chiŹc. I. N.</ chiŹc>< br>
GODS...@home.com
Re: Di: Conspiration RTA E>EF
On Fri, 05 May 2000 00:31:31 GMT, kather...@my-deja.com wrote:
>You cannot be serious
>This is absolutely preposterous.
>It is ludicruos!
>It is an insult to Diana's dignity.
>This is not the first time I've seen this hyposthesis
>it was much more vulgar.
>Sometimes I think we are no better than the journalists and paparazzi
>This type of speculation brings shame
>and ridicule
>upon any serious investigative journalists
>researching Diana's death.
>What is the purpose of this
>I hope you have a better reason
>than perversion.
>[snip]
>
>Katherine
>
>
>
>Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
>Before you buy.
<a href="http://members.home.com/godsbrain">G.O.D.S.B.R.A.I.N.</a><br>
GODS...@home.com
>From GODS...@HOME.COM Wed May 03 15:40:25 2000 Path: news1.
>Z GODSBRAIN@ DOM RODZINNY. COM poŁlubiľ maj 3 15: 40: 25 2000 bie+nia: news1.
>frmt1.
>frmt1.
>sfba.
>sfba.
>home.
>Dom rodzinny.
>com!
>com!
>newshub1.
>newshub1.
>home.
>Dom rodzinny.
>com!
>com!
>news.
>news.
>home.
>Dom rodzinny.
>com!
>com!
>news1.
>news1.
>frmt1.
>frmt1.
>sfba.
>sfba.
>home.
>Dom rodzinny.
>com.
>com.
>POSTED!
>POSTED!
>not-for-mail From: GODS...@HOME.COM Newsgroups: alt.
>not-for-mail z: GODSBRAIN@ DOM RODZINNY. COM Newsgroups: alt.
>conspiracy.
>Konspiratorstwa.
>princess-diana Subject: Re: Di: Paul, Henri, History, 60 Page Autopsy, Etc. Organization: <a href="http://members.home.com/godsbrain">G.O.D.S.B.R.A.I.N.</a><br> Reply-To: GODS...@HOME.COM,GODS...@AOL.COM Message-ID: <suv0hs4b86ldf6kh1...@4ax.com> References: <20000416220330.
>princess-diana poddany: Re: Di: Paul, Henri, historia, 60 pa autopsja, itd.. organizacja: < href=" http:// czŚonek. dom rodzinny. com/ godsbrain"> G. O. D. S. B. R. . I. N.</ >< br> Reply-To: GODSBRAIN@ DOM RODZINNY. COM, GODSBRAIN@ AOL. COM Message-ID: < suv0hs4b86ldf6kh11pg4usgb988mp55km@ 4ax. com> odwoŚanie siO: < 20000416220330.
>18658.
>18658.
>0000...@ng-cg1.aol.com> <38fa9...@huge.aa.net> <8n1mfss0cu2ou4qhe...@4ax.com> <025220ee.
>4069@ ng-cg1. aol. com> < 38fa90de_2@ ogromny. aa. bez potrŚceą> < 8n1mfss0cu2ou4qhej2ujs106jhqfrbbol@ 4ax. com> < 025220ee.
>5e23...@usw-ex0104-033.remarq.com> <VHL8$AAWpz$4I...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> <03cfeca4.
>5e23de39@ usw-ex0104-033. remarq. com> < VHL8$ AAWpz$ 4IAaS@ lastings. softnet. d-ca. uk> < 03cfeca4.
>e454...@usw-ex0105-038.remarq.com> <5AGHurAe...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> <022cd178.
>e454e6ea@ usw-ex0105-038. remarq. com> < 5AGHurAeP0A5IAT7@ lastings. softnet. d-ca. uk> < 022cd178.
>7c06...@usw-ex0105-037.remarq.com> <0PU0NLBY...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> <2ehrgsobh76u0sheo...@4ax.com> <EwaIiIA+...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.
>7c06d2cf@ usw-ex0105-037. remarq. com> < 0PU0NLBYabD5IAaW@ lastings. softnet. d-ca. uk> < 2ehrgsobh76u0sheo8fsoso92h16ood0pr@ 4ax. com> < EwaIiIA+ 6EE5IAXR@ lastings. softnet. d-ca. uk> X-Newsreader: mocna strona agent 1.
>7/32.
>7/ 32.
>534 MIME-Version: 1.
>534 MIME-Version: 1.
>0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 683 Date: Wed, 03 May 2000 22:40:25 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.
>0 Content-Type: tekscie/ gŚadki; charset= us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit ustawiaľ siO wzdŚu+: 683 data: poŁlubiľ, 3 maj 2000 22: 40: 25 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.
>7.
>7.
>83.
>83.
>23 X-Complaints-To: ab...@home.net X-Trace: news1.
>23 X-Complaints-To: nadu+ywaľ@ dom rodzinny. bez potrŚceą X-Trace: news1.
>frmt1.
>frmt1.
>sfba.
>sfba.
>home.
>Dom rodzinny.
>com 957393625 24.
>com 957393625 24.
>7.
>7.
>83.
>83.
>23 (Wed, 03 May 2000 15:40:25 PDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 03 May 2000 15:40:25 PDT Xref: newshub1.
>23( poŁlubiľ, 3 maj 2000 15: 40: 25 PDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: poŁlubiľ, 3 maj 2000 15: 40: 25 PDT Xref: newshub1.
>home.
>Dom rodzinny.
>com alt.
>com alt.
>conspiracy.
>Konspiratorstwa.
>princess-diana:30031204 -------- </html> OK.
>princess-diana: 30031204 --------</ html> OK.
> What do we call this?
>Co czyniľ my dawaľ na imiO ten?
> The daily replay of the daily revised version of the God's Brain Suppositional Hypothesis.
>Przedimek okreŁlony codzienny powtarzaľ od przedimek okreŁlony codzienny poprawiaľ tŚumaczeą od przedimek okreŁlony B=g m=zg Suppositional hipoteza.
> Act ______ Scene ________ Having read the below a time or two, or few, some opportunity to explain weighted influence factors in the construction of the daily hypothesis.
>Akcie ______ awantura ________ Having czytajmy przedimek okreŁlony pod mitrOga albo 2, albo maŚo, some gratka +eby wyjaŁniaľ weighted wpŚywaľ na faktor w przedimek okreŁlony budowa od przedimek okreŁlony codzienny hipoteza.
> Since the authorities have had two and a half years with the manpower, peoplepower, staff power, of what was it reported?
>Since przedimek okreŁlony autorytecie have had 2 i poŚowa latek z przedimek okreŁlony siŚa robocza, peoplepower, staff moc, od co byľ to reported?
> Some 24 full time investigators and million(s) dollar equivalent budgets I am not competing with that.
>Some 24 peŚny mitrOga investigators i 1000000( s) dolar r=wnowartoŁciowy bud+ecie I byľ nie braľ udziaŚ z +e.
> The outcome reports of that investigation appear to be: Drunk driver speeds without the care of D+D+TRJ and abruptly turns left into a central column.
>Przedimek okreŁlony wynik detonacja od +e Łledztw pojawiaľ siO +eby byľ: nap=j kierowca szybkoŁľ bez przedimek okreŁlony doz=r od D+ D+ TRJ i nagle obracaľ opuszczaľ do centralny kolumna.
> Simple Road Traffic Accident RTA.
>Prosty jezdnia Traffic kraksa RTA.
> When and over the time since the creation of alt.
>Kiedy i na przedimek okreŁlony mitrOga since przedimek okreŁlony stworzeą od alt.
>conspiracy.
>Konspiratorstwa.
>princess-diana by b.
>princess-diana przez b.
>anana his philosophical position as I read it is to approximately take the position for sake of arguement that Diana was killed as the result of a conspiracy.
>anana jego filozoficzny pozycja gdy I czytajmy to byľ +eby okoŚo podejmowaľ przedimek okreŁlony pozycja dla sprawa od arguement +e Diana byľ uŁmierzaľ gdy przedimek okreŁlony skutek od konspiratorstwa.
> Because it has appeared to me that while times, places, people, and motives have been discussed I have a feeling that there has been less than reasonable consideration of some possibilities.
>Because to has pojawiaľ siO +eby me +e chwila razy, miejsc, lud, i motywacja have byľ dyskutowaŚ I have feeling +e tam has byľ maŚy than rozsŚdny namysŚ od some mo+liwoŁľ.
> As a consequence of that belief I am trying to construct a suppositional hypothesis that will identify possible, persons, places, things that may be considered as possible.
>Gdy konsekwencja od +e wiara I byľ pr=bowaľ +eby zbudowaľ suppositional hipoteza +e bOdŚ rozpoznawaľ mo+liwy, indywidua, miejsc, rzecz +e maj byľ rozwa+aľ gdy mo+liwy.
> The intent is to create multiple fictional tracks such that the most possible/ununderstood may be considered.
>Przedimek okreŁlony zdeterminowany byľ +eby tworzyľ wieloraki fikcyjny bie+nia such +e przedimek okreŁlony najbardziej mo+liwy/ ununderstood maj byľ rozwa+aľ.
> Many of the pieces are for the most part agreed as having been in the area but there is a lot of discrepancy as to the EXACT location at a SPECIFIC INSTANT.
>Du+o od przedimek okreŁlony kawaŚeczek byľ dla przedimek okreŁlony najbardziej czOŁľ uzgadniaľ gdy having byľ w przedimek okreŁlony powierzchnia opr=cz tam byľ du+o od rozbie+noŁľ gdy +eby przedimek okreŁlony îCISúY lokacja przy îCISúY CHWILA.
> My intent is to create this fictional supposition to give, or try to determine, the differences between points of agreement and points of disharmony.
>M=j zdeterminowany byľ +eby tworzyľ ten fikcyjny domniemanie +eby dawaľ, albo pr=bowaľ +eby ustalaľ, przedimek okreŁlony r=+nica poglŚd=w miOdzy cecha od porozumieą i cecha od dysharmonia.
> Agreement/Disagreement and Harmony/Disharmony.
>Porozumieą/ niezgodnoŁľ i harmonia/ dysharmonia.
> Concord vs Discord.
>Zgoda vs niezgoda.
> If there might have been common interest to finance a joint project to lessen Diana's influence with the media because she was percieved to be "stepping on someones toes" , my words, then how might some such plan, plot, conspiracy, have been considered achievable from a variety of possible participant's points of view?
>Je+eli tam potOga have byľ bŚoni zainteresowaą +eby finansowaŚ knajpa projekcie +eby zmniejszaľ Diana's wpŚywaľ na z przedimek okreŁlony media because she byľ percieved +eby byľ" stepping na someones paluch" , m=j sŚowo, nastOpnie jak potOga some such mapka, grzŚdka, konspiratorstwa, have byľ rozwa+aľ dokonalny z odmiana od mo+liwy uczestnik cecha od perspektywa?
> My typing fingers are not going to stand too long a discussion at this point so I am going to try to speed along.
>M=j typing dotykaľ palcem byľ nie going to kandydujO tak+e dŚugo debata przy ten cecha so I byľ going to pr=bowaľ +eby szybkoŁľ along.
> My supposition is that if there was a conspiracy it had to be to do something.
>M=j domniemanie byľ +e je+eli tam byľ konspiratorstwa to had +eby byľ +eby czyniľ something.
> A photo of Diana giving Dodi a blow job in the back seat of a limo would be pretty good.
> fotka od Diana dawaľ Dodi cios praca w przedimek okreŁlony grzbiecie sadzaľ od limo would byľ Śadny dobry.
>For the photo to achieve maximum benefit it had to be secret and to be used as a threat.
>Dla przedimek okreŁlony fotka +eby odnoŁmy maksymalny korzyŁľ to had +eby byľ tajny i +eby byľ posŚugiwaľ sie gdy gro ba.
>The actual publication in mass media would deflate its power.
>Przedimek okreŁlony faktyczny wydawnictw w masowy media would przeprowadzaľ deflacjO jego moc.
> But it had to have strong and undisputable evidence that it was TRUE if it were ever going to be used.
>Opr=cz to had +eby have strong i undisputable dow=d +e to byľ DOBRZE WYPIONOWANY je+eli to byľ kiedykolwiek going to byľ posŚugiwaľ sie.
> For some paparazzi to "peeping tom" photo a divorcee with her boyfriend in private was not going to do the job.
>Dla some paparazzi +eby" zerkaľ tom" fotka rozwodnik z jŚ chŚopiec w prywatny byľ nie going to czyniľ przedimek okreŁlony praca.
> So the construct of a whore for money with an oily bedhopper in the back seat of a very expensive limo would be much more philosophically correct for the purpose of a conspiracy to get a photo to use for blackmail in the future but not for actual publication.
>So przedimek okreŁlony zbudowaľ od ladacznica dla forsa z przedimek nieokreŁlony natŚuszczony bedhopper w przedimek okreŁlony grzbiecie sadzaľ od bardzo drogi limo would byľ du+o wiOcej filozoficznie poprawiaľ dla przedimek okreŁlony cel od konspiratorstwa +eby robiľ siO fotka +eby posŚugiwaľ sie dla szanta+ w przedimek okreŁlony przyszŚoŁľ opr=cz nie dla faktyczny wydawnictw.
> On Wed, 3 May 2000 17:07:26 +0100, Steve Reed <asr...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> wrote: >Path: news1.
>Na poŁlubiľ, 3 maj 2000 17: 7: 26+ 100, Steve trzcina< asreed@ lastings. softnet. d-ca. uk> pisaľ: > bie+nia: news1.
>frmt1.
>frmt1.
>sfba.
>sfba.
>home.
>Dom rodzinny.
>com!
>com!
>newshub2.
>newshub2.
>rdc1.
>rdc1.
>sfba.
>sfba.
>home.
>Dom rodzinny.
>com!
>com!
>newshub1.
>newshub1.
>home.
>Dom rodzinny.
>com!
>com!
>news.
>news.
>home.
>Dom rodzinny.
>com!
>com!
>feeder.
>Karmiciel.
>via.
>via.
>net!
>Bez potrŚceą!
>diablo.
>diablo.
>theplanet.
>theplanet.
>net!
>Bez potrŚceą!
>news.
>news.
>theplanet.
>theplanet.
>net!
>Bez potrŚceą!
>newspost.
>newspost.
>theplanet.
>theplanet.
>net!
>Bez potrŚceą!
>lastings.
>lastings.
>softnet.
>softnet.
>co.
>D-ca.
>uk!
>uk!
>asreed >From: Steve Reed <asr...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> >Newsgroups: alt.
>asreed> z: Steve trzcina< asreed@ lastings. softnet. d-ca. uk> > Newsgroups: alt.
>conspiracy.
>Konspiratorstwa.
>princess-diana >Subject: Re: Di: Paul, Henri, History, 60 Page Autopsy, Etc. >Date: Wed, 3 May 2000 17:07:26 +0100 >Organization: Home >Lines: 297 >Message-ID: <EwaIiIA+...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> >References: <20000416201432.
>princess-diana> poddany: Re: Di: Paul, Henri, historia, 60 pa autopsja, itd.. > data: poŁlubiľ, 3 maj 2000 17: 7: 26+ 100> organizacja: dom rodzinny> ustawiaľ siO wzdŚu+: 297> Message-ID: < EwaIiIA+ 6EE5IAXR@ lastings. softnet. d-ca. uk> > odwoŚanie siO: < 20000416201432.
>18648.
>18648.
>0000...@ng-cg1.aol.com> > <20000416220330.
>4517@ ng-cg1. aol. com> > < 20000416220330.
>18658.
>18658.
>0000...@ng-cg1.aol.com> <38fa9...@huge.aa.net> > <8n1mfss0cu2ou4qhe...@4ax.com> > <025220ee.
>4069@ ng-cg1. aol. com> < 38fa90de_2@ ogromny. aa. bez potrŚceą> > < 8n1mfss0cu2ou4qhej2ujs106jhqfrbbol@ 4ax. com> > < 025220ee.
>5e23...@usw-ex0104-033.remarq.com> > <VHL8$AAWpz$4I...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> > <03cfeca4.
>5e23de39@ usw-ex0104-033. remarq. com> > < VHL8$ AAWpz$ 4IAaS@ lastings. softnet. d-ca. uk> > < 03cfeca4.
>e454...@usw-ex0105-038.remarq.com> > <5AGHurAe...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> > <022cd178.
>e454e6ea@ usw-ex0105-038. remarq. com> > < 5AGHurAeP0A5IAT7@ lastings. softnet. d-ca. uk> > < 022cd178.
>7c06...@usw-ex0105-037.remarq.com> > <0PU0NLBY...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> > <2ehrgsobh76u0sheo...@4ax.com> >Reply-To: Andrew Steven Reed <ar...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> >NNTP-Posting-Host: modem88.
>7c06d2cf@ usw-ex0105-037. remarq. com> > < 0PU0NLBYabD5IAaW@ lastings. softnet. d-ca. uk> > < 2ehrgsobh76u0sheo8fsoso92h16ood0pr@ 4ax. com> > Reply-To: Andrzej Steven trzcina< areed@ lastings. softnet. d-ca. uk> > NNTP-Posting-Host: modem88.
>fred.
>fred.
>pol.
>pol.
>co.
>D-ca.
>uk >Mime-Version: 1.
>uk> Mime-Version: 1.
>0 >X-Trace: newsreaderg1.
>0> X-Trace: newsreaderg1.
>core.
>JŚdro.
>theplanet.
>theplanet.
>net 957376918 19338 195.
>Bez potrŚceą 957376918 19338 195.
>92.
>92.
>7.
>7.
>216 (3 May 2000 18:01:58 GMT) >NNTP-Posting-Date: 3 May 2000 18:01:58 GMT >X-Complaints-To: ab...@theplanet.net >X-Newsreader: Turnpike Integrated Version 4.
>216( 3 maj 2000 18: 1: 58 GMT) > NNTP-Posting-Date: 3 maj 2000 18: 1: 58 GMT> X-Complaints-To: nadu+ywaľ@ theplanet. bez potrŚceą> X-Newsreader: rogatka zintegrowany tŚumaczeą 4.
>02 M <TWkHBtca5wWBvmfWwoLIWQkgFM> >Xref: newshub1.
>2 M< TWkHBtca5wWBvmfWwoLIWQkgFM> > Xref: newshub1.
>home.
>Dom rodzinny.
>com alt.
>com alt.
>conspiracy.
>Konspiratorstwa.
>princess-diana:30031199 > >In article <2ehrgsobh76u0sheo...@4ax.com>, >GODS...@HOME.COM writes >>>there was "a white car", >>>in the middle of the road, behind him.
>princess-diana: 30031199> > w artykuŚ< 2ehrgsobh76u0sheo8fsoso92h16ood0pr@ 4ax. com>, > GODSBRAIN@ DOM RODZINNY. COM pisaľ>>> tam byľ" biel aucie", >>> w przedimek okreŁlony poŚowa od przedimek okreŁlony jezdnia, z tyŚu him.
> >> >>So Livestre lied.
>>> >>So Livestre lied.
> The white car was not in the middle >>of the road, the Mercedes was in the middle of the >>road.
>Przedimek okreŁlony biel aucie byľ nie w przedimek okreŁlony poŚowa>> od przedimek okreŁlony jezdnia, przedimek okreŁlony Mercedes byľ w przedimek okreŁlony poŚowa od przedimek okreŁlony>> jezdnia.
> Why did Livestre lie?
>Czemu czyniľ Livestre kŚamstw?
> Maybe Livestre did not lie in that particular.
>Byľ mo+e +e... Livestre czyniľ nie kŚamstw w +e partykularny.
> One needs to be very careful as to "at what instant" and did he say the middle of the road or the middle of the lane?
>1 potrzeba +eby byľ bardzo careful gdy +eby" przy co chwila" i czyniľ on powiedzieľ przedimek okreŁlony poŚowa od przedimek okreŁlony jezdnia albo przedimek okreŁlony poŚowa od przedimek okreŁlony lane?
> It was said that he had moved into the right lane.
>To byľ powiedzieľ +e on had poruszaľ do przedimek okreŁlony dobry lane.
> If he said the white car was in the middle of the [right] lane I would agree.
>Je+eli on powiedzieľ przedimek okreŁlony biel aucie byľ w przedimek okreŁlony poŚowa od przedimek okreŁlony[ dobry] lane I would uzgadniaľ.
>> >Levistre is not contradicting himself.
>> >Levistre byľ nie pozostawaľ w sprzecznoŁci himself.
> He saw the white car "au milieu >de la chaussee" So, does "chaussee" come closer to translating as "lane" or on the other hand, "road?
>On piŚowaľ przedimek okreŁlony biel aucie" au Łrodowisk> de la chaussee" So, czyniľ" chaussee" przychodziľ zakaączaľ +eby tŚumaczyľ gdy" lane" albo na przedimek okreŁlony inny rOka, " jezdnia?
>" Road having two lanes.
>"Jezdnia having 2 lanes.
> >and was overtaken by it ("elle me double") But exactly where were the other actors at the exact instant that "elle me double?
>>I byľ ogarniaľ przez to(" elle me dublowanie") opr=cz ŁcisŚy gdzie byľ przedimek okreŁlony inny aktor przy przedimek okreŁlony ŁcisŚy chwila +e" elle me dublowanie?
>" >"Then", he >says ("puis j'observe [retroviseur] une autre auto toujours au milieu de >la route") "I saw [rear-view mirror] another car, also in the middle of >the road" So here we have a "milieu de la route.
>" >"NastOpnie", on> powiedzieľ(" puis j'observe[ retroviseur] une autre auto toujours au Łrodowisk de> la marszruta") " I piŚowaľ[ rear-view lustro] inny aucie, i w przedimek okreŁlony poŚowa od> przedimek okreŁlony jezdnia" So tutaj my have " Łrodowisk de la marszruta.
>" Does that mean closer the lane or the road?
>"Czyniľ +e Łredni zakaączaľ przedimek okreŁlony lane albo przedimek okreŁlony jezdnia?
> >("et soudain une grosse moto sur sa gauche qui lui fait une >queue de poisson") "and, all of a sudden, a large motor-bike, to the >left of it, cutting-in in front of it".
>>("et soudain une grosse moto sur sa nietaktowny qui lui fait une> kolejka de poisson") " i, caŚy od sudden, du+y motor-bike, +eby przedimek okreŁlony> opuszczaľ od to, cutting-in in front of to".
> I will take it that AT SOME POINT a large motor-bike, comming from the left of it, and then cutting-in in front of it.
>I bOdŚ podejmowaľ to +e PRZY SOME CECHA du+y motor-bike, comming z przedimek okreŁlony opuszczaľ od to, i nastOpnie cutting-in in front of to.
> > >(another ambiguity is created by the expression "sur sa gauche", which >could be translated "to ITS left" [to the right of it, from where >Levistre says he was] or "to the left of it" [as seen from Levistre's >alleged position] and, since Levistre claims that the Mercedes "was in >the middle of the road" at that point, it could be either) Since I am trying to construct a hypothetical scene where the Merc was astraddle the white line that separated the two west bound lanes and a photographing motorcycle was to the left side of the Merc at the exact instant that the white car was on the right side.
>> >(Inny dwuznacznoŁľ byľ tworzyľ przez przedimek okreŁlony ekspresja" sur sa nietaktowny", kt=ry> could byľ tŚumaczyľ" +eby JEGO opuszczaľ" [ +eby przedimek okreŁlony dobry od to, z gdzie> Levistre powiedzieľ on byľ] albo" +eby przedimek okreŁlony opuszczaľ od to" [ gdy seen z Levistre's> utrzymujO pozycja] i, since Levistre domagaľ siO +e przedimek okreŁlony Mercedes" byľ w> przedimek okreŁlony poŚowa od przedimek okreŁlony jezdnia" przy +e cecha, to could byľ obie) Since I byľ pr=bowaľ +eby zbudowaľ hipotetyczny awantura gdzie przedimek okreŁlony Merc byľ astraddle przedimek okreŁlony biel ustawiaľ siO wzdŚu+ +e separated przedimek okreŁlony 2 zach=d Śupek iglasty lanes i fotografowaŚ motorcycle byľ +eby przedimek okreŁlony opuszczaľ boczek od przedimek okreŁlony Merc przy przedimek okreŁlony ŁcisŚy chwila +e przedimek okreŁlony biel aucie byľ na przedimek okreŁlony dobry boczek.
> .
>
> .
>
> .
>
>> >"At the same instant, for a fraction of a second, there was a tremendous >flash of light, but nothing like the flash of a camera" ("Au meme >moment, en une fraction de seconde, un enorme eclair jaillit, mais rien >a voir avec le flash d'un appareil-photo") > >My point is that the order of events is not completely clear.
>> >"Przy przedimek okreŁlony ten sam chwila, dla frakcja od 2, tam byľ ogromny> bŚysk od ŁwiatŚo, opr=cz nic lubiľ przedimek okreŁlony bŚysk od kamera" (" Au meme> chwila, en une frakcja de seconde, NZ enorme ekler jaillit, mais rien> voir avec le bŚysk d'un appareil-photo") > > m=j cecha byľ +e przedimek okreŁlony porzŚdkowaľ od ewenemencie byľ nie kompletnie bezsporny.
> It could >be that the bike cut-in in front of the Mercedes just before the white >car passed Levistre - either that, or the bike was further behind the >Mercedes, as both vehicles entered the tunnel, than Clifford, Olivier >and Thierry imply.
>To could> byľ +e przedimek okreŁlony rower cut-in in front of przedimek okreŁlony Mercedes sŚuszny naprzeciwko przedimek okreŁlony biel> aucie passed Levistre - obie +e, albo przedimek okreŁlony rower byľ dalszy z tyŚu przedimek okreŁlony> Mercedes, gdy obaj narzOdzie braľ udziaŚ przedimek okreŁlony tunel, than Clifford, Olivier> i Thierry dawaľ do zrozumienia.
> I suppose the bike could have braked, just before the Is there any chance that one of the skid marks, like the single one, was the bike?
>I je+eli przedimek okreŁlony rower could have orlica, sŚuszny naprzeciwko przedimek okreŁlony byľ tam jakiŁ przypadkowo zrobiľ +e 1 od przedimek okreŁlony pŚozy ocena, lubiľ przedimek okreŁlony jeden 1, byľ przedimek okreŁlony rower?
> >tunnel (to avoid running into a Mercedes/white-car pile-up) and that >Levistre might not have been as far along the tunnel as he thought he >was.
>>Tunel( +eby unikaľ kandydujO do Mercedes/ white-car karambol) i +e> Levistre potOga nie have byľ gdy daleki along przedimek okreŁlony tunel gdy on namysŚ on> byľ.
> There is another branch of my lack of understanding and that follows along a train of thought that the picture was intended but the crash was an accident.
>Tam byľ inny agenda od m=j niedostatek od rozumieľ i +e Łledziľ along szkoliľ od namysŚ +e przedimek okreŁlony ilustracja byľ zamierzaľ opr=cz przedimek okreŁlony kraksa byľ przedimek nieokreŁlony kraksa.
> In the "accident" hypothesis approximately the motorcycle photographer could have accidently fired a half metre too far forward and instead of shooting in to the back seat he could have accidently hit HP directly in the eyes as Henri Paul looked to the left as the motorcycle came along side his side window.
>W przedimek okreŁlony" kraksa" hipoteza okoŚo przedimek okreŁlony motorcycle fotograf could have accidently ogieą poŚowa metr tak+e daleki ŁmiaŚy i instead of polowaą w +eby przedimek okreŁlony grzbiecie sadzaľ on could have accidently hicie HP bezpoŁrednio w przedimek okreŁlony oczach gdy Henri Paul patrzeľ +eby przedimek okreŁlony opuszczaľ gdy przedimek okreŁlony motorcycle przychodziľ along boczek jego boczek okien.
>Then the blinding flash could have caused HP to FLINCH and swerve to the right just a little.
>NastOpnie przedimek okreŁlony Łlepy bŚysk could have wywoŚujO HP +eby WZDRYGAŚ SI- i skrOcaľ +eby przedimek okreŁlony dobry sŚuszny maŚy.
> At that point hitting the rear of the accelerating white car.
>Przy +e cecha hitting przedimek okreŁlony tyŚ od przedimek okreŁlony przyŁpieszaľ biel aucie.
> As the white car's rear goes to the right its front goes to the left.
>Gdy przedimek okreŁlony biel aucie tyŚ goes to przedimek okreŁlony dobry jego froncie goes to przedimek okreŁlony opuszczaľ.
> To correct, the driver throws to the right and the rear goes to the left.
>ťeby poprawiaľ, przedimek okreŁlony kierowca rzuciľ +eby przedimek okreŁlony dobry i przedimek okreŁlony tyŚ goes to przedimek okreŁlony opuszczaľ.
> Essentially tossing the front of the Merc into the central columns.
>Istotnie odrzucaľ do tyŚu przedimek okreŁlony froncie od przedimek okreŁlony Merc do przedimek okreŁlony centralny kolumna.
> >Thus, the Mercedes hit the white car, side-to-side, and impelled it >forwards, towards Levistre, and was FOLLOWING it, as it passed >Levistre's position, and as the bike overtook the Mercedes.
>>Tak wiOc, przedimek okreŁlony Mercedes hicie przedimek okreŁlony biel aucie, side-to-side, i zmuszaľ kogoŁ do zrobienia czegoŁ to> naprz=d, towards Levistre, i byľ NAST-PNY to, gdy to passed> Levistre's pozycja, i gdy przedimek okreŁlony rower ogarniaľ przedimek okreŁlony Mercedes.
> I think that the first, photographing, bike should have been ahead of the white car.
>I think +e przedimek okreŁlony 1, fotografowaŚ, rower should have byľ do przodu od przedimek okreŁlony biel aucie.
> If the bike and the car essentially accelerated at the same instant the bike would outrun the car.
>Je+eli przedimek okreŁlony rower i przedimek okreŁlony aucie istotnie przyŁpieszaľ przy przedimek okreŁlony ten sam chwila przedimek okreŁlony rower would zdystansowaľ przedimek okreŁlony aucie.
> I think.
>I think.
> Bikes are far faster at acceleration that cars.
>Rower byľ daleki faster przy akceleracja +e aucie.
> Any disagreements?
>JakiŁ niezgodnoŁľ?
>Of course, with two riders and a turbo car ...?
>Od daą, z 2 je dziec i turbo aucie...?
> For one thing, you are supposing then that the white car was ahead of the Merc at the instant that the Merc hit the central column/pilar/post.
>Dla 1 rzecz, you byľ je+eli nastOpnie +e przedimek okreŁlony biel aucie byľ do przodu od przedimek okreŁlony Merc przy przedimek okreŁlony chwila +e przedimek okreŁlony Merc hicie przedimek okreŁlony centralny kolumna/ pilar/ korespondencja.
> That is in accord with my first guess.
>ťe byľ w porozumieą z m=j 1 domyŁlaľ siO.
>> >Does that clear things up?
>> >Czyniľ +e bezsporny rzecz do g=ry?
> No.
>Nie.
> It smokes them up.
>To paliľ them do g=ry.
> But gives a number of possible occurances to consider.
>Opr=cz dawaľ cyferka od mo+liwy occurances +eby rozwa+aľ.
>>> >>>Behind that, he says, there was >>>"another car" (presumably the Mercedes S- 280) and behind that, a large >>>motor-bike.
>>> >>>Z tyŚu +e, on powiedzieľ, tam byľ>>>" inny aucie" ( przypuszczalnie przedimek okreŁlony Mercedes S- 280) i z tyŚu +e, du+y>>> motor-bike.
> So my first thought on that is that that is a second bike.
>So m=j 1 namysŚ na +e byľ +e +e byľ 2 rower.
> And if we are talking about the left that might be better described as a second bike on the left as there might have been one or more bikes on the right in addition.
>I je+eli my byľ talking o przedimek okreŁlony opuszczaľ +e potOga byľ dobry charakteryzowaŚ gdy 2 rower na przedimek okreŁlony opuszczaľ gdy tam potOga have byľ 1 albo wiOcej rower na przedimek okreŁlony dobry w domieszka.
>>> >>Livestre lies again.
>>> >>Livestre kŚamstw jeszcze raz.
>> >What do you mean?
>> >Co czyniľ you Łredni?
> What evidence is there that Levistre is "lying"?
>Co dow=d byľ tam +e Levistre byľ" lying"?
> My supposition.
>M=j domniemanie.
>> >> He clearly saw and may have been a part >>of a conspiracy to cover up.
>> >>On jasno piŚowaľ i maj have byľ czOŁľ>> od konspiratorstwa +eby osŚona do g=ry.
> So in my supposition he saw it >>and he lied about it.
>So w m=j domniemanie on piŚowaľ to>> i on lied o to.
> Now if we go off on a train of thought to >>explore a hypothesis that Livestre was deliberately lying then >>I'll have to think about that some more.
>Teraz je+eli my go skreŁlony na szkoliľ od namysŚ +eby>> zgŚObiaľ hipoteza +e Livestre byľ rozmyŁlnie lying nastOpnie>> I'll I'll have +eby think o +e some wiOcej.
> I have not until the >>present considered the possibility that he was deliberately >>lying.
>I have nie until przedimek okreŁlony>> ofiara rozwa+aľ przedimek okreŁlony mo+liwoŁľ +e on byľ rozmyŁlnie>> lying.
>>> >I have - he could be in the pay of Al-Fayed (or his high-level masters) >That's always a possibility; but why should we single him out?
>>> >I have - on could byľ w przedimek okreŁlony pŚaciľ od Al-Fayed( albo jego high-level mistrzowski) > +e byľ zawsze mo+liwoŁľ; opr=cz czemu should my jeden him poza?
> I'm not singling him out.
>I'm byľ nie singling him poza.
> I am theorizing that there may have been a whole swarm of conspiring pap's surrounding Diana's car.
>I byľ teoretyzujO +e tam maj have byľ caŚy czereda od konspirowaŚ sutek surrounding Diana's aucie.
> >What >about any (or ALL) of the other witnesses?
>>Co> o jakiŁ( albo CAúY) od przedimek okreŁlony inny Łwiadek?
> I am inclined to go with the >majority (who saw closely pursuing vehicles) and focus suspicion on >Mohammed and Souad who - alone - say they did not.
>I byľ byľ nachylonym +eby go z przedimek okreŁlony> wiOkszoŁľ( kto piŚowaľ ŁciŁle Łcigaľ narzOdzie) i ogniskowaŚ podejrzeą na> Mohammed i Souad kto - alone - powiedzieľ oni czyniľ nie.
>> >>If he were deliberately lying and saw the three vehicles >>abreast, > > He says he saw them one behind the other - until the bike overtook the >Mercedes.
>> >>Je+eli on byľ rozmyŁlnie lying i piŚowaľ przedimek okreŁlony 3 narzOdzie>> obok siebie, > > on powiedzieľ on piŚowaľ them 1 z tyŚu przedimek okreŁlony inny - until przedimek okreŁlony rower ogarniaľ przedimek okreŁlony> Mercedes.
> Then the bike and the Mercedes were "abreast", but the white >car - so he implies - had already overtaken him by then!
>NastOpnie przedimek okreŁlony rower i przedimek okreŁlony Mercedes byľ" obok siebie", opr=cz przedimek okreŁlony biel> aucie - so on dawaľ do zrozumienia - had ju+ ogarniaľ him przez nastOpnie!
> But why should >you suspect this to be a lie?
>Opr=cz czemu should> you aresztant ten +eby byľ kŚamstw?
> I think you, we, need to be very careful about exactly what instant is being described as being related to any single comment.
>I think you, my, potrzeba +eby byľ bardzo careful o ŁcisŚy co chwila byľ byľ charakteryzowaŚ gdy byľ opowiadaľ +eby jakiŁ jeden uwaga.
>> >> the photo flashes, the motorcycle accelerate, >>the car on the right bump the Merc into the central >>pilars, > >You want to hypothesize that the bike-overtake/flash occurred BEFORE the >sliding collision?
>> >>Przedimek okreŁlony fotka bŚysk, przedimek okreŁlony motorcycle przyŁpieszaľ, >> przedimek okreŁlony aucie na przedimek okreŁlony dobry wyb=j przedimek okreŁlony Merc do przedimek okreŁlony centralny>> pilars, > > You bieda +eby hipotetyzowaľ +e przedimek okreŁlony bike-overtake/ bŚysk mieľ miejsce NAPRZECIWKO przedimek okreŁlony> sliding zderzeą?
> What on earth for?
>Co na nora dla?
> Well, if the supposition is as two photographing vehicles taking a photograph from both sides at the same instant .
>Dobrze, je+eli przedimek okreŁlony domniemanie byľ gdy 2 fotografowaŚ narzOdzie podejmowaľ zdjOľ z obaj boczek przy przedimek okreŁlony ten sam chwila.
> .
>
> .
>
> .
>
> There may also have been two contacts between the two vehicles?
>Tam maj i have byľ 2 kontakcie miOdzy przedimek okreŁlony 2 narzOdzie?
>The mirror thing may not have been considered significant.
>Przedimek okreŁlony lustro rzecz maj nie have byľ rozwa+aľ significant.
> The mirror would not have broken out the tail light.
>Przedimek okreŁlony lustro would nie have spŚukany poza przedimek okreŁlony Łledziľ ŁwiatŚo.
> So if the tail light was broken would not one suspect a corresponding dent on the Merc's right front fender?
>So je+eli przedimek okreŁlony Łledziľ ŁwiatŚo byľ spŚukany would nie 1 aresztant zgadzaľ siO wgniataľ na przedimek okreŁlony Merc's dobry froncie bŚotnik?
>> In reading this over I can not understand quickly the actions to cover up circumstances by police, courts, etc. unless Diana bite off and swallowed the tip of Dodi's penis from the force of the crash.
>>W lektura ten na I blaszanka nie rozumieľ szybko przedimek okreŁlony akcja +eby osŚona do g=ry okolicznoŁľ przez policja, boisk, itd.. je+eli nie Diana gryz skreŁlony i swallowed przedimek okreŁlony czubek od Dodi's chuj z przedimek okreŁlony pchnŚľ od przedimek okreŁlony kraksa.
> If some such had happened then that could explain a lot of things, But it would also demonstrate that there was no fear in the back seat at the time of crash which would be important to suggest that there was no demonstrated disagreement with Henri Paul's driving performance prior to the crash.
>Je+eli some such had wydarzaľ siO nastOpnie +e could wyjaŁniaľ du+o od rzecz, opr=cz to would i demonstrowaŚ +e tam byľ nie obawa w przedimek okreŁlony grzbiecie sadzaľ przy przedimek okreŁlony mitrOga od kraksa kt=ry would byľ wa+ny +eby suggest +e tam byľ nie demonstrowaŚ niezgodnoŁľ z Henri Paul's gnajmy speŚnieą przed +eby przedimek okreŁlony kraksa.
> >> that the first photoflashing motorcycle sped off >>past him and out of the tunnel as well as the vehicle that >>had bumped the Merc.
>>>ťe przedimek okreŁlony 1 photoflashing motorcycle sped skreŁlony>> przeszŚy him i out of przedimek okreŁlony tunel as well as przedimek okreŁlony narzOdzie +e>> had wyb=j przedimek okreŁlony Merc.
> and then reported that in essence >>a followup motorcycle stopped to view into the Merc >>and it then resumed to exit the tunnel, etc. >> >You mean Levistre is concealing the existence of a second motorcycle?
>I nastOpnie reported +e w esencja>> followup motorcycle stajO +eby perspektywa do przedimek okreŁlony Merc>> i to nastOpnie dokoączyľ +eby wyjŁľ przedimek okreŁlony tunel, itd.. >> > You Łredni Levistre byľ ukrywaľ przedimek okreŁlony egzystencja od 2 motorcycle?
>>True, Thierry H.
>>Dobrze wypionowany, Thierry H.
> says he saw "several" motorcycles pursuing the >Mercedes, closely, towards the tunnel (he had a view along the cour >Albert Premier from the carriageway itself) but Clifford G.
>Powiedzieľ on piŚowaľ" several" motorcycles Łcigaľ przedimek okreŁlony> Mercedes, ŁciŁle, towards przedimek okreŁlony tunel( on had perspektywa along przedimek okreŁlony cour> Albert gŚ=wny z przedimek okreŁlony carriageway itself) opr=cz Clifford G.
> and Olivier >P (who were positioned to the right [north] of the road and could see no >more than the tunnel-entrance) report only " a car in front of the >Mercedes and a [one!
>I Olivier> P( kto byľ positioned +eby przedimek okreŁlony dobry[ p=Śnoc] od przedimek okreŁlony jezdnia i could biskupstwo nie> wiOcej than przedimek okreŁlony tunnel-entrance) detonacja jedyny" aucie in front of przedimek okreŁlony> Mercedes i [ 1!
>] powerful motor-cycle, 30 - 40 metres behind.
>]Mocny motor-cycle, 30 - 40 metr z tyŚu.
> I think it was Brian Anderson's story that a motorcycle moved to pass the Merc on its left as it entered the tunnel, which would be exact in accord with my one theory.
>I think to byľ Brian Anderson's anegdota +e motorcycle poruszaľ +eby identyfikator przedimek okreŁlony Merc na jego opuszczaľ gdy to braľ udziaŚ przedimek okreŁlony tunel, kt=ry would byľ ŁcisŚy w porozumieą z m=j 1 teoria.
>> >Why should we not assume that the other bikes left the cour Albert >Premier, at the exit slip-road, leaving the pair on the bike, which >Clifford, Olivier and Levistre saw, to proceed into the tunnel for the >kill!?
>> >Czemu should my nie braľ na siebie +e przedimek okreŁlony inny rower opuszczaľ przedimek okreŁlony cour Albert> gŚ=wny, przy przedimek okreŁlony wyjŁľ slip-road, opuszczaľ przedimek okreŁlony dobieraľ do pary na przedimek okreŁlony rower, kt=ry> Clifford, Olivier i Levistre piŚowaľ, +eby iŁľ do przedimek okreŁlony tunel dla przedimek okreŁlony> uŁmierzaľ!?
> I don't think that the word "kill" is at all proper in a larger view.
>I czyniľ nie think +e przedimek okreŁlony sŚowo" uŁmierzaľ" byľ przy caŚy poprawny w du+y perspektywa.
>"Photo" would I suggest be a more prevalent term for that point.
>"Fotka" would I suggest byľ wiOcej powszechny kadencja dla +e cecha.
>> >>I would like to see the animation sequences down to the 1 meter >>resolution.
>> >>I would lubiľ +eby biskupstwo przedimek okreŁlony animacja kolejnoŁľ meszek +eby przedimek okreŁlony 1 parkometr>> decyzja.
> I think the main constant that we can use is the >>physical distance on the road as being traversed by the Merc.
>I think przedimek okreŁlony gŚ=wna rura wodociŚgowa staŚy +e my blaszanka posŚugiwaľ sie byľ przedimek okreŁlony>> fizyczny odlegŚoŁľ na przedimek okreŁlony jezdnia gdy byľ przechodziľ przez przedimek okreŁlony Merc.
> >>So the animation reference frames could be identified by reference >>to the tunnel face as metres + "plus" or - "minus" the tunnel face.
>>>So przedimek okreŁlony animacja odwoŚanie siO oprawa could byľ rozpoznawaľ przez odwoŚanie siO>> +eby przedimek okreŁlony tunel lic gdy metr+ " plus" albo -" minus" przedimek okreŁlony tunel lic.
>>>> >We would all (those of us who really wish to have it explained in >detail, that is) like to see sophisticated event-reconstruction >techniques brought to bear, together with an account of exactly what >data was employed and how it was used.
>>>> >My would caŚy( tamci od us kto rzeczywiŁcie chOľ +eby have to wyjaŁniaľ w> duperela, +e byľ) lubiľ +eby biskupstwo sophisticated event-reconstruction> technik przynieŁľ +eby nied wied , razem z przedimek nieokreŁlony relacja od ŁcisŚy co> podstawa odniesienia byľ zatrudniaľ i jak to byľ posŚugiwaľ sie.
> Fat chance of that, however - >unless you happen to have an event-reconstruction team on hand and you >can afford to cock a snoot at the politico-media complex.
>TŚuszcz przypadkowo zrobiľ od +e, jakkolwiek -> je+eli nie you wydarzaľ siO +eby have przedimek nieokreŁlony event-reconstruction brygada na rOka i you> blaszanka dostarczyľ +eby kogut snoot przy przedimek okreŁlony politico-media zŚo+ony.
> There is the traffic accident reconstruction site off my web page.
>Tam byľ przedimek okreŁlony traffic kraksa odbudowa umiejscowieą skreŁlony m=j bŚona pŚawna pa .
> I saw reference to the most professional software photosho or paint shop of something like that.
>I piŚowaľ odwoŚanie siO +eby przedimek okreŁlony najbardziej profesjonalny oprogramowanie photosho albo malowaŚ sklep od something lubiľ +e.
> I got a copy off the web.
>I robiľ siO egzemplarz skreŁlony przedimek okreŁlony bŚona pŚawna.
> One of these years I will move to do my accident and if at the same time I did a second of the Diana crash not much for starters.
>1 od ci latek I bOdŚ poruszaľ +eby czyniľ m=j kraksa i je+eli przy przedimek okreŁlony ten sam mitrOga I czyniľ 2 od przedimek okreŁlony Diana kraksa nie du+o dla startujŚcy.
> > >>>Note that there is no vehicle present, in Levistre's story, which could >>>be the car of the witnesses Souad M.
>> >>>Adnotacja +e tam byľ nie narzOdzie ofiara, w Levistre's anegdota, kt=ry could>>> byľ przedimek okreŁlony aucie od przedimek okreŁlony Łwiadek Souad M.
> and Mohammed M.
>I Mohammed M.
> If we believe >>>Levistre, they weren't there!
>Je+eli my wierzyľ>>> Levistre, oni byľ nie tam!
> On the other hand, if we believe THEM, >>>the Mercedes crashed without any help from anyone - a very convenient >>>version of events, for the authorities, and completely contrary to the >>>testimony of ALL the other witnesses.
>Na przedimek okreŁlony inny rOka, je+eli my wierzyľ THEM, >>> przedimek okreŁlony Mercedes crashed bez jakiŁ pomoc z ktoŁ - bardzo dogodny>>> tŚumaczeą od ewenemencie, dla przedimek okreŁlony autorytecie, i kompletnie przeciwstawny +eby przedimek okreŁlony>>> Łwiadectw od CAúY przedimek okreŁlony inny Łwiadek.
>>> I am not suggesting that consideration should be limited to only one hypothetically possible series of events.
>>>I byľ nie suggesting +e namysŚ should byľ ograniczmy (siO) +eby jedyny 1 przypuszczalnie mo+liwy series od ewenemencie.
> It appears to me that there are apparently conflicting reports of circumstances.
>To pojawiaľ siO +eby me +e tam byľ widocznie Łcieraľ siO detonacja od okolicznoŁľ.
> Therefore I suggest several parallel hypothetical story lines.
>Dlatego I suggest several podobny hipotetyczny anegdota ustawiaľ siO wzdŚu+.
> That calls to mind something that I think Senator Sam Ervin said during the course of the Watergate hearings on Nixon's impeachment.
>ťe dawaľ na imiO +eby umysŚ something +e I think senator Sam Ervin powiedzieľ podczas przedimek okreŁlony daą od przedimek okreŁlony Watergate audiencja na Nixon's podawanie w wŚtpliwoŁľ.
> The in the four gospels there are accounts of what was reported to have been written by Pilate on the sign to be placed over Jesus Christ's head on the cross.
>Przedimek okreŁlony w przedimek okreŁlony 4 ewangelia tam byľ relacja od co byľ reported +eby have byľ pisaľ przez Pilate na przedimek okreŁlony znak +eby byľ placed na Jezus Chrystus gŚowa na przedimek okreŁlony krzy+owka.
> Senator Sam said that if individuals whose testimoney we so reverence from the written testimony could be so reported as divergent then we need not be dismayed that good people of our own day may be reported as to not have agreed perfectly.
>Senator Sam powiedzieľ +e je+eli indywidua czyj testimoney my so reverence z przedimek okreŁlony pisaľ Łwiadectw could byľ so reported gdy r=+norodny nastOpnie my potrzeba nie byľ niepok=j +e dobry lud od nasz posiadaľ dzionek maj byľ reported gdy +eby nie have uzgadniaľ perfekcyjnie.
> >>Hummnn >>> >>>The sequence of events, as Levistre recounts it, is very interesting, >>>because he seems to be saying that the "white car" stayed ahead of the >>>Mercedes and the motor-bike.
>>>Hummnn>>> >>> przedimek okreŁlony kolejnoŁľ od ewenemencie, gdy Levistre opowiedzieľ to, byľ bardzo interesowaŚ, >>> because on seems +eby byľ powiedzieľ +e przedimek okreŁlony" biel aucie" stayed do przodu od przedimek okreŁlony>>> Mercedes i przedimek okreŁlony motor-bike.
> I would think "ahead" of the Merc would be correct but not that the white car stayed ahead of the bike.
>I would think" do przodu" od przedimek okreŁlony Merc would byľ poprawiaľ opr=cz nie +e przedimek okreŁlony biel aucie stayed do przodu od przedimek okreŁlony rower.
> Explaination given above.
>Explaination dawaľ nad.
>>> >>Well, in my SH one possibility that I want to consider is that both >>the white car on the Merc's right hand side and the motorcycle on >>the Merc's left hand side came to a synchronized position along side >>the Merc such as to be able to take symultaneous flash photographs >>into the Merc from both sides at the same time.
>>> >>Dobrze, w m=j SH 1 mo+liwoŁľ +e I bieda +eby rozwa+aľ byľ +e obaj>> przedimek okreŁlony biel aucie na przedimek okreŁlony Merc's dobry rOka boczek i przedimek okreŁlony motorcycle na>> przedimek okreŁlony Merc's opuszczaľ rOka boczek przychodziľ +eby synchronized pozycja along boczek>> przedimek okreŁlony Merc such gdy +eby byľ zdolny +eby podejmowaľ symultaneous bŚysk zdjOľ>> do przedimek okreŁlony Merc z obaj boczek przy przedimek okreŁlony ten sam mitrOga.
> If one is in a very >>heavy law suit one needs at least TWO corroberating withnesses.
>Je+eli 1 byľ w bardzo>> ciO+ki prawo garsonka 1 potrzeba przy najmniejszy 2 corroberating withnesses.
> And a big pile of paps only seconds behind would be very important also.
>I du+y kupa od sutek jedyny seconds z tyŚu would byľ bardzo wa+ny i.
> If somebody hinted at the presence of a blackmail photo they could be assassinated in short order before they could ever get close to a court of law, and I heard a song the other day called "Smuggler's Blues" done in the Eighties by Glenn Frey has some good words.
>Je+eli somebody hinted przy przedimek okreŁlony obecnoŁľ od szanta+ fotka oni could byľ zabijaľ w kr=tki porzŚdkowaľ naprzeciwko oni could kiedykolwiek robiľ siO zakaączaľ +eby boisk od prawo, i I sŚyszeľ pieŁą przedimek okreŁlony inny dzionek called" przemytnik bŚOkicie" czyniľ w przedimek okreŁlony lata osiemdziesiŚte przez Glenn Frey has some dobry sŚowo.
>>> >This seems to me to be fanciful in the extreme.
>>> >Ten seems +eby me +eby byľ kapryŁny w przedimek okreŁlony ekstrema.
> On what grounds do you >suggest it?
>Na co gruncie czyniľ you> suggest to?
>> >>The same scene photographed by two separate photographers at >>exactly the same instant would be IDEAL.
>> >>Przedimek okreŁlony ten sam awantura fotografowaŚ przez 2 oddzielaľ fotograf przy>> ŁcisŚy przedimek okreŁlony ten sam chwila would byľ IDEAú.
>>> >"Ideal" for what?
>>> >"IdeaŚ" dla co?
> Come on Al!
>Przychodziľ na Al!
> What are these simultaneous, two-angle >flash-photos supposed to be for?
>Co byľ ci simultaneous, two-angle> flash-photos supposed +eby byľ dla?
> Okay - you've said before that you >think they would have been compromising photos, and that MAF set up the >car-switch and the pursuit in order to obtain them.
>Dobrze! - you've you've powiedzieľ naprzeciwko +e you> think oni would have byľ kompromisowy fotka, i +e MAF nastawiaľ do g=ry przedimek okreŁlony> car-switch i przedimek okreŁlony poŁcig w porzŚdkowaľ +eby nabywaľ them.
> This is an >interesting idea, because, although it seems most likely to me that MAF >DID make these arrangements, I cannot decide precisely what it was that >he thought was going to happen.
>Ten byľ przedimek nieokreŁlony> interesowaŚ idea, because, choľ to seems najbardziej prawdopodobny +eby me +e MAF> CZYNIŚ robiľ ci aran+acja, I blaszanka nie decydowaŚ dokŚadnie co to byľ +e> on namysŚ byľ going to wydarzaľ siO.
> A compromising photograph.
> kompromisowy zdjOľ.
> Exactly in line with MAF's general opinion of John.
>îcisŚy w ustawiaľ siO wzdŚu+ z MAF's generaŚ ocena od wychodek.
> Q.
>Q.
> Public, Di, etc. > >Let us say that Diana and Dodi were not sleeping together, she was not >pregnant by him and they were not going to get engaged - or some >combination of these negatives - such that, in order to (what?
>Paąstwowy, Di, itd.. > > pozwalaľ us powiedzieľ +e Diana i Dodi byľ nie sleeping razem, she byľ nie> brzemienny przez him i oni byľ nie going to robiľ siO wŚŚczaľ - albo some> kombinacja od ci ujemny - such +e, w porzŚdkowaľ +eby( co?
>) gain >influence over Diana or disgrace her or force her to marry Dodi?
>)Nabieraľ> wpŚywaľ na na Diana albo haąba jŚ albo pchnŚľ jŚ +eby poŁlubiaľ Dodi?
> - the >Al-Fayeds conceived the scheme I would guess that conception of the scheme would have happened far away from MAF.
>- przedimek okreŁlony> Al-Fayeds poczŚľ przedimek okreŁlony plan I would domyŁlaľ siO +e koncepcja od przedimek okreŁlony plan would have wydarzaľ siO daleki daleko z MAF.
> If a group were looking for someone to set up some such scheme MAF might have been found to have been a good candidate to approach for the leading role but the script had been written long before and they just needed some one to play the part.
>Je+eli gromada byľ looking for someone +eby nastawiaľ do g=ry some such plan MAF potOga have byľ znale ľ +eby have byľ dobry aspirant +eby dostOp dla przedimek okreŁlony byľ przewodnikiem rola opr=cz przedimek okreŁlony rOkopis had byľ pisaľ dŚugo naprzeciwko i oni sŚuszny needed some 1 +eby luz przedimek okreŁlony czOŁľ.
> >of obtaining compromising photographs.
>>Od nabywaľ kompromisowy zdjOľ.
> A >clever ruse is employed to get rid of some of the escort (but why not >all?
>> inteligentny podstOp byľ zatrudniaľ +eby robiľ siO uwolniľ od some od przedimek okreŁlony eskorta( opr=cz czemu nie> caŚy?
>) THE COMPROMISING photo to be used for blackmail to influence Diana not to take a strong public stand on some particular issue from time to time would have been financed by an external consortium, QEII, Chas, Military landmine sales proponents, etc. In order to be of use at selected times the photo could not be public.
>)PRZEDIMEK OKREîLONY KOMPROMISOWY fotka +eby byľ posŚugiwaľ sie dla szanta+ +eby wpŚywaľ na Diana nie +eby podejmowaľ strong paąstwowy kandydujO na some partykularny sprawa z mitrOga +eby mitrOga would have byľ finansowaŚ przez przedimek nieokreŁlony z zewnŚtrz konsorcja, QEII, Chas, wojskowy landmine sprzeda+ wnioskodawca, itd.. w porzŚdkowaľ +eby byľ od posŚugiwaľ sie przy selekcjonujO razy przedimek okreŁlony fotka could nie byľ paąstwowy.
> If that happened it would have been a one time shot when ever it fell into public hands.
>Je+eli +e wydarzaľ siO to would have byľ 1 mitrOga strzelaľ kiedy kiedykolwiek to Łcinaľ do paąstwowy rOka.
> To be worth the expense and effort it had to be kept secret but its circumstance had to be indisputable else any single person threatening exposure of some such would be under extremely high surveillance in moments.
>ťeby byľ warta przedimek okreŁlony koszcie i pr=ba to had +eby byľ trzymaľ tajny opr=cz jego okolicznoŁľ had +eby byľ bezsporny albo jakiŁ jeden indywidua groziľ demitologizacja od some such would byľ pod nadzwyczajnie gŚ=wny surveillance w chwila.
> > the remaining escort follows from the Hotel, against orders, thus >giving the impression that they are up to no good.
>>Przedimek okreŁlony zostawaľ eskorta Łledziľ z przedimek okreŁlony hotel, przeciw porzŚdkowaľ, tak wiOc> dawaľ przedimek okreŁlony edycja +e oni byľ do g=ry +eby nie dobry.
> Henri has been >briefed to flee them - he flees.
>Henri has byľ> kr=tki +eby uciekaľ them - on uciekaľ.
> An ambush of pursuers has been arranged >on the cour la Reine - to keep Henri in flight and to give Dodi an >excuse for grabbing Diana (as though protectively) I can't imagine anything but a photograph of a blowjob.
>Przedimek nieokreŁlony wciŚgaľ w zasadzkO od ŁcigajŚcy has byľ aran+owaľ> na przedimek okreŁlony cour la Reine - +eby trzymaľ Henri w locie i +eby dawaľ Dodi przedimek nieokreŁlony> usprawiedliwiaľ dla chwytajmy Diana( gdy choľ ochronnie) I blaszanka nie pojmowaľ coŁ opr=cz zdjOľ od blowjob.
> Sex is no big thing nowadays.
>PŚeľ byľ nie du+y rzecz obecnie.
> In royal family tradition, the past, it may have been able to throw a little influence at an intense moment of public conflict.
>W kr=lewski familia tradycja, przedimek okreŁlony przeszŚy, to maj have been able to rzuciľ maŚy wpŚywaľ na przy przedimek nieokreŁlony intensywny chwila od paąstwowy Łcieraľ siO.
> There is so much detailed sex on the web that I wouldn't doubt that to find a microscopic photo of a pubic hair would take more than a few minutes.
>Tam byľ so du+o drobiazgowy pŚeľ na przedimek okreŁlony bŚona pŚawna +e I wouldn't nie wŚtpiľ +e +eby znale ľ mikroskopijny fotka od Śonowy hair would podejmowaľ wiOcej than maŚo drobiazgowy.
> So if any eyebrows were going to be raised maybe a court threatening a loss of Di's finances for breach of contract re: approximately non modest public behavior.
>So je+eli jakiŁ brew byľ going to byľ podnosiľ byľ mo+e +e... boisk groziľ strata od Di's finansowaŚ dla naruszenie od kontrakcie re: okoŚo non skromny paąstwowy postOpowaą.
> So if Di was very cognizant of contract provisions regarding public behavior as a determinant of her divorce settlement then she would have to have exercised the utmost discression.
>So je+eli Di byľ bardzo powiadomiony od kontrakcie zabezpieczenie odnoŁnie paąstwowy postOpowaą gdy decydowanie od jŚ oddzielaľ rozstrzygniOcie nastOpnie she would have +eby have gimnastykujO siO przedimek okreŁlony najwy+szy discression.
> But if she was going to find any male support outside of her ex's she would have to at some point show some affection.
>Opr=cz je+eli she byľ going to znale ľ jakiŁ mO+czyzna utrzymywanie zewnOtrzna strona od jŚ eks she would have +eby przy some cecha pokazywaľ some choroba.
> Now where could one find any more hope of privacy than in the tunnel of love in a speeding limosine?
>Teraz gdzie could 1 znale ľ jakiŁ wiOcej mieľ nadziejO od prywatnoŁľ than w przedimek okreŁlony tunel od miŚoŁľ w speeding limosine?
> But to be effective for black mail the photo would have to appear as immodest public behavior.
>Opr=cz +eby byľ efektywny dla czerą wysyŚaľ pocztŚ przedimek okreŁlony fotka would have +eby pojawiaľ siO gdy nieskromny paąstwowy postOpowaą.
> I said PUBLIC.
>I powiedzieľ PA-STWOWY.
> So on the one hand Diana would have shyed away from any PUBLIC behavior but people interested in obtaining a photo for blackmail would have to make the circumstances of the photo look as public as possible.
>So na przedimek okreŁlony 1 rOka Diana would have shyed daleko z jakiŁ PA-STWOWY postOpowaą opr=cz lud interesowaŚ w nabywaľ fotka dla szanta+ would have +eby robiľ przedimek okreŁlony okolicznoŁľ od przedimek okreŁlony fotka patrzeľ gdy paąstwowy gdy mo+liwy.
> TWO photo's from TWO different photographers and surrounding photos from another hundred photographers could be made to look like PUBLIC IMMODESTY while the circumstance of the back seat of a speeding limosine in the tunnel in the middle of the night is about as close to "private" behavior as I can imagine anyone could get on short notice.
>2 fotka z 2 inny fotograf i surrounding fotka z inny 100 fotograf could byľ robiľ +eby patrzeľ lubiľ PA-STWOWY NIEPRZYZWOITOîŚ chwila przedimek okreŁlony okolicznoŁľ od przedimek okreŁlony grzbiecie sadzaľ od speeding limosine w przedimek okreŁlony tunel w przedimek okreŁlony poŚowa od przedimek okreŁlony noc byľ o gdy zakaączaľ +eby" prywatny" postOpowaą gdy I blaszanka pojmowaľ ktoŁ could robiľ siO na kr=tki notatka.
> >- a car is stationed >at the tunnel-entrance to stop the Mercedes (a very risky proceeding, >from a father's point of view, don't you think?
>>- aucie byľ stationed> przy przedimek okreŁlony tunnel-entrance +eby kropka przedimek okreŁlony Mercedes( bardzo ryzykowny postOpowaą, > z ojciec cecha od perspektywa, czyniľ nie you think?
>) the Mercedes is slowed, >the pursuers catch up, the photographs are taken.
>)Przedimek okreŁlony Mercedes byľ slowed, > przedimek okreŁlony ŁcigajŚcy atrapa do g=ry, przedimek okreŁlony zdjOľ byľ podejmowaľ.
>> >Photographs of what?
>> >ZdjOľ od co?
> Diana giving Dodi a blow job.
>Diana dawaľ Dodi cios praca.
> What else could even raise an eyebrowe nowadays?
>Co albo could r=wny podnosiľ przedimek nieokreŁlony eyebrowe obecnie?
> Hell, if you had to sell such a photograph to get a MacDonald's hamburger you would have a lot of competition in the current market.
>PiekŚo, je+eli you had +eby sprzedajO such zdjOľ +eby robiľ siO MacDonald's hamburger you would have du+o od wsp=Śzawodnictw w przedimek okreŁlony aktualny rynka.
> > A terrified Diana in Dodi's arms?
>> przera+aľ Diana w Dodi's ramiO?
> Diana being >raped by Dodi?
>Diana byľ> raped przez Dodi?
> - is that what you're working up to saying?
>- byľ +e co you're byľ pracujŚcy do g=ry +eby powiedzieľ?
> My dear chap!
>M=j drogi czŚowiek!
> Who is going to conspire, and pay big money, for something like that?
>Kto byľ going to konspirowaŚ, i pŚaciľ du+y forsa, dla something lubiľ +e?
>Nobody.
>Nikt.
> >Diana crouched down on the floor behind Henri's seat, and Dodi remained >upright - probably viewing the pursuit with anxiety - possibly grappling >with TRJ to prevent him interfering with the driving.
>>Diana kucajmy meszek na przedimek okreŁlony podŚoga z tyŚu Henri's sadzaľ, i Dodi zostawaľ> pionowy - prawdopodobnie viewing przedimek okreŁlony poŁcig z niepok=j - byľ mo+e walka wrOcz> z TRJ +eby zapobiegaľ him wtrŚcaľ siO z przedimek okreŁlony gnajmy.
> What sign is >there - apart from the fact that neither Diana nor Dodi were wearing >seat-belts - that Dodi was attempting to grapple with Diana?
>Co znak byľ> tam - na uboczu z przedimek okreŁlony fakcie +e +aden Diana nor Dodi byľ byľ ubranym> seat-belts - +e Dodi byľ attempting +eby walka wrOcz z Diana?
>> >Again, I say, "photographs of what?
>> >Jeszcze raz, I powiedzieľ, " zdjOľ od co?
>" - precisely - and what were they >for?
>"- dokŚadnie - i co byľ oni> dla?
> - according to your theory.
>- according to sw=j teoria.
> A picture of a blow job - for blackmail.
> ilustracja od cios praca - dla szanta+.
>> >Why could these photographs not have been taken with spy-cameras at one >of the Fayed residences Because such a photo would possibly be identified as an invasion of privacy.
>> >Czemu could ci zdjOľ nie have byľ podejmowaľ z spy-cameras przy 1> od przedimek okreŁlony Fayed lokum Because such fotka would byľ mo+e byľ rozpoznawaľ gdy przedimek nieokreŁlony najazd od prywatnoŁľ.
> It had to look like PUBLIC Immodest Behavior to cause a diminution of Diana's influence in the public media.
>To had +eby patrzeľ lubiľ PA-STWOWY nieskromny postOpowaą +eby powodowaľ redukcja od Diana's wpŚywaľ na w przedimek okreŁlony paąstwowy media.
> >at which Diana stayed?
>>Przy kt=ry Diana stayed?
> How could it have been >hoped that photographs of an especially compromising nature could have >been obtained at high speed in the Alma Tunnel, rather than on the >Jonikal, at the Ritz or at the rue Arsene?
>Jak could to have byľ> mieľ nadziejO +e zdjOľ od przedimek nieokreŁlony specjalnie kompromisowy przyroda could have> byľ nabywaľ przy gŚ=wny szybkoŁľ w przedimek okreŁlony Alma tunel, raczej than na przedimek okreŁlony> Jonikal, przy przedimek okreŁlony Ritz albo przy przedimek okreŁlony rue Arsene?
> What on earth is the point?
>Co na nora byľ przedimek okreŁlony cecha?
> Would behavior on the yatch or at the Ritz be considered public or private by Diana.
>Would postOpowaą na przedimek okreŁlony yatch albo przy przedimek okreŁlony Ritz byľ rozwa+aľ paąstwowy albo prywatny przez Diana.
> My guess is that Diana would have considered it PUBLIC.
>M=j domyŁlaľ siO byľ +e Diana would have rozwa+aľ to PA-STWOWY.
>> >One glimmer of a suggestion of a possibility does occur to me, as a >result of examining this idea, however.
>> >1 promyk od podsuniOcie myŁli od mo+liwoŁľ czyniľ mieľ miejsce +eby me, gdy > skutek od oglŚdaľ ten idea, jakkolwiek.
> What if Dodi was having >difficulty getting physical with Diana?
>Co je+eli Dodi byľ having> trudnoŁľ robiľ siO fizyczny z Diana?
> Did Dad devise an elaborate >ruse to throw them together?
>Czyniľ tatuŁ wynale ľ przedimek nieokreŁlony opracowywaľ dokŚadnie> podstOp +eby rzuciľ them razem?
> Or rather, was he advised to do so by >those who wanted Diana dead NOT DEAD.
>Albo raczej, byľ on doradziľ +eby czyniľ so przez> tamci kto wanted Diana gŚuchy NIE GúUCHY.
> There is a whole hell of a lot of difference in wanting some one to have less public influence in the public media than in wanting someone to be dead.
>Tam byľ caŚy piekŚo od du+o od r=+nica poglŚd=w w wanting some 1 +eby have maŚy paąstwowy wpŚywaľ na w przedimek okreŁlony paąstwowy media than w wanting someone +eby byľ gŚuchy.
> >- so that he would implement the scheme >without knowing what it was really for?
>>- so that on would narzOdzie przedimek okreŁlony plan> bez poznawaľ co to byľ rzeczywiŁcie dla?
> Quite simple.
>CaŚkiem prosty.
> A compromising photograph.
> kompromisowy zdjOľ.
> >Something of the sort must have >happened, I think - and it's not so incredible if you consider that >MAF's masters may have been pretending to attempt to pull off a Fayed- >Spencer match (with big bucks in it for MAF) for some time - so that >the Machiavellian complexity of engineering the car-switch, the >disposition of the escort, the arrangements for the route and the >programming of Henri Paul, might not have aroused MAF's suspicions.
>>Something od przedimek okreŁlony autoramencie musieľ have> wydarzaľ siO, I think - i to byľ nie so niewiarygodny je+eli you rozwa+aľ +e> MAF's mistrzowski maj have byľ udajO +eby pr=ba +eby ciŚgnieą skreŁlony Fayed-> Spencer zapaŚka( z du+y kozioŚ w to dla MAF) dla some mitrOga - so that> przedimek okreŁlony Machiavellian zŚo+onoŁľ od in+ynieria przedimek okreŁlony car-switch, przedimek okreŁlony> dyslokacja od przedimek okreŁlony eskorta, przedimek okreŁlony aran+acja dla przedimek okreŁlony marszruta i przedimek okreŁlony> programowania od Henri Paul, potOga nie have obudziľ MAF's podejrzeą.
> A photograph would be the most logical thing in the whole world.
> zdjOľ would byľ przedimek okreŁlony najbardziej logiczny rzecz w przedimek okreŁlony caŚy Łwiat.
>No body would be suspicious of anything.
>Nie ciaŚek would byľ suspicious od coŁ.
>> >Other factors, such as sabotaging the S-280's brakes and air-bags, >briefing the escort to monitor the crash but not get involved, etc, >could have been achieved by MAF's backers, over MAF's head, The theft and modification of the vehicle could have been well disguised.
>> >Inny faktor, such gdy sabotaging przedimek okreŁlony S-280's orlica i air-bags, > odprawa przedimek okreŁlony eskorta +eby monitor przedimek okreŁlony kraksa opr=cz nie robiľ siO wymagaľ, itd., > could have byľ odnoŁmy przez MAF's stronnik, na MAF's gŚowa, przedimek okreŁlony kradzie+ i modyfikacja od przedimek okreŁlony narzOdzie could have byľ dobrze disguised.
> >such that >Siegel and Musa (Etoile Limousines) and Wingfield and Dournot were not >only working for MAF, but for his masters, DIRECTLY.
>>such +e> Siegel i Musa( Etoile limuzyna) i Wingfield i Dournot byľ nie> jedyny pracujŚcy dla MAF, opr=cz dla jego mistrzowski, BEZPOîREDNIO.
> However, if that were part of the plot, then PLANS TO GET THAT VEHICLE TO THAT PLACE IN TIME WOULD HAVE TO HAVE BEEN ROCK SOLID FOR MONTHS IN ADVANCE.
>Jakkolwiek, je+eli +e byľ czOŁľ od przedimek okreŁlony grzŚdka, nastOpnie MAPKA ťEBY ROBIŚ SI- ťE NARZ-DZIE ťEBY ťE MIEJSC W MITR-GA WOULD HAVE ťEBY HAVE BYŚ SKAúA STAúY DLA MIESIŃC W PúACIŚ Z G+RY.
> There is the clear windows in one train of thought and defective equipment as possibly another.
>Tam byľ przedimek okreŁlony bezsporny okien w 1 szkoliľ od namysŚ i wadliwy sprzOcie gdy byľ mo+e inny.
>> >Indeed, assuming that MAF did not know that the fatal crash was >intended, those of MAF's employees who MUST have known that a fatal >crash was intended, MUST have been working directly for those who >intentionally engineered it.
>> >Istotnie, braľ na siebie +e MAF czyniľ nie poznawaľ +e przedimek okreŁlony Łmiertelny kraksa byľ> zamierzaľ, tamci od MAF's pracownik kto MUSIEŚ have poznawaľ +e Łmiertelny> kraksa byľ zamierzaľ, MUSIEŚ have byľ pracujŚcy bezpoŁrednio dla tamci kto> celowo engineered to.
>> If a crash after the photo were planned the least people in the area who needed to know was just the driver of the white car.
>>Je+eli kraksa po przedimek okreŁlony fotka byľ planned przedimek okreŁlony najmniejszy lud w przedimek okreŁlony powierzchnia kto needed +eby poznawaľ byľ sŚuszny przedimek okreŁlony kierowca od przedimek okreŁlony biel aucie.
> Second could have been the photographer on the back of the motorcycle who had to aim a shot into the driver's eyes.
>2 could have byľ przedimek okreŁlony fotograf na przedimek okreŁlony grzbiecie od przedimek okreŁlony motorcycle kto had +eby cel strzelaľ do przedimek okreŁlony kierowca oczach.
> >>>At least, he describes the "white car" >>>passing him, and disappearing westwards, before he begins to describe >>>the motor-bike overtaking the Mercedes and cutting-in in front of it.
>>>>Przy najmniejszy, on charakteryzowaŚ przedimek okreŁlony" biel aucie" >>> przechodzenie him, i znikaľ na zach=d, naprzeciwko on rozpoczynaľ +eby charakteryzowaŚ>>> przedimek okreŁlony motor-bike ogarniaľ przedimek okreŁlony Mercedes i cutting-in in front of to.
> >> >>So this gets the locations screwed up and out of sync.
>>> >>So ten robiľ siO przedimek okreŁlony lokacja screwed do g=ry i out of sync.
>>> >>> >>> The impression given (that the "white car" was a long way ahead of the >>>Mercedes and the motorbike) is probably an illusion created by the >>>difficulty involved in describing the situation; >> >>Also, a witness in a high speed drive has their own road to watch as >>well as looking in the rear view mirror.
>>> >>> >>>Przedimek okreŁlony edycja dawaľ( +e przedimek okreŁlony" biel aucie" byľ dŚugo dukcie do przodu od przedimek okreŁlony>>> Mercedes i przedimek okreŁlony motocykl) byľ prawdopodobnie przedimek nieokreŁlony iluzja tworzyľ przez przedimek okreŁlony>>> trudnoŁľ wymagaľ w charakteryzowaŚ przedimek okreŁlony sytuacja; >> >> i, Łwiadek w gŚ=wny szybkoŁľ gnajmy has ich posiadaľ jezdnia +eby czata gdy>> dobrze gdy patrzeľ w przedimek okreŁlony tyŚ perspektywa lustro.
> So one might have a strobe >>light effect of only seeing a flash of an instant when they happened >>to have the opportunity to look in the mirror.
>So 1 potOga have stroboskop>> ŁwiatŚo efekcie od jedyny seeing bŚysk od przedimek nieokreŁlony chwila kiedy oni wydarzaľ siO>> +eby have przedimek okreŁlony gratka +eby patrzeľ w przedimek okreŁlony lustro.
>>> >>>but there is no >>>escaping the conclusion that the Mercedes did not completely squeeze >>>past the white car, but came alongside it, on its left, in a sliding >>>collision, >> >>My suggestion would be to consider that the Merc was the >>vehicle in the middle of the road, that the white vehicle would >>have been on its right and the motorcycle on its left, three >>abreast.
>>> >>>Opr=cz tam byľ nie>>> uciekaľ przedimek okreŁlony finalizacja +e przedimek okreŁlony Mercedes czyniľ nie kompletnie Łciskaľ>>> przeszŚy przedimek okreŁlony biel aucie, opr=cz przychodziľ alongside to, na jego opuszczaľ, w sliding>>> zderzeą, >> >> m=j podsuniOcie myŁli would byľ +eby rozwa+aľ +e przedimek okreŁlony Merc byľ przedimek okreŁlony>> narzOdzie w przedimek okreŁlony poŚowa od przedimek okreŁlony jezdnia, +e przedimek okreŁlony biel narzOdzie would>> have byľ na jego dobry i przedimek okreŁlony motorcycle na jego opuszczaľ, 3>> obok siebie.
>>> >>And that point photoflashes were fired and then the white >>car accelerated >> >>>which impelled the white car forwards, towards Levistre and >>>out of harm's way; >> >>And the motorcycle accelerated >> >>>whereupon the motorbike >> >>accelerated and swerved in front of >>the Mercedes.
>>> >>I +e cecha photoflashes byľ ogieą i nastOpnie przedimek okreŁlony biel>> aucie przyŁpieszaľ>> >>> kt=ry zmuszaľ kogoŁ do zrobienia czegoŁ przedimek okreŁlony biel aucie naprz=d, towards Levistre i>>> out of szkoda dukcie; >> >> i przedimek okreŁlony motorcycle przyŁpieszaľ>> >>> whereupon przedimek okreŁlony motocykl>> >> przyŁpieszaľ i swerved in front of>> przedimek okreŁlony Mercedes.
>>> >>No.
>>> >>Nie.
> That is even wrong.
>ťe byľ r=wny bŚOdny.
> In my SH.
>W m=j SH.
>>> >>Let's try it another way.
>>> >>Pozwalaľ Let's pr=bowaľ to inny dukcie.
> More to the >>"DELIBERATE BUMP OFF" conspiracy >>supposition.
>WiOcej +eby przedimek okreŁlony>>" NARADZAŚ SI- WYB+J SKREîLONY" konspiratorstwa>> domniemanie.
>>> >>In that, the motorcycle would have fired >>a series of quick flashes as it accelerated >>in front of the Mercedes.
>>> >>W +e, przedimek okreŁlony motorcycle would have ogieą>> series od szybki bŚysk gdy to przyŁpieszaľ>> in front of przedimek okreŁlony Mercedes.
> The first flash >>would have been into the back seat but >>a second would have been directly into >>the eyes of Henri Paul.
>Przedimek okreŁlony 1 bŚysk>> would have byľ do przedimek okreŁlony grzbiecie sadzaľ opr=cz>> 2 would have byľ bezpoŁrednio do>> przedimek okreŁlony oczach od Henri Paul.
> Having blinded >>him, it would then accelerate and as soon >>as it was clear the vehicle on the right would >>bump the Mercedes' front into the center >>pilars.
>Having Łlepy>> him, to would nastOpnie przyŁpieszaľ i gdy soon>> gdy to byľ bezsporny przedimek okreŁlony narzOdzie na przedimek okreŁlony dobry would>> wyb=j przedimek okreŁlony Mercedes' froncie do przedimek okreŁlony centra>> pilars.
>>> >>>overtook the slowed Mercedes >>>and (also according to Levistre) cut-in in front of it and produced "a >>>searing burst of light, much brighter than a photo-flash".
>>> >>>Ogarniaľ przedimek okreŁlony slowed Mercedes>>> i( i according to Levistre) cut-in in front of to i pŚody rolne" >>> searing przebijaľ od ŁwiatŚo, du+o jasny than photo-flash".
>>>> >>>At this point, Levistre, braked and came to a halt near the western end >>>of the tunnel.
>>>> >>>Przy ten cecha, Levistre, orlica i przychodziľ +eby przystanŚľ blisko przedimek okreŁlony zachodni zakaączaľ>>> od przedimek okreŁlony tunel.
> >> >>More correctly, NOT "At this point" but at "A POINT" near the >>western end of the tunnel.
>>> >>WiOcej poprawnie, NIE" przy ten cecha" opr=cz przy" CECHA" blisko przedimek okreŁlony>> zachodni zakaączaľ od przedimek okreŁlony tunel.
>>> >>>The Mercedes had crashed, and the bikers (like Brenda >>>Wells, Levistre affirms that there were two of them) had stopped by the >>>wreck.
>>> >>>Przedimek okreŁlony Mercedes had crashed, i przedimek okreŁlony bikers( lubiľ Brenda>>> dobrze, Levistre stwierdzaľ +e tam byľ 2 od them) had stajO przez przedimek okreŁlony>>> destrukcja.
> >> >>That does not sound possible to me.
>>> >>ťe czyniľ nie bezpieczny mo+liwy +eby me.
> It may depend upon speed.
>To maj zale+eľ na szybkoŁľ.
>>>Assuming that the whole action was taking place at some >>above average speed then if at least the bike on the left had >>accelerated ahead of the Merc it could not have stopped.
>>>Braľ na siebie +e przedimek okreŁlony caŚy akcja byľ podejmowaľ miejsc przy some>> nad Łredni szybkoŁľ nastOpnie je+eli przy najmniejszy przedimek okreŁlony rower na przedimek okreŁlony opuszczaľ had>> przyŁpieszaľ do przodu od przedimek okreŁlony Merc to could nie have stajO.
> If it >>did not stop then it may have passed Livestre and exited the >>tunnel.
>Je+eli to>> czyniľ nie kropka nastOpnie to maj have passed Livestre i exited przedimek okreŁlony>> tunel.
> Whether a second bike stopped might be considerable.
>Czy 2 rower stajO potOga byľ znaczny.
>>> >>>One of them got off, momentarily, to look into the Mercedes, >>>jumped back on again, and the bike sped off, passing Levistre as it did >>>so.
>>> >>>1 od them robiľ siO skreŁlony, chwilowo, +eby patrzeľ do przedimek okreŁlony Mercedes, >>> podskoczyľ grzbiecie na jeszcze raz, i przedimek okreŁlony rower sped skreŁlony, przechodzenie Levistre gdy to czyniľ>>> so.
> Levistre describes the bike as "black" and the two men as "dressed >>>in black with black helmets".
>Levistre charakteryzowaŚ przedimek okreŁlony rower gdy" czerą" i przedimek okreŁlony 2 mO+czyzna gdy" dressed>>> w czerą z czerą heŚm".
> The whole thing took just a few seconds.
>Przedimek okreŁlony caŚy rzecz podejmowaľ sŚuszny maŚo seconds.
>>>> >>>Considerable efforts have been made to discredit Levistre.
>>>> >>>Znaczny pr=ba have byľ robiľ +eby dyskredytowaŚ Levistre.
> It has been >>>said, for example, that his attitude to the press was "hostile" and that >>>he was trying to "gain attention"; but there could be another reason for >>>these attacks on his character - he witnessed a murder!
>To has byľ>>> powiedzieľ, dla przykŚad, +e jego poza +eby przedimek okreŁlony naciŁniOcie byľ" nieprzyjazny" i +e>>> on byľ pr=bowaľ +eby" nabieraľ atencja"; opr=cz tam could byľ inny przyczyna dla>>> ci atak na jego czcionka - on witnessed mord!
> There is no >>>other interpretation you can put on his testimony.
>Tam byľ nie>>> inny spos=b zrozumienia you blaszanka kŚaŁľ na jego Łwiadectw.
>>>> >>>Yes, indeed (to answer your question) the lanes were used as a slow-lane >>>and an overtaking lane - ludicrous speed-limit signs notwithstanding!
>>>> >>>Yes, istotnie( +eby rozwiŚzanie sw=j problem) przedimek okreŁlony lanes byľ posŚugiwaľ sie gdy slow-lane>>> i przedimek nieokreŁlony ogarniaľ lane - Łmieszny speed-limit znak jednak!
>>>> >>>Other answers in another post >> >><a href="http://members.home.com/godsbrain">G.O.D.S.B.R.A.I.N.</a><br> > >-- >Steve Reed Alvin H.
>>>> >>>Inny rozwiŚzanie w inny korespondencja>> >>< href=" http:// czŚonek. dom rodzinny. com/ godsbrain"> G. O. D. S. B. R. . I. N.</ >< br> > > --> Steve trzcina Alvin H.
> White <a href="http://members.home.com/godsbrain">G.O.D.S.B.R.A.I.N.</a><br>
>Biel< href=" http:// czŚonek. dom rodzinny. com/ godsbrain"> G. O. D. S. B. R. . I. N.</ >< br>
GODS...@home.com
>From GODS...@HOME.COM Wed May 03 15:40:25 2000 Path: news1.
> COM. خانه@ GODSBRAIN از
> 3 بهدن ممكن كردن ازدهاج
>: راه 2000 25: ?هلم: ?انزده
>. news1
>frmt1.
>. frmt1
>sfba.
>. sfba
>home.
>. خانه
>com!
>! com
>newshub1.
>. newshub1
>home.
>. خانه
>com!
>! com
>news.
>. خبر
>home.
>. خانه
>com!
>! com
>news1.
>. news1
>frmt1.
>. frmt1
>sfba.
>. sfba
>home.
>. خانه
>com.
>. com
>POSTED!
>! ?ماشتن
>not-for-mail From: GODS...@HOME.COM Newsgroups: alt.
>@ GODSBRAIN: از not-for-mail
>. alt: Newsgroups COM. خانه
>conspiracy.
>. تهطنَه
>princess-diana Subject: Re: Di: Paul, Henri, History, 60 Page Autopsy, Etc. Organization: <a href="http://members.home.com/godsbrain">G.O.D.S.B.R.A.I.N.</a><br> Reply-To: GODS...@HOME.COM,GODS...@AOL.COM Message-ID: <suv0hs4b86ldf6kh1...@4ax.com> References: <20000416220330.
>: Di: Re: رشته princess-diana
> Page شصتم, تاريخ, Henri, ?هلس
> يك: < سازمان. Etc, كالبد?شايى
>. خانه. عضه:// http=" href
>. S. D. O. G"> godsbrain/ com
>> br>< يك.</ N. من. يك. R. B
>. خانه@ GODSBRAIN: Reply-To
> COM. AOL@ GODSBRAIN, COM
>: < Message-ID
>@ suv0hs4b86ldf6kh11pg4usgb988mp55km
>: < رجهع> com. 4ax
>. 20000416220330
>18658.
>. 18658
>0000...@ng-cg1.aol.com> <38fa9...@huge.aa.net> <8n1mfss0cu2ou4qhe...@4ax.com> <025220ee.
>> < com. aol. ng-cg1@ 4069
>. aa. بزر? بسيار@ 38fa90de_2
>> < انداختن بتهر
>@ 8n1mfss0cu2ou4qhej2ujs106jhqfrbbol
>. 025220ee> < com. 4ax
>5e23...@usw-ex0104-033.remarq.com> <VHL8$AAWpz$4I...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> <03cfeca4.
>. usw-ex0104-033@ 5e23de39
>$ AAWpz$ VHL8> < com. remarq
>. co. softnet. lastings@ 4IAaS
>. 03cfeca4> < uk
>e454...@usw-ex0105-038.remarq.com> <5AGHurAe...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> <022cd178.
>. usw-ex0105-038@ e454e6ea
>> < com. remarq
>. lastings@ 5AGHurAeP0A5IAT7
>. 022cd178> < uk. co. 022cd178
>
>7c06...@usw-ex0105-037.remarq.com> <0PU0NLBY...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> <2ehrgsobh76u0sheo...@4ax.com> <EwaIiIA+...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.
>. usw-ex0105-037@ 7c06d2cf
>> < com. remarq
>. lastings@ 0PU0NLBYabD5IAaW
>> < uk. co. softnet
>@ 2ehrgsobh76u0sheo8fsoso92h16ood0pr
>+ EwaIiIA> < com. 4ax
>. softnet. lastings@ 6EE5IAXR
> هنر: X-Newsreader> uk. co
>. يكم مأمهر
>7/32.
>. 32/ هفت
>534 MIME-Version: 1.
>. يكم: MIME-Version 534
>0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 683 Date: Wed, 03 May 2000 22:40:25 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.
>/ متن: Content-Type كردن تمركز
> us-ascii= charset; دشت
>: Content-Transfer-Encoding
>: تاريخ 683: كشيدن خط 7bit
> 2000 بهدن ممكن 3, كردن ازدهاج
> GMT 25: ?هلم: 22
>. 24: NNTP-Posting-Host
>7.
>. هفت
>83.
>. 83
>23 X-Complaints-To: ab...@home.net X-Trace: news1.
>: X-Complaints-To 23
>. خانه@ استفاده سهءِ
>. news1: X-Trace. news1
>
>frmt1.
>. frmt1
>sfba.
>. sfba
>home.
>. خانه
>com 957393625 24.
>. 24 957393625 com
>7.
>. هفت
>83.
>. 83
>23 (Wed, 03 May 2000 15:40:25 PDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 03 May 2000 15:40:25 PDT Xref: newshub1.
> بهدن ممكن 3, كردن ازدهاج( 23
>) PDT 25: ?هلم: ?انزده 2000
>: NNTP-Posting-Date
> 2000 بهدن ممكن 3, كردن ازدهاج
>: Xref PDT 25: ?هلم: ?انزده
>. newshub1
>home.
>. خانه
>com alt.
>. alt com
>conspiracy.
>. تهطنَه
>princess-diana:30031204 -------- </html> OK.
> 30031204: princess-diana
>. OK> html</ --------
> What do we call this?
>? اين صدا ما كردن ا?ر ?ى
> The daily replay of the daily revised version of the God's Brain Suppositional Hypothesis.
> از بازىكردن دهباره رهزانه
> كردن اصلاح رهزانه
> مغز خدا از هيژه شرح
>. فرضيه Suppositional
> Act ______ Scene ________ Having read the below a time or two, or few, some opportunity to explain weighted influence factors in the construction of the daily hypothesis.
> ________ صحنه ______ كردن عمل
> يك ?انَين خهاندن Having
> بعضى, كم يا, ف مهسقد يا دفعه
> هزن دادن تهضيح به فرصت
> ساختمان در عامل influence
>. فرضيه رهزانه از
> Since the authorities have had two and a half years with the manpower, peoplepower, staff power, of what was it reported?
> صلاحيتدار مرجع تا ازآنهقت
> سال نصف يك ه ف مهسقد had have
>, كار نيرهى با
> ?رفتن كارمند, peoplepower
>? ?زارش آن است ا?ر ?ى از? ?زارش
>
> Some 24 full time investigators and million(s) dollar equivalent budgets I am not competing with that.
> كننده رسيد?ى دفعه ?ر 24 بعضى
> بهدجه معادل دلار) s( ميليهن ه
>. آن با كردن رقابت خير است. آن
>
> The outcome reports of that investigation appear to be: Drunk driver speeds without the care of D+D+TRJ and abruptly turns left into a central column.
> تحقيق آن از ?زارش نتيجه
> نهشيدن: است به بهدن نمايان
> تهجه بدهن تندشده راننده
> نا?هانى ه TRJ+ D+ D از
> مركزى يك تهى مرخصى سردرآهردن
>. ستهن
> Simple Road Traffic Accident RTA.
>. RTA تصادف ترافيك راه ساده
> When and over the time since the creation of alt.
> تا ازآنهقت دفعه بغلى ه كى
>. alt از creation
>conspiracy.
>. تهطنَه
>princess-diana by b.
>. b by princess-diana
>anana his philosophical position as I read it is to approximately take the position for sake of arguement that Diana was killed as the result of a conspiracy.
> فلسفهاى آنمرد مال anana
> آن خهاندن من مثل دادن قرار
> كردن مهاظبت تقريباً به است
> از خاطر براى دادن قرار
> شكار ه ماه الهه آن arguement
> از شدن منتج مثل كشتن است
>. تهطنَه يك
> Because it has appeared to me that while times, places, people, and motives have been discussed I have a feeling that there has been less than reasonable consideration of some possibilities.
> بهدن نمايان has آن اينكه براى
> كه زمانى آن me به
>, آهردن بياد, بسيار اهقات
> است have علت ه, آهردن مردم
> يك have من كردن بحث
> است has آنجا آن كردن احساس
> بعضى از ملاحظه منطقى از كمتر
>. امكان
> As a consequence of that belief I am trying to construct a suppositional hypothesis that will identify possible, persons, places, things that may be considered as possible.
> من اعتقاد آن از نتيجه يك مثل
> يك ساختن به آزمهده است
> اراده آن فرضيه suppositional
>, شخص, ممكن كردن شناسايى
> بهدن ممكن آن ?يز, آهردن بياد
>. ممكن مثل كردن ملاحظه است
> The intent is to create multiple fictional tracks such that the most possible/ununderstood may be considered.
> آهردن بهجهد به است نيت
> fictional مضرب
> آن ?نين اين ميدانى ه ده هرزش
>/ ممكن بيشترين
> است بهدن ممكن ununderstood
>. كردن ملاحظه
> Many of the pieces are for the most part agreed as having been in the area but there is a lot of discrepancy as to the EXACT location at a SPECIFIC INSTANT.
> براى است تكه از خيلى
> مثل كردن مهافقت منطقه بيشترين
> م?ر مساحت در است having
> اختلاف از شده ?م يك است آنجا
> بطرف جا ?رفتن بزهر به مثل
>. لحظه هيژه يك
> My intent is to create this fictional supposition to give, or try to determine, the differences between points of agreement and points of disharmony.
> آهردن بهجهد به است نيت من مال
> به فرض fictional اين
> به ?هشيدن يا, شدن تسليم
> ميان فرق , كردن معين
> ه قرارداد از ?ذاشتن نقطه
>. تهازن عدم از ?ذاشتن نقطه
> Agreement/Disagreement and Harmony/Disharmony.
>/ هماهن?ى ه اختلاف/ قرارداد
>. تهازن عدم
> Concord vs Discord.
>. ناساز?ارى vs آهن?ى هم
> If there might have been common interest to finance a joint project to lessen Diana's influence with the media because she was percieved to be "stepping on someones toes" , my words, then how might some such plan, plot, conspiracy, have been considered achievable from a variety of possible participant's points of view?
> have تهانانَى آنجا كردن فرض
> دادن بهدجه به علاقه عادى است
> به انداختن تصهير بند يك
> influence Diana's كردن كمتر
> اه اينكه براى media با
> مرحله" است به percieved است
>" , ?ا ان?شت someones بر
> ?طهر س?س, كلمه من مال
>, نقش ?نين اين بعضى تهانانَى
> است have, تهطنَه, ?يدن تهطنَه
> يك از يافتنى دست كردن ملاحظه
> كننده شركت ممكن از تنهع
>? نظر از ?ذاشتن نقطه
> My typing fingers are not going to stand too long a discussion at this point so I am going to try to speed along.
> خير است كردن ان?شت تي? من مال
> ?نين هم بهدن استهار going to
> اين بطرف بحث يك دراز
> است من اينطهر كه ?ذاشتن نقطه
> تندشده به ?هشيدن going to
>. همراه
> My supposition is that if there was a conspiracy it had to be to do something.
> كردن فرض آن است فرض من مال
> به had آن تهطنَه يك است آنجا
>. ?يزى يك كردن به است
> A photo of Diana giving Dodi a blow job in the back seat of a limo would be pretty good.
> شكار ه ماه الهه از عكس يك
> كار دميدن يك Dodi شدن تسليم
> limo يك از مسند عقب به در
>. خهب خهش?ل است كهك
>For the photo to achieve maximum benefit it had to be secret and to be used as a threat.
> دادن انجام به عكس براى
> به had آن كردن منفعت حداكثر
> كردن استفاده است به ه راز است
>. تهديد يك مثل
>The actual publication in mass media would deflate its power.
> انبهه در انتشار هاقعى
> كردن خالى باد كهك media
>. برق اه مال
> But it had to have strong and undisputable evidence that it was TRUE if it were ever going to be used.
> ه قهى have به had آن م?ر
> است آن آن ?هاه undisputable
> هر?ز است آن كردن فرض اصلى
>. كردن استفاده است going to
> For some paparazzi to "peeping tom" photo a divorcee with her boyfriend in private was not going to do the job.
>" به paparazzi بعضى براى
> يك عكس" نر كردن ن?اه دزدكى
> در ?سر دهست اه مال با مطلقه
> كردن going to خير است خصهصى
>. كار
> So the construct of a whore for money with an oily bedhopper in the back seat of a very expensive limo would be much more philosophically correct for the purpose of a conspiracy to get a photo to use for blackmail in the future but not for actual publication.
> يك از ساختن اينطهر كه
> رهغنى يك با ?هل براى جنده
> مسند عقب به در bedhopper
> است كهك limo ?ران خيلى يك از
> philosophically بيشتر زياد
> از مقصهد براى كردن صحيح
> عكس يك شدن ?ياده به تهطنَه يك
> شانتاژ براى كردن استفاده به
> براى خير م?ر آينده در
>. انتشار هاقعى
> On Wed, 3 May 2000 17:07:26 +0100, Steve Reed <asr...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> wrote: >Path: news1.
> بهدن ممكن سهم, كردن ازدهاج بر
> Steve, 100+ 26: 7: هفده 2000
>. lastings@ asreed< نى
>: > نهشتن> uk. co. softnet
>. news1: راه
>frmt1.
>. frmt1
>sfba.
>. sfba
>home.
>. خانه
>com!
>! com
>newshub2.
>. newshub2
>rdc1.
>. rdc1
>sfba.
>. sfba
>home.
>. خانه
>com!
>! com
>newshub1.
>. newshub1
>home.
>. خانه
>com!
>! com
>news.
>. خبر
>home.
>. خانه
>com!
>! com
>feeder.
>. خهراننده
>via.
>. طريق از
>net!
>! انداختن بتهر
>diablo.
>. diablo
>theplanet.
>. theplanet
>net!
>! انداختن بتهر
>news.
>. خبر
>theplanet.
>. theplanet
>net!
>! انداختن بتهر
>newspost.
>. newspost
>theplanet.
>. theplanet
>net!
>! انداختن بتهر
>lastings.
>. lastings
>softnet.
>. softnet
>co.
>. co
>uk!
>! uk
>asreed >From: Steve Reed <asr...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> >Newsgroups: alt.
>@ asreed< نى Steve: از> asreed
>> > uk. co. softnet. lastings
>. alt: Newsgroups
>conspiracy.
>. تهطنَه
>princess-diana >Subject: Re: Di: Paul, Henri, History, 60 Page Autopsy, Etc. >Date: Wed, 3 May 2000 17:07:26 +0100 >Organization: Home >Lines: 297 >Message-ID: <EwaIiIA+...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> >References: <20000416201432.
>: Di: Re: رشته> princess-diana
> Page شصتم, تاريخ, Henri, ?هلس
>: تاريخ. > Etc, كالبد?شايى
> بهدن ممكن سهم, كردن ازدهاج
>> 100+ 26: 7: هفده 2000
>> 297: كشيدن خط> خانه: سازمان
>+ EwaIiIA: < Message-ID
>. softnet. lastings@ 6EE5IAXR
>: < رجهع> > uk. co
>. 20000416201432
>18648.
>. 18648
>0000...@ng-cg1.aol.com> > <20000416220330.
>> > < com. aol. ng-cg1@ 4517
>. 20000416220330
>18658.
>. 18658
>0000...@ng-cg1.aol.com> <38fa9...@huge.aa.net> > <8n1mfss0cu2ou4qhe...@4ax.com> > <025220ee.
>> < com. aol. ng-cg1@ 4069
>. aa. بزر? بسيار@ 38fa90de_2
>> > < انداختن بتهر
>@ 8n1mfss0cu2ou4qhej2ujs106jhqfrbbol
>. 025220ee> > < com. 4ax
>5e23...@usw-ex0104-033.remarq.com> > <VHL8$AAWpz$4I...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> > <03cfeca4.
>. usw-ex0104-033@ 5e23de39
>$ AAWpz$ VHL8> > < com. remarq
>. co. softnet. lastings@ 4IAaS
>. 03cfeca4> > < uk
>e454...@usw-ex0105-038.remarq.com> > <5AGHurAe...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> > <022cd178.
>. usw-ex0105-038@ e454e6ea
>> > < com. remarq
>. lastings@ 5AGHurAeP0A5IAT7
>> > < uk. co. softnet
>. 022cd178
>7c06...@usw-ex0105-037.remarq.com> > <0PU0NLBY...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> > <2ehrgsobh76u0sheo...@4ax.com> >Reply-To: Andrew Steven Reed <ar...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> >NNTP-Posting-Host: modem88.
>. usw-ex0105-037@ 7c06d2cf
>> > < com. remarq
>. lastings@ 0PU0NLBYabD5IAaW
>> > < uk. co. softnet
>@ 2ehrgsobh76u0sheo8fsoso92h16ood0pr
>: Reply-To> > com. 4ax
>@ areed< نى Steven ?هن شمشير
>> > uk. co. softnet. lastings
>. modem88: NNTP-Posting-Host
>fred.
>. fred
>pol.
>. pol
>co.
>. co
>uk >Mime-Version: 1.
>. يكم: Mime-Version> uk
>0 >X-Trace: newsreaderg1.
>: X-Trace> كردن تمركز
>. newsreaderg1
>core.
>. مركز
>theplanet.
>. theplanet
>net 957376918 19338 195.
> 19338 957376918 انداختن بتهر
>. 195
>92.
>. 92
>7.
>. هفت
>216 (3 May 2000 18:01:58 GMT) >NNTP-Posting-Date: 3 May 2000 18:01:58 GMT >X-Complaints-To: ab...@theplanet.net >X-Newsreader: Turnpike Integrated Version 4.
>: هجده 2000 بهدن ممكن سهم( 216
>) > GMT 58: 1
> سهم: NNTP-Posting-Date
> 58: 1: هجده 2000 بهدن ممكن
>: X-Complaints-To> GMT
>. theplanet@ استفاده سهءِ
>: X-Newsreader> انداختن بتهر
> هيژه شرح كردن يكى باهم شاهراه
>. ?هار
>02 M <TWkHBtca5wWBvmfWwoLIWQkgFM> >Xref: newshub1.
>< M 2
>> > TWkHBtca5wWBvmfWwoLIWQkgFM
>. newshub1: Xref
>home.
>. خانه
>com alt.
>. alt com
>conspiracy.
>. تهطنَه
>princess-diana:30031199 > >In article <2ehrgsobh76u0sheo...@4ax.com>, >GODS...@HOME.COM writes >>>there was "a white car", >>>in the middle of the road, behind him.
>> > 30031199: princess-diana
>< مقاله در
>@ 2ehrgsobh76u0sheo8fsoso92h16ood0pr
>. خانه@ GODSBRAIN>, > com. 4ax
> يك" است آنجا>>> نهشتن COM
> ميانى در", >>> ها?ن سفيد
>. را آنمرد ك?ل, راه از
> >> >>So Livestre lied.
>>> >>. ?ذاشتن Livestre اينطهر كه
> The white car was not in the middle >>of the road, the Mercedes was in the middle of the >>road.
> در خير است ها?ن سفيد
> , راه از>> ميانى
> از ميانى در است Mercedes
>. راه>>
> Why did Livestre lie?
>? ?ذاشتن Livestre كردن ?را
> Maybe Livestre did not lie in that particular.
> خير كردن Livestre Maybe
>. هيژه آن در ?ذاشتن
> One needs to be very careful as to "at what instant" and did he say the middle of the road or the middle of the lane?
> خيلى است به داشتن احتياج يكم
> ا?ر ?ى بطرف" به مثل محتاط
> مزبهر اه كردن ه" لحظه
> ميانى يا راه از ميانى
>? باريكراه از
> It was said that he had moved into the right lane.
> had اه آن مزبهر است آن
> حق تهى كردن كشى اسباب
>. باريكراه
> If he said the white car was in the middle of the [right] lane I would agree.
> سفيد مزبهر اه كردن فرض
>[ از ميانى در است ها?ن
> كهك من باريكراه] حق
>. كردن مهافقت
>> >Levistre is not contradicting himself.
>> > داشتن تناقض خير است Levistre
>. خهدش
> He saw the white car "au milieu >de la chaussee" So, does "chaussee" come closer to translating as "lane" or on the other hand, "road?
> au" ها?ن سفيد كردن اره اه
>" chaussee la de> مركز
>" chaussee" كردن, اينطهر كه
> كردن ترجمه به بستن ميلهءسربى
> دي?ر بر يا" باريكراه" مثل
>? راه, " دست
>" Road having two lanes.
>". باريكراه ف مهسقد having. باريكراه
>
> >and was overtaken by it ("elle me double") But exactly where were the other actors at the exact instant that "elle me double?
>>(" آن by ?رفتن هها بى است ه
> دقيقاً م?ر") دهتا me elle
> هنر?يشه دي?ر است كه جايى
>" آن لحظه ?رفتن بزهر بطرف
>? دهتا me elle
>" >"Then", he >says ("puis j'observe [retroviseur] une autre auto toujours au milieu de >la route") "I saw [rear-view mirror] another car, also in the middle of >the road" So here we have a "milieu de la route.
>" >" puis(" مزبهر> اه", س?س
> une] retroviseur[ j'observe
> toujours راندن اتهمبيل autre
> من") " جاده la> de مركز au
>] آنَينه rear-view[ كردن اره
>> از ميانى در ه, ها?ن دي?ر
> ما اينجا اينطهر كه" راه
>. جاده la de مركز" يك have
>" Does that mean closer the lane or the road?
>" بستن هسيله آن كردن
>? راه يا باريكراه
> >("et soudain une grosse moto sur sa gauche qui lui fait une >queue de poisson") "and, all of a sudden, a large motor-bike, to the >left of it, cutting-in in front of it".
>>(" moto grosse une soudain et
> fait lui qui gauche sa sur
> همه, ه") " poisson de صف> une
> بزر? يك, نا?هانى يك از
> از مرخصى> به, motor-bike
> in front of cutting-in, آن
>". آن
> I will take it that AT SOME POINT a large motor-bike, comming from the left of it, and then cutting-in in front of it.
> آن آن كردن مهاظبت اراده من
> بزر? يك ?ذاشتن نقطه بعضى بطرف
> از comming, motor-bike
> cutting-in س?س ه, آن از مرخصى
>. آن in front of
> > >(another ambiguity is created by the expression "sur sa gauche", which >could be translated "to ITS left" [to the right of it, from where >Levistre says he was] or "to the left of it" [as seen from Levistre's >alleged position] and, since Levistre claims that the Mercedes "was in >the middle of the road" at that point, it could be either) Since I am trying to construct a hypothetical scene where the Merc was astraddle the white line that separated the two west bound lanes and a photographing motorcycle was to the left side of the Merc at the exact instant that the white car was on the right side.
>> >( by آهردن بهجهد است ابهام دي?ر
>", gauche sa sur" بيان
> است كردن كم?هت> يك كدام
> اه مال به" كردن ترجمه
> از, آن از حق به" [ مرخصى
> اه مزبهر Levistre> كه جايى
> از مرخصى به" يا] است
> از كردن اره مثل" [ آن
> كردن ادعا> Levistre's
> تا ازآنهقت, ه] دادن قرار
> آن كردن ادعا Levistre
> ميانى > در است" Mercedes
> آن بطرف" راه از
> كردن كم?هت آن, ?ذاشتن نقطه
> است من تا ازآنهقت) يا است
> صحنه فرضى يك ساختن به آزمهده
> است Merc كه جايى
> كشيدن خط سفيد astraddle
> عازم غرب ف مهسقد جدا آن
> مهتهرسيكلت عكس يك ه باريكراه
> از ضلع مرخصى به است
> لحظه ?رفتن بزهر بطرف Merc
> بر است ها?ن سفيد آن
>. ضلع حق
> .
>
> .
>
> .
>
>> >"At the same instant, for a fraction of a second, there was a tremendous >flash of light, but nothing like the flash of a camera" ("Au meme >moment, en une fraction de seconde, un enorme eclair jaillit, mais rien >a voir avec le flash d'un appareil-photo") > >My point is that the order of events is not completely clear.
>> >" يك براى, لحظه جهر يك بطرف
> است آنجا, ف مهسقد يك از كسر
> از زدن برق> بزر? خيلى يك
> ?طهر ?يز هي? م?ر, ?راغ
> يك از زدن برق
>> meme Au" (" عكاسى دهربين
>, seconde de كسر une en, لحظه
> كرمدار كله?ه enorme un
> voir يك> rien mais, jaillit
> d'un زدن برق le avec
> من مال") > > appareil-photo
> از نظم آن است ?ذاشتن نقطه
>. هاضح يكسر خير است رهيداد
> It could >be that the bike cut-in in front of the Mercedes just before the white >car passed Levistre - either that, or the bike was further behind the >Mercedes, as both vehicles entered the tunnel, than Clifford, Olivier >and Thierry imply.
> آن است> كردن كم?هت آن
> in front of cut-in ده?رخه
>> سفيد ?يشاز بحق Mercedes
> يا - Levistre كردن غش ها?ن
> بيشتر است ده?رخه يا, آن
> هرده مثل, Mercedes> ك?ل
> شدن داخل نقليه هسيلهء
>, Clifford از, زدن تهنل
> Thierry ه> Olivier
>. دربرداشتن
> I suppose the bike could have braked, just before the Is there any chance that one of the skid marks, like the single one, was the bike?
> ده?رخه كردن فرض من
> بحق, ترمز have كردن كم?هت
> آن فرصت هر آنجا است ?يشاز
> خهردن ليز از يكم
>, يكم مجرد ?طهر, زدن درجا
>? ده?رخه است
> >tunnel (to avoid running into a Mercedes/white-car pile-up) and that >Levistre might not have been as far along the tunnel as he thought he >was.
>> كردن خهددارى به( زدن تهنل
>/ Mercedes يك تهى كلاف
>> آن ه) pile-up white-car
> have خير تهانانَى Levistre
> همراه دهر مثل است
>> اه كردن فكر اه مثل زدن تهنل
>. است
> There is another branch of my lack of understanding and that follows along a train of thought that the picture was intended but the crash was an accident.
> من مال از شعبه دي?ر است آنجا
> كردن ?يرهى آن ه فهميدن از عدم
> از دادن تعليم يك همراه
> است عكس آن كردن فكر
> كردن سقهط م?ر داشتن خيال
>. تصادف يك است
> In the "accident" hypothesis approximately the motorcycle photographer could have accidently fired a half metre too far forward and instead of shooting in to the back seat he could have accidently hit HP directly in the eyes as Henri Paul looked to the left as the motorcycle came along side his side window.
> تقريباً فرضيه" تصادف" در
> عكاس مهتهرسيكلت
> accidently have كردن كم?هت
> ?نين هم metre نصف يك شدن آتشى
> instead of ه خفا از بيرهن دهر
> به در كردن تيراندازى
> كردن كم?هت اه مسند عقب به
> accidently have
> در مستقيماً HP كردن تشريح خهب
> ?هلس Henri مثل ?شمدار
> مثل مرخصى به آمدن بنظر
> ميلهءسربى مهتهرسيكلت
> ضلع آنمرد مال ضلع همراه
>. ?نجره
>Then the blinding flash could have caused HP to FLINCH and swerve to the right just a little.
> زدن برق كهر س?س
> به HP هدف have كردن كم?هت
> به دادن هيراژ ه كشيدن عقب
>. كه?ك يك بحق حق
> At that point hitting the rear of the accelerating white car.
> ?ذاشتن نقطه آن بطرف
> كردن بزر? كردن تشريح خهب
>. ها?ن سفيد كردن تسريع . ها?ن
>
> As the white car's rear goes to the right its front goes to the left.
> كردن بزر? ها?ن سفيد مثل
> جله اه مال حق goes to
>. مرخصى goes to
> To correct, the driver throws to the right and the rear goes to the left.
> راننده , كردن صحيح به
> ه حق به ?رتابكرد
>. مرخصى goes to. مرخصى
>
> Essentially tossing the front of the Merc into the central columns.
> جله كردن مالى ماست اصلاً
> مركزى تهى Merc از
>. ستهن
> >Thus, the Mercedes hit the white car, side-to-side, and impelled it >forwards, towards Levistre, and was FOLLOWING it, as it passed >Levistre's position, and as the bike overtook the Mercedes.
>> Mercedes , بنابراين
>, ها?ن سفيد كردن تشريح خهب
> كردن هادار ه, side-to-side
> است ه, Levistre بطرف, جله> آن
>> كردن غش آن مثل, آن ?يرهى
> مثل ه, دادن قرار Levistre's
> ?رفتن هها بى ده?رخه
>. Mercedes
> I think that the first, photographing, bike should have been ahead of the white car.
>, عكس, يكم آن كردن فكر من
> از ?يش است have بايد ده?رخه
>. ها?ن سفيد
> If the bike and the car essentially accelerated at the same instant the bike would outrun the car.
> ه ده?رخه كردن فرض
> بطرف كردن تسريع اصلاً ها?ن
> ده?رخه لحظه جهر يك
>. ها?ن دهيدن تندتر كهك
> I think.
>. كردن فكر من
> Bikes are far faster at acceleration that cars.
> ?رفتن رهزه دهر است ده?رخه
>. ها?ن آن تسريع بطرف
> Any disagreements?
>? اختلاف هر
>Of course, with two riders and a turbo car ...?
> يك ه سهار ف مهسقد با, دهره از
>...? ها?ن تهربينى
> For one thing, you are supposing then that the white car was ahead of the Merc at the instant that the Merc hit the central column/pilar/post.
> است you, ?يز يكم براى
> ها?ن سفيد آن س?س كردن فرض
> بطرف Merc از ?يش است
> Merc آن لحظه
> مركزى كردن تشريح خهب
>. ?ماشتن/ pilar/ ستهن
> That is in accord with my first guess.
> من مال با مهافقت در است آن
>. زدن حدس يكم
>> >Does that clear things up?
>> >? با رهبره ?يز هاضح آن كردن
> No.
>. هي?
> It smokes them up.
>. با رهبره را آنها دهد آن
> But gives a number of possible occurances to consider.
> ممكن از عدد يك شدن تسليم م?ر
>. كردن ملاحظه به occurances
>>> >>>Behind that, he says, there was >>>"another car" (presumably the Mercedes S- 280) and behind that, a large >>>motor-bike.
>>> >>> آنجا, مزبهر اه, آن ك?ل
> محتملاً" ( ها?ن دي?ر>>>" است
> ك?ل ه) 280 S- Mercedes
>. motor-bike>>> بزر? يك, آن
> So my first thought on that is that that is a second bike.
> كردن فكر يكم من مال اينطهر كه
> يك است آن آن است آن بر
>. ده?رخه ف مهسقد
> And if we are talking about the left that might be better described as a second bike on the left as there might have been one or more bikes on the right in addition.
> است ما كردن فرض ه
> مرخصى دهر كردن راضى باحرف
> دادن شرح خهب است تهانانَى آن
> بر ده?رخه ف مهسقد يك مثل
> have تهانانَى آنجا مثل مرخصى
> بر ده?رخه بيشتر يا يكم است
>. جمع در حق
>>> >>Livestre lies again.
>>> >>. دهباره ?ذاشتن Livestre
>> >What do you mean?
>> >? هسيله you كردن ا?ر ?ى
> What evidence is there that Levistre is "lying"?
> آن آنجا است ?هاه ا?ر ?ى
>"? ?ذاشتن" است Levistre
> My supposition.
>. فرض من مال
>> >> He clearly saw and may have been a part >>of a conspiracy to cover up.
>> >> ه كردن اره برهشنى اه
>>> منطقه يك است have بهدن ممكن
> ?هشانيدن به تهطنَه يك از
>. با رهبره
> So in my supposition he saw it >>and he lied about it.
> اه فرض من مال در اينطهر كه
> دهر ?ذاشتن اه ه>> آن كردن اره
>. آن
> Now if we go off on a train of thought to >>explore a hypothesis that Livestre was deliberately lying then >>I'll have to think about that some more.
> ما كردن فرض حالا
> يك بر تعطيل سركردن ?يزى بدهن
>>> به كردن فكر از دادن تعليم
> آن فرضيه يك كردن جستجه
> deliberately است Livestre
> به have بايست من>> س?س ?ذاشتن
>. بيشتر بعضى آن دهر كردن فكر
> I have not until the >>present considered the possibility that he was deliberately >>lying.
> حاضر>> تا خير have من
> اه آن امكان كردن ملاحظه
>. ?ذاشتن>> deliberately است
>>> >I have - he could be in the pay of Al-Fayed (or his high-level masters) >That's always a possibility; but why should we single him out?
>>> > است كردن كم?هت اه - have من
> از شده ?رداخته در
> آنمرد مال يا( Al-Fayed
> است آن) > ارباب high-level
> بايد ?را م?ر; امكان يك هميشه
>? خامهش را آنمرد مجرد ما
> I'm not singling him out.
> را آنمرد مجرد خير است من
>. خامهش
> I am theorizing that there may have been a whole swarm of conspiring pap's surrounding Diana's car.
> آنجا آن كردن فرض است من
> تمام يك است have بهدن ممكن
> ?يدن تهطنَه از كردن ازدحام
> Diana's محاصره ?ستان نهك
>. ها?ن
> >What >about any (or ALL) of the other witnesses?
>> از) همه يا( هر دهر> ا?ر ?ى
>? شاهد دي?ر
> I am inclined to go with the >majority (who saw closely pursuing vehicles) and focus suspicion on >Mohammed and Souad who - alone - say they did not.
> به كردن سرازير است من
>> با سركردن ?يزى بدهن
> ازنزديك كردن اره كه( اكثريت
> ه) نقليه هسيلهء كردن تعقيب
>> بر ظن سهءِ نقطهءانفجار
> - تنها - كه Souad ه Mohammed
>. خير كردن آنها مزبهر
>> >>If he were deliberately lying and saw the three vehicles >>abreast, > > He says he saw them one behind the other - until the bike overtook the >Mercedes.
>> >> deliberately است اه كردن فرض
> سهم كردن اره ه ?ذاشتن
> اه, > > آ?اه>> نقليه هسيلهء
> يكم را آنها كردن اره اه مزبهر
> ده?رخه تا - دي?ر ك?ل
>. Mercedes> ?رفتن هها بى
> Then the bike and the Mercedes were "abreast", but the white >car - so he implies - had already overtaken him by then!
> Mercedes ه ده?رخه س?س
>> سفيد م?ر", آ?اه" است
> دربرداشتن اه اينطهر كه - ها?ن
> ?رفتن هها بى حاضر درحال had -
>! س?س by را آنمرد
> But why should >you suspect this to be a lie?
> بهدن مظنهن you> بايد ?را م?ر
>? ?ذاشتن يك است به اين
> I think you, we, need to be very careful about exactly what instant is being described as being related to any single comment.
>, ما, you كردن فكر من
> خيلى است به داشتن احتياج
> لحظه ا?ر ?ى دقيقاً دهر محتاط
> است مثل دادن شرح است است
> مجرد هر به دادن نسبت
>. دادن نظريه
>> >> the photo flashes, the motorcycle accelerate, >>the car on the right bump the Merc into the central >>pilars, > >You want to hypothesize that the bike-overtake/flash occurred BEFORE the >sliding collision?
>> >> , زدن برق عكس
> , >> كردن تسريع مهتهرسيكلت
> انداز دست حق بر ها?ن
>>> مركزى تهى Merc
> You, > > pilars
> كردن فرض به كردن هرهد تقاضاى
> زدن برق/ bike-overtake آن
> لغزنده> ?يشاز دادن رخ
>? تصادم
> What on earth for?
>? براى زمين بر ا?ر ?ى
> Well, if the supposition is as two photographing vehicles taking a photograph from both sides at the same instant .
> مثل است فرض كردن فرض, ?اه
> نقليه هسيلهء عكس ف مهسقد
> هرده از عكس يك كردن مهاظبت
>. لحظه جهر يك بطرف ضلع
> .
>
> .
>
> .
>
> There may also have been two contacts between the two vehicles?
> است have ه بهدن ممكن آنجا
> ميان تماسى ف مهسقد
>? نقليه هسيلهء ف مهسقد
>The mirror thing may not have been considered significant.
> خير بهدن ممكن ?يز آنَينه
>. مهم كردن ملاحظه است have
> The mirror would not have broken out the tail light.
> شكستن have خير كهك آنَينه
>. ?راغ دم خامهش
> So if the tail light was broken would not one suspect a corresponding dent on the Merc's right front fender?
> دم كردن فرض اينطهر كه
> يكم خير كهك شكستن است ?راغ
> بهدن مطابق يك بهدن مظنهن
> جله حق Merc's بر دندان
>? ?ل?ير
>> In reading this over I can not understand quickly the actions to cover up circumstances by police, courts, etc. unless Diana bite off and swallowed the tip of Dodi's penis from the force of the crash.
>> من بغلى اين خهاندن در
> بسرعت فهميدن خير كردن كم?هت
> با رهبره ?هشانيدن به عمل
>, كردن حفاظت by آمد ?يش
> م?راينكه. etc, داد?اه
> ه تعطيل تكه شكار ه ماه الهه
> Dodi's از نصيحت ?ل?له
> از كردن مجبهر از ذكهر آلت
>. كردن سقهط
> If some such had happened then that could explain a lot of things, But it would also demonstrate that there was no fear in the back seat at the time of crash which would be important to suggest that there was no demonstrated disagreement with Henri Paul's driving performance prior to the crash.
> had ?نين اين بعضى كردن فرض
> آن س?س افتادن اتفاق
> يك دادن تهضيح كردن كم?هت
> ه كهك آن م?ر, ?يز از شده ?م
> هي? است آنجا آن دادن نشان
> مسند عقب به در داشتن ترس
> كردن سقهط از دفعه بطرف
> به مهم است كهك يك كدام
> هي? است آنجا آن كردن ?يشنهاد
> Henri با اختلاف دادن نشان
> قبلى انجام كردن رانند?ى ?هلس
>. كردن سقهط به
> >> that the first photoflashing motorcycle sped off >>past him and out of the tunnel as well as the vehicle that >>had bumped the Merc.
>>> photoflashing يكم آن
>>> تعطيل تندشده مهتهرسيكلت
> out of ه را آنمرد ?ذشته
> as well as زدن تهنل
> had>> آن نقليه هسيلهء
>. Merc انداز دست
> and then reported that in essence >>a followup motorcycle stopped to view into the Merc >>and it then resumed to exit the tunnel, etc. >> >You mean Levistre is concealing the existence of a second motorcycle?
> يك>> هجهد در آن ?زارش س?س ه
> مهتهرسيكلت followup
> تهى نظر به ايستادن راه سر
> به ازسر?رفتن س?س آن ه>> Merc
>, زدن تهنل رفتن بيرهن
> Levistre هسيله You. >> > etc
> يك از هجهد كردن ?نهان است
>? مهتهرسيكلت ف مهسقد
>>True, Thierry H.
>>. H Thierry, اصلى
> says he saw "several" motorcycles pursuing the >Mercedes, closely, towards the tunnel (he had a view along the cour >Albert Premier from the carriageway itself) but Clifford G.
>" ?ند)ين(" كردن اره اه مزبهر
>> كردن تعقيب مهتهرسيكلت
> بطرف, ازنزديك, Mercedes
> همراه نظر يك had اه( زدن تهنل
> از هزير نخست Albert> cour
> م?ر) خهدش carriageway
>. G Clifford
> and Olivier >P (who were positioned to the right [north] of the road and could see no >more than the tunnel-entrance) report only " a car in front of the >Mercedes and a [one!
> است كه( P> Olivier ه
> از] شمال[ حق به دادن قرار
> كردن اره كردن كم?هت ه راه
> از بيشتر> هي?
>" فقط ?زارش) tunnel-entrance
>> in front of ها?ن يك
>! يكم[ يك ه Mercedes
>] powerful motor-cycle, 30 - 40 metres behind.
>] - سيم, motor-cycle ?رقدرت
>. ك?ل metres ?هلم
> I think it was Brian Anderson's story that a motorcycle moved to pass the Merc on its left as it entered the tunnel, which would be exact in accord with my one theory.
> Brian است آن كردن فكر من
> يك آن طبقه Anderson's
> به كردن كشى اسباب مهتهرسيكلت
> اه مال بر Merc كردن غش
> شدن داخل آن مثل مرخصى
> است كهك يك كدام, زدن تهنل
> با مهافقت در ?رفتن بزهر
>. فرضيه يكم من مال
>> >Why should we not assume that the other bikes left the cour Albert >Premier, at the exit slip-road, leaving the pair on the bike, which >Clifford, Olivier and Levistre saw, to proceed into the tunnel for the >kill!?
>> > آن كردن فرض خير ما بايد ?را
> مرخصى ده?رخه دي?ر
> بطرف, هزير نخست> Albert cour
>, slip-road رفتن بيرهن
> بر كردن جفت مرخصى
>, Clifford> يك كدام, ده?رخه
>, كردن اره Levistre ه Olivier
> زدن تهنل تهى رفتن بجله به
>!? كشتن> براى
> I don't think that the word "kill" is at all proper in a larger view.
> آن كردن فكر خير كردن من
> درست همه بطرف است" كشتن" كلمه
>. نظر بزر? يك در
>"Photo" would I suggest be a more prevalent term for that point.
>" است كردن ?يشنهاد من كهك" عكس
> آن براى دهره متداهل بيشتر يك
>. ?ذاشتن نقطه
>> >>I would like to see the animation sequences down to the 1 meter >>resolution.
>> >> كردن اره به ?طهر كهك من
> به ?ر سرهمى ?شت كارتهن
>. آرزه>> متر يكم
> I think the main constant that we can use is the >>physical distance on the road as being traversed by the Merc.
> آن ثابت اصلى كردن فكر من
> كردن استفاده كردن كم?هت ما
> بر فاصله بدنى>> است
> by عبهر است مثل راه
>. Merc
> >>So the animation reference frames could be identified by reference >>to the tunnel face as metres + "plus" or - "minus" the tunnel face.
>>> قاب رجهع كارتهن اينطهر كه
> كردن شناسايى است كردن كم?هت
> زدن تهنل به>> رجهع by
>+ " metres مثل شدن مهاجه
> " منهاى" - يا" بعلاههء
>. شدن مهاجه زدن تهنل
>>>> >We would all (those of us who really wish to have it explained in >detail, that is) like to see sophisticated event-reconstruction >techniques brought to bear, together with an account of exactly what >data was employed and how it was used.
>>>> > كه ما به از آنها( همه كهك ما
> آن have به داشتن آرزه حقيقتاً
> آن, كارى تميز> در دادن تهضيح
> جازدن كردن اره به ?طهر) است
> فن> event-reconstruction
> با باهم, شده زانَيده به آهردن
>> ا?ر ?ى دقيقاً از حساب يك
> ه كردن استخدام است اطلاعات
>. كردن استفاده است آن ?طهر
> Fat chance of that, however - >unless you happen to have an event-reconstruction team on hand and you >can afford to cock a snoot at the politico-media complex.
>> - ا?ر?ه, آن از فرصت Fat
> به افتادن اتفاق you م?راينكه
> event-reconstruction يك have
> كردن كم?هت> you ه دست بر دسته
> يك خرهس به داشتن استطاعت
> politico-media بطرف snoot
>. عقده
> There is the traffic accident reconstruction site off my web page.
> تصادف ترافيك است آنجا
> من مال تعطيل محل بنا تجديد
>. page ?رده
> I saw reference to the most professional software photosho or paint shop of something like that.
> به رجهع كردن اره من
> software حرفهاى بيشترين
> از دكان كشيدن عكس يا photosho
>. آن ?طهر ?يزى يك
> I got a copy off the web.
> كردن تقليد يك شدن ?ياده من
>. ?رده تعطيل
> One of these years I will move to do my accident and if at the same time I did a second of the Diana crash not much for starters.
> اراده من سال اينها از يكم
> من مال كردن به كردن كشى اسباب
> بطرف كردن فرض ه تصادف
> يك كردن من دفعه جهر يك
> از ف مهسقد
> خير كردن سقهط شكار ه ماه الهه
>. كننده شرهع براى زياد
> > >>>Note that there is no vehicle present, in Levistre's story, which could >>>be the car of the witnesses Souad M.
>> >>> هي? است آنجا آن كردن يادداشت
> در, حاضر نقليه هسيلهء
> يك كدام, طبقه Levistre's
> از ها?ن است>>> كردن كم?هت
>. M Souad شاهد
> and Mohammed M.
>. M Mohammed ه
> If we believe >>>Levistre, they weren't there!
>>>> باهركردن ما كردن فرض
>! آنجا خير است آنها! آنجا
>
> On the other hand, if we believe THEM, >>>the Mercedes crashed without any help from anyone - a very convenient >>>version of events, for the authorities, and completely contrary to the >>>testimony of ALL the other witnesses.
> ما كردن فرض, دست دي?ر بر
> , >>> را آنها باهركردن
> هر بدهن كردن سقهط Mercedes
>>>> راحت خيلى يك - هركس از كمك
> براى, رهيداد از هيژه شرح
> معكهس يكسر ه, صلاحيتدار مرجع
> همه از شهادت>>> به
>. شاهد دي?ر
>>> I am not suggesting that consideration should be limited to only one hypothetically possible series of events.
>>> آن كردن ?يشنهاد خير است من
> به ?ذاشتن حد است بايد ملاحظه
> ممكن hypothetically يكم فقط
>. رهيداد از سرى
> It appears to me that there are apparently conflicting reports of circumstances.
> آنجا آن me به بهدن نمايان آن
> از ?زارش مغايرت ظاهراً است
>. آمد ?يش
> Therefore I suggest several parallel hypothetical story lines.
> كردن ?يشنهاد من بنابراين
> طبقه فرضى كردن مقايسه ?ند)ين(
>. كشيدن خط
> That calls to mind something that I think Senator Sam Ervin said during the course of the Watergate hearings on Nixon's impeachment.
> ?يزى يك دادن اهميت به صدا آن
> سناتهر كردن فكر من آن
> مزبهر Ervin عهام آمريكانَى
> از دهره درحين
> Nixon's بر شنهايى Watergate
>. اتهام
> The in the four gospels there are accounts of what was reported to have been written by Pilate on the sign to be placed over Jesus Christ's head on the cross.
> آنجا انجيل ?هار در
> ?زارش است ا?ر ?ى از حساب است
> Pilate by نهشتن است have به
> است به منزله بر
> سر مسيح عيسى بغلى آهردن بياد
>. زدن ?يهند بر
> Senator Sam said that if individuals whose testimoney we so reverence from the written testimony could be so reported as divergent then we need not be dismayed that good people of our own day may be reported as to not have agreed perfectly.
> مزبهر عهام آمريكانَى سناتهر
> كى مال انفرادى كردن فرض آن
> اينطهر كه ما testimoney
> شهادت نهشتن از احترام
> اينطهر كه است كردن كم?هت
> ما س?س هم دهراز مثل ?زارش
> آن يأس است خير داشتن احتياج
> ما مال از آهردن مردم خهب
> است بهدن ممكن رهز بهدن مالك
> have خير به مثل ?زارش
>. كاملاً كردن مهافقت
> >>Hummnn >>> >>>The sequence of events, as Levistre recounts it, is very interesting, >>>because he seems to be saying that the "white car" stayed ahead of the >>>Mercedes and the motor-bike.
>>> سرهمى ?شت >>> >>> Hummnn
> Levistre مثل, رهيداد از
> است, آن ?فتن كلمه به كلمه
> اه اينكه براى, >>> علاقه خيلى
> آن مزبهر است به رسيدن بنظر
> از ?يش تعهيق" ها?ن سفيد"
> ه Mercedes>>>
>. motor-bike
> I would think "ahead" of the Merc would be correct but not that the white car stayed ahead of the bike.
> از" ?يش" كردن فكر كهك من
> م?ر كردن صحيح است كهك Merc
> تعهيق ها?ن سفيد آن خير
>. ده?رخه از ?يش
> Explaination given above.
> شدن تسليم Explaination
>. بالاى
>>> >>Well, in my SH one possibility that I want to consider is that both >>the white car on the Merc's right hand side and the motorcycle on >>the Merc's left hand side came to a synchronized position along side >>the Merc such as to be able to take symultaneous flash photographs >>into the Merc from both sides at the same time.
>>> >> امكان يكم SH من مال در, ?اه
> به كردن هرهد تقاضاى من آن
> >> هرده آن است كردن ملاحظه
> حق Merc's بر ها?ن سفيد
>>> بر مهتهرسيكلت ه ضلع دست
> ضلع دست مرخصى Merc's
> كردن زمان هم يك به ميلهءسربى
> >> ضلع همراه دادن قرار
> قادر است به مثل ?نين اين Merc
> symultaneous كردن مهاظبت به
> از Merc تهى>> عكس زدن برق
> جهر يك بطرف ضلع هرده
>. دفعه
> If one is in a very >>heavy law suit one needs at least TWO corroberating withnesses.
>>> خيلى يك در است يكم كردن فرض
> يكم بهدن مناسب قانهن سن?ين
> كمترين بطرف داشتن احتياج
> corroberating ف مهسقد
>. withnesses
> And a big pile of paps only seconds behind would be very important also.
> از كردن ك?ه بزر? يك ه
> كهك ك?ل seconds فقط ?ستان نهك
>. ه مهم خيلى است
> If somebody hinted at the presence of a blackmail photo they could be assassinated in short order before they could ever get close to a court of law, and I heard a song the other day called "Smuggler's Blues" done in the Eighties by Glenn Frey has some good words.
> كردن اشاره يكنفر كردن فرض
> شانتاژ يك از حضهر بطرف
> كشتن است كردن كم?هت آنها عكس
> آنها ?يشاز نظم مختصر در
> شدن ?ياده هر?ز كردن كم?هت
> ه, قانهن از داد?اه يك به بستن
> رهز دي?ر آهاز يك شنيدن من
> در كردن" آبى قا?اق?ى" صدا
> has Frey Glenn by Eighties
>. كلمه خهب بعضى
>>> >This seems to me to be fanciful in the extreme.
>>> > است به me به رسيدن بنظر اين
>. اليه منتهى در خيال?رست
> On what grounds do you >suggest it?
>> you كردن زمينه ا?ر ?ى بر
>? آن كردن ?يشنهاد
>> >>The same scene photographed by two separate photographers at >>exactly the same instant would be IDEAL.
>> >> by عكس صحنه جهر يك
>>> بطرف عكاس جدا ف مهسقد
> كهك لحظه جهر يك دقيقاً
>. مطلهب كمال است
>>> >"Ideal" for what?
>>> >"? ا?ر ?ى براى" مطلهب كمال
> Come on Al!
>! Al بر ميلهءسربى
> What are these simultaneous, two-angle >flash-photos supposed to be for?
> اينها است ا?ر ?ى
>> two-angle, simultaneous
> است به كردن فرض flash-photos
>? براى
> Okay - you've said before that you >think they would have been compromising photos, and that MAF set up the >car-switch and the pursuit in order to obtain them.
> مزبهر you've you've - باشه
> آنها كردن فكر> you آن ?يشاز
> ه, عكس كردن سازش است have كهك
>> با رهبره ?ذاشتن MAF آن
> نظم در تعقيب ه car-switch
>. را آنها آهردن بدست به
> This is an >interesting idea, because, although it seems most likely to me that MAF >DID make these arrangements, I cannot decide precisely what it was that >he thought was going to happen.
>, عقيده علاقه> يك است اين
> آن ا?ر?ه, اينكه براى
> به احتمالى بيشترين رسيدن بنظر
> شده ساخته كردن> MAF آن me
> كردن كم?هت من, ترتيب اينها
> ا?ر ?ى دقيقاً ?رفتن تصميم خير
> است كردن فكر اه> آن است آن
>. افتادن اتفاق going to
> A compromising photograph.
>. عكس كردن سازش يك
> Exactly in line with MAF's general opinion of John.
> MAF's با كشيدن خط در دقيقاً
>. يهحنا از عقيده عمهمى
> Q.
>. Q
> Public, Di, etc. > >Let us say that Diana and Dodi were not sleeping together, she was not >pregnant by him and they were not going to get engaged - or some >combination of these negatives - such that, in order to (what?
>. > > etc, Di, عمهمى
> آن مزبهر ما به كردن هانمهد
> است Dodi ه شكار ه ماه الهه
>, باهم كردن فرامهش باخهاب خير
> را آنمرد by آبستن> خير است اه
> going to خير است آنها ه
> يا - كردن نامزد شدن ?ياده
> - منفى اينها از قفل رمز> بعضى
>( به نظم در, آن ?نين اين
>? ا?ر ?ى
>) gain >influence over Diana or disgrace her or force her to marry Dodi?
>) بغلى influence> آهردن بدست
> يا شكار ه ماه الهه
> يا اه مال كردن دار لكه
> متأهل به اه مال كردن مجبهر
>? Dodi
> - the >Al-Fayeds conceived the scheme I would guess that conception of the scheme would have happened far away from MAF.
> كردن آبستن Al-Fayeds> -
> كهك من كردن كشى نقشه
> از تصهر آن زدن حدس
> have كهك كردن كشى نقشه
>. MAF از دهر دهر. MAF
>
> If a group were looking for someone to set up some such scheme MAF might have been found to have been a good candidate to approach for the leading role but the script had been written long before and they just needed some one to play the part.
> است ?رهه يك كردن فرض
> ?ذاشتن به يكنفر looking for
> ?نين اين بعضى با رهبره
> تهانانَى MAF كردن كشى نقشه
> have به كردن ?يدا است have
> نزديكى به نامزد خهب يك است
> م?ر نقش رد?ا براى
> دراز نهشتن است had نهشت دست
> داشتن احتياج بحق آنها ه ?يشاز
> كردن بازى به يكم بعضى
>. منطقه
> >of obtaining compromising photographs.
>>. عكس كردن سازش آهردن بدست. عكس
>
> A >clever ruse is employed to get rid of some of the escort (but why not >all?
> است كلك باههش> يك
> شدن ?ياده به كردن استخدام
> از بعضى از كردن خلاص
>> خير ?را م?ر( كردن مشايعت
>? همه
>) THE COMPROMISING photo to be used for blackmail to influence Diana not to take a strong public stand on some particular issue from time to time would have been financed by an external consortium, QEII, Chas, Military landmine sales proponents, etc. In order to be of use at selected times the photo could not be public.
>) است به عكس كردن سازش
> به شانتاژ براى كردن استفاده
> خير شكار ه ماه الهه influence
> عمهمى قهى يك كردن مهاظبت به
> هيژه بعضى بر بهدن استهار
> كهك دفعه به دفعه از كردن صادر
> يك by دادن بهدجه است have
>, Chas, QEII, كنسرسيهم خارجى
>, طرفدار فرهش landmine ارتش
> از است به نظم در. etc
> بر?زيده بطرف كردن استفاده
> عكس بسيار اهقات
>. عمهمى است خير كردن كم?هت
> If that happened it would have been a one time shot when ever it fell into public hands.
> آن افتادن اتفاق آن كردن فرض
> دفعه يكم يك است have كهك
> آن هر?ز كى كردن تيراندازى
>. دست عمهمى تهى سقهط
> To be worth the expense and effort it had to be kept secret but its circumstance had to be indisputable else any single person threatening exposure of some such would be under extremely high surveillance in moments.
> كهشش ه مخارج ارزش است به
> راز كردن محافظت است به had آن
> است به had آمد ?يش اه مال م?ر
> شخص مجرد هر دي?ر ?را ه ?هن بى
> بعضى از مهاجهت كردن تهديد
> نهايت بى زير است كهك ?نين اين
>. لحظه در نظارت بلند
> > the remaining escort follows from the Hotel, against orders, thus >giving the impression that they are up to no good.
>> كردن مشايعت ماندن
> مخالف, هتل از كردن ?يرهى
> شدن تسليم> بنابراين, نظم
> به با رهبره است آنها آن جا
>. خهب هي?
> Henri has been >briefed to flee them - he flees.
> ?ذاشتن درجريان> است has Henri
>. flees اه - را آنها flee به
> An ambush of pursuers has been arranged >on the cour la Reine - to keep Henri in flight and to give Dodi an >excuse for grabbing Diana (as though protectively) I can't imagine anything but a photograph of a blowjob.
> از حملهكردن خبر بى يك
> است has كننده دنبال
> la cour بر> دادن ترتيب
> Henri كردن محافظت به - Reine
> Dodi شدن تسليم به ه ?رهاز در
> ?رفتن براى بخشيدن> يك
> ا?ر?ه مثل( شكار ه ماه الهه
> خير كردن كم?هت من) حفاظى بطهر
> از عكس يك م?ر هر?يز كردن تصهر
>. blowjob يك
> Sex is no big thing nowadays.
> ?يز بزر? هي? است جنس
>. اينرهزها
> In royal family tradition, the past, it may have been able to throw a little influence at an intense moment of public conflict.
> , رسم خانهاده سلطنتى در
> have بهدن ممكن آن, ?ذشته
> كه?ك يك ?رتابكرد كردن كم?هت
> لحظه شديد يك بطرف influence
>. مغايرت عمهمى از
> There is so much detailed sex on the web that I wouldn't doubt that to find a microscopic photo of a pubic hair would take more than a few minutes.
> زياد اينطهر كه است آنجا
> آن ?رده بر جنس كارى تميز
> كردن ?يدا به آن شك خير كهك من
> عهرتى يك از عكس ميكرهسكه?ى يك
> از بيشتر كردن مهاظبت كهك مه
>. ريز كم يك
> So if any eyebrows were going to be raised maybe a court threatening a loss of Di's finances for breach of contract re: approximately non modest public behavior.
> ابره هر كردن فرض اينطهر كه
> كردن بلند است going to است
> يك كردن تهديد داد?اه يك maybe
> براى دادن بهدجه Di's از باخت
>: re كردن منقبض از شكستن
> عمهمى فرهتن non تقريباً
>. رفتار
> So if Di was very cognizant of contract provisions regarding public behavior as a determinant of her divorce settlement then she would have to have exercised the utmost discression.
> است Di كردن فرض اينطهر كه
> كردن منقبض از آ?اه خيلى
> عمهمى به راجع دادن آذهقه
> از كننده تعيين يك مثل رفتار
> اه س?س سازش دادن طلاق اه مال
> بكاربردن have به have كهك
>. discression منتهاى
> But if she was going to find any male support outside of her ex's she would have to at some point show some affection.
> going to است اه كردن فرض م?ر
> ?اه تكيه نر هر كردن ?يدا
> كهك اه سابق اه مال از بيرهن
> ?ذاشتن نقطه بعضى بطرف به have
>. محبت بعضى كردن هدايت بداخل
> Now where could one find any more hope of privacy than in the tunnel of love in a speeding limosine?
> يكم كردن كم?هت كه جايى حالا
> داشتن اميد بيشتر هر كردن ?يدا
> از زدن تهنل در از خلهت از
> تندشده يك در داشتن دهست
>? limosine
> But to be effective for black mail the photo would have to appear as immodest public behavior.
> سياه براى مؤثر است به م?ر
> به have كهك عكس كردن ?ست
> عمهمى حيا بى مثل بهدن نمايان
>. رفتار
> I said PUBLIC.
>. عمهمى مزبهر من
> So on the one hand Diana would have shyed away from any PUBLIC behavior but people interested in obtaining a photo for blackmail would have to make the circumstances of the photo look as public as possible.
> دست يكم بر اينطهر كه
> have كهك شكار ه ماه الهه
> رفتار عمهمى هر از دهر shyed
> در علاقه آهردن مردم م?ر
> شانتاژ براى عكس يك آهردن بدست
> شده ساخته به have كهك
> آمدن بنظر عكس از آمد ?يش
>. ممكن مثل عمهمى مثل
> TWO photo's from TWO different photographers and surrounding photos from another hundred photographers could be made to look like PUBLIC IMMODESTY while the circumstance of the back seat of a speeding limosine in the tunnel in the middle of the night is about as close to "private" behavior as I can imagine anyone could get on short notice.
> متفاهت ف مهسقد از عكس ف مهسقد
> صد دي?ر از عكس محاصره ه عكاس
> شده ساخته است كردن كم?هت عكاس
> عمهمى ?طهر آمدن بنظر به
> آمد ?يش كه زمانى بيشرمى
> يك از مسند عقب به از
> در limosine تندشده
> از ميانى در زدن تهنل
>" به بستن مثل دهر است شب
> من مثل رفتار" خصهصى
> هركس كردن تصهر كردن كم?هت
> مختصر بر شدن ?ياده كردن كم?هت
>. شدن ملتفت
> >- a car is stationed >at the tunnel-entrance to stop the Mercedes (a very risky proceeding, >from a father's point of view, don't you think?
>> بطرف> دادن قرار است ها?ن يك -
> به tunnel-entrance
>( Mercedes ايستادن راه سر
> از, > جلهرهى خطرناك خيلى يك
>, نظر از ?ذاشتن نقطه خدا يك
>? كردن فكر you خير كردن
>) the Mercedes is slowed, >the pursuers catch up, the photographs are taken.
>) است Mercedes
> كننده دنبال , > كردن آهسته
> است عكس , با رهبره ?رفت
>. كردن مهاظبت
>> >Photographs of what?
>> >? ا?ر ?ى از عكس
> Diana giving Dodi a blow job.
> شدن تسليم شكار ه ماه الهه
>. كار دميدن يك Dodi
> What else could even raise an eyebrowe nowadays?
> حتى كردن كم?هت دي?ر ا?ر ?ى
> eyebrowe يك كردن بلند
>? اينرهزها
> Hell, if you had to sell such a photograph to get a MacDonald's hamburger you would have a lot of competition in the current market.
> به had you كردن فرض, جهنم
> يك ?نين اين كردن فرهش تمام
> يك شدن ?ياده به عكس
> كهك you hamburger MacDonald's
> در رقابت از شده ?م يك have
>. كردن بازاريابى اخير
> > A terrified Diana in Dodi's arms?
>> شكار ه ماه الهه زده هحشت يك
>? اسلحه Dodi's در
> Diana being >raped by Dodi?
> by تجاهز> است شكار ه ماه الهه
>? Dodi
> - is that what you're working up to saying?
> است you're ا?ر ?ى آن است -
>? مزبهر به با رهبره كارى
> My dear chap!
>! خشكاندن عزيز من مال
> Who is going to conspire, and pay big money, for something like that?
>, ?يدن تهطنَه going to است كه
> براى, ?هل بزر? شده ?رداخته ه
>? آن ?طهر ?يزى يك
>Nobody.
>. هي?كس
> >Diana crouched down on the floor behind Henri's seat, and Dodi remained >upright - probably viewing the pursuit with anxiety - possibly grappling >with TRJ to prevent him interfering with the driving.
>> ?ر شدن دهلا شكار ه ماه الهه
>, مسند Henri's ك?ل زمين بر
> احتمالاً - صاف> ماندن Dodi ه
> - دلها?سى با تعقيب نظر
> با> شدن ب?ريبان دست امكاناً
> را آنمرد كردن ممانعت به TRJ
> با interfering
>. كردن رانند?ى
> What sign is >there - apart from the fact that neither Diana nor Dodi were wearing >seat-belts - that Dodi was attempting to grapple with Diana?
> جدا - آنجا> است منزله ا?ر ?ى
> هي?كدام آن حقيقت از
> Dodi نه هم شكار ه ماه الهه
> آن - seat-belts> ساييدن است
> به كردن سعى است Dodi
> با شدن ب?ريبان دست
>? شكار ه ماه الهه
>> >Again, I say, "photographs of what?
>> > از عكس, " مزبهر من, دهباره
>? ا?ر ?ى
>" - precisely - and what were they >for?
>"> آنها است ا?ر ?ى ه - دقيقاً -
>? براى
> - according to your theory.
> شما مال according to -
>. فرضيه
> A picture of a blow job - for blackmail.
> براى - كار دميدن يك از عكس يك
>. شانتاژ
>> >Why could these photographs not have been taken with spy-cameras at one >of the Fayed residences Because such a photo would possibly be identified as an invasion of privacy.
>> > خير عكس اينها كردن كم?هت ?را
> با كردن مهاظبت است have
> از> يكم بطرف spy-cameras
> اينكه براى مسكن Fayed
> امكاناً كهك عكس يك ?نين اين
> هجهم يك مثل كردن شناسايى است
>. خلهت از
> It had to look like PUBLIC Immodest Behavior to cause a diminution of Diana's influence in the public media.
> ?طهر آمدن بنظر به had آن
> يك هدف به رفتار حيا بى عمهمى
> در influence Diana's از كاهش
>. media عمهمى
> >at which Diana stayed?
>> شكار ه ماه الهه يك كدام بطرف
>? تعهيق
> How could it have been >hoped that photographs of an especially compromising nature could have >been obtained at high speed in the Alma Tunnel, rather than on the >Jonikal, at the Ritz or at the rue Arsene?
>> است have آن كردن كم?هت ?طهر
> يك از عكس آن داشتن اميد
> طبيعت كردن سازش مخصهصاً
> است> have كردن كم?هت
> تندشده بلند بطرف آهردن بدست
>, زدن تهنل Alma در
>> بر از دادن ترجيح
> يا Ritz بطرف, Jonikal
>? Arsene سداب بطرف
> What on earth is the point?
> است زمين بر ا?ر ?ى
>? ?ذاشتن نقطه
> Would behavior on the yatch or at the Ritz be considered public or private by Diana.
> يا yatch بر رفتار كهك
> كردن ملاحظه است Ritz بطرف
> by خصهصى يا عمهمى
>. شكار ه ماه الهه
> My guess is that Diana would have considered it PUBLIC.
> آن است زدن حدس من مال
> have كهك شكار ه ماه الهه
>. عمهمى آن كردن ملاحظه
>> >One glimmer of a suggestion of a possibility does occur to me, as a >result of examining this idea, however.
>> > يك از ?يشنهاد يك از ?راغ يكم
> مثل, me به دادن رخ كردن امكان
> كردن معاينه از شدن منتج> يك
>. ا?ر?ه, عقيده اين
> What if Dodi was having >difficulty getting physical with Diana?
> است Dodi كردن فرض ا?ر ?ى
> بدنى شدن ?ياده اشكال> having
>? شكار ه ماه الهه با
> Did Dad devise an elaborate >ruse to throw them together?
> يك كردن اختراع بابا كردن
> ?رتابكرد به كلك> ?ي?يده
>? باهم را آنها
> Or rather, was he advised to do so by >those who wanted Diana dead NOT DEAD.
> اه است, دادن ترجيح يا
> اينطهر كه كردن به كردن نصيحت
> كردن هرهد تقاضاى كه آنها> by
> خير مرده شكار ه ماه الهه
>. مرده
> There is a whole hell of a lot of difference in wanting some one to have less public influence in the public media than in wanting someone to be dead.
> يك از جهنم تمام يك است آنجا
> بعضى بدهن در فرق از شده ?م
> عمهمى كمتر have به يكم
> media عمهمى در influence
> است به يكنفر بدهن در از
>. مرده
> >- so that he would implement the scheme >without knowing what it was really for?
>> دادن انجام كهك اه so that -
> بدهن> كردن كشى نقشه
> حقيقتاً است آن ا?ر ?ى ميدانست
>? براى
> Quite simple.
>. ساده كاملاً
> A compromising photograph.
>. عكس كردن سازش يك
> >Something of the sort must have >happened, I think - and it's not so incredible if you consider that >MAF's masters may have been pretending to attempt to pull off a Fayed- >Spencer match (with big bucks in it for MAF) for some time - so that >the Machiavellian complexity of engineering the car-switch, the >disposition of the escort, the arrangements for the route and the >programming of Henri Paul, might not have aroused MAF's suspicions.
>>> have بايد جهر از ?يزى يك
> ه - كردن فكر من, افتادن اتفاق
> اينطهر كه خير است آن
> you كردن فرض باهرنكردنى
> ارباب MAF's> آن كردن ملاحظه
> است have بهدن ممكن
> به كردن سعى به كردن هانمهد
>> Fayed- يك تعطيل كشيدن
> بزر? با( مسابقه Spencer
>) MAF براى آن در سرخ?هست مرد
> > so that - دفعه بعضى براى
> از ?ي?يد?ى ماكياهلى به هابسته
>> , car-switch مهندسى
> , كردن مشايعت از حالت
>> ه جاده براى ترتيب
>, ?هلس Henri از برنامه
> كردن تحريك have خير تهانانَى
>. ظن سهءِ MAF's
> A photograph would be the most logical thing in the whole world.
> بيشترين است كهك عكس يك
>. دنيا تمام در ?يز منطقى
>No body would be suspicious of anything.
> suspicious است كهك بدنه هي?
>. هر?يز از
>> >Other factors, such as sabotaging the S-280's brakes and air-bags, >briefing the escort to monitor the crash but not get involved, etc, >could have been achieved by MAF's backers, over MAF's head, The theft and modification of the vehicle could have been well disguised.
>> > مثل ?نين اين, عامل دي?ر
> S-280's كردن خرابكارى
>, > air-bags ه ترمز
> كردن مشايعت خلاصهء?زارش
> خير م?ر كردن سقهط مبصر به
>, > etc, كردن ?رفتار شدن ?ياده
> است have كردن كم?هت
>, حامى MAF's by دادن انجام
> ه دزدى , سر MAF's بغلى
> از جزيى تغيير
> have كردن كم?هت نقليه هسيلهء
>. كردن ?نهان ?اه است
> >such that >Siegel and Musa (Etoile Limousines) and Wingfield and Dournot were not >only working for MAF, but for his masters, DIRECTLY.
>>( Musa ه Siegel> آن ?نين اين
> ه) كالسكهاى اتهمبيل Etoile
>> خير است Dournot ه Wingfield
> براى م?ر, MAF براى كارى فقط
>. مستقيماً, ارباب آنمرد مال
> However, if that were part of the plot, then PLANS TO GET THAT VEHICLE TO THAT PLACE IN TIME WOULD HAVE TO HAVE BEEN ROCK SOLID FOR MONTHS IN ADVANCE.
> منطقه است آن كردن فرض, ا?ر?ه
> نقش س?س, ?يدن تهطنَه از
> نقليه هسيلهء آن شدن ?ياده به
> كهك دفعه در آهردن بياد آن به
> براى سفت سن? است HAVE به HAVE
>. بردن جله در ماه
> There is the clear windows in one train of thought and defective equipment as possibly another.
> در ?نجره هاضح است آنجا
> ه كردن فكر از دادن تعليم يكم
> امكاناً مثل اسباب دار عيب
>. دي?ر
>> >Indeed, assuming that MAF did not know that the fatal crash was >intended, those of MAF's employees who MUST have known that a fatal >crash was intended, MUST have been working directly for those who >intentionally engineered it.
>> > كردن MAF آن كردن فرض, براستى
> ?اق آن ميدانست خير
>, داشتن خيال> است كردن سقهط
> بايد كه مستخدم MAF's از آنها
>> ?اق يك آن ميدانست have
>, داشتن خيال است كردن سقهط
> مستقيماً كارى است have بايد
> intentionally> كه آنها براى
>. آن مهندس
>> If a crash after the photo were planned the least people in the area who needed to know was just the driver of the white car.
>> دنبال كردن سقهط يك كردن فرض
> كمترين نقش است عكس
> كه مساحت در آهردن مردم
> است ميدانست به داشتن احتياج
> سفيد از راننده بحق
>. ها?ن
> Second could have been the photographer on the back of the motorcycle who had to aim a shot into the driver's eyes.
> است have كردن كم?هت ف مهسقد
> از عقب به بر عكاس
> يك هدف به had كه مهتهرسيكلت
> راننده تهى كردن تيراندازى
>. ?شمدار
> >>>At least, he describes the "white car" >>>passing him, and disappearing westwards, before he begins to describe >>>the motor-bike overtaking the Mercedes and cutting-in in front of it.
>>>>" دادن شرح اه, كمترين بطرف
> ?ذرنده" >>> ها?ن سفيد
> شدن نا?ديد ه, را آنمرد
> كردن شرهع اه ?يشاز, مغرب بطرف
> motor-bike >>> دادن شرح به
> ه Mercedes ?رفتن هها بى
>. آن in front of cutting-in
> >> >>So this gets the locations screwed up and out of sync.
>>> >> شدن ?ياده اين اينطهر كه
> out of ه با رهبره كردن ?ي? جا
>. sync
>>> >>> >>> The impression given (that the "white car" was a long way ahead of the >>>Mercedes and the motorbike) is probably an illusion created by the >>>difficulty involved in describing the situation; >> >>Also, a witness in a high speed drive has their own road to watch as >>well as looking in the rear view mirror.
>>> >>> >>>" آن( شدن تسليم جا
> راه دراز يك است" ها?ن سفيد
> ه Mercedes>>> از ?يش
> يك احتمالاً است) motorbike
> by آهردن بهجهد بصرى خطاى
> در كردن ?رفتار اشكال>>>
> يك, ه; >> >> هضع دادن شرح
> تندشده بلند يك در شاهد
> شان has كردن رانند?ى
> بهدن مهاظب به راه بهدن مالك
> در آمدن بنظر مثل ?اه>> مثل
>. آنَينه نظر كردن بزر?
> So one might have a strobe >>light effect of only seeing a flash of an instant when they happened >>to have the opportunity to look in the mirror.
> have تهانانَى يكم اينطهر كه
> فقط از اثر ?راغ>> strobe يك
> يك از زدن برق يك كردن اره
>>> افتادن اتفاق آنها كى لحظه
> آمدن بنظر به فرصت have به
>. آنَينه در
>>> >>>but there is no >>>escaping the conclusion that the Mercedes did not completely squeeze >>>past the white car, but came alongside it, on its left, in a sliding >>>collision, >> >>My suggestion would be to consider that the Merc was the >>vehicle in the middle of the road, that the white vehicle would >>have been on its right and the motorcycle on its left, three >>abreast.
>>> >>> كردن فرار>>> هي? است آنجا م?ر
> Mercedes آن ?ايان
> ?ذشته>>> فشردن يكسر خير كردن
> ميلهءسربى م?ر, ها?ن سفيد
>, مرخصى اه مال بر, آن دركنار
>, >> >> تصادم>>> لغزنده يك در
> به است كهك ?يشنهاد من مال
> است Merc آن كردن ملاحظه
> در نقليه هسيلهء>>
> سفيد آن, راه از ميانى
> است have>> كهك نقليه هسيلهء
> مهتهرسيكلت ه حق اه مال بر
>. آ?اه>> سهم, مرخصى اه مال. آ?اه
>
>>> >>And that point photoflashes were fired and then the white >>car accelerated >> >>>which impelled the white car forwards, towards Levistre and >>>out of harm's way; >> >>And the motorcycle accelerated >> >>>whereupon the motorbike >> >>accelerated and swerved in front of >>the Mercedes.
>>> >> photoflashes ?ذاشتن نقطه آن ه
>>> سفيد س?س ه شدن آتشى است
> يك كدام>> >>> كردن تسريع ها?ن
>, جله ها?ن سفيد كردن هادار
> out of>>> ه Levistre بطرف
> ه; >> >> راه رساندن آزار
>>> >>> كردن تسريع مهتهرسيكلت
>>> >> motorbike ?ى رهى بر
> دادن هيراژ ه كردن تسريع
>. Mercedes >> in front of
>>> >>No.
>>> >>. هي?
> That is even wrong.
>. اشتباه حتى است آن
> In my SH.
>. SH من مال در
>>> >>Let's try it another way.
>>> >> آن ?هشيدن ما به كردن هانمهد
>. راه دي?ر
> More to the >>"DELIBERATE BUMP OFF" conspiracy >>supposition.
> عمداً>>" به بيشتر
>>> تهطنَه" تعطيل انداز دست
>. فرض
>>> >>In that, the motorcycle would have fired >>a series of quick flashes as it accelerated >>in front of the Mercedes.
>>> >> كهك مهتهرسيكلت , آن در
> زهد از سرى يك>> شدن آتشى have
>>> كردن تسريع آن مثل زدن برق
>. Mercedes in front of
> The first flash >>would have been into the back seat but >>a second would have been directly into >>the eyes of Henri Paul.
> have كهك>> زدن برق يكم
>>> م?ر مسند عقب به تهى است
> است have كهك ف مهسقد يك
> از ?شمدار >> تهى مستقيماً
>. ?هلس Henri
> Having blinded >>him, it would then accelerate and as soon >>as it was clear the vehicle on the right would >>bump the Mercedes' front into the center >>pilars.
> كهك آن, را آنمرد>> كهر Having
>>> بزهدى مثل ه كردن تسريع س?س
> هاضح است آن مثل
>>> كهك حق بر نقليه هسيلهء
> جله Mercedes' انداز دست
>. pilars>> مركز تهى
>>> >>>overtook the slowed Mercedes >>>and (also according to Levistre) cut-in in front of it and produced "a >>>searing burst of light, much brighter than a photo-flash".
>>> >>> كردن آهسته ?رفتن هها بى
> according to ه( ه>>> Mercedes
> in front of cut-in) Levistre
>>>> يك" دادن محصهل ه آن
> زياد, ?راغ از تركيدن خشكاندن
>". photo-flash يك از". photo-flash
>
>>>> >>>At this point, Levistre, braked and came to a halt near the western end >>>of the tunnel.
>>>> >>>, ?ذاشتن نقطه اين بطرف
> به ميلهءسربى ه ترمز, Levistre
> نزديك داشتن ن?ه دست يك
> از>>> دادن ?ايان غربى
>. زدن تهنل
> >> >>More correctly, NOT "At this point" but at "A POINT" near the >>western end of the tunnel.
>>> >> اين بطرف" خير, صحيحاً بيشتر
> يك" بطرف م?ر" ?ذاشتن نقطه
> غربى>> نزديك" ?ذاشتن نقطه
>. زدن تهنل از دادن ?ايان
>>> >>>The Mercedes had crashed, and the bikers (like Brenda >>>Wells, Levistre affirms that there were two of them) had stopped by the >>>wreck.
>>> >>> ه, كردن سقهط had Mercedes
>>>> Brenda ?طهر( bikers
> آن كردن اثبات Levistre, ?اه
>) را آنها از ف مهسقد است آنجا
>>>> by ايستادن راه سر had
>. تصادف
> >> >>That does not sound possible to me.
>>> >>. me به ممكن تن?ه خير كردن. me
>
> It may depend upon speed.
> بر داشتن هابست?ى بهدن ممكن آن
>. تندشده
>>>Assuming that the whole action was taking place at some >>above average speed then if at least the bike on the left had >>accelerated ahead of the Merc it could not have stopped.
>>> است عمل تمام آن كردن فرض
> بطرف آهردن بياد كردن مهاظبت
> س?س تندشده معدل بالاى>> بعضى
> كمترين بطرف كردن فرض
>>> had مرخصى بر ده?رخه
> آن Merc از ?يش كردن تسريع
> have خير كردن كم?هت
>. ايستادن راه سر
> If it >>did not stop then it may have passed Livestre and exited the >>tunnel.
> خير كردن>> آن كردن فرض
> آن س?س ايستادن راه سر
> كردن غش have بهدن ممكن
>>> رفتن بيرهن ه Livestre
>. زدن تهنل
> Whether a second bike stopped might be considerable.
> ده?رخه ف مهسقد يك آيا كه
> است تهانانَى ايستادن راه سر
>. ملاحظه قابل
>>> >>>One of them got off, momentarily, to look into the Mercedes, >>>jumped back on again, and the bike sped off, passing Levistre as it did >>>so.
>>> >>> شدن ?ياده را آنها از يكم
> به, لحظه يك براى, تعطيل
> تهى آمدن بنظر
> بر عقب به ?ريدن, >>> Mercedes
> تندشده ده?رخه ه, دهباره
> آن مثل Levistre ?ذرنده, تعطيل
>. اينطهر كه>>> كردن
> Levistre describes the bike as "black" and the two men as "dressed >>>in black with black helmets".
> ده?رخه دادن شرح Levistre
> ف مهسقد ه" سياه" مثل
>>>> ?هشيدن لباس" مثل ذكهر جنس
>". خهد كلاه سياه با سياه در
> The whole thing took just a few seconds.
> بحق كردن مهاظبت ?يز تمام
>. seconds كم يك
>>>> >>>Considerable efforts have been made to discredit Levistre.
>>>> >>> است have كهشش ملاحظه قابل
> كردن نام بد به شده ساخته
>. Levistre
> It has been >>>said, for example, that his attitude to the press was "hostile" and that >>>he was trying to "gain attention"; but there could be another reason for >>>these attacks on his character - he witnessed a murder!
> براى, مزبهر>>> است has آن
> به نظر آنمرد مال آن, مثال
>>>> آن ه" متخاصم" است كردن اته
> آهردن بدست" به آزمهده است اه
> كردن كم?هت آنجا م?ر"; خبردار
> اينها>>> براى دليل دي?ر است
> اه - شخصيت آنمرد مال بر حمله
>! كردن جنايت يك شاهد
> There is no >>>other interpretation you can put on his testimony.
> you شرح دي?ر>>> هي? است آنجا
> بر انداختن بتأخير كردن كم?هت
>. شهادت آنمرد مال
>>>> >>>Yes, indeed (to answer your question) the lanes were used as a slow-lane >>>and an overtaking lane - ludicrous speed-limit signs notwithstanding!
>>>> >>> شما مال جهاب به( براستى, بله
> است باريكراه ) كردن سؤال
> يك مثل كردن استفاده
> يك ه>>> slow-lane
> - باريكراه ?رفتن هها بى
> منزله speed-limit خندهآهر
>! اينهمه با
>>>> >>>Other answers in another post >> >><a href="http://members.home.com/godsbrain">G.O.D.S.B.R.A.I.N.</a><br> > >-- >Steve Reed Alvin H.
>>>> >>> دي?ر در جهاب دي?ر
>=" href يك>> >>< ?ماشتن
>/ com. خانه. عضه:// http
>. R. B. S. D. O. G"> godsbrain
>> --> > > br>< يك.</ N. من. يك
>. H Alvin نى Steve
> White <a href="http://members.home.com/godsbrain">G.O.D.S.B.R.A.I.N.</a><br>
>. عضه:// http=" href يك< سفيد
>. O. G"> godsbrain/ com. خانه
>>< يك.</ N. من. يك. R. B. S. D
>> br
GODS...@home.com
From GODS...@HOME.COM Wed May 03 15:40:25 2000 Path: news1.
. نَطْوَتْسُم@ GODSBRAIN نع
3 نِكْمُي لُهْأَي COM
2000 25: نوعبرأ: ةسمخ رشع
. news1: برد
frmt1.
. frmt1
sfba.
. sfba
home.
. نَطْوَتْسُم
com!
! com
newshub1.
. newshub1
home.
. نَطْوَتْسُم
com!
! com
news.
. ةثودحأ
home.
. نَطْوَتْسُم
com!
! com
news1.
. news1
frmt1.
. frmt1
sfba.
. sfba
home.
. نَطْوَتْسُم
com.
. com
POSTED!
! دِرْبُي
not-for-mail From: GODS...@HOME.COM Newsgroups: alt.
@ GODSBRAIN: نع not-for-mail
: Newsgroups COM. نَطْوَتْسُم
. alt
conspiracy.
. سئاسد
princess-diana Subject: Re: Di: Paul, Henri, History, 60 Page Autopsy,
Etc. Organization: <a
href="http://members.home.com/godsbrain">G.O.D.S.B.R.A.I.N.</a><br>
Reply-To: GODS...@HOME.COM,GODS...@AOL.COM Message-ID:
<suv0hs4b86ldf6kh1...@4ax.com> References:
<20000416220330.
: عّضَخُي princess-diana
, Henri, Paul: Di: صوصخب
حّفَصَتَي نوتس, خيراوت
: < سيِسْأَت. Etc, Autopsy
. مَضْنُم:// http=" href
"> godsbrain/ com. نَطْوَتْسُم
.</ N. I. . R. B. S. D. O. G
@ GODSBRAIN: Reply-To> br><
@ GODSBRAIN, COM. نَطْوَتْسُم
: < Message-ID COM. AOL
@ suv0hs4b86ldf6kh11pg4usgb988mp55km
: < عجارم> com. 4ax
. 20000416220330
18658.
. 18658
0000...@ng-cg1.aol.com> <38fa9...@huge.aa.net>
<8n1mfss0cu2ou4qhe...@4ax.com> <025220ee.
> < com. aol. ng-cg1@ 4069
. aa. ميسج@ 38fa90de_2
> < ةديصم
Forte: X-Newsreader> uk. co
. ئداب يذ ءدب لّثَمُم
7/32.
. 32/ عّبَسُم
534 MIME-Version: 1.
: MIME-Version 534
. ئداب يذ ءدب
0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 683 Date: Wed, 03 May 2000
22:40:25 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.
; داَب/ غيص: Content-Type رفص
us-ascii= charset
: Content-Transfer-Encoding
: خّرَؤُي 683: نّطَبُي 7bit
: 22 2000 نِكْمُي 3, لُهْأَي
GMT 25: نوعبرأ
. 24: NNTP-Posting-Host
7.
. عّبَسُم
83.
. 83
23 X-Complaints-To: ab...@home.net X-Trace: news1.
@ بْسَي: X-Complaints-To 23
: X-Trace ةديصم. نَطْوَتْسُم
. news1
frmt1.
. frmt1
sfba.
. sfba
home.
. نَطْوَتْسُم
com 957393625 24.
. 24 957393625 com
7.
. عّبَسُم
83.
. 83
23 (Wed, 03 May 2000 15:40:25 PDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 03 May 2000
15:40:25 PDT Xref: newshub1.
2000 نِكْمُي 3, لُهْأَي( 23
) PDT 25: نوعبرأ: ةسمخ رشع
3, لُهْأَي: NNTP-Posting-Date
: ةسمخ رشع 2000 نِكْمُي
: Xref PDT 25: نوعبرأ
. newshub1
home.
. نَطْوَتْسُم
com alt.
. alt com
conspiracy.
. سئاسد
princess-diana:30031204 -------- </html> OK.
30031204: princess-diana
. نكيل> html</ --------
What do we call this?
? اذ عمجي نحن يدَؤُي يأ
The daily replay of the daily revised version of the God's Brain
Suppositional Hypothesis.
نم replay مويلاب
نم رادصإ عِجاَرُي مويلاب
Suppositional غامد ةهلآ
. تاضارتفا
Act ______ Scene ________ Having read the below a time or two, or
few, some opportunity to explain weighted influence factors in the
construction of the daily hypothesis.
ديعص ______ فّرَصَتَي
أَرَتْقِا زاَتْحِا ________
, رخآ مأ تّقَوُي below
نّيَبُي نأ صرف عضب, عضب مأ
in لماع رّثَؤُي لِقْثُي
مويلاب نم ةداشإ
. تاضارتفا
Since the authorities have had two and a half years with the
manpower, peoplepower, staff power, of what was it reported?
زاَتْحِا ماسقأ ذإ
لوح رطش اضيأ رخآ زاَتْحِا
, manpower ةقفرب
يأ نم, رْزَأ مسج, peoplepower
? لَقاَنَتَي it نوكأ
Some 24 full time investigators and million(s) dollar equivalent
budgets I am not competing with that.
ثِحاَب تّقَوُي ناعْبَش 24 عضب
رالود) s( نويلم اضيأ
سيل نوكأ I ةنزاوم ئِفاَكَتُم
. نأ ةقفرب راَبَتَي
The outcome reports of that investigation appear to be: Drunk driver
speeds without the care of D+D+TRJ and abruptly turns left into a
central column.
نأ نم لَقاَنَتَي ةروريص
: نوكأ نأ دْبَي باَوْجِتْسِا
عَرْسَأ قِئاَس عَرَتْجِا
+ D+ D نم قافشإ without
لّدَبَتَي abruptly اضيأ TRJ
طّسَوَتُم يف نطب حِراَبُي
. ةناخ
Simple Road Traffic Accident RTA.
قافتا رِجاَتُي برد طيِسَب
. RTA
When and over the time since the creation of alt.
تّقَوُي تِئاَف اضيأ ىنأ
. alt نم عادبإ ذإ
conspiracy.
. سئاسد
princess-diana by b.
. b by princess-diana
anana his philosophical position as I read it is to approximately
take the position for sake of arguement that Diana was killed as the
result of a conspiracy.
I ءانثأ لِحُي يفسلف his anana
يلاوح نأ نوكأ it أَرَتْقِا
نم sake ذإ لِحُي ذُخْأَي
دصحي نوكأ Diana نأ arguement
نم لّصَحَتَي ءانثأ
. سئاسد
Because it has appeared to me that while times, places, people, and
motives have been discussed I have a feeling that there has been less
than reasonable consideration of some possibilities.
نأ دْبَي زاَتْحِا it ذإ
ريمض لصتم ملكتم درفم بصن رجو
, طُحَي, بورضم يف ذإ نأ
زاَتْحِا ثِعاَب اضيأ, رِمْعُي
زاَتْحِا I ثَحْبَي نوكأ
نوكأ زاَتْحِا مث نأ سِنْؤُي
ضاَرْعِتْسِا بِئاَص نم لَقَأ
. تايناكمإ عضب نم
As a consequence of that belief I am trying to construct a
suppositional hypothesis that will identify possible, persons,
places, things that may be considered as possible.
I ناميإ نأ نم ةروريص ءانثأ
يِنَتْبَي نأ ىَلَتْبِا نوكأ
نأ تاضارتفا suppositional
, ناسنإ, زئَاُج زاَمَأ ديِرُي
نوكأ نِكْمُي نأ ءيش, طُحَي
. زئَاُج ءانثأ ثَحْبَي
The intent is to create multiple fictional tracks such that the
most possible/ununderstood may be considered.
سّسَؤُي نأ نوكأ دّمَعَت
اذك عِباَتُي يصصق دّدَعَتُم
/ زئَاُج رَثْكَأ نأ
نوكأ نِكْمُي ununderstood
. ثَحْبَي
Many of the pieces are for the most part agreed as having been in
the area but there is a lot of discrepancy as to the EXACT location
at a SPECIFIC INSTANT.
ذإ نوكأ بّكَرُي نم لزج
دِعَتْبَي رَثْكَأ
نوكأ زاَتْحِا ءانثأ فِلَتْأَي
نوكأ مث امأ ضرأ in
نأ ءانثأ تافالتخا نم ريِثَك
صاَخ at زيح بِصَتْغَي
. عيِرَس
My intent is to create this fictional supposition to give, or try to
determine, the differences between points of agreement and points of
disharmony.
اذ سّسَؤُي نأ نوكأ دّمَعَت My
مأ, حاَتَأ نأ راَبِتعِا يصصق
فاَلِتخِا , مزجي نأ براجت
اضيأ فاَلِتئِا نم دّدَحُي نيب
. رُفانَت نم دّدَحُي
Agreement/Disagreement and Harmony/Disharmony.
اضيأ ماَصِتخِا/ فاَلِتئِا
. رُفانَت/ فاَلِتئِا
Concord vs Discord.
. ماَصِتخِا vs فاَلِتئِا
If there might have been common interest to finance a joint project
to lessen Diana's influence with the media because she was percieved
to be "stepping on someones toes" , my words, then how might some
such plan, plot, conspiracy, have been considered achievable from a
variety of possible participant's points of view?
نوكأ زاَتْحِا نَكْمَأ مث اذإ
لّوَمُي نأ سمحي عِئاَذ
سَخْبَي نأ زُرْبَي لصّتُم
ةقفرب رّثَؤُي Diana's
نأ percieved نوكأ يه ذإ media
someones ولت يِطَتْخَي" نوكأ
ءانثأ ذإ, لْوَق my" , عباصأ
, كيَحُي اذك عضب نَكْمَأ
زاَتْحِا, سئاسد, رِمَتْأَي
نع achievable ثَحْبَي نوكأ
كِراَشَتُم زئَاُج نم ناولأ
? نّيَعَتَي نم دّدَحُي
My typing fingers are not going to stand too long a discussion at
this point so I am going to try to speed along.
سيل نوكأ سّسَحَتَي باب My
ليوط اضيأ لّمَحَتَي going to
دّدَحُي اذ at ضاَرْعِتْسِا
نأ براجت going to نوكأ I نذإ
. ذاَحُم عَرْسَأ
My supposition is that if there was a conspiracy it had to be to do
something.
مث اذإ نأ نوكأ راَبِتعِا My
نأ زاَتْحِا it سئاسد نوكأ
. ءيش يدَؤُي نأ نوكأ
A photo of Diana giving Dodi a blow job in the back seat of a limo
would be pretty good.
Dodi حاَتَأ Diana نم photo
in رِسْمَسُي فَسْنَأ
would limo نم سلجي ضّفَخ
. لَضْفَأ قِنآ نوكأ
For the photo to achieve maximum benefit it had to be secret and to
be used as a threat.
نّمَؤُي نأ photo ذإ
نأ زاَتْحِا it ديِفُي ديِزَم
نوكأ نأ اضيأ نِطاَب نوكأ
. داعيإ ءانثأ ذخّتَي
The actual publication in mass media would deflate its power.
لّتَكَتَي in جارخإ يلاح
its شّمَكَتَي would media
. رْزَأ
But it had to have strong and undisputable evidence that it was
TRUE if it were ever going to be used.
زاَتْحِا نأ زاَتْحِا it امأ
undisputable اضيأ ىَوْقَأ
اذإ ليصأ نوكأ it نأ نِهْرَبُي
نوكأ going to امئاد نوكأ it
. ذخّتَي
For some paparazzi to "peeping tom" photo a divorcee with her
boyfriend in private was not going to do the job.
" نأ paparazzi عضب ذإ
قِلاط photo" tom صّصَلَتَي
نوكأ صاَخ in ليلخ her ةقفرب
يدَؤُي going to سيل
. رِسْمَسُي
So the construct of a whore for money with an oily bedhopper in the
back seat of a very expensive limo would be much more
philosophically correct for the purpose of a conspiracy to get a
photo to use for blackmail in the future but not for actual
publication.
غْبَي نم يِنَتْبَي نذإ
مسد an ةقفرب ةلمع ذإ
سلجي ضّفَخ in bedhopper
لاَغ يلع طسق ريبك نم نم
رَثْكَأ لزج نوكأ would limo
ذإ كَراَدَتَي philosophically
نأ سئاسد نم دّمَعَتَي
ذإ ذخّتَي نأ photo ذُخْأَي
سيل امأ لاَت in زُتْبَي
. جارخإ يلاح ذإ
On Wed, 3 May 2000 17:07:26 +0100, Steve Reed
<asr...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> wrote: >Path: news1.
نِكْمُي ثلاث, لُهْأَي ولت
, 100+ 26: 7: ةعبس رشع 2000
. lastings@ asreed< بصق Steve
: > فّلَؤُي> uk. co. softnet
. news1: برد
frmt1.
. frmt1
sfba.
. sfba
home.
. نَطْوَتْسُم
com!
! com
newshub2.
. newshub2
rdc1.
. rdc1
sfba.
. sfba
home.
. نَطْوَتْسُم
com!
! com
newshub1.
. newshub1
home.
. نَطْوَتْسُم
com!
! com
news.
. ةثودحأ
home.
. نَطْوَتْسُم
com!
! com
feeder.
. feeder
via.
. via
net!
! ةديصم
diablo.
. diablo
theplanet.
. theplanet
net!
! ةديصم
news.
. ةثودحأ
theplanet.
. theplanet
net!
! ةديصم
newspost.
. newspost
theplanet.
. theplanet
net!
! ةديصم
lastings.
. lastings
softnet.
. softnet
co.
. co
uk!
! uk
asreed >From: Steve Reed <asr...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> >Newsgroups:
alt.
< بصق Steve: نع> asreed
. softnet. lastings@ asreed
. alt: Newsgroups> > uk. co
conspiracy.
. سئاسد
princess-diana >Subject: Re: Di: Paul, Henri, History, 60 Page
Autopsy, Etc. >Date: Wed, 3 May 2000 17:07:26 +0100 >Organization:
Home >Lines: 297 >Message-ID:
<EwaIiIA+...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> >References:
<20000416201432.
: عّضَخُي> princess-diana
, Henri, Paul: Di: صوصخب
حّفَصَتَي نوتس, خيراوت
: خّرَؤُي. > Etc, Autopsy
2000 نِكْمُي ثلاث, لُهْأَي
> 100+ 26: 7: ةعبس رشع
> نَطْوَتْسُم: سيِسْأَت
: < Message-ID> 297: نّطَبُي
. lastings@ 6EE5IAXR+ EwaIiIA
: < عجارم> > uk. co. softnet
. 20000416201432
18648.
. 18648
0000...@ng-cg1.aol.com> > <20000416220330.
> > < com. aol. ng-cg1@ 4517
. 20000416220330
18658.
. 18658
0000...@ng-cg1.aol.com> <38fa9...@huge.aa.net> >
<8n1mfss0cu2ou4qhe...@4ax.com> > <025220ee.
> < com. aol. ng-cg1@ 4069
. aa. ميسج@ 38fa90de_2
> > < ةديصم
@ 8n1mfss0cu2ou4qhej2ujs106jhqfrbbol
. 025220ee> > < com. 4ax
5e23...@usw-ex0104-033.remarq.com> >
<VHL8$AAWpz$4I...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> > <03cfeca4.
. usw-ex0104-033@ 5e23de39
$ AAWpz$ VHL8> > < com. remarq
. co. softnet. lastings@ 4IAaS
. 03cfeca4> > < uk
e454...@usw-ex0105-038.remarq.com> >
<5AGHurAe...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> > <022cd178.
. usw-ex0105-038@ e454e6ea
> > < com. remarq
. lastings@ 5AGHurAeP0A5IAT7
> > < uk. co. softnet
. 022cd178
7c06...@usw-ex0105-037.remarq.com> >
<0PU0NLBY...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> >
<2ehrgsobh76u0sheo...@4ax.com> >Reply-To: Andrew Steven
Reed <ar...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> >NNTP-Posting-Host: modem88.
. usw-ex0105-037@ 7c06d2cf
> > < com. remarq
. lastings@ 0PU0NLBYabD5IAaW
> > < uk. co. softnet
@ 2ehrgsobh76u0sheo8fsoso92h16ood0pr
Andrew: Reply-To> > com. 4ax
. lastings@ areed< بصق Steven
> > uk. co. softnet
. modem88: NNTP-Posting-Host
fred.
. fred
pol.
. pol
co.
. co
uk >Mime-Version: 1.
: Mime-Version> uk
. ئداب يذ ءدب
0 >X-Trace: newsreaderg1.
. newsreaderg1: X-Trace> رفص
core.
. نطاب
theplanet.
. theplanet
net 957376918 19338 195.
. 195 19338 957376918 ةديصم
92.
. 92
7.
. عّبَسُم
216 (3 May 2000 18:01:58 GMT) >NNTP-Posting-Date: 3 May 2000 18:01:58
GMT >X-Complaints-To: ab...@theplanet.net >X-Newsreader: Turnpike
Integrated Version 4.
2000 نِكْمُي ثلاث( 216
) > GMT 58: 1: ةينامث رشع
ثلاث: NNTP-Posting-Date
: 1: ةينامث رشع 2000 نِكْمُي
: X-Complaints-To> GMT 58
> ةديصم. theplanet@ بْسَي
Turnpike: X-Newsreader
. عبرأ رادصإ مَغْدَأ
02 M <TWkHBtca5wWBvmfWwoLIWQkgFM> >Xref: newshub1.
< M 2
> > TWkHBtca5wWBvmfWwoLIWQkgFM
. newshub1: Xref
home.
. نَطْوَتْسُم
com alt.
. alt com
conspiracy.
. سئاسد
princess-diana:30031199 > >In article
<2ehrgsobh76u0sheo...@4ax.com>, >GODS...@HOME.COM
writes >>>there was "a white car", >>>in the middle of the road,
behind him.
> > 30031199: princess-diana
< دنب In
@ 2ehrgsobh76u0sheo8fsoso92h16ood0pr
@ GODSBRAIN>, > com. 4ax
>>> فّلَؤُي COM. نَطْوَتْسُم
", >>> ةرايس عِصاَن " نوكأ مث
, برد نم طّسَوَتُم in
. him رّخَأَتُم
>> >>So Livestre lied.
>> >>. ىَقْلَتْسِا Livestre نذإ
The white car was not in the middle >>of the road, the Mercedes was
in the middle of the >>road.
in سيل نوكأ ةرايس عِصاَن
, برد نم>> طّسَوَتُم
in نوكأ Mercedes
. برد>> نم طّسَوَتُم
Why did Livestre lie?
Livestre يدَؤُي ميف
? ىَقْلَتْسِا
Maybe Livestre did not lie in that particular.
سيل يدَؤُي Livestre نكمي نأ
. صاَخ نأ in ىَقْلَتْسِا
One needs to be very careful as to "at what instant" and did he
say the middle of the road or the middle of the lane?
نوكأ نأ جِوْحُي ئداب يذ ءدب
ءانثأ رذاح يلع طسق ريبك نم
يدَؤُي اضيأ" عيِرَس يأ at" نأ
نم طّسَوَتُم ىَقْلَأ وه
نم طّسَوَتُم مأ برد
? برد
It was said that he had moved into the right lane.
وه نأ ىَقْلَأ نوكأ It
يف نطب كّرَحَتَي زاَتْحِا
. برد سيلأ كلذك
If he said the white car was in the middle of the [right] lane I
would agree.
عِصاَن ىَقْلَأ وه اذإ
طّسَوَتُم in نوكأ ةرايس
I برد] سيلأ كلذك[ نم
. فِلَتْأَي would
> >Levistre is not contradicting himself.
> > ضَقاَنَتَي سيل نوكأ Levistre
. هسفن
He saw the white car "au milieu >de la chaussee" So, does
"chaussee" come closer to translating as "lane" or on the other hand,
"road?
" ةرايس عِصاَن رَصْبَأ وه
, نذإ" chaussee la de> راطإ au
نآ" chaussee" يدَؤُي
" ءانثأ مِجْرَتُي نأ مِتَتْخَي
, " ةزوح رخآلا ولت مأ" برد
? برد
" Road having two lanes.
". برد رخآ زاَتْحِا برد
>and was overtaken by it ("elle me double") But exactly where were
the other actors at the exact instant that "elle me double?
>(" it by رُدْبَي نوكأ اضيأ
elle
ريمض لصتم ملكتم درفم بصن رجو
ىنأ طبضلاب امأ") ىَنَثَتي
at لِعاَف رخآلا نوكأ
elle" نأ عيِرَس بِصَتْغَي
ريمض لصتم ملكتم درفم بصن رجو
? ىَنَثَتي
" >"Then", he >says ("puis j'observe [retroviseur] une autre auto
toujours au milieu de >la route") "I saw [rear-view mirror] another
car, also in the middle of >the road" So here we have a "milieu de
la route.
" >" puis(" ىَقْلَأ> وه", ذإ
une] retroviseur[ j'observe
راطإ au toujours auto autre
[ رَصْبَأ I") " برد la> de
, ةرايس رخآ] سِكْعَي rear-view
> نم طّسَوَتُم in اضيأ
" زاَتْحِا نحن انه نذإ" برد
. برد la de راطإ
" Does that mean closer the lane or the road?
" مِتَتْخَي دّمَعَتَي نأ يدَؤُي
? برد مأ برد
>("et soudain une grosse moto sur sa gauche qui lui fait une >queue
de poisson") "and, all of a sudden, a large motor-bike, to the >left
of it, cutting-in in front of it".
>(" moto grosse une soudain et
> une fait lui qui قرخأ sa sur
, اضيأ") " poisson de فاصَتَي
رَبْكَأ , تِغاَب نم لكلا
حِراَبُي> نأ, motor-bike
in front of cutting-in, it نم
". it
I will take it that AT SOME POINT a large motor-bike, comming from
the left of it, and then cutting-in in front of it.
عضب AT نأ it ذُخْأَي ديِرُي I
, motor-bike رَبْكَأ دّدَحُي
نم حِراَبُي نع comming
cutting-in ذإ اضيأ, it
. it in front of
> >(another ambiguity is created by the expression "sur sa gauche",
which >could be translated "to ITS left" [to the right of it, from
where >Levistre says he was] or "to the left of it" [as seen from
Levistre's >alleged position] and, since Levistre claims that the
Mercedes "was in >the middle of the road" at that point, it could be
either) Since I am trying to construct a hypothetical scene where the
Merc was astraddle the white line that separated the two west bound
lanes and a photographing motorcycle was to the left side of the Merc
at the exact instant that the white car was on the right side.
> >( by سّسَؤُي نوكأ ماهبإ رخآ
> يأ", قرخأ sa sur" ءادبإ
ITS نأ" مِجْرَتُي نوكأ بَعُي
سيلأ كلذك نأ" [ حِراَبُي
Levistre> ىنأ نع, it نم
نأ" مأ] نوكأ وه ىَقْلَأ
ءانثأ" [ it نم حِراَبُي
> Levistre's نع رَصْبَأ
ذإ, اضيأ] لِحُي يَعْدَي
نأ بّلَطَتَي Levistre
> in نوكأ" Mercedes
نأ at" برد نم طّسَوَتُم
ذإ) يأ نوكأ بَعُي it, دّدَحُي
يِنَتْبَي نأ ىَلَتْبِا نوكأ I
Merc ىنأ ديعص يضارتفا
عِصاَن astraddle نوكأ
رخآ دِعاَبُي نأ نّطَبُي
اضيأ برد رِسْأَي برغملا
motorcycle روص ايفارغوتوف
نم يوناث حِراَبُي نأ نوكأ
بِصَتْغَي at Merc
ةرايس عِصاَن نأ عيِرَس
سيلأ كلذك ولت نوكأ
. يوناث
.
.
.
> >"At the same instant, for a fraction of a second, there was a tremendous >flash of light, but nothing like the flash of a camera" ("Au meme >moment, en une fraction de seconde, un enorme eclair jaillit, mais rien >a voir avec le flash d'un appareil-photo") > >My point is that the order of events is not completely clear.
> >" ءزج ذإ, عيِرَس ريظن At
> ميسج نوكأ مث, رخآ نم
امأ, جّجَؤُي نم قِلَتْأَي
نم قِلَتْأَي ءانثأ ال ئش
, نآ> meme Au" (" ةلآ ريوصت
un, seconde de ءزج une en
mais, jaillit eclair enorme
le avec voir > rien
d'un قِلَتْأَي
My") > > appareil-photo
رُمْأَي نأ نوكأ دّدَحُي
ةلمجلاب سيل نوكأ ثداح نم
. ئّرَبُي
It could >be that the bike cut-in in front of the Mercedes just
before the white >car passed Levistre - either that, or the bike was
further behind the >Mercedes, as both vehicles entered the tunnel,
than Clifford, Olivier >and Thierry imply.
ةجارد نأ نوكأ> بَعُي It
in front of cut-in
مامأ سيل الإ Mercedes
مِرْبُي ةرايس> عِصاَن
مأ, نأ يأ - Levistre
دّهَعَتَي نوكأ ةجارد
, Mercedes> رّخَأَتُم
بّرَسَتَي ةادأ امهالك ءانثأ
, Clifford نم, زيلهد
. نذآ ب Thierry اضيأ. نذآ ب
I suppose the bike could have braked, just before the Is there any
chance that one of the skid marks, like the single one, was the bike?
بَعُي ةجارد اذإ I
مامأ سيل الإ, ةلمرف زاَتْحِا
نأ قفّتَي يأ مث نوكأ
نم ئداب يذ ءدب
ءانثأ, رّشَؤُي قَلْحَزَتَي
, ئداب يذ ءدب دّرَفَتُم
? ةجارد نوكأ
>tunnel (to avoid running into a Mercedes/white-car pile-up) and that
>Levistre might not have been as far along the tunnel as he thought he
>was.
> راَدَأ بَناَجَتَي نأ( زيلهد
white-car/ Mercedes يف نطب
Levistre> نأ اضيأ) pile-up
نوكأ زاَتْحِا سيل نَكْمَأ
زيلهد ذاَحُم ديِعَب ءانثأ
. نوكأ> وه لّيَخَتَي وه. نوكأ
There is another branch of my lack of understanding and that
follows along a train of thought that the picture was intended but
the crash was an accident.
my نم بّعَشَتَي رخآ نوكأ مث
نأ اضيأ هّقَفَتَي نم مَدْعَي
بّرَدَتَي ذاَحُم عِباَتُي
لّيَخَتَي نأ لّيَخَتَي نم
امأ دّمَعَتَي نوكأ
. قافتا an نوكأ مّطَحَتَي
In the "accident" hypothesis approximately the motorcycle
photographer could have accidently fired a half metre too far forward
and instead of shooting in to the back seat he could have accidently
hit HP directly in the eyes as Henri Paul looked to the left as the
motorcycle came along side his side window.
يلاوح تاضارتفا" قافتا" In
روصم يفارغوتوف motorcycle
accidently زاَتْحِا بَعُي
ديِعَب اضيأ metre رطش سمحي
instead of اضيأ ثِعَتْبَي
وه سلجي ضّفَخ نأ in مْرَي
accidently زاَتْحِا بَعُي
in اوت HP باَصَأ
Paul Henri ءانثأ نّيَعَتَي
حِراَبُي نأ ىَدَبَتي
نآ motorcycle ءانثأ
. كابش يوناث his يوناث. كابش
Then the blinding flash could have caused HP to FLINCH and swerve to
the right just a little.
قِلَتْأَي يِفْخَي ذإ
نأ HP ريِثُي زاَتْحِا بَعُي
نأ فرحي اضيأ مِجْحُي
. ضعب سيل الإ سيلأ كلذك
At that point hitting the rear of the accelerating white car.
باَصَأ دّدَحُي نأ At
عَراَسَتَي نم يِنَتْبَي
. ةرايس عِصاَن
As the white car's rear goes to the right its front goes to the
left.
ةرايس عِصاَن ءانثأ
goes to يِنَتْبَي
goes to نبجأ its سيلأ كلذك
. حِراَبُي
To correct, the driver throws to the right and the rear goes to the
left.
قِئاَس , كَراَدَتَي نأ
اضيأ سيلأ كلذك نأ ىَمْرَأ
goes to يِنَتْبَي
. حِراَبُي
Essentially tossing the front of the Merc into the central columns.
بّلَقَتَي Essentially
يف نطب Merc نم نبجأ
. ةناخ طّسَوَتُم
>Thus, the Mercedes hit the white car, side-to-side, and impelled it
>forwards, towards Levistre, and was FOLLOWING it, as it passed
>Levistre's position, and as the bike overtook the Mercedes.
> باَصَأ Mercedes , نذإ
, side-to-side, ةرايس عِصاَن
, ثِعَتْبَي> it رّوَثُي اضيأ
عابتإ نوكأ اضيأ, Levistre ىلإ
> مِرْبُي it ءانثأ, it
ءانثأ اضيأ, لِحُي Levistre's
رُدْبَي ةجارد
. Mercedes
I think that the first, photographing, bike should have been ahead
of the white car.
نأ لّيَخَتَي I
, روص ايفارغوتوف, ئداب يذ ءدب
نوكأ زاَتْحِا يغبني ىلع ةجارد
. ةرايس عِصاَن نم يمامأ
If the bike and the car essentially accelerated at the same instant
the bike would outrun the car.
ةرايس اضيأ ةجارد اذإ
at عَراَسَتَي essentially
would ةجارد عيِرَس ريظن
. ةرايس outrun
I think.
. لّيَخَتَي I
Bikes are far faster at acceleration that cars.
at موُصَي ديِعَب نوكأ ةجارد
. ةرايس نأ عارسإ
Any disagreements?
? ماَصِتخِا يأ
Of course, with two riders and a turbo car ...?
اضيأ بِكاَر رخآ ةقفرب, رجي نم
...? ةرايس turbo
For one thing, you are supposing then that the white car was ahead of
the Merc at the instant that the Merc hit the central
column/pilar/post.
نوكأ تنأ, ءيش ئداب يذ ءدب ذإ
ةرايس عِصاَن نأ ذإ اذإ
at Merc نم يمامأ نوكأ
باَصَأ Merc نأ عيِرَس
/ pilar/ ةناخ طّسَوَتُم
. دِرْبُي
That is in accord with my first guess.
my ةقفرب فِلَتْأَي in نوكأ نأ
. سُدْحَي ئداب يذ ءدب
> >Does that clear things up?
> > ءيش ئّرَبُي نأ يدَؤُي
? رِهاَس
No.
. الك
It smokes them up.
نخُدَي It
ريمض لصتم عمج بئاغ بصن رجو
. رِهاَس
But gives a number of possible occurances to consider.
نم بِسَتْحَي حاَتَأ امأ
نأ occurances زئَاُج
. ثَحْبَي
>> >>>Behind that, he says, there was >>>"another car" (presumably the Mercedes S- 280) and behind that, a large >>>motor-bike.
>> >>> مث, ىَقْلَأ وه, نأ رّخَأَتُم
" ( ةرايس رخآ>>>" نوكأ
S- Mercedes presumably
, نأ رّخَأَتُم اضيأ) 280
. motor-bike>>> رَبْكَأ
So my first thought on that is that that is a second bike.
لّيَخَتَي ئداب يذ ءدب my نذإ
رخآ نوكأ نأ نأ نوكأ نأ ولت
. ةجارد
And if we are talking about the left that might be better described
as a second bike on the left as there might have been one or more
bikes on the right in addition.
ثَداَحَتَي نوكأ نحن اذإ اضيأ
نأ حِراَبُي اميف قلعتي ب
مُسْرَي لَضْفَأ نوكأ نَكْمَأ
ولت ةجارد رخآ ءانثأ
نَكْمَأ مث ءانثأ حِراَبُي
مأ ئداب يذ ءدب نوكأ زاَتْحِا
ولت ةجارد رَثْكَأ
. عابتإ in سيلأ كلذك
>> >>Livestre lies again.
>> >> ىَقْلَتْسِا Livestre
. نم ديدج
> >What do you mean?
> >? دّمَعَتَي تنأ يدَؤُي يأ
What evidence is there that Levistre is "lying"?
نأ مث نوكأ نِهْرَبُي يأ
"? ىَقْلَتْسِا" نوكأ"? ىَقْلَتْسِا
My supposition.
. راَبِتعِا My
> >> He clearly saw and may have been a part >>of a conspiracy to cover up.
> >> نِكْمُي اضيأ رَصْبَأ حوضوب وه
>> دِعَتْبَي نوكأ زاَتْحِا
نّمَؤُي نأ سئاسد نم
. رِهاَس
So in my supposition he saw it >>and he lied about it.
وه راَبِتعِا my in نذإ
وه اضيأ>> it رَصْبَأ
. it اميف قلعتي ب. it
Now if we go off on a train of thought to >>explore a hypothesis
that Livestre was deliberately lying then >>I'll have to think about
that some more.
ابناج بَهْذَي نحن اذإ نآلا
لّيَخَتَي نم بّرَدَتَي ولت
نأ تاضارتفا رْحَتُي>> نأ
ادصق نوكأ Livestre
فوس I'll>> ذإ ىَقْلَتْسِا
لّيَخَتَي نأ زاَتْحِا
. رَثْكَأ عضب نأ. رَثْكَأ
I have not until the >>present considered the possibility that he
was deliberately >>lying.
>> ىلإ سيل زاَتْحِا I
نأ تايناكمإ ثَحْبَي دْبُي
. ىَقْلَتْسِا>> ادصق نوكأ وه
>> >I have - he could be in the pay of Al-Fayed (or his high-level masters) >That's always a possibility; but why should we single him out?
>> > in نوكأ بَعُي وه - زاَتْحِا I
مأ( Al-Fayed نم رَمْثَأ
) > عّلَضَتَي high-level his
امأ; تايناكمإ امئاد نوكأ نأ
دّرَفَتُم نحن يغبني ىلع ميف
? جَرْخَم him
I'm not singling him out.
him دّرَفَتُم سيل نوكأ I'm
. جَرْخَم
I am theorizing that there may have been a whole swarm of
conspiring pap's surrounding Diana's car.
نِكْمُي مث نأ رظني نوكأ I
لكلا نوكأ زاَتْحِا
pap's رِمَتْأَي نم عّمَجَتَي
. ةرايس Diana's رُزْأَي
>What >about any (or ALL) of the other witnesses?
>) لكلا مأ( يأ اميف قلعتي ب> يأ
? يدأ ةداهش رخآلا نم
I am inclined to go with the >majority (who saw closely pursuing
vehicles) and focus suspicion on >Mohammed and Souad who - alone - say
they did not.
بَهْذَي نأ ىَنَثَتي نوكأ I
يأ( تايبلغأ> ةقفرب
رِشاَبُي closely رَصْبَأ
بايتْرِا زّكَرَتَي اضيأ) ةادأ
- يأ Souad اضيأ دمحم> ولت
امه ىَقْلَأ - دّرَفَتُم
. سيل يدَؤُي
> >>If he were deliberately lying and saw the three vehicles >>abreast, > > He says he saw them one behind the other - until the bike overtook the >Mercedes.
> >> ىَقْلَتْسِا ادصق نوكأ وه اذإ
>> ةادأ ثلاث رَصْبَأ اضيأ
وه ىَقْلَأ وه, > > abreast
رَصْبَأ
ريمض لصتم عمج بئاغ بصن رجو
رّخَأَتُم ئداب يذ ءدب
رُدْبَي ةجارد ىلإ - رخآلا
. Mercedes>
Then the bike and the Mercedes were "abreast", but the white >car -
so he implies - had already overtaken him by then!
اضيأ ةجارد ذإ
امأ", abreast" نوكأ Mercedes
وه نذإ - ةرايس> عِصاَن
already زاَتْحِا - نذآ ب
! ذإ by him رُدْبَي
But why should >you suspect this to be a lie?
تنأ> يغبني ىلع ميف امأ
نوكأ نأ اذ بّيَرَتَي
? ىَقْلَتْسِا
I think you, we, need to be very careful about exactly what instant
is being described as being related to any single comment.
جِوْحُي, نحن, تنأ لّيَخَتَي I
رذاح يلع طسق ريبك نم نوكأ نأ
عيِرَس يأ طبضلاب اميف قلعتي ب
نوكأ ءانثأ مُسْرَي نوكأ نوكأ
دّرَفَتُم يأ نأ لَقاَنَتَي
. بيقعت
> >> the photo flashes, the motorcycle accelerate, >>the car on the right bump the Merc into the central >>pilars, > >You want to hypothesize that the bike-overtake/flash occurred BEFORE the >sliding collision?
> >> , قِلَتْأَي photo
, >> عَراَسَتَي motorcycle
سيلأ كلذك ولت ةرايس
يف نطب Merc طّبَخَتَي
تنأ, > > pilars>> طّسَوَتُم
نأ ضِرَتْفَي نأ يِغَتْبَي
قِلَتْأَي/ bike-overtake
قَلَزْنِا> مامأ دِجَي
? ماَطِترِا
What on earth for?
? ذإ ضرأ ولت يأ
Well, if the supposition is as two photographing vehicles taking a
photograph from both sides at the same instant .
راَبِتعِا اذإ, لَضْفَأ
روص ايفارغوتوف رخآ ءانثأ نوكأ
روص ايفارغوتوف ذُخْأَي ةادأ
ريظن at يوناث امهالك نع
. عيِرَس
.
.
.
There may also have been two contacts between the two vehicles?
نوكأ زاَتْحِا اضيأ نِكْمُي مث
رخآ نيب رِباَخُي رخآ
? ةادأ
The mirror thing may not have been considered significant.
سيل نِكْمُي ءيش سِكْعَي
. ليلج ثَحْبَي نوكأ زاَتْحِا
The mirror would not have broken out the tail light.
سيل would سِكْعَي
جَرْخَم مّطَحَتَي زاَتْحِا
. جّجَؤُي لّيَذُي
So if the tail light was broken would not one suspect a
corresponding dent on the Merc's right front fender?
جّجَؤُي لّيَذُي اذإ نذإ
سيل would مّطَحَتَي نوكأ
بّيَرَتَي ئداب يذ ءدب
Merc's ولت زحي لَساَرَتَي
? fender نبجأ سيلأ كلذك
> In reading this over I can not understand quickly the actions to cover up circumstances by police, courts, etc. unless Diana bite off and swallowed the tip of Dodi's penis from the force of the crash.
> بَعُي I تِئاَف اذ ةوالِت In
يلع حانج ةعرسلا هّقَفَتَي سيل
نّمَؤُي نأ ريِثْأَت
, سيلوب by لاح رِهاَس
Diana جِرْخُي. etc, لّزَغَتَي
عِلَتْبَي اضيأ ابناج ضَع
نع penis Dodi's نم فرحي
. مّطَحَتَي نم مِغْرُي
If some such had happened then that could explain a lot of things,
But it would also demonstrate that there was no fear in the back seat
at the time of crash which would be important to suggest that there
was no demonstrated disagreement with Henri Paul's driving
performance prior to the crash.
قفّتَي زاَتْحِا اذك عضب اذإ
ريِثَك نّيَبُي بَعُي نأ ذإ
اضيأ would it امأ, ءيش نم
ىَشَخَتي الك نوكأ مث نأ دْبُي
at سلجي ضّفَخ in
would يأ مّطَحَتَي نم تّقَوُي
مث نأ يِئَتْرَي نأ ليلج نوكأ
ماَصِتخِا دْبُي الك نوكأ
رّوَثُي Paul's Henri ةقفرب
نأ قِباَس مامتإ
. مّطَحَتَي
>> that the first photoflashing motorcycle sped off >>past him and
out of the tunnel as well as the vehicle that >>had bumped the Merc.
>> ئداب يذ ءدب نأ
motorcycle photoflashing
him فَلَس>> ابناج عَرْسَأ
زيلهد out of اضيأ
>> نأ ةادأ as well as
. Merc طّبَخَتَي. Merc
and then reported that in essence >>a followup motorcycle stopped to
view into the Merc >>and it then resumed to exit the tunnel, etc. >>
>You mean Levistre is concealing the existence of a second motorcycle?
in نأ لَقاَنَتَي ذإ اضيأ
followup >> ريِطْعَت
نأ لُطْبَي motorcycle
>> Merc يف نطب نّيَعَتَي
نأ عِباَتُي ذإ it اضيأ
. >> > etc, زيلهد جُرْخَي
نوكأ Levistre دّمَعَتَي تنأ
نم ةَماَدِتْسِا نِطْبُي
? motorcycle رخآ
>True, Thierry H.
>. H Thierry, ليصأ
says he saw "several" motorcycles pursuing the >Mercedes, closely,
towards the tunnel (he had a view along the cour >Albert Premier from
the carriageway itself) but Clifford G.
" رَصْبَأ وه ىَقْلَأ
motorcycles" دّرَفَتُم
, Mercedes> رِشاَبُي
وه( زيلهد ىلإ, closely
ذاَحُم نّيَعَتَي زاَتْحِا
سيئر ءارزولا Albert> cour
امأ) هسفن carriageway نع
. G Clifford
and Olivier >P (who were positioned to the right [north] of the road
and could see no >more than the tunnel-entrance) report only " a car
in front of the >Mercedes and a [one!
نوكأ يأ( P> Olivier اضيأ
] لامش[ سيلأ كلذك نأ لِحُي
رَصْبَأ بَعُي اضيأ برد نم
نم رَثْكَأ> الك
لَقاَنَتَي) tunnel-entrance
ةرايس " طقف باسحلا
Mercedes> in front of
! ئداب يذ ءدب[ اضيأ
] powerful motor-cycle, 30 - 40 metres behind.
] - نوثالث, motor-cycle زيزع
. رّخَأَتُم metres نوعبرأ
I think it was Brian Anderson's story that a motorcycle moved to
pass the Merc on its left as it entered the tunnel, which would be
exact in accord with my one theory.
Brian نوكأ it لّيَخَتَي I
نأ ثيداحأ Anderson's
نأ كّرَحَتَي motorcycle
its ولت Merc مِرْبُي
بّرَسَتَي it ءانثأ حِراَبُي
نوكأ would يأ, زيلهد
ةقفرب فِلَتْأَي in بِصَتْغَي
. تايرظن ئداب يذ ءدب my
> >Why should we not assume that the other bikes left the cour Albert >Premier, at the exit slip-road, leaving the pair on the bike, which >Clifford, Olivier and Levistre saw, to proceed into the tunnel for the >kill!?
> > سيل نحن يغبني ىلع ميف
ةجارد رخآلا نأ مّشَجَتَي
> Albert cour حِراَبُي
جُرْخَي at, سيئر ءارزولا
عمجي حِراَبُي, slip-road
, Clifford> يأ, ةجارد ولت
Levistre اضيأ Olivier
يف نطب عِباَتُي نأ, رَصْبَأ
!? دصحي> ذإ زيلهد
I don't think that the word "kill" is at all proper in a larger view.
نأ لّيَخَتَي سيل يدَؤُي I
لكلا at نوكأ" دصحي" لْوَق
. نّيَعَتَي رَبْكَأ in. نّيَعَتَي
"Photo" would I suggest be a more prevalent term for that point.
" نوكأ يِئَتْرَي I would" Photo
نأ ذإ يمَسُي دِئاَس رَثْكَأ
. دّدَحُي
> >>I would like to see the animation sequences down to the 1 meter >>resolution.
> >> رَصْبَأ نأ ءانثأ would I
نأ down لِسْلَسُي ءايحإ
. رارصإ>> رحب ئداب يذ ءدب
I think the main constant that we can use is the >>physical
distance on the road as being traversed by the Merc.
تِباَث يساسأ لّيَخَتَي I
نوكأ ذخّتَي بَعُي نحن نأ
ولت دّعَبُي يندب>>
by طَخَتي نوكأ ءانثأ برد
. Merc
>>So the animation reference frames could be identified by
reference >>to the tunnel face as metres + "plus" or - "minus" the
tunnel face.
>> كيَحُي عجارم ءايحإ نذإ
>> عجارم by زاَمَأ نوكأ بَعُي
ءانثأ هجّتَي زيلهد نأ
" يبلس" - مأ" يفاضإ+ " metres
. هجّتَي زيلهد
>>> >We would all (those of us who really wish to have it explained in >detail, that is) like to see sophisticated event-reconstruction >techniques brought to bear, together with an account of exactly what >data was employed and how it was used.
>>> > نم كئلوأ( لكلا would نحن
ريمض لصتم نيملكتملل بصن رجو
يِغَتْبَي لكب ينعم ةملكلا يأ
> in نّيَبُي it زاَتْحِا نأ
نأ ءانثأ) نوكأ نأ, دُرْسَي
كنحي رَصْبَأ
بولسأ> event-reconstruction
اعم, مّشَجَتَي نأ بِلَتْجَي
> يأ طبضلاب نم باسح an ةقفرب
اضيأ مّكَحُي نوكأ تايطعم
. ذخّتَي نوكأ it ءانثأ
Fat chance of that, however - >unless you happen to have an
event-reconstruction team on hand and you >can afford to cock a snoot
at the politico-media complex.
> - امأ, نأ نم قفّتَي نيِدَب
نأ قفّتَي تنأ جِرْخُي
an زاَتْحِا
ولت ةقرف event-reconstruction
حيِتُي بَعُي> تنأ اضيأ ةزوح
at snoot ةدنزأ نأ
. بْعَص politico-media
There is the traffic accident reconstruction site off my web page.
قافتا رِجاَتُي نوكأ مث
my ابناج زيح ديدجت
. حّفَصَتَي تيب توبكنعلا
I saw reference to the most professional software photosho or paint
shop of something like that.
نأ عجارم رَصْبَأ I
تايجمرب فِرَتْحُم رَثْكَأ
نم عّضَبَتَي نهدي مأ photosho
. نأ ءانثأ ءيش
I got a copy off the web.
ابناج روص ذُخْأَي I
. تيب توبكنعلا
One of these years I will move to do my accident and if at the same
time I did a second of the Diana crash not much for starters.
I لوح كئلوأ نم ئداب يذ ءدب
my يدَؤُي نأ كّرَحَتَي ديِرُي
ريظن at اذإ اضيأ قافتا
نم رخآ يدَؤُي I تّقَوُي
ذإ لزج سيل مّطَحَتَي Diana
. ئِداَب
> >>>Note that there is no vehicle present, in Levistre's story,
which could >>>be the car of the witnesses Souad M.
> >>> ةادأ الك نوكأ مث نأ نودي
, ثيداحأ Levistre's in, دْبُي
نم ةرايس نوكأ>>> بَعُي يأ
. M Souad يدأ ةداهش
and Mohammed M.
. M دمحم اضيأ
If we believe >>>Levistre, they weren't there!
, Levistre>>> لاَخَي نحن اذإ
! مث سيل نوكأ امه
On the other hand, if we believe THEM, >>>the Mercedes crashed
without any help from anyone - a very convenient >>>version of
events, for the authorities, and completely contrary to the
>>>testimony of ALL the other witnesses.
نحن اذإ, ةزوح رخآلا ولت
لاَخَي
, >>> ريمض لصتم عمج بئاغ بصن رجو
مّطَحَتَي Mercedes
- دحأ نع رزَآُي يأ without
>>> حيِرُم يلع طسق ريبك نم
, ماسقأ ذإ, ثداح نم رادصإ
نأ نِياَبَتُم ةلمجلاب اضيأ
رخآلا لكلا نم ةلدأ>>>
. يدأ ةداهش
>> I am not suggesting that consideration should be limited to only one hypothetically possible series of events.
>> نأ يِئَتْرَي سيل نوكأ I
نوكأ يغبني ىلع ضاَرْعِتْسِا
طقف باسحلا نأ زِجَتْحَي
hypothetically ئداب يذ ءدب
. ثداح نم series زئَاُج
It appears to me that there are apparently conflicting reports of
circumstances.
نأ دْبَي It
ريمض لصتم ملكتم درفم بصن رجو
بَراَضَتَي ودبي نأ نوكأ مث نأ
. لاح نم لَقاَنَتَي
Therefore I suggest several parallel hypothetical story lines.
دّرَفَتُم يِئَتْرَي I نذإ
ثيداحأ يضارتفا يِذاَحُي
. نّطَبُي
That calls to mind something that I think Senator Sam Ervin said
during the course of the Watergate hearings on Nixon's impeachment.
I نأ ءيش عْرَي نأ عمجي نأ
وضع يف سلجم خويشلا لّيَخَتَي
ءانثأ ىَقْلَأ Ervin Sam
تاقيقحت Watergate نم رجي
. ماهتا Nixon's ولت
The in the four gospels there are accounts of what was reported to
have been written by Pilate on the sign to be placed over Jesus
Christ's head on the cross.
نوكأ مث ليجنإ عبرأ in
نأ لَقاَنَتَي نوكأ يأ نم باسح
by فّلَؤُي نوكأ زاَتْحِا
نأ رّشَؤُي ولت Pilate
Jesus تِئاَف طُحَي نوكأ
ولت سّأَرَتَي Christ's
. طَخَتي
Senator Sam said that if individuals whose testimoney we so
reverence from the written testimony could be so reported as
divergent then we need not be dismayed that good people of our own
day may be reported as to not have agreed perfectly.
Sam وضع يف سلجم خويشلا
whose صاَخ اذإ نأ ىَقْلَأ
بّيَهَتَي نذإ نحن testimoney
بَعُي ةلدأ فّلَؤُي نع
ءانثأ لَقاَنَتَي نذإ نوكأ
سيل جِوْحُي نحن ذإ غِئاَز
لَضْفَأ نأ رّيَحُي نوكأ
راهن كّلَمَتَي our نم رِمْعُي
ءانثأ لَقاَنَتَي نوكأ نِكْمُي
فِلَتْأَي زاَتْحِا سيل نأ
. perfectly
>>Hummnn >>> >>>The sequence of events, as Levistre recounts it, is
very interesting, >>>because he seems to be saying that the "white
car" stayed ahead of the >>>Mercedes and the motor-bike.
>> لِسْلَسُي >>> >>> Hummnn
كْحَي Levistre ءانثأ, ثداح نم
يلع طسق ريبك نم نوكأ, it
نوكأ نأ دْبَي وه ذإ, >>> سمحي
" ةرايس عِصاَن" نأ ىَقْلَأ
>>> نم يمامأ قَبُي
اضيأ Mercedes
. motor-bike
I would think "ahead" of the Merc would be correct but not that the
white car stayed ahead of the bike.
نم" يمامأ" لّيَخَتَي would I
نوكأ would Merc
نأ سيل امأ كَراَدَتَي
نم يمامأ قَبُي ةرايس عِصاَن
. ةجارد
Explaination given above.
. هالعأ حاَتَأ Explaination
>> >>Well, in my SH one possibility that I want to consider is that both >>the white car on the Merc's right hand side and the motorcycle on >>the Merc's left hand side came to a synchronized position along side >>the Merc such as to be able to take symultaneous flash photographs >>into the Merc from both sides at the same time.
>> >> ئداب يذ ءدب SH my in, لَضْفَأ
نأ يِغَتْبَي I نأ تايناكمإ
>> امهالك نأ نوكأ ثَحْبَي
Merc's ولت ةرايس عِصاَن
اضيأ يوناث ةزوح سيلأ كلذك
Merc's >> ولت motorcycle
نأ نآ يوناث ةزوح حِراَبُي
ذاَحُم لِحُي نَماَزَتَي
نأ ءانثأ اذك Merc >> يوناث
ذُخْأَي نأ ريدج نوكأ
قِلَتْأَي symultaneous
يف نطب>> روص ايفارغوتوف
at يوناث امهالك نع Merc
. تّقَوُي ريظن
If one is in a very >>heavy law suit one needs at least TWO
corroberating withnesses.
in نوكأ ئداب يذ ءدب اذإ
ليِقَث>> يلع طسق ريبك نم
ئداب يذ ءدب باوثأ عيرشت
رخآ دحلا ىندألا at جِوْحُي
. withnesses corroberating
And a big pile of paps only seconds behind would be very important
also.
paps نم روساب مَظْعَأ اضيأ
رّخَأَتُم seconds طقف باسحلا
يلع طسق ريبك نم نوكأ would
. اضيأ ليلج
If somebody hinted at the presence of a blackmail photo they could
be assassinated in short order before they could ever get close to a
court of law, and I heard a song the other day called "Smuggler's
Blues" done in the Eighties by Glenn Frey has some good words.
نم روضح at نذآ ب دحأ اذإ
بَعُي امه photo زُتْبَي
ريِصَق in لاَتْغَي نوكأ
امئاد بَعُي امه مامأ رُمْأَي
نأ مِتَتْخَي ذُخْأَي
I اضيأ, عيرشت نم لّزَغَتَي
رخآلا بْرَط عِمَتْسَي
" قَرْزَي بّرَهُم" عمجي راهن
by Eighties in يدَؤُي
عضب زاَتْحِا Frey Glenn
. لْوَق لَضْفَأ
>> >This seems to me to be fanciful in the extreme.
>> > نأ دْبَي اذ
ريمض لصتم ملكتم درفم بصن رجو
in بَرْغَتْسُم نوكأ نأ
. فارطأ
On what grounds do you >suggest it?
> تنأ يدَؤُي يضارأ يأ ولت
? it يِئَتْرَي
> >>The same scene photographed by two separate photographers at >>exactly the same instant would be IDEAL.
> >> روص ايفارغوتوف ديعص ريظن
دِعاَبُي رخآ by
طبضلاب>> at روصم يفارغوتوف
نوكأ would عيِرَس ريظن
. لَثْمَأ
>> >"Ideal" for what?
>> >"? يأ ذإ" لَثْمَأ
Come on Al!
! Al ولت نآ
What are these simultaneous, two-angle >flash-photos supposed to be
for?
, نِماَزَتُم كئلوأ نوكأ يأ
flash-photos> two-angle
? ذإ نوكأ نأ لّيَخَتَي
Okay - you've said before that you >think they would have been
compromising photos, and that MAF set up the >car-switch and the
pursuit in order to obtain them.
ىَقْلَأ زاَتْحِا تنأ - Okay
امه لّيَخَتَي> تنأ نأ مامأ
ةيوست نوكأ زاَتْحِا would
دَمْجَأ MAF نأ اضيأ, photos
اضيأ car-switch> رِهاَس
نأ رُمْأَي in راشب
ذُخْأَي
. ريمض لصتم عمج بئاغ بصن رجو
This is an >interesting idea, because, although it seems most likely
to me that MAF >DID make these arrangements, I cannot decide precisely
what it was that >he thought was going to happen.
, راَبِتعِا سمحي> an نوكأ اذ
دْبَي it مغرلاب نم نأ, ذإ
نأ عّقَوَتُم رَثْكَأ
ريمض لصتم ملكتم درفم بصن رجو
كئلوأ أَدْبَأ يدَؤُي> MAF نأ
مزجي سيل بَعُي I, دادعإ
وه> نأ نوكأ it يأ طبضلاب
going to نوكأ لّيَخَتَي
. قفّتَي
A compromising photograph.
. روص ايفارغوتوف ةيوست
Exactly in line with MAF's general opinion of John.
MAF's ةقفرب نّطَبُي in طبضلاب
. ىيحي نم راَبِتعِا عماج
Q.
. Q
Public, Di, etc. > >Let us say that Diana and Dodi were not sleeping
together, she was not >pregnant by him and they were not going to get
engaged - or some >combination of these negatives - such that, in
order to (what?
حاَتَأ. > > etc, Di, عِئاَش
ريمض لصتم نيملكتملل بصن رجو
Dodi اضيأ Diana نأ ىَقْلَأ
نوكأ يه, اعم دُقْرَي سيل نوكأ
امه اضيأ him by ىلبح> سيل
ذُخْأَي going to سيل نوكأ
نم جامدإ> عضب مأ - رِماَخُي
in, نأ اذك - بلس كئلوأ
? يأ( نأ رُمْأَي
) gain >influence over Diana or disgrace her or force her to marry
Dodi?
) تِئاَف رّثَؤُي> بّسَكَتَي
مِغْرُي مأ her سندي مأ Diana
? Dodi لُهْأَي نأ her
- the >Al-Fayeds conceived the scheme I would guess that conception
of the scheme would have happened far away from MAF.
عِدَتْبَي Al-Fayeds> -
سُدْحَي would I رِمَتْأَي
رِمَتْأَي نم كاردإ نأ
ديِعَب قفّتَي زاَتْحِا would
. MAF نع بِئاَغ
If a group were looking for someone to set up some such scheme MAF
might have been found to have been a good candidate to approach for
the leading role but the script had been written long before and they
just needed some one to play the part.
نوكأ بّوَبُي اذإ
دَمْجَأ نأ دحأ looking for
MAF رِمَتْأَي اذك عضب رِهاَس
نوكأ زاَتْحِا نَكْمَأ
نوكأ زاَتْحِا نأ طّقَلَتَي
فَزْأَي نأ حّشَرَتُم لَضْفَأ
امأ كاَرِتشِا مَكَح ذإ
فّلَؤُي نوكأ زاَتْحِا طَخ
سيل الإ امه اضيأ مامأ ليوط
نأ ئداب يذ ءدب عضب جِوْحُي
. دِعَتْبَي بَعاَلَتَي
>of obtaining compromising photographs.
> ةيوست ذُخْأَي نم
. روص ايفارغوتوف
A >clever ruse is employed to get rid of some of the escort (but why
not >all?
مّكَحُي نوكأ ةليح فيِقَث>
نم عضب نم ديرجت ذُخْأَي نأ
? لكلا> سيل ميف امأ( سرحي? لكلا
) THE COMPROMISING photo to be used for blackmail to influence Diana
not to take a strong public stand on some particular issue from time
to time would have been financed by an external consortium, QEII,
Chas, Military landmine sales proponents, etc. In order to be of use
at selected times the photo could not be public.
) نوكأ نأ photo ةيوست
رّثَؤُي نأ زُتْبَي ذإ ذخّتَي
ذُخْأَي نأ سيل Diana
ولت لّمَحَتَي عِئاَش ىَوْقَأ
تّقَوُي نع لّصَحَتَي صاَخ عضب
زاَتْحِا would تّقَوُي نأ
ينارب an by لّوَمُي نوكأ
يبرح, Chas, QEII, داحتا
. etc, دّيَؤُم تاعيب landmine
ذخّتَي نم نوكأ نأ رُمْأَي In
بورضم يف رّيَخَتَي at
. عِئاَش نوكأ سيل بَعُي. عِئاَش
If that happened it would have been a one time shot when ever it
fell into public hands.
would it قفّتَي نأ اذإ
ئداب يذ ءدب نوكأ زاَتْحِا
it امئاد ىنأ مْرَي تّقَوُي
عِئاَش يف نطب ضّفَخَتَي
. ةزوح
To be worth the expense and effort it had to be kept secret but its
circumstance had to be indisputable else any single person
threatening exposure of some such would be under extremely high
surveillance in moments.
ةفلكت قاقحتسا نوكأ نأ
نأ زاَتْحِا it داَهِتجِا اضيأ
لاح its امأ نِطاَب رِبُي نوكأ
نوكأ نأ زاَتْحِا
يأ رخآ ال قرطتي هيلإ كشلا
دّدَهَتَي ناسنإ دّرَفَتُم
نوكأ would اذك عضب نم راهظإ
خِذاَب يلإ يصقأ دح ىندأ
. نآ in دّصَرَت
> the remaining escort follows from the Hotel, against orders, thus
>giving the impression that they are up to no good.
> نع عِباَتُي سرحي قَبُي
, رُمْأَي فِلاَخُم, ناخ
نأ ريِثْأَت حاَتَأ> نذإ
الك نأ رِهاَس نوكأ امه
. لَضْفَأ
Henri has been >briefed to flee them - he flees.
> نوكأ زاَتْحِا Henri
رَبْدَأ نأ رِصَتْخَي
- ريمض لصتم عمج بئاغ بصن رجو
. رَبْدَأ وه
An ambush of pursuers has been arranged >on the cour la Reine - to
keep Henri in flight and to give Dodi an >excuse for grabbing Diana
(as though protectively) I can't imagine anything but a photograph
of a blowjob.
بِلاَط نم بّقَرَتَي An
ولت> بّوَبُي نوكأ زاَتْحِا
رِبُي نأ - Reine la cour
حاَتَأ نأ اضيأ رابدإ in Henri
ذإ حِماَسُي> an Dodi
ءانثأ( Diana فّطَخَتَي
I) protectively مغرلاب نم نأ
anything لّيَخَتَي سيل بَعُي
نم روص ايفارغوتوف امأ
. blowjob
Sex is no big thing nowadays.
ءيش مَظْعَأ الك نوكأ عاجض
. نآلا
In royal family tradition, the past, it may have been able to throw
a little influence at an intense moment of public conflict.
, حالطصا طاهرأ يناطلس In
زاَتْحِا نِكْمُي it, فَلَس
رّثَؤُي ضعب ىَمْرَأ بَعُي
عِئاَش نم نآ intense an at
. بَراَضَتَي
There is so much detailed sex on the web that I wouldn't doubt
that to find a microscopic photo of a pubic hair would take more than
a few minutes.
عاجض دُرْسَي لزج نذإ نوكأ مث
I نأ تيب توبكنعلا ولت
نأ نأ بّيَرَتَي سيل wouldn't
نم photo يرهجم طّقَلَتَي
ذُخْأَي would ةرعش pubic
. ريِغَص عضب نم رَثْكَأ
So if any eyebrows were going to be raised maybe a court
threatening a loss of Di's finances for breach of contract re:
approximately non modest public behavior.
going to نوكأ بجاح يأ اذإ نذإ
نكمي نأ يِنَتْبَي نوكأ
دّدَهَتَي لّزَغَتَي
ذإ لّوَمُي Di's نم داَقِتفِا
: صوصخب جّنَشَتَي نم دَعَتي
عِئاَش لِجَخ non يلاوح
. فّرَصَت
So if Di was very cognizant of contract provisions regarding
public behavior as a determinant of her divorce settlement then she
would have to have exercised the utmost discression.
نوكأ Di اذإ نذإ
نم ريِبَخ يلع طسق ريبك نم
دّوَزُي جّنَشَتَي
فّرَصَت عِئاَش اميف قلعتي ب
her نم determinant ءانثأ
would يه ذإ ناكسإ قّلَطُي
يدَؤُي زاَتْحِا نأ زاَتْحِا
. discression utmost
But if she was going to find any male support outside of her ex's
she would have to at some point show some affection.
going to نوكأ يه اذإ امأ
جراخ رزَآُي ركذ يأ طّقَلَتَي
زاَتْحِا would يه ex's her نم
يِداَبُي دّدَحُي عضب at نأ
. ساسحإ عضب
Now where could one find any more hope of privacy than in the tunnel
of love in a speeding limosine?
ئداب يذ ءدب بَعُي ىنأ نآلا
لُمْأَي رَثْكَأ يأ طّقَلَتَي
زيلهد in نم ءاَلِتْخِا نم
عَرْسَأ in هّلَدَتَي نم
? limosine
But to be effective for black mail the photo would have to appear as
immodest public behavior.
دّوَسُي ذإ راَس نوكأ نأ امأ
would photo دِرْبُي
ءانثأ دْبَي نأ زاَتْحِا
. فّرَصَت عِئاَش ئّرَجَتُم
I said PUBLIC.
. عِئاَش ىَقْلَأ I
So on the one hand Diana would have shyed away from any PUBLIC
behavior but people interested in obtaining a photo for blackmail
would have to make the circumstances of the photo look as public as
possible.
ةزوح ئداب يذ ءدب ولت نذإ
shyed زاَتْحِا would Diana
فّرَصَت عِئاَش يأ نع بِئاَغ
ذُخْأَي in سمحي رِمْعُي امأ
would زُتْبَي ذإ photo
لاح أَدْبَأ نأ زاَتْحِا
ءانثأ ىَدَبَتي photo نم
. زئَاُج ءانثأ عِئاَش
TWO photo's from TWO different photographers and surrounding photos
from another hundred photographers could be made to look like PUBLIC
IMMODESTY while the circumstance of the back seat of a speeding
limosine in the tunnel in the middle of the night is about as close
to "private" behavior as I can imagine anyone could get on short
notice.
نِياَبَتُم رخآ نع photo's رخآ
رُزْأَي اضيأ روصم يفارغوتوف
ةئم رخآ نع photos
نوكأ بَعُي روصم يفارغوتوف
ءانثأ ىَدَبَتي نأ أَدْبَأ
لاح ذإ IMMODESTY عِئاَش
نم سلجي ضّفَخ نم
زيلهد in limosine عَرْسَأ
ليل نم طّسَوَتُم in
ءانثأ اميف قلعتي ب نوكأ
فّرَصَت" صاَخ" نأ مِتَتْخَي
دحأ لّيَخَتَي بَعُي I ءانثأ
ريِصَق ولت ذُخْأَي بَعُي
. سِنْؤُي
>- a car is stationed >at the tunnel-entrance to stop the Mercedes (a
very risky proceeding, >from a father's point of view, don't you
think?
> at> طُحَي نوكأ ةرايس -
لُطْبَي نأ tunnel-entrance
( Mercedes
, > عابت risky يلع طسق ريبك نم
نم دّدَحُي لسني نع
تنأ سيل يدَؤُي, نّيَعَتَي
? لّيَخَتَي
) the Mercedes is slowed, >the pursuers catch up, the photographs are
taken.
), > رّخَؤُي نوكأ Mercedes
, رِهاَس طّقَلَتَي بِلاَط
نوكأ روص ايفارغوتوف
. ذُخْأَي
> >Photographs of what?
> >? يأ نم روص ايفارغوتوف
Diana giving Dodi a blow job.
فَسْنَأ Dodi حاَتَأ Diana
. رِسْمَسُي
What else could even raise an eyebrowe nowadays?
an يِنَتْبَي كدي بَعُي رخآ يأ
? نآلا eyebrowe
Hell, if you had to sell such a photograph to get a MacDonald's
hamburger you would have a lot of competition in the current market.
نأ زاَتْحِا تنأ اذإ, Hell
روص ايفارغوتوف اذك عيِبَي
MacDonald's ذُخْأَي نأ
زاَتْحِا would تنأ hamburger
in قاَبِتسِا نم ريِثَك
. قّوَسُي هاجتا
> A terrified Diana in Dodi's arms?
> Dodi's in Diana فاَخَأ
? حّلَسُي
Diana being >raped by Dodi?
by بِصَتْغَي> نوكأ Diana
? Dodi
- is that what you're working up to saying?
ةرادإ نوكأ تنأ يأ نأ نوكأ -
? ىَقْلَأ نأ رِهاَس
My dear chap!
! عَلْسَي بيبح My
Who is going to conspire, and pay big money, for something like that?
, رِمَتْأَي going to نوكأ يأ
ذإ, ةلمع مَظْعَأ رَمْثَأ اضيأ
? نأ ءانثأ ءيش
Nobody.
. ال دحأ
>Diana crouched down on the floor behind Henri's seat, and Dodi
remained >upright - probably viewing the pursuit with anxiety -
possibly grappling >with TRJ to prevent him interfering with the
driving.
> ولت down crouched Diana
Henri's رّخَأَتُم طّلَبُي
> قَبُي Dodi اضيأ, سلجي
نّيَعَتَي نم زئاجلا - upright
- تانب ردصلا ةقفرب راشب
TRJ ةقفرب> كِبَتْشَي نكمي نأ
لّخَدَتُم him بّنَجَتَي نأ
. رّوَثُي ةقفرب
What sign is >there - apart from the fact that neither Diana nor
Dodi were wearing >seat-belts - that Dodi was attempting to grapple
with Diana?
ابناج - مث> نوكأ رّشَؤُي يأ
Diana neither نأ ةقيقح نع
> اَيَزَتي نوكأ Dodi الو
نوكأ Dodi نأ - seat-belts
ةقفرب كِبَتْشَي نأ برجي
? Diana
> >Again, I say, "photographs of what?
> >, " ىَقْلَأ I, نم ديدج
? يأ نم روص ايفارغوتوف
" - precisely - and what were they >for?
"> امه نوكأ يأ اضيأ - طبضلاب -
? ذإ
- according to your theory.
. تايرظن your according to -
A picture of a blow job - for blackmail.
فَسْنَأ نم لّيَخَتَي
. زُتْبَي ذإ - رِسْمَسُي
> >Why could these photographs not have been taken with spy-cameras at one >of the Fayed residences Because such a photo would possibly be identified as an invasion of privacy.
> > كئلوأ بَعُي ميف
زاَتْحِا سيل روص ايفارغوتوف
ةقفرب ذُخْأَي نوكأ
> ئداب يذ ءدب at spy-cameras
اذك ذإ ةماقإ Fayed نم
نوكأ نكمي نأ would photo
نم ةحاجإ an ءانثأ زاَمَأ
. ءاَلِتْخِا
It had to look like PUBLIC Immodest Behavior to cause a
diminution of Diana's influence in the public media.
ءانثأ ىَدَبَتي نأ زاَتْحِا It
نأ فّرَصَت ئّرَجَتُم عِئاَش
Diana's نم لالقإ ريِثُي
. media عِئاَش in. media
>at which Diana stayed?
>? قَبُي Diana يأ at
How could it have been >hoped that photographs of an especially
compromising nature could have >been obtained at high speed in the
Alma Tunnel, rather than on the >Jonikal, at the Ritz or at the rue
Arsene?
> نوكأ زاَتْحِا it بَعُي ءانثأ
نم روص ايفارغوتوف نأ لُمْأَي
بَعُي نايِك ةيوست اصوصخ an
at ذُخْأَي نوكأ> زاَتْحِا
Alma in عَرْسَأ خِذاَب
> ولت نم امنإ, زيلهد
at مأ Ritz at, Jonikal
? Arsene مِدْنُي
What on earth is the point?
? دّدَحُي نوكأ ضرأ ولت? دّدَحُي
Would behavior on the yatch or at the Ritz be considered public or
private by Diana.
yatch ولت فّرَصَت Would
ثَحْبَي نوكأ Ritz at مأ
. Diana by صاَخ مأ عِئاَش
My guess is that Diana would have considered it PUBLIC.
Diana نأ نوكأ سُدْحَي My
it ثَحْبَي زاَتْحِا would
. عِئاَش
> >One glimmer of a suggestion of a possibility does occur to me, as a >result of examining this idea, however.
> > نم قَرْقَرَتَي ئداب يذ ءدب
يدَؤُي تايناكمإ نم ءاحيإ
نأ دِجَي
, ريمض لصتم ملكتم درفم بصن رجو
ثَحْبَي نم لّصَحَتَي> ءانثأ
. امأ, راَبِتعِا اذ
What if Dodi was having >difficulty getting physical with Diana?
> زاَتْحِا نوكأ Dodi اذإ يأ
ةقفرب يندب ذُخْأَي ليقارع
? Diana
Did Dad devise an elaborate >ruse to throw them together?
an عِدَتْبَي اباب يدَؤُي
ىَمْرَأ نأ ةليح> عِسوُي
ريمض لصتم عمج بئاغ بصن رجو
? اعم
Or rather, was he advised to do so by >those who wanted Diana dead
NOT DEAD.
نأ دّشَرُي وه نوكأ, امنإ مأ
يأ كئلوأ> by نذإ يدَؤُي
سيل دِماَخ Diana يِغَتْبَي
. دِماَخ
There is a whole hell of a lot of difference in wanting some one to
have less public influence in the public media than in wanting
someone to be dead.
نم hell لكلا نوكأ مث
in فاَلِتخِا نم ريِثَك
نأ ئداب يذ ءدب عضب ءاَغِتْبِا
رّثَؤُي عِئاَش لَقَأ زاَتْحِا
in نم media عِئاَش in
نوكأ نأ دحأ ءاَغِتْبِا
. دِماَخ
>- so that he would implement the scheme >without knowing what it was
really for?
> مِتُي would وه so that -
يأ كَرْدَأ without> رِمَتْأَي
? ذإ لكب ينعم ةملكلا نوكأ it
Quite simple.
. طيِسَب لكب ينعم ةملكلا
A compromising photograph.
. روص ايفارغوتوف ةيوست
>Something of the sort must have >happened, I think - and it's not
so incredible if you consider that >MAF's masters may have been
pretending to attempt to pull off a Fayed- >Spencer match (with big
bucks in it for MAF) for some time - so that >the Machiavellian
complexity of engineering the car-switch, the >disposition of the
escort, the arrangements for the route and the >programming of Henri
Paul, might not have aroused MAF's suspicions.
> يغبني ىلع بّوَبُي نم ءيش
لّيَخَتَي I, قفّتَي> زاَتْحِا
نذإ سيل نوكأ it's اضيأ -
ثَحْبَي تنأ اذإ incredible
نِكْمُي عّلَضَتَي MAF's> نأ
نأ عّنَصَتَي نوكأ زاَتْحِا
ابناج بِذَتْجَي نأ برجي
( فِلَتْأَي Spencer> Fayed-
ذإ it in يبظ مَظْعَأ ةقفرب
- تّقَوُي عضب ذإ) MAF
Machiavellian > so that
ةَسَدْنَه نم تاديقعت
نم دادعتسا> , car-switch
ذإ دادعإ , سرحي
نم ةَجَمْرَب> اضيأ برد
سيل نَكْمَأ, Paul Henri
MAF's ثِعَتْبَي زاَتْحِا
. بايتْرِا
A photograph would be the most logical thing in the whole world.
نوكأ would روص ايفارغوتوف
in ءيش لوُقْعَم رَثْكَأ
. سانأ لكلا
No body would be suspicious of anything.
نم كاَش نوكأ would نادبأ الك
. anything
> >Other factors, such as sabotaging the S-280's brakes and air-bags, >briefing the escort to monitor the crash but not get involved, etc, >could have been achieved by MAF's backers, over MAF's head, The theft and modification of the vehicle could have been well disguised.
> > بّرَخُي ءانثأ اذك, لماع رخآلا
اضيأ ةلمرف S-280's
نأ سرحي زاجيإ, > air-bags
امأ مّطَحَتَي بِقاَرُي
, > etc, نّمَضَتَي ذُخْأَي سيل
نّمَؤُي نوكأ زاَتْحِا بَعُي
تِئاَف, دّيَؤُم MAF's by
, سّأَرَتَي MAF's
نم لّدَبَت اضيأ باَلِتسِا
نوكأ زاَتْحِا بَعُي ةادأ
. رّتَسَتَي لَضْفَأ
>such that >Siegel and Musa (Etoile Limousines) and Wingfield and
Dournot were not >only working for MAF, but for his masters, DIRECTLY.
>( Musa اضيأ Siegel> نأ اذك
اضيأ) Limousines Etoile
نوكأ Dournot اضيأ Wingfield
, MAF ذإ ةرادإ طقف باسحلا> سيل
. اوت, عّلَضَتَي his ذإ امأ
However, if that were part of the plot, then PLANS TO GET THAT
VEHICLE TO THAT PLACE IN TIME WOULD HAVE TO HAVE BEEN ROCK SOLID FOR
MONTHS IN ADVANCE.
نم دِعَتْبَي نوكأ نأ اذإ, امأ
نأ كيَحُي ذإ, رِمَتْأَي
طُحَي نأ نأ ةادأ نأ ذُخْأَي
نأ زاَتْحِا WOULD تّقَوُي IN
تِباَث حجرأتي نوكأ زاَتْحِا
. عّفَرَتَي IN رهش ذإ
There is the clear windows in one train of thought and defective
equipment as possibly another.
in كابش ئّرَبُي نوكأ مث
نم بّرَدَتَي ئداب يذ ءدب
فلختم ايلقع اضيأ لّيَخَتَي
. رخآ نكمي نأ ءانثأ دادمإ
> >Indeed, assuming that MAF did not know that the fatal crash was >intended, those of MAF's employees who MUST have known that a fatal >crash was intended, MUST have been working directly for those who >intentionally engineered it.
> > يدَؤُي MAF نأ مّشَجَتَي, امنإ
كِتاَف نأ كَرْدَأ سيل
, دّمَعَتَي> نوكأ مّطَحَتَي
يأ لِماَع MAF's نم كئلوأ
نأ كَرْدَأ زاَتْحِا يغبني ىلع
نوكأ مّطَحَتَي> كِتاَف
زاَتْحِا يغبني ىلع, دّمَعَتَي
> يأ كئلوأ ذإ اوت ةرادإ نوكأ
. it ربدي ادصق
> If a crash after the photo were planned the least people in the area who needed to know was just the driver of the white car.
> photo رثإ مّطَحَتَي اذإ
دحلا ىندألا كيَحُي نوكأ
جِوْحُي يأ ضرأ in رِمْعُي
سيل الإ نوكأ كَرْدَأ نأ
. ةرايس عِصاَن نم قِئاَس
Second could have been the photographer on the back of the
motorcycle who had to aim a shot into the driver's eyes.
نوكأ زاَتْحِا بَعُي رخآ
ضّفَخ ولت روصم يفارغوتوف
زاَتْحِا يأ motorcycle نم
يف نطب مْرَي يِغَتْبَي نأ
. نّيَعَتَي قِئاَس
>>>At least, he describes the "white car" >>>passing him, and
disappearing westwards, before he begins to describe >>>the motor-bike
overtaking the Mercedes and cutting-in in front of it.
>>> مُسْرَي وه, دحلا ىندألا At
لِفآ" >>> ةرايس عِصاَن"
دّدَبَتَي اضيأ, him
نأ أَدْبَأ وه مامأ, westwards
motor-bike >>> مُسْرَي
اضيأ Mercedes رُدْبَي
. it in front of cutting-in
>> >>So this gets the locations screwed up and out of sync.
>> >> ظووالق زيح ذُخْأَي اذ نذإ
. sync out of اضيأ رِهاَس
>> >>> >>> The impression given (that the "white car" was a long way ahead of the >>>Mercedes and the motorbike) is probably an illusion created by the >>>difficulty involved in describing the situation; >> >>Also, a witness in a high speed drive has their own road to watch as >>well as looking in the rear view mirror.
>> >>> >>>" نأ( حاَتَأ ريِثْأَت
ليوط نوكأ" ةرايس عِصاَن
>>> نم يمامأ هاجتا
) motorbike اضيأ Mercedes
عاَدِخْنِا an نم زئاجلا نوكأ
ليقارع>>> by سّسَؤُي
مُسْرَي in نّمَضَتَي
يدأ ةداهش , اضيأ; >> >> رمأ
رّوَثُي عَرْسَأ خِذاَب in
برد كّلَمَتَي their زاَتْحِا
لَضْفَأ>> ءانثأ عِباَتُي نأ
in ىَدَبَتي ءانثأ
. سِكْعَي نّيَعَتَي. سِكْعَي
So one might have a strobe >>light effect of only seeing a flash of
an instant when they happened >>to have the opportunity to look in
the mirror.
نَكْمَأ ئداب يذ ءدب نذإ
جّجَؤُي>> strobe زاَتْحِا
رَصْبَأ طقف باسحلا نم مّمَتُي
ىنأ عيِرَس an نم قِلَتْأَي
زاَتْحِا نأ>> قفّتَي امه
in ىَدَبَتي نأ صرف
. سِكْعَي
>> >>>but there is no >>>escaping the conclusion that the Mercedes did not completely squeeze >>>past the white car, but came alongside it, on its left, in a sliding >>>collision, >> >>My suggestion would be to consider that the Merc was the >>vehicle in the middle of the road, that the white vehicle would >>have been on its right and the motorcycle on its left, three >>abreast.
>> >>> بّرَسَتَي>>> الك نوكأ مث امأ
Mercedes نأ ماربإ
>>> رشحي ةلمجلاب سيل يدَؤُي
امأ, ةرايس عِصاَن فَلَس
its ولت, it alongside نآ
>>> قَلَزْنِا in, حِراَبُي
ءاحيإ My, >> >> ماَطِترِا
نأ ثَحْبَي نأ نوكأ would
in ةادأ>> نوكأ Merc
نأ, برد نم طّسَوَتُم
زاَتْحِا>> would ةادأ عِصاَن
اضيأ سيلأ كلذك its ولت نوكأ
its ولت motorcycle
. abreast>> ثلاث, حِراَبُي
>> >>And that point photoflashes were fired and then the white >>car accelerated >> >>>which impelled the white car forwards, towards Levistre and >>>out of harm's way; >> >>And the motorcycle accelerated >> >>>whereupon the motorbike >> >>accelerated and swerved in front of >>the Mercedes.
>> >> photoflashes دّدَحُي نأ اضيأ
ذإ اضيأ سمحي نوكأ
ةرايس>> عِصاَن
رّوَثُي يأ>> >>> عَراَسَتَي
, ثِعَتْبَي ةرايس عِصاَن
out of>>> اضيأ Levistre ىلإ
اضيأ; >> >> هاجتا يِذْؤُي
>> >>> عَراَسَتَي motorcycle
>> >> motorbike ذئدنع
فرحي اضيأ عَراَسَتَي
. Mercedes >> in front of
>> >>No.
>> >>. الك
That is even wrong.
. يِذْؤُي كدي نوكأ نأ
In my SH.
. SH my In
>> >>Let's try it another way.
>> >> حاَتَأ
ريمض لصتم نيملكتملل بصن رجو
. هاجتا رخآ it براجت
More to the >>"DELIBERATE BUMP OFF" conspiracy >>supposition.
رِمَتْأَي>>" نأ رَثْكَأ
>> سئاسد" ابناج طّبَخَتَي
. راَبِتعِا
>> >>In that, the motorcycle would have fired >>a series of quick flashes as it accelerated >>in front of the Mercedes.
>> >> would motorcycle , نأ In
نم series >> سمحي زاَتْحِا
it ءانثأ قِلَتْأَي عيِرَس
in front of>> عَراَسَتَي
. Mercedes
The first flash >>would have been into the back seat but >>a
second would have been directly into >>the eyes of Henri Paul.
>> قِلَتْأَي ئداب يذ ءدب
يف نطب نوكأ زاَتْحِا would
رخآ >> امأ سلجي ضّفَخ
اوت نوكأ زاَتْحِا would
نم نّيَعَتَي >> يف نطب
. Paul Henri
Having blinded >>him, it would then accelerate and as soon >>as it
was clear the vehicle on the right would >>bump the Mercedes' front
into the center >>pilars.
it, him>> يِفْخَي زاَتْحِا
اضيأ عَراَسَتَي ذإ would
نوكأ it ءانثأ>> ناعرس ءانثأ
ولت ةادأ ئّرَبُي
طّبَخَتَي>> would سيلأ كلذك
يف نطب نبجأ Mercedes'
. pilars>> زّكَرَتَي
>> >>>overtook the slowed Mercedes >>>and (also according to Levistre) cut-in in front of it and produced "a >>>searing burst of light, much brighter than a photo-flash".
>> >>> رّخَؤُي رُدْبَي
اضيأ( اضيأ>>> Mercedes
cut-in) Levistre according to
" نّمَؤُي اضيأ it in front of
لِبْذُي>>>
نم ترجفنا ةدئازلا ةيدودلا
نم يهب لزج, جّجَؤُي
". photo-flash
>>> >>>At this point, Levistre, braked and came to a halt near the western end >>>of the tunnel.
>>> >>>, Levistre, دّدَحُي اذ At
فّقَوَتَي نأ نآ اضيأ ةلمرف
نم>>> مِتُي يبرغ فَزْأَي
. زيلهد
>> >>More correctly, NOT "At this point" but at "A POINT" near the
>>western end of the tunnel.
>> >> اذ At" سيل, قحب رَثْكَأ
" دّدَحُي " at امأ" دّدَحُي
نم مِتُي يبرغ>> فَزْأَي
. زيلهد
>> >>>The Mercedes had crashed, and the bikers (like Brenda >>>Wells, Levistre affirms that there were two of them) had stopped by the >>>wreck.
>> >>> زاَتْحِا Mercedes
( bikers اضيأ, مّطَحَتَي
, رابآ>>> Brenda ءانثأ
نوكأ مث نأ دّكَؤُي Levistre
نم رخآ
) ريمض لصتم عمج بئاغ بصن رجو
>>> by لُطْبَي زاَتْحِا
. مّطَحَتَي
>> >>That does not sound possible to me.
>> >> نأ زئَاُج سرجي سيل يدَؤُي نأ
. ريمض لصتم ملكتم درفم بصن رجو
It may depend upon speed.
ولت طيُنَي نِكْمُي It
. عَرْسَأ
>>Assuming that the whole action was taking place at some >>above average speed then if at least the bike on the left had >>accelerated ahead of the Merc it could not have stopped.
>> لكلا نأ مّشَجَتَي
طُحَي ذُخْأَي نوكأ ريِثْأَت
بِراَقُم هالعأ>> عضب at
دحلا ىندألا at اذإ ذإ عَرْسَأ
حِراَبُي ولت ةجارد
يمامأ عَراَسَتَي>> زاَتْحِا
سيل بَعُي it Merc نم
. لُطْبَي زاَتْحِا
If it >>did not stop then it may have passed Livestre and exited
the >>tunnel.
لُطْبَي سيل يدَؤُي>> it اذإ
زاَتْحِا نِكْمُي it ذإ
جُرْخَي اضيأ Livestre مِرْبُي
. زيلهد>>
Whether a second bike stopped might be considerable.
لُطْبَي ةجارد رخآ اذإ
. considerable نوكأ نَكْمَأ
>> >>>One of them got off, momentarily, to look into the Mercedes, >>>jumped back on again, and the bike sped off, passing Levistre as it did >>>so.
>> >>> نم ئداب يذ ءدب
ريمض لصتم عمج بئاغ بصن رجو
, momentarily, ابناج ذُخْأَي
يف نطب ىَدَبَتي نأ
بَثاَوَتَي, >>> Mercedes
اضيأ, نم ديدج ولت ضّفَخ
لِفآ, ابناج عَرْسَأ ةجارد
>>> يدَؤُي it ءانثأ Levistre
. نذإ
Levistre describes the bike as "black" and the two men as "dressed
>>>in black with black helmets".
ةجارد مُسْرَي Levistre
رخآ اضيأ" دّوَسُي" ءانثأ
دّوَسُي in>>> فذح" ءانثأ سنإ
". ةذوخ دّوَسُي ةقفرب
The whole thing took just a few seconds.
سيل الإ ذُخْأَي ءيش لكلا
. seconds عضب
>>> >>>Considerable efforts have been made to discredit Levistre.
>>> >>> داَهِتجِا Considerable
نأ أَدْبَأ نوكأ زاَتْحِا
. Levistre هّفَسُي
It has been >>>said, for example, that his attitude to the press was
"hostile" and that >>>he was trying to "gain attention"; but there
could be another reason for >>>these attacks on his character - he
witnessed a murder!
, ىَقْلَأ>>> نوكأ زاَتْحِا It
نأ هاجتا his نأ, وذح ذإ
>>> نأ اضيأ" داَعُم" نوكأ رشحي
" نأ ىَلَتْبِا نوكأ وه
مث امأ"; ءاغصإ بّسَكَتَي
رّكَفَتَي رخآ نوكأ بَعُي
his ولت بيِصُي كئلوأ>>> ذإ
يدأ ةداهش وه - فرح
! لاَتْغَي
There is no >>>other interpretation you can put on his testimony.
رخآلا>>> الك نوكأ مث
ولت لَحَأ بَعُي تنأ ةَمَجْرَت
. ةلدأ his
>>> >>>Yes, indeed (to answer your question) the lanes were used as a slow-lane >>>and an overtaking lane - ludicrous speed-limit signs notwithstanding!
>>> >>> your بِواَجُي نأ( امنإ, يإ
نوكأ برد ) بّيَرَتَي
>>> slow-lane ءانثأ ذخّتَي
ةرخسم - برد رُدْبَي an اضيأ
رّشَؤُي speed-limit
! ضغب رظنلا نع
>>> >>>Other answers in another post >> >><a href="http://members.home.com/godsbrain">G.O.D.S.B.R.A.I.N.</a><br> > >-- >Steve Reed Alvin H.
>>> >>> رخآ in بِواَجُي رخآلا
=" href >> >>< دِرْبُي
. نَطْوَتْسُم. مَضْنُم:// http
. S. D. O. G"> godsbrain/ com
> > > br>< .</ N. I. . R. B
. H Alvin بصق Steve> --
White <a
href="http://members.home.com/godsbrain">G.O.D.S.B.R.A.I.N.</a><br>
:// http=" href < عِصاَن
/ com. نَطْوَتْسُم. مَضْنُم
. R. B. S. D. O. G"> godsbrain
> br>< .</ N. I.
Cromwell
ron <ron_winn...@lineone.net.invalid> wrote in message
news:0430eced...@usw-ex0106-045.remarq.com...
>
>
> Keep them on the move. Don't let them settle down for the night.
> Its time to go.
Who is 'them'? Dodi and Diana? If so, then our poster is approaching matters
entirely wrongly. The hotel from which they were about depart, was owned by
Dodi's father. In the absence of his father, Dodi was clearly in charge of
matters. Their movements flowed purely from Dodi's will. It was up to him
where they went and what time they arrived and departed. The posters leaves
us with the false impression that Dodi and Diana were being manipulated, an
assertion for which there is no evidence.
Where can we get some peace away from all this?
> Was there no rooms at the Ritz?
Of course there was! Dodi and Diana were staying in one(the imperial suit).
The idea that there was no room, for the son of the owner of the hotel, is
entirely ridiculous.
Could they not have sent a
> trusted member of the Ritz staff to collect their things from
> the apartment?
yes.
Was Dodi not able to issue commands to the Ritz
> staff?
yes, obviously so. Why else would the deputy manager leave the hotel with
Dodi to collect another of his expensive babbles.
A simple call to the butler at the apartment would have
> revealed that the paps were awaiting their arrival there.
Even that was unnecessary. Dodi and Diana had been at the apartment. It
was because of the situation there and outside the Chez Benoit, that Dodi
had dramatically altered his plans and gone to the Ritz. I think it rather
foolish on Dodi's part, to imagine that he could avoid a second
confrontation with the paps, by returning to his apartment.
So was
> the apartment a better choice to spend the night than to stay
> were they were? Why for heaven's sake.
According to the bodyguards, Dodi was becoming very angry and frustrated
with the paps. He was also failing to keep his bodyguards abreast of his
plans. By the time of their arrival at the Ritz, the situation had got
completely out of hand. Obviously, it was safer to stay put. But Dodi
obviously was not prepared to sacrifice a little bit of freedom for a whole
lot of safety. The rest is history.
Geoff.
kather...@my-deja.com
Andrew Steven Reed <ar...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> wrote:
[snip]
> Oh, I think there was fear all right! I don't think there was
> disagreement with HP's driving - but only because the passengers - or
at
> least one of them - believed that an assassination-attempt was in
> progress, which is why she was discovered hunched up on the floor
> between the seats. You can't fall into a position like that, and you
> don't assume it, in preference to putting on a seat-belt, unless you
are
> afraid of being shot at. Looking at photos of Dodi, taken that
evening,
> however, I think he was as scared as she was, and just as much a
victim
> of the scheme.
If Diana had not been sitting face-forward when the impact occurred,
how do you explain the fact that one of her earrings was embedded in
the dashboard at the front of the car? How could it have gotten there
had she initially been huddled on the backseat floor of the car.
GODS...@home.com
On Sat, 06 May 2000 19:07:40 GMT, kather...@my-deja.com wrote:
>If Diana had not been sitting face-forward when the impact occurred,
>how do you explain the fact that one of her earrings was embedded in
>the dashboard at the front of the car? How could it have gotten there
>had she initially been huddled on the backseat floor of the car.
>
>[snip]
>Katherine
>
>
>Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
>Before you buy.
Which earing was it? Right or Left?
GODSBRAIN
>Date: Thu, 4 May 2000 23:16:29 +0100
>Subject: Re: Di: Paul, Henri, History, 60 Page Autopsy, Etc.
>>>Levistre is not contradicting himself. He saw the white car "au milieu
>>>de la chaussee"
>>>("et soudain une grosse moto sur sa gauche qui lui fait une
>>>queue de poisson") "and, all of a sudden, a large motor-bike, to the
>>>left of it, cutting-in in front of it".
"queue de poisson" might translate
as "fish tail" or "tail of fish."
That is a phrase that I haven't heard
for years. Maybe back to when
"drag racing" was popular locally
in my high school years.
When two cars would race from
a stop sign. Floor board it, burn
rubber, the back of the cars would
fishtail. Because the rear wheels
were spinning and smoking they
did not have traction on the roadway
and the back end would alternately
slide from left to right and back as
the driver interspersed corrections.
Was, is, Levistre a "drag racing" fan?
Where did he learn to use this term
fish tail? Is it generic to some
types of common events in France?
It sounds to me a little different than
just saying that the bike passed from
the left side and pulled in front. It would
suggest a more rapid and less controlled
comming around maybe.
<a href="http://members.home.com/godsbrain/index.htm">G.O.D.S.B.R.A.I.N.</a>
<br>
kather...@my-deja.com
GODS...@HOME.COM,GODS...@AOL.COM wrote:
> </html>
>
> On Sat, 06 May 2000 19:07:40 GMT, kather...@my-deja.com wrote:
>
> >If Diana had not been sitting face-forward when the impact occurred,
> >how do you explain the fact that one of her earrings was embedded in
> >the dashboard at the front of the car? How could it have gotten there
> >had she initially been huddled on the backseat floor of the car.
> >
> >[snip]
> >Katherine
> >
> >
> >Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> >Before you buy.
>
> Which earing was it? Right or Left?
I don't know. The book "The Day Diana Died" [pg 281 of large print
version - only one available when I got it (don't need it yet) :-)]
says that "On impact, Diana's earrings were torn away - one landing in
the roadway, the other embedded in the dash."
The book "Death of a Princess" says under "Diana's effects" (pg
216): "One gold earring (on October 22, investigators found the other
earring under the dasbhoard of the wrecked car)".
Even these two accounts appear to be somewhat different: "embedded in"
as opposed to "under the dashboard" can be taken quite differently. I
am even wondering if they were clip-ons as opposed to pierced. Not that
it would make a difference in right vs. left, but possibly if force of
impact required to dislodge them.
Perhaps no one knows which earring was which?
Katherine
>
> <a href="http://members.home.com/godsbrain">G.O.D.S.B.R.A.I.N.</a><br>
>
>
GODSBRAIN
>Subject: Re: Di: Paul, Henri, History, 60 Page Autopsy, Etc.
>Date: Mon, 08 May 2000 06:52:23 GMT
>> >If Diana had not been sitting face-forward when the impact occurred,
>> >how do you explain the fact that one of her earrings was embedded in
>> >the dashboard at the front of the car? How could it have gotten there
>> >had she initially been huddled on the backseat floor of the car.
>> >
>> >[snip]
>> >Katherine
>> Which earing was it? Right or Left?
>
>I don't know. The book "The Day Diana Died" [pg 281 of large print
>version - only one available when I got it (don't need it yet) :-)]
>says that "On impact, Diana's earrings were torn away - one landing in
>the roadway
Wow! How could one have landed in
the roadway? Was a window open?
Where on the roadway was it found in
relation to the car's final resting place?
Or even in relation to the path that the
vehicle had traversed?
>the other embedded in the dash."
I suspect that the phrase "embeded in
the dash" could use some study.
As automobiles developed way back
there was a dash board I guess put
up front to protect occupants from
being thrown forward into wires and
equipment in the event of a crash and
to hide various cables, etc.
That "dash board" over automobile
development varied in composition
including things like "padded dash."
But also the area under the dash
board can also be referred to as
the dash. So that something could
bounce up under the dash board and
come to rest on various shelfs and
radio's, speedometer parts, heater
hoses, airconditioner parts, etc.
While someone could imagine that in
a case with a padded, like foam,
dash "board" a passenger could be
thrown physically against the actual
dash board and some item like an
earing could actually be left embedded
in the "dash board" itself, I think it
would be more probable that the
earing came off and was tossed
up and under the dash and then some
author got the terminology slightly
confused.
I would think, however, that a close
study of where exactly the item was
found could give some information
about the force and even the force
vectors during the range of time
between say the first impact with
the central 13th column up to the
time at which the vehicle came
finally to a complete stop.
And then to consider whether the
earing reported as found outside
the vehicle arrived there by being
thrown from the force of the crash
or by some human intervention.
>Even these two accounts appear to be somewhat different: "embedded in"
>as opposed to "under the dashboard" can be taken quite differently.
There was what I get for reading the post
two or more times. As I come down
to answer item by item I can get ahead
of the "what was there" and answer the
question before I get to it on the response
pass. :-)
>I
>am even wondering if they were clip-ons as opposed to pierced
Yes. Good question. Anybody know, or
have a guess?
Did Di often, occasionally, sometimes,
wear one or the other?
>Not that
>it would make a difference in right vs. left, but possibly if force of
>impact required to dislodge them.
Well, I am not so sure that a very close
analysis of the force vectors during the
crash phase might shed considerable
light on things.
We have a lot of spare time here and
we have not even begun to get close
to a fine examination of the processes
that occurred just between the initial
impact with the pilar and then up to
the time that the vehicle came to a
complete stop.
I think we could take a few months just
to work our way through that phase,
down to the millisecond by millisecond.
>Perhaps no one knows which earring was which?
>
>Katherine
>>
Well, I would be interested in trying to
find out. Even from the starting positions
to the ending positions.
Jakhals
Wath is this for bullshit ?
>>Daad ______ scene ________ gehad gelezen de beneden maal or 2, or weinig, sommige gelegenheden jegens uiteengezet weighted invloed factor in de constructie of de dagelijks hypothese.
>> Since the authorities have had two and a half years with the manpower, peoplepower, staff power, of what was it reported?
>>Sinds de autoriteit gehad gehad 2 en helft jaar mede de manpower, peoplepower, staf macht, of wat was het gerapporteerd?
>> Some 24 full time investigators and million(s) dollar equivalent budgets I am not competing with that.
>>Sommige 24 vol maal onderzoeker en 1000000( s) dollar equivalent budget ik am niet concurreerde mede dat.
>> The outcome reports of that investigation appear to be: Drunk driver speeds without the care of D+D+TRJ and abruptly turns left into a central column.
>>De outcome verslag of dat onderzoek bleek jegens be: dronk bestuurder snelheid zonder de zorgde of D+ D+ TRJ en abrupt draai verlaat into voornaamste kolom.
>> Simple Road Traffic Accident RTA.
>>Enkelvoudig Road verkeer ongeluk RTA.
>> When and over the time since the creation of alt.
>>Toen en over de maal sinds de schepping of alt.
>>conspiracy.
>>Samenzweringen.
>>princess-diana by b.
>>princess-diana bij b.
>>anana his philosophical position as I read it is to approximately take the position for sake of arguement that Diana was killed as the result of a conspiracy.
>>anana zijn filosofisch positie als ik gelezen het is jegens geschat genomen de positie voor sake of arguement dat Diana was doden als de gevolge of samenzweringen.
>> Because it has appeared to me that while times, places, people, and motives have been discussed I have a feeling that there has been less than reasonable consideration of some possibilities.
>>Because het gehad bleek jegens mij dat terwijl maal, plaats, lieden, en motief gehad been discuteerde ik gehad gevoeld dat aldaar gehad been klein than redelijk overweging of sommige mogelijkheden.
>> As a consequence of that belief I am trying to construct a suppositional hypothesis that will identify possible, persons, places, things that may be considered as possible.
>>Als consequentie of dat belief ik am geprobeerd jegens bouwt suppositional hypothese dat will geidentificeerd mogelijk, particulieren, plaats, ding dat mei be aangezien als mogelijk.
>>216( 3 mei 2000 18: 1: 58 GMT) > NNTP-Posting-Date: 3 mei 2000 18: 1: 58 GMT> X-Complaints-To: misbruik@ theplanet. net> X-Newsreader: tolweg geintegreerd versie 4.
>>> >(another dubbelzinnigheden is geschapen bij de uitdrukking" sur sa gauche", hetwelk> kan be vertaald" jegens HETIS verlaat" [ jegens de richtig of het, van waar> Levistre gezegd hij was] or" jegens de verlaat of het" [ als gezien van Levistre's> alleged positie] en, sinds Levistre claims dat de Mercedes" was in> de middelst of de road" at dat punt, het kan be either) sinds ik am geprobeerd jegens bouwt hypothetisch scene waar de Merc was astraddle de blanken lijn dat gescheiden de 2 west bound lanes en fotografeerde motorfiets was jegens de verlaat kant of de Merc at de exact instant dat de blanken auto was aan de richtig kant.
>> .
>>
>> .
>>
>> .
>>
>>> >"At the same instant, for a fraction of a second, there was a tremendous >flash of light, but nothing like the flash of a camera" ("Au meme >moment, en une fraction de seconde, un enorme eclair jaillit, mais rien >a voir avec le flash d'un appareil-photo") > >My point is that the order of events is not completely clear.
>>> >"At de dezelfde instant, voor fractie of 2, aldaar was geweldig> bliksemde of licht, doch niets evenals de bliksemde of camera" (" Au meme> moment, en une fractie de seconde, un enorme eclair jaillit, mais rien> voir avec le bliksemde d'un appareil-photo") > > mijn punt is dat de orde of gebeurtenis is niet compleet clear.
>> It could >be that the bike cut-in in front of the Mercedes just before the white >car passed Levistre - either that, or the bike was further behind the >Mercedes, as both vehicles entered the tunnel, than Clifford, Olivier >and Thierry imply.
>>Het kan> be dat de bike cut-in in front of de Mercedes gerecht voor de blanken> auto doorgevaren Levistre - either dat, or de bike was verder achter de> Mercedes, als beide vervoermiddel binnengaan de tunnel, than Clifford, Olivier> en Thierry imply.
>> I suppose the bike could have braked, just before the Is there any chance that one of the skid marks, like the single one, was the bike?
>>Ik als de bike kan gehad remt, gerecht voor de Is aldaar enig kans dat 1 of de gegleden gemarkeerd, evenals de enkele 1, was de bike?
>>> >>De foto's bliksemde, de motorfiets versneld, >> de auto aan de richtig hotsen de Merc into de voornaamste>> pilars, > > je gewild jegens hypothesize dat de bike-overtake/ bliksemde voorgekomen VOOR de> gleden botsing?
>>>>Dus de animation verwijzing kader kan be geidentificeerd bij verwijzing>> jegens de tunnel aangezicht als metres+ " plus" or -" minus" de tunnel aangezicht.
>>>>Hummnn>>> >>> de opeenvolging of gebeurtenis, als Levistre recounts het, is zeer geinteresseerd, >>> because hij scheen jegens be gezegd dat de" blanken auto" stayed ahead of de>>> Mercedes en de motor-bike.
>> I would think "ahead" of the Merc would be correct but not that the white car stayed ahead of the bike.
>>Ik would dacht" ahead" of de Merc would be corrigeerde doch niet dat de blanken auto stayed ahead of de bike.
>> Explaination given above.
>>Explaination gaf boven.
>>>> >>Well, in my SH one possibility that I want to consider is that both >>the white car on the Merc's right hand side and the motorcycle on >>the Merc's left hand side came to a synchronized position along side >>the Merc such as to be able to take symultaneous flash photographs >>into the Merc from both sides at the same time.
>>>> >>Bronnen, in mijn SH 1 mogelijkheden dat ik gewild jegens aangezien is dat beide>> de blanken auto aan de Merc's richtig hand kant en de motorfiets aan>> de Merc's verlaat hand kant gekomen jegens gesynchroniseerd positie along kant>> de Merc dergelijk als jegens be able jegens genomen symultaneous bliksemde foto>> into de Merc van beide kant at de dezelfde maal.
>> If one is in a very >>heavy law suit one needs at least TWO corroberating withnesses.
>>Als 1 is in zeer>> zwaar wet pak 1 behoefte at klein 2 corroberating withnesses.
>> And a big pile of paps only seconds behind would be very important also.
>>En groot stapels of paps slechts seconds achter would be zeer belangrijk en.
>> If somebody hinted at the presence of a blackmail photo they could be assassinated in short order before they could ever get close to a court of law, and I heard a song the other day called "Smuggler's Blues" done in the Eighties by Glenn Frey has some good words.
>>Als somebody hinted at de aanwezigheid of chantage foto's ze kan be vermoord in korter orde voor ze kan eeuwig kreeg afgesloten jegens gerecht of wet, en ik gehoord gezang de ander dag belde" smokkelaar Blues" deden in de Eighties bij Glenn Frey gehad sommige best woord.
>>>> >This seems to me to be fanciful in the extreme.
>>>> >Dit scheen jegens mij jegens be fanciful in de uiterste.
>> On what grounds do you >suggest it?
>>Aan wat grond deden je> geopperd het?
>>> >>The same scene photographed by two separate photographers at >>exactly the same instant would be IDEAL.
>>> >>De dezelfde scene fotografeerde bij 2 gescheiden fotograaf at>> exact de dezelfde instant would be IDEAAL.
>>>> >"Ideal" for what?
>>>> >"Ideaal" voor wat?
>> Come on Al!
>>Gekomen aan Al!
>> What are these simultaneous, two-angle >flash-photos supposed to be for?
>>Wat are deze simultaan, two-angle> flash-photos vermoed jegens be voor?
>> Okay - you've said before that you >think they would have been compromising photos, and that MAF set up the >car-switch and the pursuit in order to obtain them.
>>Okay - je gehad gezegd voor dat je> dacht ze would gehad been compromising foto's, en dat MAF set op de> car-switch en de vervolging in orde jegens behaald hen.
>> This is an >interesting idea, because, although it seems most likely to me that MAF >DID make these arrangements, I cannot decide precisely what it was that >he thought was going to happen.
>>Dit is > geinteresseerd begrip, because, ofschoon het scheen meest soortgelijk jegens mij dat MAF> DEDEN gemaakt deze ordening, ik kan niet beslissen precisely wat het was dat> hij dacht was going to gebeurd.
>> A compromising photograph.
>> compromising foto.
>> Exactly in line with MAF's general opinion of John.
>>Exact in lijn mede MAF's generaal mening of John.
>> Q.
>>Q.
>> Public, Di, etc. > >Let us say that Diana and Dodi were not sleeping together, she was not >pregnant by him and they were not going to get engaged - or some >combination of these negatives - such that, in order to (what?
>>Publiek, Di, enz. > > gelaten ons gezegd dat Diana en Dodi were niet geslapen bijeen, she was niet> zwanger bij hem en ze were niet going to kreeg engageerde - or sommige> combinatie of deze afwijzing - dergelijk dat, in orde jegens( wat?
>>) gain >influence over Diana or disgrace her or force her to marry Dodi?
>>)gain> invloed over Diana or disgrace haar or kracht haar jegens gehuwd Dodi?
>> - the >Al-Fayeds conceived the scheme I would guess that conception of the scheme would have happened far away from MAF.
>>- de> Al-Fayeds bedacht de scheme ik would gissing dat conception of de scheme would gehad gebeurd ver voort van MAF.
>> If a group were looking for someone to set up some such scheme MAF might have been found to have been a good candidate to approach for the leading role but the script had been written long before and they just needed some one to play the part.
>>Als groep were looking for someone jegens set op sommige dergelijk scheme MAF might gehad been gevonden jegens gehad been best kandidaat jegens benaderd voor de geleid rol doch de script gehad been geschreven lang voor en ze gerecht behoefde sommige 1 jegens gespeeld de deel.
>>Dus aan de 1 hand Diana would gehad shyed voort van enig PUBLIEK handelswijz doch lieden geinteresseerd in behaald foto's voor chantage would gehad jegens gemaakt de omstandighed of de foto's blik als publiek als mogelijk.
>>> >Waarom kan deze foto niet gehad been genomen mede spy-cameras at 1> of de Fayed residentie Because dergelijk foto's would mogelijk be geidentificeerd als inval of privacy.
>>>>>At klein, hij beschreef de" blanken auto" >>> doorgevaren hem, en verdween westwards, voor hij beginnen jegens beschreef>>> de motor-bike overtaking de Mercedes en cutting-in in front of het.
_________________________________________________
Francus uilus plumatus cum loofus maximus (ere-Belg)
Nomen est omen.
banana
alt.conspiracy.princess-diana and stamped at '17:49:49' on 'Wed, 19 Apr
2000', fay <f...@thedeep.screaming.net> writes:
>guess i must be honoured then Banana has replied to me on a couple of
>occasions......
>
>GODSBRAIN <gods...@aol.com> wrote in message
>news:20000419080308...@ng-md1.aol.com...
>> >Subject: Re: Di: Paul, Henri, History, 60 Page Autopsy, Etc.
>> >From: "Aleeta" ajoh...@psesd.org
>>
>> >Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2000 01:10:20 -0700
>>
>> > "ron" <ron_winn...@lineone.net.invalid> wrote in message =
>> >news:025220ee...@usw-ex0104-033.remarq.com...
>> >
>>
>> > I'am 51 knocking on 52 and still await a line from Banana before
>> > it is too late. Hey, what does one have to do to get a bit of
>> > attention round here?
>> >
>>
>> >
>> > ~~~~Make a post in his name.:o)) Don't feel bad, it took him well =
>> >over a year before he ever spoke to me and I used to ask him questions =
>> >and they were ignored and at that time I was on the conspiracy side. As
>=
>> >soon as I gathered enough material and started noticing how MAF told so =
>> >many lies and no one conspiracist agreed on any one thing, I made =
>> >complaints about MAF and then he started talking to me and hasn't =
>> >quit.:o)) Do something unique.<VBG>
I just don't know what to say to the above, I really don't! :-)
--
banana
Andrew/
I have an important message for you.
Andrew/
Howard Beale
Andrew/ <and...@altairiv.d3mon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:3918A83E...@altairiv.d3mon.co.uk...
> Herr Dr Wagner?
>
> I have an important message for you.
Oh dear.......
--
Howard Beale
"I'm as mad as hell and I'm not going to take it anymore"
Steve Reed
<gods...@aol.com> writes
>
>>>>de la chaussee"
>
>>>>queue de poisson") "and, all of a sudden, a large motor-bike, to the
>>>>left of it, cutting-in in front of it".
>
>as "fish tail" or "tail of fish."
>
>That is a phrase that I haven't heard
>for years. Maybe back to when
>"drag racing" was popular locally
>in my high school years.
>
>When two cars would race from
>a stop sign. Floor board it, burn
>rubber, the back of the cars would
>fishtail.
It's not the same thing. The French expression describes the sinuous
line taken by an overtaking vehicle as it swerves in front of another
and then straightens out again.
--
Steve Reed
GODS...@home.com
>From GODS...@HOME.COM Wed May 03 15:40:25 2000 Path: news1.
>El GODSBRAIN@ HEJM. COM Wed maj 3 15: 40: 25 2000 Path: news1.
>frmt1.
>frmt1.
>sfba.
>sfba.
>home.
>Hejm.
>com!
>com!
>newshub1.
>newshub1.
>home.
>Hejm.
>com!
>com!
>news.
>news.
>home.
>Hejm.
>com!
>com!
>news1.
>news1.
>frmt1.
>frmt1.
>sfba.
>sfba.
>home.
>Hejm.
>com.
>com.
>POSTED!
>FOST!
>not-for-mail From: GODS...@HOME.COM Newsgroups: alt.
>not-for-mail el: GODSBRAIN@ HEJM. COM Newsgroups: alt.
>conspiracy.
>conspiracy.
>princess-diana Subject: Re: Di: Paul, Henri, History, 60 Page Autopsy, Etc. Organization: <a href="http://members.home.com/godsbrain">G.O.D.S.B.R.A.I.N.</a><br> Reply-To: GODS...@HOME.COM,GODS...@AOL.COM Message-ID: <suv0hs4b86ldf6kh1...@4ax.com> References: <20000416220330.
>princess-diana subjekt: Re: Di: Paul, Henri, histori, 60 pagx Autopsy, ktp. Organization: < a href=" http:// members. hejm. com/ godsbrain"> G. O. D. S. B. R. a. mi. N.</ a>< br> Reply-To: GODSBRAIN@ HEJM. COM, GODSBRAIN@ AOL. COM Message-ID: < suv0hs4b86ldf6kh11pg4usgb988mp55km@ 4ax. com> References: < 20000416220330.
>18658.
>18658.
>0000...@ng-cg1.aol.com> <38fa9...@huge.aa.net> <8n1mfss0cu2ou4qhe...@4ax.com> <025220ee.
>4069@ ng-cg1. aol. com> < 38fa90de_2@ huge. aa. ret> < 8n1mfss0cu2ou4qhej2ujs106jhqfrbbol@ 4ax. com> < 025220ee.
>5e23...@usw-ex0104-033.remarq.com> <VHL8$AAWpz$4I...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> <03cfeca4.
>5e23de39@ usw-ex0104-033. remarq. com> < VHL8$ AAWpz$ 4IAaS@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> < 03cfeca4.
>e454...@usw-ex0105-038.remarq.com> <5AGHurAe...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> <022cd178.
>e454e6ea@ usw-ex0105-038. remarq. com> < 5AGHurAeP0A5IAT7@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> < 022cd178.
>7c06...@usw-ex0105-037.remarq.com> <0PU0NLBY...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> <2ehrgsobh76u0sheo...@4ax.com> <EwaIiIA+...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.
>7c06d2cf@ usw-ex0105-037. remarq. com> < 0PU0NLBYabD5IAaW@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> < 2ehrgsobh76u0sheo8fsoso92h16ood0pr@ 4ax. com> < EwaIiIA+ 6EE5IAXR@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> X-Newsreader: Forte agent 1.
>7/32.
>7/ 32.
>534 MIME-Version: 1.
>534 MIME-Version: 1.
>0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 683 Date: Wed, 03 May 2000 22:40:25 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.
>0 Content-Type: tekst/ plain; charset= us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit lini: 683 daktil: Wed, 3 maj 2000 22: 40: 25 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.
>7.
>7.
>83.
>83.
>23 X-Complaints-To: ab...@home.net X-Trace: news1.
>23 X-Complaints-To: abuse@ hejm. ret X-Trace: news1.
>frmt1.
>frmt1.
>sfba.
>sfba.
>home.
>Hejm.
>com 957393625 24.
>com 957393625 24.
>7.
>7.
>83.
>83.
>23 (Wed, 03 May 2000 15:40:25 PDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 03 May 2000 15:40:25 PDT Xref: newshub1.
>23( Wed, 3 maj 2000 15: 40: 25 PDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 3 maj 2000 15: 40: 25 PDT Xref: newshub1.
>home.
>Hejm.
>com alt.
>com alt.
>conspiracy.
>conspiracy.
>princess-diana:30031204 -------- </html> OK.
>princess-diana: 30031204 --------</ html> OK.
> What do we call this?
>Ki do ni vok this?
> The daily replay of the daily revised version of the God's Brain Suppositional Hypothesis.
>Des daily replay da des daily revised version da des di cerb Suppositional Hypothesis.
> Act ______ Scene ________ Having read the below a time or two, or few, some opportunity to explain weighted influence factors in the construction of the daily hypothesis.
>Ag ______ scen ________ hav leg des below a temp aux 2, aux few, kelk opportunity al eksplik weighted influ factors en des construction da des daily hypothesis.
> Since the authorities have had two and a half years with the manpower, peoplepower, staff power, of what was it reported?
>Ekde des auxtoritat hav hav 2 kaj a half jar kun des manpower, peoplepower, stab potenc, da ki est gxi raport?
> Some 24 full time investigators and million(s) dollar equivalent budgets I am not competing with that.
>Kelk 24 plen temp investigators kaj 1000000( s) dolar ekvivalent budgxet mi est not kondur kun ke.
> The outcome reports of that investigation appear to be: Drunk driver speeds without the care of D+D+TRJ and abruptly turns left into a central column.
>Des outcome raport da ke investigation aper al est: drink driver speeds sen des zorg da D+ D+ TRJ kaj abruptly torn las into a central kolon.
> Simple Road Traffic Accident RTA.
>Simpl Road trafik akcident RTA.
> When and over the time since the creation of alt.
>Kiam kaj over des temp ekde des creation da alt.
>conspiracy.
>conspiracy.
>princess-diana by b.
>princess-diana per b.
>anana his philosophical position as I read it is to approximately take the position for sake of arguement that Diana was killed as the result of a conspiracy.
>anana his philosophical pozici as mi leg gxi est al approximately pren des pozici por sake da arguement ke Diana est killed as des rezult da a conspiracy.
> Because it has appeared to me that while times, places, people, and motives have been discussed I have a feeling that there has been less than reasonable consideration of some possibilities.
>Because gxi hav aper al me ke while temp, ej, popol, kaj motiv hav est diskut mi hav a felt ke tie hav est malplej than reasonable consideration da kelk possibilities.
> As a consequence of that belief I am trying to construct a suppositional hypothesis that will identify possible, persons, places, things that may be considered as possible.
>As a consequence da ke belief mi est pen al konstru a suppositional hypothesis ke testament identify possible, an, ej, ajx ke maj est konsider as possible.
> The intent is to create multiple fictional tracks such that the most possible/ununderstood may be considered.
>Des intent est al kre obl fictional tracks such ke des plej possible/ ununderstood maj est konsider.
> Many of the pieces are for the most part agreed as having been in the area but there is a lot of discrepancy as to the EXACT location at a SPECIFIC INSTANT.
>Many da des pec est por des plej part agreed as hav est en des are sed tie est a lot da discrepancy as al des EXACT location je a SPECIF INSTANT.
> My intent is to create this fictional supposition to give, or try to determine, the differences between points of agreement and points of disharmony.
>My intent est al kre this fictional supposition al don, aux pen al determin, des differences inter pint da agreement kaj pint da disharmony.
> Agreement/Disagreement and Harmony/Disharmony.
>Agreement/ Disagreement kaj harmoni/ Disharmony.
> Concord vs Discord.
>Concord vs Discord.
> If there might have been common interest to finance a joint project to lessen Diana's influence with the media because she was percieved to be "stepping on someones toes" , my words, then how might some such plan, plot, conspiracy, have been considered achievable from a variety of possible participant's points of view?
>Se tie might hav est komun interes al financ a artik projekt al lessen Diana's influ kun des media because sxi est percieved al est" pasx sur someones toes" , my vort, tiam kiel might kelk such plan, plot, conspiracy, hav est konsider achievable el a variety da possible participant's pint da view?
> My typing fingers are not going to stand too long a discussion at this point so I am going to try to speed along.
>My tajp fingr est not going to bud tro long a discussion je this pint tial mi est going to pen al speed along.
> My supposition is that if there was a conspiracy it had to be to do something.
>My supposition est ke se tie est a conspiracy gxi hav al est al do io.
> A photo of Diana giving Dodi a blow job in the back seat of a limo would be pretty good.
>A photo da Diana don Dodi a blov job en des dors seat da a limo would est pretty bon.
>For the photo to achieve maximum benefit it had to be secret and to be used as a threat.
>Por des photo al achieve maksimum benefit gxi hav al est sekret kaj al est uz as a threat.
>The actual publication in mass media would deflate its power.
>Des real publication en amas media would deflate its potenc.
> But it had to have strong and undisputable evidence that it was TRUE if it were ever going to be used.
>Sed gxi hav al hav fort kaj undisputable evidence ke gxi est PRAV se gxi est ever going to est uz.
> For some paparazzi to "peeping tom" photo a divorcee with her boyfriend in private was not going to do the job.
>Por kelk paparazzi al" peeping tom" photo a divorcee kun her boyfriend en privat est not going to do des job.
> So the construct of a whore for money with an oily bedhopper in the back seat of a very expensive limo would be much more philosophically correct for the purpose of a conspiracy to get a photo to use for blackmail in the future but not for actual publication.
>Tial des konstru da a whore por mon kun an oily bedhopper en des dors seat da a tre expensive limo would est mult pli philosophically gxust por des purpose da a conspiracy al get a photo al uz por blackmail en des future sed not por real publication.
> On Wed, 3 May 2000 17:07:26 +0100, Steve Reed <asr...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> wrote: >Path: news1.
>Sur Wed, 3 maj 2000 17: 7: 26+ 100, Steve Reed< asreed@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> skrib: > Path: news1.
>frmt1.
>frmt1.
>sfba.
>sfba.
>home.
>Hejm.
>com!
>com!
>newshub2.
>newshub2.
>rdc1.
>rdc1.
>sfba.
>sfba.
>home.
>Hejm.
>com!
>com!
>newshub1.
>newshub1.
>home.
>Hejm.
>com!
>com!
>news.
>news.
>home.
>Hejm.
>com!
>com!
>feeder.
>feeder.
>via.
>via.
>net!
>Ret!
>diablo.
>diablo.
>theplanet.
>theplanet.
>net!
>Ret!
>news.
>news.
>theplanet.
>theplanet.
>net!
>Ret!
>newspost.
>newspost.
>theplanet.
>theplanet.
>net!
>Ret!
>lastings.
>lastings.
>softnet.
>softnet.
>co.
>co.
>uk!
>uk!
>asreed >From: Steve Reed <asr...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> >Newsgroups: alt.
>asreed> el: Steve Reed< asreed@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> > Newsgroups: alt.
>conspiracy.
>conspiracy.
>princess-diana >Subject: Re: Di: Paul, Henri, History, 60 Page Autopsy, Etc. >Date: Wed, 3 May 2000 17:07:26 +0100 >Organization: Home >Lines: 297 >Message-ID: <EwaIiIA+...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> >References: <20000416201432.
>princess-diana> subjekt: Re: Di: Paul, Henri, histori, 60 pagx Autopsy, ktp. > daktil: Wed, 3 maj 2000 17: 7: 26+ 100> Organization: hejm> lini: 297> Message-ID: < EwaIiIA+ 6EE5IAXR@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> > References: < 20000416201432.
>18648.
>18648.
>0000...@ng-cg1.aol.com> > <20000416220330.
>4517@ ng-cg1. aol. com> > < 20000416220330.
>18658.
>18658.
>0000...@ng-cg1.aol.com> <38fa9...@huge.aa.net> > <8n1mfss0cu2ou4qhe...@4ax.com> > <025220ee.
>4069@ ng-cg1. aol. com> < 38fa90de_2@ huge. aa. ret> > < 8n1mfss0cu2ou4qhej2ujs106jhqfrbbol@ 4ax. com> > < 025220ee.
>5e23...@usw-ex0104-033.remarq.com> > <VHL8$AAWpz$4I...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> > <03cfeca4.
>5e23de39@ usw-ex0104-033. remarq. com> > < VHL8$ AAWpz$ 4IAaS@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> > < 03cfeca4.
>e454...@usw-ex0105-038.remarq.com> > <5AGHurAe...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> > <022cd178.
>e454e6ea@ usw-ex0105-038. remarq. com> > < 5AGHurAeP0A5IAT7@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> > < 022cd178.
>7c06...@usw-ex0105-037.remarq.com> > <0PU0NLBY...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> > <2ehrgsobh76u0sheo...@4ax.com> >Reply-To: Andrew Steven Reed <ar...@lastings.softnet.co.uk> >NNTP-Posting-Host: modem88.
>7c06d2cf@ usw-ex0105-037. remarq. com> > < 0PU0NLBYabD5IAaW@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> > < 2ehrgsobh76u0sheo8fsoso92h16ood0pr@ 4ax. com> > Reply-To: Andrew Steven Reed< areed@ lastings. softnet. co. uk> > NNTP-Posting-Host: modem88.
>fred.
>fred.
>pol.
>pol.
>co.
>co.
>uk >Mime-Version: 1.
>uk> Mime-Version: 1.
>0 >X-Trace: newsreaderg1.
>0> X-Trace: newsreaderg1.
>core.
>core.
>theplanet.
>theplanet.
>net 957376918 19338 195.
>Ret 957376918 19338 195.
>92.
>92.
>7.
>7.
>216 (3 May 2000 18:01:58 GMT) >NNTP-Posting-Date: 3 May 2000 18:01:58 GMT >X-Complaints-To: ab...@theplanet.net >X-Newsreader: Turnpike Integrated Version 4.
>216( 3 maj 2000 18: 1: 58 GMT) > NNTP-Posting-Date: 3 maj 2000 18: 1: 58 GMT> X-Complaints-To: abuse@ theplanet. ret> X-Newsreader: Turnpike Integrated Version 4.
>02 M <TWkHBtca5wWBvmfWwoLIWQkgFM> >Xref: newshub1.
>2 M< TWkHBtca5wWBvmfWwoLIWQkgFM> > Xref: newshub1.
>home.
>Hejm.
>com alt.
>com alt.
>conspiracy.
>conspiracy.
>princess-diana:30031199 > >In article <2ehrgsobh76u0sheo...@4ax.com>, >GODS...@HOME.COM writes >>>there was "a white car", >>>in the middle of the road, behind him.
>princess-diana: 30031199> > en artikol< 2ehrgsobh76u0sheo8fsoso92h16ood0pr@ 4ax. com>, > GODSBRAIN@ HEJM. COM skrib>>> tie est" a blank auxt", >>> en des mez da des road, behind him.
> >> >>So Livestre lied.
>>> >>Tial Livestre mensog.
> The white car was not in the middle >>of the road, the Mercedes was in the middle of the >>road.
>Des blank auxt est not en des mez>> da des road, des Mercedes est en des mez da des>> road.
> Why did Livestre lie?
>Kial did Livestre mensog?
> Maybe Livestre did not lie in that particular.
>Maybe Livestre did not mensog en ke particular.
> One needs to be very careful as to "at what instant" and did he say the middle of the road or the middle of the lane?
>1 bezon al est tre careful as al" je ki instant" kaj did li dir des mez da des road aux des mez da des lane?
> It was said that he had moved into the right lane.
>Gxi est dir ke li hav mov into des dekstr lane.
> If he said the white car was in the middle of the [right] lane I would agree.
>Se li dir des blank auxt est en des mez da des[ dekstr] lane mi would agree.
>> >Levistre is not contradicting himself.
>> >Levistre est not contradicting himself.
> He saw the white car "au milieu >de la chaussee" So, does "chaussee" come closer to translating as "lane" or on the other hand, "road?
>Li seg des blank auxt" au milieu> de la chaussee" tial, does" chaussee" ven closer al traduk as" lane" aux sur des ali man, " road?
>" Road having two lanes.
>"Road hav 2 lanes.
> >and was overtaken by it ("elle me double") But exactly where were the other actors at the exact instant that "elle me double?
>>Kaj est overtaken per gxi(" elle me double") sed exactly kie est des ali aktor je des exact instant ke" elle me double?
>" >"Then", he >says ("puis j'observe [retroviseur] une autre auto toujours au milieu de >la route") "I saw [rear-view mirror] another car, also in the middle of >the road" So here we have a "milieu de la route.
>" >"Tiam", li> dir(" puis j'observe[ retroviseur] une autre auto toujours au milieu de> la route") " mi seg[ rear-view spegul] another auxt, kaj en des mez da> des road" tial here ni hav a" milieu de la route.
>" Does that mean closer the lane or the road?
>"Does ke mean closer des lane aux des road?
> >("et soudain une grosse moto sur sa gauche qui lui fait une >queue de poisson") "and, all of a sudden, a large motor-bike, to the >left of it, cutting-in in front of it".
>>("et soudain une grosse moto sur sa gauche qui lui fait une> queue de poisson") " kaj, all da a subit, a large motor-bike, al des> las da gxi, cutting-in in front of gxi".
> I will take it that AT SOME POINT a large motor-bike, comming from the left of it, and then cutting-in in front of it.
>Mi testament pren gxi ke JE KELK PINT a large motor-bike, comming el des las da gxi, kaj tiam cutting-in in front of gxi.
> > >(another ambiguity is created by the expression "sur sa gauche", which >could be translated "to ITS left" [to the right of it, from where >Levistre says he was] or "to the left of it" [as seen from Levistre's >alleged position] and, since Levistre claims that the Mercedes "was in >the middle of the road" at that point, it could be either) Since I am trying to construct a hypothetical scene where the Merc was astraddle the white line that separated the two west bound lanes and a photographing motorcycle was to the left side of the Merc at the exact instant that the white car was on the right side.
>> >(another ambiguity est kre per des mien" sur sa gauche", which> could est traduk" al ITS las" [ al des dekstr da gxi, el kie> Levistre dir li est] aux" al des las da gxi" [ as seg el Levistre's> alleged pozici] kaj, ekde Levistre pretend ke des Mercedes" est en> des mez da des road" je ke pint, gxi could est either) ekde mi est pen al konstru a hypothetical scen kie des Merc est astraddle des blank lini ke separated des 2 okcident bind lanes kaj a fot motorcycle est al des las flank da des Merc je des exact instant ke des blank auxt est sur des dekstr flank.
> .
>
> .
>
> .
>
>> >"At the same instant, for a fraction of a second, there was a tremendous >flash of light, but nothing like the flash of a camera" ("Au meme >moment, en une fraction de seconde, un enorme eclair jaillit, mais rien >a voir avec le flash d'un appareil-photo") > >My point is that the order of events is not completely clear.
>> >"Je des sam instant, por a frakci da a 2, tie est a tremendous> flash da light, sed nothing like des flash da a camera" (" Au meme> moment, en une frakci de seconde, un enorme eclair jaillit, mais rien> a voir avec le flash d'un appareil-photo") > > My pint est ke des mend da events est not completely klar.
> It could >be that the bike cut-in in front of the Mercedes just before the white >car passed Levistre - either that, or the bike was further behind the >Mercedes, as both vehicles entered the tunnel, than Clifford, Olivier >and Thierry imply.
>Gxi could> est ke des bike cut-in in front of des Mercedes just antaux des blank> auxt pas Levistre - either ke, aux des bike est plu behind des> Mercedes, as ambaux vehicles entered des tunnel, than Clifford, Olivier> kaj Thierry implic.
> I suppose the bike could have braked, just before the Is there any chance that one of the skid marks, like the single one, was the bike?
>Mi se des bike could hav brems, just antaux des est tie any sxanc ke 1 da des skid mark, like des single 1, est des bike?
> >tunnel (to avoid running into a Mercedes/white-car pile-up) and that >Levistre might not have been as far along the tunnel as he thought he >was.
>>tunnel( al evit kur into a Mercedes/ white-car pile-up) kaj ke> Levistre might not hav est as far along des tunnel as li opini li> est.
> There is another branch of my lack of understanding and that follows along a train of thought that the picture was intended but the crash was an accident.
>Tie est another brancx da my lack da kompren kaj ke sekv along a dres da opini ke des bild est intenc sed des crash est an akcident.
> In the "accident" hypothesis approximately the motorcycle photographer could have accidently fired a half metre too far forward and instead of shooting in to the back seat he could have accidently hit HP directly in the eyes as Henri Paul looked to the left as the motorcycle came along side his side window.
>En des" akcident" hypothesis approximately des motorcycle photographer could hav accidently fajr a half metre tro far forward kaj instead of paf en al des dors seat li could hav accidently hit HP directly en des okul as Henri Paul jen al des las as des motorcycle ven along flank his flank fenestr.
>Then the blinding flash could have caused HP to FLINCH and swerve to the right just a little.
>Tiam des blind flash could hav ig HP al FLINCH kaj swerve al des dekstr just a malplej.
> At that point hitting the rear of the accelerating white car.
>Je ke pint hitting des rear da des akcel blank auxt.
> As the white car's rear goes to the right its front goes to the left.
>As des blank auxt rear goes to des dekstr its front goes to des las.
> To correct, the driver throws to the right and the rear goes to the left.
>Al gxust, des driver jxet al des dekstr kaj des rear goes to des las.
> Essentially tossing the front of the Merc into the central columns.
>Essentially tossing des front da des Merc into des central kolon.
> >Thus, the Mercedes hit the white car, side-to-side, and impelled it >forwards, towards Levistre, and was FOLLOWING it, as it passed >Levistre's position, and as the bike overtook the Mercedes.
>>Tiel, des Mercedes hit des blank auxt, side-to-side, kaj impelled gxi> forwards, towards Levistre, kaj est SEKV gxi, as gxi pas> Levistre's pozici, kaj as des bike overtook des Mercedes.
> I think that the first, photographing, bike should have been ahead of the white car.
>Mi opini ke des 1, fot, bike should hav est ahead da des blank auxt.
> If the bike and the car essentially accelerated at the same instant the bike would outrun the car.
>Se des bike kaj des auxt essentially akcel je des sam instant des bike would outrun des auxt.
> I think.
>Mi opini.
> Bikes are far faster at acceleration that cars.
>Bikes est far fast je acceleration ke auxt.
> Any disagreements?
>Any disagreements?
>Of course, with two riders and a turbo car ...?
>Da kurs, kun 2 riders kaj a turbo auxt...?
> For one thing, you are supposing then that the white car was ahead of the Merc at the instant that the Merc hit the central column/pilar/post.
>Por 1 ajx, vi est se tiam ke des blank auxt est ahead da des Merc je des instant ke des Merc hit des central kolon/ pilar/ fost.
> That is in accord with my first guess.
>Ke est en accord kun my 1 diven.
>> >Does that clear things up?
>> >Does ke klar ajx up?
> No.
>Ne.
> It smokes them up.
>Gxi fum them up.
> But gives a number of possible occurances to consider.
>Sed don a nombr da possible occurances al konsider.
>>> >>>Behind that, he says, there was >>>"another car" (presumably the Mercedes S- 280) and behind that, a large >>>motor-bike.
>>> >>>Behind ke, li dir, tie est>>>" another auxt" ( presumably des Mercedes S- 280) kaj behind ke, a large>>> motor-bike.
> So my first thought on that is that that is a second bike.
>Tial my 1 opini sur ke est ke ke est a 2 bike.
> And if we are talking about the left that might be better described as a second bike on the left as there might have been one or more bikes on the right in addition.
>Kaj se ni est talking pri des las ke might est bon described as a 2 bike sur des las as tie might hav est 1 aux pli bikes sur des dekstr en adici.
>>> >>Livestre lies again.
>>> >>Livestre mensog re.
>> >What do you mean?
>> >Ki do vi mean?
> What evidence is there that Levistre is "lying"?
>Ki evidence est tie ke Levistre est" mensog"?
> My supposition.
>My supposition.
>> >> He clearly saw and may have been a part >>of a conspiracy to cover up.
>> >>Li clearly seg kaj maj hav est a part>> da a conspiracy al kovr up.
> So in my supposition he saw it >>and he lied about it.
>Tial en my supposition li seg gxi>> kaj li mensog pri gxi.
> Now if we go off on a train of thought to >>explore a hypothesis that Livestre was deliberately lying then >>I'll have to think about that some more.
>Nun se ni ir off sur a dres da opini al>> esplor a hypothesis ke Livestre est deliberately mensog tiam>> mi I'll hav al opini pri ke kelk pli.
> I have not until the >>present considered the possibility that he was deliberately >>lying.
>Mi hav not gxis des>> aktual konsider des possibility ke li est deliberately>> mensog.
>>> >I have - he could be in the pay of Al-Fayed (or his high-level masters) >That's always a possibility; but why should we single him out?
>>> >Mi hav - li could est en des pag da Al-Fayed( aux his high-level mastr) > ke est cxiam a possibility; sed kial should ni single him out?
> I'm not singling him out.
>Mi est not singling him out.
> I am theorizing that there may have been a whole swarm of conspiring pap's surrounding Diana's car.
>Mi est theorizing ke tie maj hav est a whole swarm da konspir pap's surrounding Diana's auxt.
> >What >about any (or ALL) of the other witnesses?
>>Ki> pri any( aux ALL) da des ali witnesses?
> I am inclined to go with the >majority (who saw closely pursuing vehicles) and focus suspicion on >Mohammed and Souad who - alone - say they did not.
>Mi est inklin al ir kun des> majority( who seg closely pursuing vehicles) kaj focus suspicion sur> Mohammed kaj Souad who - sol - dir ili did not.
>> >>If he were deliberately lying and saw the three vehicles >>abreast, > > He says he saw them one behind the other - until the bike overtook the >Mercedes.
>> >>Se li est deliberately mensog kaj seg des 3 vehicles>> abreast, > > li dir li seg them 1 behind des ali - gxis des bike overtook des> Mercedes.
> Then the bike and the Mercedes were "abreast", but the white >car - so he implies - had already overtaken him by then!
>Tiam des bike kaj des Mercedes est" abreast", sed des blank> auxt - tial li implic - hav jam overtaken him per tiam!
> But why should >you suspect this to be a lie?
>Sed kial should> vi suspekt this al est a mensog?
> I think you, we, need to be very careful about exactly what instant is being described as being related to any single comment.
>Mi opini vi, ni, bezon al est tre careful pri exactly ki instant est est described as est rakont al any single comment.
>> >> the photo flashes, the motorcycle accelerate, >>the car on the right bump the Merc into the central >>pilars, > >You want to hypothesize that the bike-overtake/flash occurred BEFORE the >sliding collision?
>> >>Des photo flashes, des motorcycle akcel, >> des auxt sur des dekstr gxib des Merc into des central>> pilars, > > vi want al hypothesize ke des bike-overtake/ flash occurred ANTAUX des> sliding collision?
> What on earth for?
>Ki sur ter por?
> Well, if the supposition is as two photographing vehicles taking a photograph from both sides at the same instant .
>Nu, se des supposition est as 2 fot vehicles pren a fot el ambaux flank je des sam instant.
> .
>
> .
>
> .
>
> There may also have been two contacts between the two vehicles?
>Tie maj kaj hav est 2 kontakt inter des 2 vehicles?
>The mirror thing may not have been considered significant.
>Des spegul ajx maj not hav est konsider significant.
> The mirror would not have broken out the tail light.
>Des spegul would not hav romp out des vost light.
> So if the tail light was broken would not one suspect a corresponding dent on the Merc's right front fender?
>Tial se des vost light est romp would not 1 suspekt a korespond dent sur des Merc's dekstr front fender?
>> In reading this over I can not understand quickly the actions to cover up circumstances by police, courts, etc. unless Diana bite off and swallowed the tip of Dodi's penis from the force of the crash.
>>En leg this over mi can not kompren quickly des actions al kovr up cirkonstanc per polic, kort, ktp. unless Diana bit off kaj glut des tip da Dodi's penis el des force da des crash.
> If some such had happened then that could explain a lot of things, But it would also demonstrate that there was no fear in the back seat at the time of crash which would be important to suggest that there was no demonstrated disagreement with Henri Paul's driving performance prior to the crash.
>Se kelk such hav okaz tiam ke could eksplik a lot da ajx, sed gxi would kaj demonstrate ke tie est ne tim en des dors seat je des temp da crash which would est grav al sugest ke tie est ne demonstrated disagreement kun Henri Paul's driv performance prior al des crash.
> >> that the first photoflashing motorcycle sped off >>past him and out of the tunnel as well as the vehicle that >>had bumped the Merc.
>>>Ke des 1 photoflashing motorcycle sped off>> preter him kaj out of des tunnel as well as des vehicle ke>> hav gxib des Merc.
> and then reported that in essence >>a followup motorcycle stopped to view into the Merc >>and it then resumed to exit the tunnel, etc. >> >You mean Levistre is concealing the existence of a second motorcycle?
>Kaj tiam raport ke en esenc>> a followup motorcycle stop al view into des Merc>> kaj gxi tiam resumed al exit des tunnel, ktp. >> > vi mean Levistre est concealing des existence da a 2 motorcycle?
>>True, Thierry H.
>>Prav, Thierry H.
> says he saw "several" motorcycles pursuing the >Mercedes, closely, towards the tunnel (he had a view along the cour >Albert Premier from the carriageway itself) but Clifford G.
>Dir li seg" several" motorcycles pursuing des> Mercedes, closely, towards des tunnel( li hav a view along des cour> Albert Premier el des carriageway itself) sed Clifford G.
> and Olivier >P (who were positioned to the right [north] of the road and could see no >more than the tunnel-entrance) report only " a car in front of the >Mercedes and a [one!
>Kaj Olivier> P( who est pozici al des dekstr[ nord] da des road kaj could seg ne> pli than des tunnel-entrance) raport nur" a auxt in front of des> Mercedes kaj a[ 1!
>] powerful motor-cycle, 30 - 40 metres behind.
>]powerful motor-cycle, 30 - 40 metres behind.
> I think it was Brian Anderson's story that a motorcycle moved to pass the Merc on its left as it entered the tunnel, which would be exact in accord with my one theory.
>Mi opini gxi est Brian Anderson's fabel ke a motorcycle mov al pas des Merc sur its las as gxi entered des tunnel, which would est exact en accord kun my 1 ism.
>> >Why should we not assume that the other bikes left the cour Albert >Premier, at the exit slip-road, leaving the pair on the bike, which >Clifford, Olivier and Levistre saw, to proceed into the tunnel for the >kill!?
>> >Kial should ni not assume ke des ali bikes las des cour Albert> Premier, je des exit slip-road, las des par sur des bike, which> Clifford, Olivier kaj Levistre seg, al proced into des tunnel por des> kill!?
> I don't think that the word "kill" is at all proper in a larger view.
>Mi don't don't opini ke des vort" kill" est je all proper en a larger view.
>"Photo" would I suggest be a more prevalent term for that point.
>"Photo" would mi sugest est a pli prevalent kondicx por ke pint.
>> >>I would like to see the animation sequences down to the 1 meter >>resolution.
>> >>Mi would like al seg des animation sequences down al des 1 metr>> resolution.
> I think the main constant that we can use is the >>physical distance on the road as being traversed by the Merc.
>Mi opini des main konstant ke ni can uz est des>> physical distanc sur des road as est traversed per des Merc.
> >>So the animation reference frames could be identified by reference >>to the tunnel face as metres + "plus" or - "minus" the tunnel face.
>>>Tial des animation reference kadr could est identified per reference>> al des tunnel vizagx as metres+ " plus" aux -" minus" des tunnel vizagx.
>>>> >We would all (those of us who really wish to have it explained in >detail, that is) like to see sophisticated event-reconstruction >techniques brought to bear, together with an account of exactly what >data was employed and how it was used.
>>>> >Ni would all( those da us who really wish al hav gxi eksplik en> detal, ke est) like al seg sophisticated event-reconstruction> techniques brought al bor, together kun an kont da exactly ki> data est employed kaj kiel gxi est uz.
> Fat chance of that, however - >unless you happen to have an event-reconstruction team on hand and you >can afford to cock a snoot at the politico-media complex.
>Fat sxanc da ke, tamen -> unless vi okaz al hav an event-reconstruction team sur man kaj vi> can afford al cock a snoot je des politico-media kompleks.
> There is the traffic accident reconstruction site off my web page.
>Tie est des trafik akcident reconstruction situ off my web pagx.
> I saw reference to the most professional software photosho or paint shop of something like that.
>Mi seg reference al des plej professional software photosho aux pentr butik da io like ke.
> I got a copy off the web.
>Mi got a ekzempler off des web.
> One of these years I will move to do my accident and if at the same time I did a second of the Diana crash not much for starters.
>1 da these jar mi testament mov al do my akcident kaj se je des sam temp mi did a 2 da des Diana crash not mult por starters.
> > >>>Note that there is no vehicle present, in Levistre's story, which could >>>be the car of the witnesses Souad M.
>> >>>Not ke tie est ne vehicle aktual, en Levistre's fabel, which could>>> est des auxt da des witnesses Souad M.
> and Mohammed M.
>Kaj Mohammed M.
> If we believe >>>Levistre, they weren't there!
>Se ni kred>>> Levistre, ili est weren't tie!
> On the other hand, if we believe THEM, >>>the Mercedes crashed without any help from anyone - a very convenient >>>version of events, for the authorities, and completely contrary to the >>>testimony of ALL the other witnesses.
>Sur des ali man, se ni kred THEM, >>> des Mercedes crashed sen any help el anyone - a tre convenient>>> version da events, por des auxtoritat, kaj completely contrary al des>>> testimony da ALL des ali witnesses.
>>> I am not suggesting that consideration should be limited to only one hypothetically possible series of events.
>>>Mi est not sugest ke consideration should est lim al nur 1 hypothetically possible seri da events.
> It appears to me that there are apparently conflicting reports of circumstances.
>Gxi aper al me ke tie est apparently conflicting raport da cirkonstanc.
> Therefore I suggest several parallel hypothetical story lines.
>Do mi sugest several parallel hypothetical fabel lini.
> That calls to mind something that I think Senator Sam Ervin said during the course of the Watergate hearings on Nixon's impeachment.
>Ke vok al mens io ke mi opini Senator Sam Ervin dir dum des kurs da des Watergate hearings sur Nixon's impeachment.
> The in the four gospels there are accounts of what was reported to have been written by Pilate on the sign to be placed over Jesus Christ's head on the cross.
>Des en des 4 gospels tie est kont da ki est raport al hav est skrib per Pilate sur des sign al est ej over Jesus Christ's kap sur des kruc.
> Senator Sam said that if individuals whose testimoney we so reverence from the written testimony could be so reported as divergent then we need not be dismayed that good people of our own day may be reported as to not have agreed perfectly.
>Senator Sam dir ke se individu whose testimoney ni tial reverence el des skrib testimony could est tial raport as divergent tiam ni bezon not est konstern ke bon popol da our own tag maj est raport as al not hav agreed perfectly.
> >>Hummnn >>> >>>The sequence of events, as Levistre recounts it, is very interesting, >>>because he seems to be saying that the "white car" stayed ahead of the >>>Mercedes and the motor-bike.
>>>Hummnn>>> >>> des sequence da events, as Levistre recounts gxi, est tre interes, >>> because li seems al est dir ke des" blank auxt" rest ahead da des>>> Mercedes kaj des motor-bike.
> I would think "ahead" of the Merc would be correct but not that the white car stayed ahead of the bike.
>Mi would opini" ahead" da des Merc would est gxust sed not ke des blank auxt rest ahead da des bike.
> Explaination given above.
>Explaination don super.
>>> >>Well, in my SH one possibility that I want to consider is that both >>the white car on the Merc's right hand side and the motorcycle on >>the Merc's left hand side came to a synchronized position along side >>the Merc such as to be able to take symultaneous flash photographs >>into the Merc from both sides at the same time.
>>> >>Nu, en my SH 1 possibility ke mi want al konsider est ke ambaux>> des blank auxt sur des Merc's dekstr man flank kaj des motorcycle sur>> des Merc's las man flank ven al a synchronized pozici along flank>> des Merc such as al est able al pren symultaneous flash fot>> into des Merc el ambaux flank je des sam temp.
> If one is in a very >>heavy law suit one needs at least TWO corroberating withnesses.
>Se 1 est en a tre>> heavy jur konven 1 bezon je malplej 2 corroberating withnesses.
> And a big pile of paps only seconds behind would be very important also.
>Kaj a grand pile da paps nur seconds behind would est tre grav kaj.
> If somebody hinted at the presence of a blackmail photo they could be assassinated in short order before they could ever get close to a court of law, and I heard a song the other day called "Smuggler's Blues" done in the Eighties by Glenn Frey has some good words.
>Se somebody hinted je des presence da a blackmail photo ili could est assassinated en short mend antaux ili could ever get close al a kort da jur, kaj mi auxd a song des ali tag vok" Smuggler's blu" done en des Eighties per Glenn Frey hav kelk bon vort.
>>> >This seems to me to be fanciful in the extreme.
>>> >This seems al me al est fanciful en des ekstrem.
> On what grounds do you >suggest it?
>Sur ki grounds do vi> sugest gxi?
>> >>The same scene photographed by two separate photographers at >>exactly the same instant would be IDEAL.
>> >>Des sam scen fot per 2 separate photographers je>> exactly des sam instant would est IDEAL.
>>> >"Ideal" for what?
>>> >"Ideal" por ki?
> Come on Al!
>Ven sur Al!
> What are these simultaneous, two-angle >flash-photos supposed to be for?
>Ki est these simultaneous, two-angle> flash-photos supoz al est por?
> Okay - you've said before that you >think they would have been compromising photos, and that MAF set up the >car-switch and the pursuit in order to obtain them.
>Okay - vi hav dir antaux ke vi> opini ili would hav est compromising photos, kaj ke MAF set up des> car-switch kaj des pursuit en mend al obtain them.
> This is an >interesting idea, because, although it seems most likely to me that MAF >DID make these arrangements, I cannot decide precisely what it was that >he thought was going to happen.
>This est an> interes ide, because, kvankam gxi seems plej likely al me ke MAF> DID far these arrangements, mi cannot cannot decid precisely ki gxi est ke> li opini est going to okaz.
> A compromising photograph.
>A compromising fot.
> Exactly in line with MAF's general opinion of John.
>Exactly en lini kun MAF's general opinion da John.
> Q.
>Q.
> Public, Di, etc. > >Let us say that Diana and Dodi were not sleeping together, she was not >pregnant by him and they were not going to get engaged - or some >combination of these negatives - such that, in order to (what?
>Publik, Di, ktp. > > Let us dir ke Diana kaj Dodi est not dorm together, sxi est not> graved per him kaj ili est not going to get engaged - aux kelk> combination da these negatives - such ke, en mend al( ki?
>) gain >influence over Diana or disgrace her or force her to marry Dodi?
>)Gajn> influ over Diana aux disgrace her aux force her al marry Dodi?
> - the >Al-Fayeds conceived the scheme I would guess that conception of the scheme would have happened far away from MAF.
>- des> Al-Fayeds conceived des scheme mi would diven ke conception da des scheme would hav okaz far for el MAF.
> If a group were looking for someone to set up some such scheme MAF might have been found to have been a good candidate to approach for the leading role but the script had been written long before and they just needed some one to play the part.
>Se a grup est looking for someone al set up kelk such scheme MAF might hav est trov al hav est a bon kandidat al approach por des konduk rol sed des script hav est skrib long antaux kaj ili just bezon kelk 1 al lud des part.
> >of obtaining compromising photographs.
>>Da obtaining compromising fot.
> A >clever ruse is employed to get rid of some of the escort (but why not >all?
>A> clever ruse est employed al get rid da kelk da des eskort( sed kial not> all?
>) THE COMPROMISING photo to be used for blackmail to influence Diana not to take a strong public stand on some particular issue from time to time would have been financed by an external consortium, QEII, Chas, Military landmine sales proponents, etc. In order to be of use at selected times the photo could not be public.
>)DES COMPROMISING photo al est uz por blackmail al influ Diana not al pren a fort publik bud sur kelk particular issue el temp al temp would hav est financ per an external consortium, QEII, Chas, Military landmine sales proponents, ktp. en mend al est da uz je selected temp des photo could not est publik.
> If that happened it would have been a one time shot when ever it fell into public hands.
>Se ke okaz gxi would hav est a 1 temp paf kiam ever gxi fal into publik man.
> To be worth the expense and effort it had to be kept secret but its circumstance had to be indisputable else any single person threatening exposure of some such would be under extremely high surveillance in moments.
>Al est valor des expense kaj effort gxi hav al est kept sekret sed its cirkonstanc hav al est indisputable else any single an minac exposure da kelk such would est sub extremely alt surveillance en moment.
> > the remaining escort follows from the Hotel, against orders, thus >giving the impression that they are up to no good.
>>Des ceter eskort sekv el des hotel, kontraux mend, tiel> don des impres ke ili est up al ne bon.
> Henri has been >briefed to flee them - he flees.
>Henri hav est> briefed al flee them - li flees.
> An ambush of pursuers has been arranged >on the cour la Reine - to keep Henri in flight and to give Dodi an >excuse for grabbing Diana (as though protectively) I can't imagine anything but a photograph of a blowjob.
>An ambush da pursuers hav est arangx> sur des cour la Reine - al keep Henri en flight kaj al don Dodi an> pretekst por grabbing Diana( as kvankam protectively) mi can't can't imag anything sed a fot da a blowjob.
> Sex is no big thing nowadays.
>Seks est ne grand ajx nowadays.
> In royal family tradition, the past, it may have been able to throw a little influence at an intense moment of public conflict.
>En royal famili tradici, des preter, gxi maj hav been able to jxet a malplej influ je an intense moment da publik conflict.
> There is so much detailed sex on the web that I wouldn't doubt that to find a microscopic photo of a pubic hair would take more than a few minutes.
>Tie est tial mult detal seks sur des web ke mi wouldn't wouldn't dub ke al trov a microscopic photo da a pubic har would pren pli than a few minut.
> So if any eyebrows were going to be raised maybe a court threatening a loss of Di's finances for breach of contract re: approximately non modest public behavior.
>Tial se any brov est going to est raised maybe a kort minac a loss da Di's financ por brecx da kontrakt re: approximately non modest publik behavior.
> So if Di was very cognizant of contract provisions regarding public behavior as a determinant of her divorce settlement then she would have to have exercised the utmost discression.
>Tial se Di est tre cognizant da kontrakt provisions regarding publik behavior as a determinant da her divorce settlement tiam sxi would hav al hav ekzerc des utmost discression.
> But if she was going to find any male support outside of her ex's she would have to at some point show some affection.
>Sed se sxi est going to trov any vir support ekster da her eks sxi would hav al je kelk pint montr kelk affection.
> Now where could one find any more hope of privacy than in the tunnel of love in a speeding limosine?
>Nun kie could 1 trov any pli esper da privacy than en des tunnel da am en a speeding limosine?
> But to be effective for black mail the photo would have to appear as immodest public behavior.
>Sed al est effective por nigr posxt des photo would hav al aper as immodest publik behavior.
> I said PUBLIC.
>Mi dir PUBLIK.
> So on the one hand Diana would have shyed away from any PUBLIC behavior but people interested in obtaining a photo for blackmail would have to make the circumstances of the photo look as public as possible.
>Tial sur des 1 man Diana would hav shyed for el any PUBLIK behavior sed popol interes en obtaining a photo por blackmail would hav al far des cirkonstanc da des photo jen as publik as possible.
> TWO photo's from TWO different photographers and surrounding photos from another hundred photographers could be made to look like PUBLIC IMMODESTY while the circumstance of the back seat of a speeding limosine in the tunnel in the middle of the night is about as close to "private" behavior as I can imagine anyone could get on short notice.
>2 photo's el 2 different photographers kaj surrounding photos el another 100 photographers could est far al jen like PUBLIK IMMODESTY while des cirkonstanc da des dors seat da a speeding limosine en des tunnel en des mez da des nokt est pri as close al" privat" behavior as mi can imag anyone could get sur short aviz.
> >- a car is stationed >at the tunnel-entrance to stop the Mercedes (a very risky proceeding, >from a father's point of view, don't you think?
>>- a auxt est staci> je des tunnel-entrance al stop des Mercedes( a tre risky proced, > el a patr pint da view, don't don't vi opini?
>) the Mercedes is slowed, >the pursuers catch up, the photographs are taken.
>)Des Mercedes est slowed, > des pursuers kapt up, des fot est pren.
>> >Photographs of what?
>> >Fot da ki?
> Diana giving Dodi a blow job.
>Diana don Dodi a blov job.
> What else could even raise an eyebrowe nowadays?
>Ki else could eben raise an eyebrowe nowadays?
> Hell, if you had to sell such a photograph to get a MacDonald's hamburger you would have a lot of competition in the current market.
>Infer, se vi hav al vend such a fot al get a MacDonald's hamburger vi would hav a lot da competition en des current merkat.
> > A terrified Diana in Dodi's arms?
>>A terrified Diana en Dodi's arm?
> Diana being >raped by Dodi?
>Diana est> raped per Dodi?
> - is that what you're working up to saying?
>- est ke ki vi est working up al dir?
> My dear chap!
>My kar chap!
> Who is going to conspire, and pay big money, for something like that?
>Who est going to konspir, kaj pag grand mon, por io like ke?
>Nobody.
>Nobody.
> >Diana crouched down on the floor behind Henri's seat, and Dodi remained >upright - probably viewing the pursuit with anxiety - possibly grappling >with TRJ to prevent him interfering with the driving.
>>Diana crouched down sur des etagx behind Henri's seat, kaj Dodi ceter> upright - probably viewing des pursuit kun anxiety - possibly grappling> kun TRJ al prevent him interfering kun des driv.
> What sign is >there - apart from the fact that neither Diana nor Dodi were wearing >seat-belts - that Dodi was attempting to grapple with Diana?
>Ki sign est> tie - apart el des fakt ke nek Diana nor Dodi est wearing> seat-belts - ke Dodi est prov al grapple kun Diana?
>> >Again, I say, "photographs of what?
>> >Re, mi dir, " fot da ki?
>" - precisely - and what were they >for?
>"- precisely - kaj ki est ili> por?
> - according to your theory.
>- according to your ism.
> A picture of a blow job - for blackmail.
>A bild da a blov job - por blackmail.
>> >Why could these photographs not have been taken with spy-cameras at one >of the Fayed residences Because such a photo would possibly be identified as an invasion of privacy.
>> >Kial could these fot not hav est pren kun spy-cameras je 1> da des Fayed residences Because such a photo would possibly est identified as an invasion da privacy.
> It had to look like PUBLIC Immodest Behavior to cause a diminution of Diana's influence in the public media.
>Gxi hav al jen like PUBLIK Immodest Behavior al ig a diminution da Diana's influ en des publik media.
> >at which Diana stayed?
>>Je which Diana rest?
> How could it have been >hoped that photographs of an especially compromising nature could have >been obtained at high speed in the Alma Tunnel, rather than on the >Jonikal, at the Ritz or at the rue Arsene?
>Kiel could gxi hav est> esper ke fot da an especially compromising natur could hav> est obtained je alt speed en des Alma Tunnel, rather than sur des> Jonikal, je des Ritz aux je des rue Arsene?
> What on earth is the point?
>Ki sur ter est des pint?
> Would behavior on the yatch or at the Ritz be considered public or private by Diana.
>Would behavior sur des yatch aux je des Ritz est konsider publik aux privat per Diana.
> My guess is that Diana would have considered it PUBLIC.
>My diven est ke Diana would hav konsider gxi PUBLIK.
>> >One glimmer of a suggestion of a possibility does occur to me, as a >result of examining this idea, however.
>> >1 glimmer da a suggestion da a possibility does occur al me, as a> rezult da ekzamen this ide, tamen.
> What if Dodi was having >difficulty getting physical with Diana?
>Ki se Dodi est hav> difficulty getting physical kun Diana?
> Did Dad devise an elaborate >ruse to throw them together?
>Did pacxj devise an elaborate> ruse al jxet them together?
> Or rather, was he advised to do so by >those who wanted Diana dead NOT DEAD.
>Aux rather, est li advised al do tial per> those who wanted Diana dead NOT DEAD.
> There is a whole hell of a lot of difference in wanting some one to have less public influence in the public media than in wanting someone to be dead.
>Tie est a whole infer da a lot da difference en wanting kelk 1 al hav malplej publik influ en des publik media than en wanting someone al est dead.
> >- so that he would implement the scheme >without knowing what it was really for?
>>- so that li would implement des scheme> sen kon ki gxi est really por?
> Quite simple.
>Quite simpl.
> A compromising photograph.
>A compromising fot.
> >Something of the sort must have >happened, I think - and it's not so incredible if you consider that >MAF's masters may have been pretending to attempt to pull off a Fayed- >Spencer match (with big bucks in it for MAF) for some time - so that >the Machiavellian complexity of engineering the car-switch, the >disposition of the escort, the arrangements for the route and the >programming of Henri Paul, might not have aroused MAF's suspicions.
>>Io da des sort dev hav> okaz, mi opini - kaj gxi est not tial incredible se vi konsider ke> MAF's mastr maj hav est pretending al prov al tir off a Fayed-> Spencer alumet( kun grand bucks en gxi por MAF) por kelk temp - so that> des Machiavellian complexity da ingxenier des car-switch, des> disposition da des eskort, des arrangements por des route kaj des> program da Henri Paul, might not hav aroused MAF's suspicions.
> A photograph would be the most logical thing in the whole world.
>A fot would est des plej logical ajx en des whole mond.
>No body would be suspicious of anything.
>Ne korp would est suspicious da anything.
>> >Other factors, such as sabotaging the S-280's brakes and air-bags, >briefing the escort to monitor the crash but not get involved, etc, >could have been achieved by MAF's backers, over MAF's head, The theft and modification of the vehicle could have been well disguised.
>> >Ali factors, such as sabotaging des S-280's brems kaj air-bags, > briefing des eskort al monitor des crash sed not get involved, ktp, > could hav est achieved per MAF's backers, over MAF's kap, des theft kaj modification da des vehicle could hav est nu disguised.
> >such that >Siegel and Musa (Etoile Limousines) and Wingfield and Dournot were not >only working for MAF, but for his masters, DIRECTLY.
>>such ke> Siegel kaj Musa( Etoile Limousines) kaj Wingfield kaj Dournot est not> nur working por MAF, sed por his mastr, DIRECTLY.
> However, if that were part of the plot, then PLANS TO GET THAT VEHICLE TO THAT PLACE IN TIME WOULD HAVE TO HAVE BEEN ROCK SOLID FOR MONTHS IN ADVANCE.
>Tamen, se ke est part da des plot, tiam PLAN AL GET KE VEHICLE AL KE EJ EN TEMP WOULD HAV AL HAV EST ROK SOLID POR MONAT EN ADVANCE.
> There is the clear windows in one train of thought and defective equipment as possibly another.
>Tie est des klar fenestr en 1 dres da opini kaj defective equipment as possibly another.
>> >Indeed, assuming that MAF did not know that the fatal crash was >intended, those of MAF's employees who MUST have known that a fatal >crash was intended, MUST have been working directly for those who >intentionally engineered it.
>> >Ja, assuming ke MAF did not kon ke des fatal crash est> intenc, those da MAF's employees who DEV hav kon ke a fatal> crash est intenc, DEV hav est working directly por those who> intentionally ingxenier gxi.
>> If a crash after the photo were planned the least people in the area who needed to know was just the driver of the white car.
>>Se a crash post des photo est plan des malplej popol en des are who bezon al kon est just des driver da des blank auxt.
> Second could have been the photographer on the back of the motorcycle who had to aim a shot into the driver's eyes.
>2 could hav est des photographer sur des dors da des motorcycle who hav al cel a paf into des driver's okul.
> >>>At least, he describes the "white car" >>>passing him, and disappearing westwards, before he begins to describe >>>the motor-bike overtaking the Mercedes and cutting-in in front of it.
>>>>Je malplej, li describes des" blank auxt" >>> pas him, kaj disappearing westwards, antaux li komenc al describe>>> des motor-bike overtaking des Mercedes kaj cutting-in in front of gxi.
> >> >>So this gets the locations screwed up and out of sync.
>>> >>Tial this gets des locations sxrauxb up kaj out of sync.
>>> >>> >>> The impression given (that the "white car" was a long way ahead of the >>>Mercedes and the motorbike) is probably an illusion created by the >>>difficulty involved in describing the situation; >> >>Also, a witness in a high speed drive has their own road to watch as >>well as looking in the rear view mirror.
>>> >>> >>>Des impres don( ke des" blank auxt" est a long voj ahead da des>>> Mercedes kaj des motorbike) est probably an iluzi kre per des>>> difficulty involved en describing des situaci; >> >> kaj, a witness en a alt speed driv hav their own road al watch as>> nu as jen en des rear view spegul.
> So one might have a strobe >>light effect of only seeing a flash of an instant when they happened >>to have the opportunity to look in the mirror.
>Tial 1 might hav a strobe>> light efik da nur seg a flash da an instant kiam ili okaz>> al hav des opportunity al jen en des spegul.
>>> >>>but there is no >>>escaping the conclusion that the Mercedes did not completely squeeze >>>past the white car, but came alongside it, on its left, in a sliding >>>collision, >> >>My suggestion would be to consider that the Merc was the >>vehicle in the middle of the road, that the white vehicle would >>have been on its right and the motorcycle on its left, three >>abreast.
>>> >>>Sed tie est ne>>> escaping des conclusion ke des Mercedes did not completely squeeze>>> preter des blank auxt, sed ven alongside gxi, sur its las, en a sliding>>> collision, >> >> My suggestion would est al konsider ke des Merc est des>> vehicle en des mez da des road, ke des blank vehicle would>> hav est sur its dekstr kaj des motorcycle sur its las, 3>> abreast.
>>> >>And that point photoflashes were fired and then the white >>car accelerated >> >>>which impelled the white car forwards, towards Levistre and >>>out of harm's way; >> >>And the motorcycle accelerated >> >>>whereupon the motorbike >> >>accelerated and swerved in front of >>the Mercedes.
>>> >>Kaj ke pint photoflashes est fajr kaj tiam des blank>> auxt akcel>> >>> which impelled des blank auxt forwards, towards Levistre kaj>>> out of harm's voj; >> >> kaj des motorcycle akcel>> >>> whereupon des motorbike>> >> akcel kaj swerved in front of>> des Mercedes.
>>> >>No.
>>> >>Ne.
> That is even wrong.
>Ke est eben wrong.
> In my SH.
>En my SH.
>>> >>Let's try it another way.
>>> >>Let's Let's pen gxi another voj.
> More to the >>"DELIBERATE BUMP OFF" conspiracy >>supposition.
>Pli al des>>" DELIBERATE GXIB OFF" conspiracy>> supposition.
>>> >>In that, the motorcycle would have fired >>a series of quick flashes as it accelerated >>in front of the Mercedes.
>>> >>En ke, des motorcycle would hav fajr>> a seri da quick flashes as gxi akcel>> in front of des Mercedes.
> The first flash >>would have been into the back seat but >>a second would have been directly into >>the eyes of Henri Paul.
>Des 1 flash>> would hav est into des dors seat sed>> a 2 would hav est directly into>> des okul da Henri Paul.
> Having blinded >>him, it would then accelerate and as soon >>as it was clear the vehicle on the right would >>bump the Mercedes' front into the center >>pilars.
>Hav blind>> him, gxi would tiam akcel kaj as baldaux>> as gxi est klar des vehicle sur des dekstr would>> gxib des Mercedes' front into des centr>> pilars.
>>> >>>overtook the slowed Mercedes >>>and (also according to Levistre) cut-in in front of it and produced "a >>>searing burst of light, much brighter than a photo-flash".
>>> >>>overtook des slowed Mercedes>>> kaj( kaj according to Levistre) cut-in in front of gxi kaj produkt" a>>> searing krev da light, mult bril than a photo-flash".
>>>> >>>At this point, Levistre, braked and came to a halt near the western end >>>of the tunnel.
>>>> >>>Je this pint, Levistre, brems kaj ven al a halt cxi des western end>>> da des tunnel.
> >> >>More correctly, NOT "At this point" but at "A POINT" near the >>western end of the tunnel.
>>> >>Pli correctly, NOT" je this pint" sed je" a PINT" cxi des>> western end da des tunnel.
>>> >>>The Mercedes had crashed, and the bikers (like Brenda >>>Wells, Levistre affirms that there were two of them) had stopped by the >>>wreck.
>>> >>>Des Mercedes hav crashed, kaj des bikers( like Brenda>>> nu, Levistre affirms ke tie est 2 da them) hav stop per des>>> wreck.
> >> >>That does not sound possible to me.
>>> >>Ke does not son possible al me.
> It may depend upon speed.
>Gxi maj depend sur speed.
>>>Assuming that the whole action was taking place at some >>above average speed then if at least the bike on the left had >>accelerated ahead of the Merc it could not have stopped.
>>>Assuming ke des whole action est pren ej je kelk>> super average speed tiam se je malplej des bike sur des las hav>> akcel ahead da des Merc gxi could not hav stop.
> If it >>did not stop then it may have passed Livestre and exited the >>tunnel.
>Se gxi>> did not stop tiam gxi maj hav pas Livestre kaj exited des>> tunnel.
> Whether a second bike stopped might be considerable.
>Cxu a 2 bike stop might est considerable.
>>> >>>One of them got off, momentarily, to look into the Mercedes, >>>jumped back on again, and the bike sped off, passing Levistre as it did >>>so.
>>> >>>1 da them got off, momentarily, al jen into des Mercedes, >>> salt dors sur re, kaj des bike sped off, pas Levistre as gxi did>>> tial.
> Levistre describes the bike as "black" and the two men as "dressed >>>in black with black helmets".
>Levistre describes des bike as" nigr" kaj des 2 hom as" dressed>>> en nigr kun nigr kask".
> The whole thing took just a few seconds.
>Des whole ajx pren just a few seconds.
>>>> >>>Considerable efforts have been made to discredit Levistre.
>>>> >>>Considerable efforts hav est far al discredit Levistre.
> It has been >>>said, for example, that his attitude to the press was "hostile" and that >>>he was trying to "gain attention"; but there could be another reason for >>>these attacks on his character - he witnessed a murder!
>Gxi hav est>>> dir, por ekzempl, ke his attitude al des prem est" hostile" kaj ke>>> li est pen al" gajn attention"; sed tie could est another raci por>>> these atak sur his karakter - li witnessed a murd!
> There is no >>>other interpretation you can put on his testimony.
>Tie est ne>>> ali interpretation vi can put sur his testimony.
>>>> >>>Yes, indeed (to answer your question) the lanes were used as a slow-lane >>>and an overtaking lane - ludicrous speed-limit signs notwithstanding!
>>>> >>>Yes, ja( al respond your question) des lanes est uz as a slow-lane>>> kaj an overtaking lane - ludicrous speed-limit sign malgraux!
>>>> >>>Other answers in another post >> >><a href="http://members.home.com/godsbrain">G.O.D.S.B.R.A.I.N.</a><br> > >-- >Steve Reed Alvin H.
>>>> >>>Ali respond en another fost>> >>< a href=" http:// members. hejm. com/ godsbrain"> G. O. D. S. B. R. a. mi. N.</ a>< br> > > --> Steve Reed Alvin H.
> White <a href="http://members.home.com/godsbrain">G.O.D.S.B.R.A.I.N.</a><br>
>Blank< a href=" http:// members. hejm. com/ godsbrain"> G. O. D. S. B. R. a. mi. N.</ a>< br>