|
|
|
Letter from London - Can Princess Diana finally rest in peace?
|
It may all end up as merely a footnote to our national story, but for years the shocking death of Princess Diana and its crude aftermath of murder and conspiracy claims have cast a painful shadow over this country.
Finally, it seems, the 10-year saga may have ended. An inquest jury concluded last week that Diana, once married to Prince Charles who is the heir to the throne, had indeed been unlawfully killed – but not as a result of any murderous plot involving the Royal family or the British establishment.
The jury pinned the blame squarely on a drunken chauffeur and pursuing celebrity photographers for the death of the princess and her lover, Dodi Fayed, in a car crash in Paris.
The conspiracy claims were made and repeated incessantly by Dodi’s father, Mohamed al Fayed, the Egyptian-born owner of the posh Harrod’s Department Store in Kensington, London.
At one time or another, Mr Fayed claimed that Prince Philip, the CIA, MI5, Tony Blair, two Metropolitan Police Commissioners and Diana’s sister were involved.
The plot
The plot, he alleged, was masterminded by Prince Philip, Diana’s former father-in-law, and carried out by the secret services to prevent Diana from marrying his son because he was a Muslim.
“Prince Philip rules the country behind the scenes,” Fayed testified at the inquest. “He is a racist. He is the real head of the royal family. Time to send him back to Germany where he comes from.”
Diana was divorced from Prince Charles, eldest son of Queen Elizabeth and Prince Philip, when she entered a relationship with Dodi Fayed.
In the early hours of August 31, 1997, the two left the Ritz Hotel in Paris in a car driven by Frenchman Henri Paul, who had been drinking.
Pursued by paparazzi, their Mercedes car entered an underpass and crashed into a concrete pillar. Diana, Dodi and the chauffeur were all killed.
After the inquest, Mohammed Fayed said the verdict was a blow and he did not intend to pursue his claims any further.
He added, “I have always believed that Prince Philip and the Queen hold valuable evidence that only they know. They were not even questioned but they should have been. No one should be above the law.”
The Paris Three
The Paris deaths were followed by long years of investigation by, first, the French police, then a three-year inquiry by British Police Commissioner Lord Stevens and finally by a six-month-long inquest, at an estimated cost to the British taxpayer of some £12 million (Sh1.4 billion).
The official verdict: unlawful killing through grossly negligent driving, effectively indicating that the princess and her lover were victims of manslaughter.
The coroner, Lord Justice Scott Baker, said there was “not a shred of evidence” to support Mohammed Fayed’s conspiracy claims.
Can the Paris Three now rest in peace?
Years ago, I got myself an extra week’s leave from the army by pretending I had a bad back when I was perfectly fit.
Everybody knows doctors cannot tell whether or not you are faking such an injury and since other members of my family did genuinely suffer from back trouble, it seemed the obvious dodge to try.
Us little people
But deep down inside, I always felt a bit uncomfortable about this deception, so there seemed to be something inevitable about what happened last week.
Attempting to screw a hasp on a door, this simple DIY task rendered me prostrate, groaning (yelping, actually) and clutching my spine. Since then, I have been doing a powerful impersonation of Groucho Marx and Quasimodo combined.
I do not really believe your sins will catch you out (I’ve seen too many great sinners enjoying the fruits of their wickedness) but somehow for us little people, there always seems to be a payback, doesn’t there?
Maybe that’s why I never cheat on my income tax. If there was a random audit, my file would most certainly be selected.
It is now an offence in this country for a man to call a woman “dear”, “darling”, “pet”, “love”, “honey”, “sweetie” or any similar form of address that men commonly use when addressing women whose real names they do not know.
This law was not voted through by Parliament but imposed by way of statutory instrument to comply with a European Directive on Equal Treatment.
Thus it was never aired in debate and no opportunity to object was offered to our lawmakers. The mover in this brainless affair was Harriet Harman, holder of the absurd Women and Equalities Ministry.
Ass of a law
I rarely agree with the Daily Mail, but when they described this legislation as “an insult to democracy and common sense”, they hit the nail on the head.
Presumably, the move was seen as protective of the dignity of women, but some obvious questions arise: Does this law extend to husbands and boyfriends?
I know lots of guys who call their girlfriends “darling” in case they address them by the name of their predecessor.
And if you cannot tell a barmaid, “Thanks, love” when she serves your beer, do you have to check her wrinkles and ring finger and make an instant decision between “miss” (which makes the feminists angry) and “madam” (with its bordello-ish overtones)?
Or even try the politically correct “ms”, which comes out as “miz” and sounds like a bee has got into the room?
Plus, where do you stand with the crude-sounding “missus” for “mrs”, which is a traditional indicator that the lady in question is married? How are you supposed to know?
With advancing years, many men use words such as “dear” because they cannot call to mind the first name of women they know well.
They do it not to be insulting or hurtful but to be kind and polite.
I suspect this ass of a law will prove entirely unworkable and will be consigned to the oblivion from which it should never have emerged.
True story: Spotting a woman waiting in the rain, a vicar pulled over and offered her a lift. “Take me to the Station Hotel,” she commanded, thinking she had hailed a taxi.
Since the weather was so bad, the man of God drove to her destination, where she proffered a five-pound note for the fare.
The vicar explained who he was. “Oh, I see,” said the woman, and putting the fiver back in her purse, she handed over a 50-pence piece.
“Put this in your Sunday collection,” she said.
Who was the funniest man in the Bible? Samson – he brought the house down.
Who was the worst sinner in the Bible? Moses – he broke all Ten Commandments at once.
Which part of Palestine was especially wealthy? The area around Jordan where the banks were overflowing.
Is it a sin for a woman to make coffee? Yes. It says in the Bible that He-brews.
Which Bible character had no parents? Joshua, son of Nun.
Who was the greatest financier in the Bible? Noah – he was floating his stock when everyone else was in liquidation.
Who was the first drug user in the Bible? Nebuchadnezzar – he was on grass for seven years.
Soure: Daily Nation |
|
 Next news - Previous news
|
|
|
|
