Diana letter said husband was plotting to kill her

LONDON (Reuters) - An infamous letter written by Princess Diana in which she warned that her ex-husband Prince Charles was planning to kill her has been published for the first time.

In the letter, written to her butler Paul Burrell 10 months before her death in a Paris car crash in 1997, Diana said: "This particular phase in my life is the most dangerous -- my husband is planning an accident in my car".

Details of the letter first emerged in 2004 but have only been made public now at the inquest into the deaths of Diana and her lover Dodi al-Fayed, who was also killed in the crash.

It can be seen on http://www.scottbaker-inquests.gov.uk/evidence/docs/INQ0010117.p df

Dodi's father Mohamed al-Fayed, owner of Harrods, says Diana and his son were killed by British security services on the orders of Prince Philip, Charles' father.

Fayed alleges the killing was ordered because the royal family did not want the mother of the future king having a child with his son. He says Diana's body was embalmed to cover up evidence she was expecting a baby.

Diana's note to Burrell is seen by conspiracy theorists as evidence that her death was not an accident as the authorities have ruled.

Major investigations by British and French police have both concluded that the couple died because their chauffeur Henri Paul was drunk and driving too fast.

In the letter, Diana writes that the alleged murder plot would involve "brake failure and serious head injury".

This would allow Charles to marry Tiggy Legge-Bourke, the former nanny of couple's sons Princes William and Harry, the note continued, adding "Camilla is nothing but a decoy."

In fact, Charles married his long-term lover Camilla Parker Bowles in 2005.

Earlier this week, the inquest heard from Diana's close confidante Lucia Flecha de Lima, wife to the then Brazilian ambassador in London, who rejected suggestions the princess feared Charles was planning a car accident.

"I still don't believe she was fearing for her life, especially from Prince Charles, the future king of your country" she said.

Diana had more reason to fear that malevolent egotistical Nazi tyrant Tony Blair than her spineless wimp of an ex-husband and his foreign father.

The Queen marks 60 years of marriage

LONDON (Reuters) - The Queen, the first reigning monarch to celebrate a diamond wedding anniversary, marked the milestone on Monday with a service of thanksgiving alongside Prince Philip.

The royal octogenarians, whose family have been buffeted by a string of scandals, divorces and tragedy, retraced their steps up the aisle of Westminster Abbey to hail 60 years of marriage.

The family's German relations were not invited to their 1947 wedding because of strong anti-German feeling after World War Two. This time they were on the guest list.

The 2,000-strong congregation included playwright Tom Stoppard and opera singer Joan Sutherland, as well as four other couples also celebrating diamond wedding anniversaries.

The service was staged the day before the actual anniversary -- November 20. On Tuesday, the royal couple will mark the day by flying to the Mediterranean island of Malta where Prince Philip was serving as a naval officer at the time of their marriage.

The wedding of the Queen, who had been in love with Philip since she was a child, offered a rare burst of colour and pageantry in an austere post-war world of rationing and shortages in Britain.

On her wedding day, the 21-year-old princess wore an ivory silk Norman Hartnell gown decorated with 10,000 seed pearls.

PARTNERSHIP FOR LIFE

In sharp contrast to their own marriage, three of the royal couple's four children have divorced.
Prince Andrew said in an interview last week that his own divorce from Sarah Ferguson had disappointed his parents who firmly believe in the "old-fashioned idea" that marriage is a partnership for life.

The 81-year-old monarch and her 86-year-old husband were greeted at the doors of Westminster Abbey by a fanfare of trumpets. Five choristers who sang at their wedding as schoolboys carried candles in the anniversary procession.

Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams, spiritual head of the world's 77 million Anglicans, praised the royal marriage as a faithful and creative partnership lived "in the full light of publicity."

"We are probably more aware than ever these days of the pressures this brings and the costs it involves," he said.

"Before we complain too loudly about a world of disposable relationships and short-term policies, a world of fracturing and insecure international bonds and the decline of trust, we should remember today that we have cause for thanksgiving."

Among those who gave readings was Oscar-winning actress Judi Dench, who recited a poem by Poet Laureate Andrew Motion, and Prince William.

Terry Kelly Declares War On The Royal Family

Off with his head!

Panel says no case for official media regulation

LONDON (Reuters) - The press should continue to be self-regulated despite such lapses as pursuing Prince William's on-off girlfriend and bugging the royal household's phones, a parliamentary committee said on Wednesday.

The notoriously aggressive print media are regulated by a newspaper-funded Press Complaints Commission (PCC) rather than by a government body, which papers say allows members of the public to have complaints heard more quickly and cheaply than in court.

Parliament's culture committee said the commission should continue to supervise the industry, but its role might need further investigation after "less than impressive performance" in restraining tabloid excess.

The comments followed scathing criticism of the media last month from former Prime Minister Tony Blair who called it a "feral beast" that tore people and reputations to shreds.

In its report, the culture committee highlighted two issues -- the harassment of Prince William's girlfriend Kate Middleton and the royal household phone bugging, for which a reporter for the country's biggest-selling newspaper was jailed.

In March, Middleton, whose house was being mobbed by paparazzi, filed a formal complaint with the PCC after the Daily Mirror printed a picture that she said was taken as a result of harassment.

The complaint was withdrawn after the Mirror apologised.

"The Press Complaints Commission took too long to act to protect Kate Middleton from clear and persistent harassment," the committee's report said.

The committee went on to describe the royal phone bugging by the News of the World as "one of the most serious breaches of the code (of conduct) in recent times".

Clive Goodman, the paper's royal correspondent, was jailed and his editor-in-chief resigned after it emerged that Goodman had eavesdropped on voicemail from royal household mobile phones.

"We are in no doubt that the editor of the News of the World was right that he had no choice but to resign," the report said.

The committee said there was no case yet for statutory regulations or signs of public support for a privacy law.

"Self-regulation by the press is infinitely preferable to the alternative," committee chairman John Whittingdale said.

I fully support the parliamentary committee's decision on this matter.

Quote of the Day 29.6.2007

"Cameron should kick the failing people out, starting with himself for forcing his MPs (supposedly Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition) to give a standing ovation for a very mediocre PM both sides of the house just wanted to get rid of and Osborne for the "heir of Blair"-statement." - an anonymous poster on Iain Dale's Diary about a probable Shadow Cabinet reshuffle

Lingerie company chief rejects MBE

The co-founder of lingerie brand Agent Provocateur has rejected his MBE because he finds Tony Blair "morally corrupt".

Joseph Corre was awarded the title for his services to the fashion industry in the Queen's Birthday Honours list.

But he knocked back the MBE on Wednesday, saying he could not accept the Prime Minister as "someone capable of giving an honour".

Mr Corre - the son of fashion designer Dame Vivienne Westwood - said he had initially been "flattered" to have his Agent Provocateur work recognised by the establishment.

"However after some serious reflection I have decided that I cannot accept it," Mr Corre, 39, said in a statement.

"I have been chosen by an organisation headed by a Prime Minister who I find morally corrupt. Who has been involved in organised lying, to the point where thousands of people including children! have suffered death, detention and torture in Afghanistan and Iraq."

Mr Corre's wife and Agent Provocateur co-founder Serena Rees is "delighted" with her own MBE and will not be rejecting it, a spokeswoman for the chain said.

The couple opened their first store in Soho in London in December 1994. The chain has since expanded to 30 shops worldwide.

"To accept this MBE as an honour would mean to me that I would have to accept the Prime Minister as someone capable of giving an honour i.e. an honourable man, which I cannot find it in my heart to do," Mr Corre's statement added.

"This in no way reflects on my opinion of the Queen whom I respect and would be honoured to have as a customer."

Bravo!!!

Iraq: Prince Harry & WMDs

Another day, another news story concerning Iraq! If someone is whinging about whether the 2003 war was legal or not, others are complaining about the lack of WMDs or something else.

Recently, the burning issue has been about whether Prince Harry should be deployed to fight in the south of the country. First he was to be deployed, then his deployment was under review, then reconfirmed and now cancelled because of a combination of new intelligence and existing fears of the Prince and those under his command being at greater risk of attack from insurgents than would normally be the case. The whole issue has been mishandled by both the army and the media, with the later in particular being guilty of abusing their freedoms by being prepared to put the Prince’s life at greater risk of death to increase their revenue. Not content with having a hand in his mother’s death and harassing his brother’s ex-girlfriend almost to an early grave, now the media are out to bury Harry himself six feet under.

Should Harry be deployed in Iraq? Yes, he should and he wants to serve his country. The army should have respect his wishes not to be treated differently from his army colleagues and the fact that he is spared from conflict but others are not and would be court-marshalled for refusing to deploy in Iraq is the height of hypocrisy and a national disgrace. When Harry decided to join the army, he knew full well that he was potentially signing away his life. Thus, if Harry’s deployment in Iraq meant that the insurgents would spend more of their time and resources trying to harm and kill him and his friends instead of innocent civilian men, women and children, then that would certainly be more preferable than the continuation of the bloody and evil status quo. If the army are not prepared to deploy Harry in Iraq, yet compel other service personnel into action against their will, then the government are morally obliged to withdraw all British ground forces from the country as soon as is possible. It is either all for one and one for all or nothing at all!

The issue of WMDs

Were there weapons of mass destruction in Iraq? It is quite clear that there were and thus both George W. Bush and Tony Blair were telling the truth on that score. Not only were WMDs smuggled out of Iraq by Saddam Hussein to Russia and China via Syria and international shipping docks such as Rotterdam, Netherlands in exchange for cash to finance a Baathist insurrection after the then-impending Anglo-American military liberation, but also some WMDs are still being discovered in Iraq today. Over the past six months, American forces have discovered hundreds of WMDs still left over from Saddam’s rule. Let us not forget, that shortly before the Coalition of the willing launched their military liberation campaign, United Nations’ weapons inspectors still found Iraq in possession of illegal WMDs in violation of previous UN resolutions. Even when hostilities between Iraq and the Coalition finally broke out into open conflict, Iraq still launched illegal missiles at Kuwait in a futile attempt to destroy the Anglo-American bases in the country.

Two more things should be noted with regard to WMDs. Firstly, Saddam himself was often misled about the reality of his WMD programme by his own scientists. These scientists took advantage of Saddam’s intellectual ignorance to gain greater financial and material privileges from themselves by overstating the progress they had made in his realising his objectives. If Saddam Hussein himself could be misled into believing that he had a stronger hand militarily than was the reality, can anyone blame the United States and Great Britain for taking him seriously? Secondly, what exactly can be considered a weapon of mass destruction? The consensus is that any biological, chemical and nuclear weapon is a WMD, but doesn’t common sense remind us that anything can become a WMD if it is in the possession individual or group that intends to use it in a violent and homicidal manner?

Quote of the Day 17.5.2007

"If it is too dangerous for Harry, it is too dangerous for the rest of the troops out there." - Rose Gentle, whose 19-year-old son Gordon died in Iraq, on the head of the British army, Richard "Commander Cunt" Dannatt's decision not to deploy Prince Harry in the country as was originally intended

Happy 300th Birthday

On this day 300 years ago, the Kingdoms of England and Scotland merged to form the Kingdom of Great Britain, a single realm encompassing the entire island of Great Britain with a single parliament and government based in Westminster.

Happy birthday Britain! May you be able to survive the continuing attacks on your existence by the Celtic separatists and the Evilpean Union.

Harry 'will quit over an Iraq ban'

Household Cavalry Regiment sources have warned that Harry will leave the Army if he is stopped from going to Iraq.

Military bosses are assessing the Prince's role in the Gulf after one of the bloodiest months for British forces in the war-torn country.

The MoD said his situation was under "constant consideration", as it was reported that the Army had launched an 11th-hour review of the decision to let him serve alongside his men.

The Household Cavalry source said: "This comes as a huge surprise. As of today, as far as the regiment's concerned, he is definitely, definitely going. This is what he signed up for and if he doesn't go, he will sign off and leave. He joined the Army for a bit of excitement and for him to be told he's not going would be awful."

And that sentiment would extend to his colleagues, he said, adding that Harry would get the best protection possible from his troop. "He has his troop, and the protection of his troop, and his vehicle," he said. "His troop will not just protect him but all the guys. He is just as important as the youngest guy in his troop. They are all there to do their bit."

Third in line to the throne Harry, 22, has set his heart on being a career soldier and leading his 11-strong armoured reconnaissance troop in Iraq. He has reportedly threatened to quit the Army before if he is not allowed to serve in a conflict zone.

In an interview to mark his 21st birthday, he insisted: "There's no way I'm going to put myself through Sandhurst and then sit on my a*** back home while my boys are out fighting for their country."

Royal sources maintained that the Prince would take any decision by Army chiefs like a "grown-up". The source said: "He's trained with his troop. He's responsible for the 11 of them. They're all bonded. They all want to go and do what they were trained to do. He's a grown-up and he'll take whatever the decision is, but he wants to go."

The source added: "He would be extremely disappointed but to say he would quit is way too strong."

Clarence House insisted that Harry was still on track to head out to Iraq, but declined to comment further. "It's an Army decision and always has been and always will be," a spokesman said.

The Parting Of The Ways

So Prince William and Kate Middleton have parted company. To be fair to both the press and the army, William's boozing and flirting with other women probably both played their part in the break up. William's time with the army will likely help him get over this development quicker than Ms. Middleton. As for Ms. Middleton, it is better to get out of her relationship with William now before she ended up like William's late mother.