New Film Shows Diana “Very Much Alive” After Car Crash
By VC |
May 14th, 2011
Translation by Autumnson Blog
早期第一批我已在警惕公民發表的文章是“戴安娜王妃的死亡和紀念：神秘學的意義“，它描述事件和有關戴夫人的犧牲儀式的象徵意義。雖然大多數人仍然認同官方的“意外“故事，證據越積越多意外並不是坐導致戴安娜死亡的因由，但實際上是一宗佈局導致她的謀殺。
A new film entitled Unlawful Killing (to be released everywhere except the UK) will apparently be showing a pictures of Diana right after the accident…still alive and not dying. Furthermore, the movie will show Diana predicting the circumstances of her death.The movie is backed by Mohamed al-Fayed, the father of Diana’s fiancé who also died that night.
一部新電影名為非法殺害（將在四處發佈除了英國）將明顯地展現一幀戴安娜的照片，直接在事故發生後仍然生存...而還未死去。此外，影片將顯示黛安娜預測她的死亡情況，電影是由穆罕默德法耶茲支持，即戴安娜的未婚夫的父親，他的兒子也在那一夜死亡。
Unlawful Killing will probably not dwell on the occult and ritualistic side of things. It remains, after all, a mass media production. When cover-ups are too sloppy and evidence begin piling disproving them, limited concessions are made to quell the public’s questions. This movie might be a limited concession, where part of the big ugly truth is revealed in order to protect the “bigger uglier truth”. We’ll see.
非法殺人將可能不會糾纏在神秘學和儀式那邊的東西，但畢竟它仍然是一件大眾媒體的生產，當掩飾是過於草率和證據開始累積否定它們，有限的讓步作出以平息公眾的質疑。這部電影可能是一項有限的讓步，其中大而醜陋的真相的部分被揭示，以保護“更大更醜陋的真相“，我們拭目以待吧。
From the London Telegraph:
來自倫敦電訊報Telegraph:
爭議性的黛安娜影片'非法殺害'的，預告片發佈
Trailer released for controversial Diana film, Unlawful Killing
The trailer for the controversial documentary examining an alleged cover-up over the death of Diana, Princess of Wales, has been released.
檢查一項據稱是戴安娜死亡的隱瞞的爭議性記錄片的預告片，已被發佈。
Unlawful Killing Official Trailer
非法殺害官方預告片
2011-05-09
The film sets out to prove a cover-up by the "establishment" over the death of Princess Diana. It has caused outrage in sections of the British press and is not scheduled for a UK release.
Controversy centers around the use of a paparazzi photograph of Princess Diana dying at the scene of the car crash that killed her, her partner Dodi al-Fayed and the car's driver Henri Paul in Paris in 1997.
Directed by actor Keith Allen and backed by Mohamed al-Fayed, father of Dodi, the film is being screened at the 2011 Cannes Film Festival on Friday.
Mr Allen describes his film as an "inquest into the inquest" of Princess Diana's death. Of the controversial photo, Mr Allen wrote in the Daily Mail: "The photo is not used in the film for the purpose of shock.
"It is included as evidence, because it shows clearly that, although Diana had been injured in the crash, she was alert and very much alive. I repeat: it is not a picture of a dying woman."
Director Keith Allan about his documentary in The Guardian：
導演奇夫阿倫在衛報關於他的記錄片The Guardian：
非法殺害 - 英國人將不會看到的電影
Unlawful Killing – the film the British won’t get to see
My documentary about the Diana inquest will be shown everywhere but the UK. Here’s why：
我部關於戴安娜死因研訊的紀錄片將在四處上映，但除了英國；這裡是原因：
The internet is a global lavatory wall, a Rabelaisian mixture of truth, lies, insanity and humour. I felt its power and madness this week, when an excerpt from my new film, Unlawful Killing, was leaked on to YouTube and seized on by US conspiracy theorists, who immediately began claiming that the CIA had murdered Princess Diana, thereby allowing others to dismiss my documentary as mad.
Deriding its critics as mad is an age-old British establishment trick. My “inquest of the inquest” film contains footage of Diana recalling how the royals wanted her consigned to a mental institution, and the inquest coroner repeatedly questioning the sanity of anyone who wondered if the crash was more than an accident. His chief target was Mohamed Al Fayed, a man I once profiled for a Channel 4 documentary. Before I met him, I’d half-believed the media caricature of him as a madman, driven nuts by the death of his son, and wildly accusing the Windsors of having planned the 1997 crash. However, I found a man who was sane and funny but frustrated that Britain wouldn’t hold an inquest into his son’s death. Michael Mansfield QC thought it unfair too, and fought for one to be held; which was why the longest inquest in British legal history eventually began in 2007.
Long before the inquest started, the eminently sane Mansfield had persuaded me that there were suspicious circumstances surrounding the crash, and signs of a cover-up by the authorities. Many journalists agreed, but as the inquest drew near, I noticed that British newspapers (several of which had regularly run “Was Diana Murdered?” pieces) suddenly fell into line, and started insisting that the inquest was a waste of time. They raised no protest when virtually all the key French witnesses refused to participate, nor did they find it odd that not one senior royal was ordered to appear, even though Diana had stated in a lawyer’s note that the Windsors were planning an “accident” to her car. Nor did they raise the issue of possible bias when legal proceedings involving the integrity of the royal family were to be heard in the royal courts of justice before a coroner who’d sworn an oath of allegiance to the Queen.
I felt the need to raise it, so I asked every major UK broadcaster (BBC, ITV, C4, Five, Sky) to commission a TV documentary about the inquest. But they refused even to contemplate such a suggestion, so Associated Rediffusion and I began filming and financing it ourselves. Shortly before the inquest began, Fayed offered to fund our project, so we could make a feature-length cinema documentary instead. We agreed, on condition that we would report events in the way we saw them, and the deal was struck.
Unlawful Killing is not about a conspiracy before the crash, but a provable conspiracy after the crash. A conspiracy organised not by a single scheming arch-fiend, but collectively by the British establishment – judges, lawyers, politicians, police chiefs, secret services, even newspaper editors – all of whom have been appointed to their positions because they are “a safe pair of hands”. Just as compass needles all point north without being told to, so these people instinctively know what is expected of them when the state’s interests are under threat and they act accordingly, quietly suppressing uncomfortable evidence or undermining the credibility of witnesses whose evidence contradicts the official narrative.
Consider just a fraction of what transpired. Over 100 significant witnesses were not called to the inquest, or refused to appear. Blood tests allegedly proving the drunkenness of the driver Henri Paul were deemed “biologically inexplicable” by a toxicologist. A British crash expert found that Diana’s seat belt had not been working. And so on.
Strangest of all was the media coverage of the verdict. Inquest evidence showed conclusively that the crash was caused by an unidentified white Fiat Uno and several unidentified motorcycles, vehicles that were certainly not paparazzi, because uncontested police evidence confirmed that the paparazzi were nowhere near the tunnel at the time of the crash. The jury understood this, bringing in a verdict of “unlawful killing” by unidentified “following vehicles”; yet within seconds, the BBC was misreporting that the jury had blamed the paparazzi, and the rest of the media meekly followed suit. Which is why – three years on – barely anyone realises what the jury’s troubling verdict really was.
Why is the film being premiered next week at Cannes, three years after the inquest ended? Because British lawyers insisted on 87 cuts before any UK release could be contemplated. So rather than butcher the film, or risk legal action, we’re showing it in France, then the US, and everywhere except the UK. Pity, because at a time when the mindless sugar rush of the royal wedding has been sending British Rrepublicans into a diabetic coma, it could act as a welcome antidote.
http://vigilantcitizen.com/latestnews/new-film-shows-diana-%e2%80%9cvery-much-alive%e2%80%9d-after-car-crash/
2Di4 -- The Unlawful Killing of Princess Diana (Sneak Preview)
2Di4-- 戴安娜王妃的非法殺害（偷雞預覽）
2011-04-28
David Icke - 戴安娜王妃的謀殺案（關於王室的真相）
光明會謀殺戴安娜(重貼)
卡樓：光明會王朝及黑手黨：前線小組和控制結構
神秘果醬從戴安娜王妃的頭髮製成
沒有留言:
發佈留言