Comet Enthusiast

Film Night Vision

 

PRINCESS DIANA - VISION OF A MISSION

PRINCESS DIANA -   A VISION OF A MISSION

A royal timebomb in waiting.

When the terrible news reached the ears of the mayor part of word societies, the word assasination came as easily to the lips of most as a simple mathematical equation. The association seemed obvious and still does today, but as to who could possibly have been behind the trigger, is as mysterious as the very nature of the death itself. Assuming of course that it was an assasination the matter of motive has to feature high up in the list of items that have to be meticulously examined. It is not as simple as hate, exasperation or vested interest in Monarchy. It goes beyond that and there are quarters where few have dared to look.

The world reacted simply to an expected,vengeful, Royal family vendetta, holding the very Queen of England herself directly responsible for the summary execution of an indiscreet challenger. It is suprising that under those circumstances, other members of the family, were not attacked or at best publicly abused.bearing in mind the strength of the conviction. It shows that there was doubt, collective doubt considering the degree of trust and perhaps sentimental attachment that most British people have for their Queen. Despite my own privileged position with respect to the accumulation of contacts within the royal circles over the years, I did not expect such a wide variety of confused and genuinely lame comments from those quarters. Very inner circles were convinced that mavericks within the country´s security services were to blame. They hesitated however, when it came to any indication of a build up of threats or warnings which the Princess herself may have commented on. They “had heard” a few things about inner royal threats, but no more than any one faction within the family would say in defence of common interests. They were quite adamant that the plot, if there was one, did not come from those quarters with the voluntary contribution that “save for one or two, most were well above such malice”. Of those two, one was ingenuous and the other, simply out of touch with reality. None, at the time, ever volunteered to say that Diana had mentioned threats of an accident and an end to her resistance. It came as a surprise to most, therefore, when the letter which appeared to attest to Diana´s concern, was published and the authenticiy of the document established.

The dangers from outside

To understand the potential threat of a security service unwilling to allow the destabilisation of the Royal system, it is important also, to understand the Royals themselves. The Key figures at least. The relationship that Princess Diana had with them differed in various quarters. The outer Royals were probably more antagonistic than the very obvious inner ones and the relationship the Princess had with both the Queen and the Duke was better than she had with her own husband. It is now obvious that the Duke of Edinburgh himself admired her personality and saw what he had always suspected, that his own son was not up to many things. The relationship between them, was not a father and son one in the sentimental role of the phrase. Very few people have correctly interpreted the kind of man Prince Phillip has always been or the counterbalance he represented as a vociferous and often startlingly direct consort. His support of Charles therefore was not one easily identified with blind admiration. Diana´s rebellious stand therefore would not have either provoked much of a response other than one of caution and perhaps the odd lecture or two. Later correspondence from Diana illustrates this clearly. The Queen herself, was clearly fearful of an attempt from what she called “dark forces” and did not hesitate to think her car had been interfered with when she was told of the accident. Prince Charles however, disgusted by her behaviour, which had always overshadowed and perhaps even deducted from his “presence” would have found any feelings of animosity in him rise no higher than leaving her to her own devices – which is what he did. He was acutely aware of his own position with respect to his inability to be himself in her presence and found greater comfort in Camilla´s company who after all, had more than simply slept with him. In fact, she had, over a long period, identified with his sentimental nature and one would suspect, a nature riddled with a wide variety of fears. Bearing in mind the complex destabilising changes taking place in Britain, in the main for the worse, it is not difficult to understand these underlying fears. He was, however, toughened by an educational system created for him by cold and demanding family advisors oblivious to the psychological harm that it was bound to cause. Prince Edward curiously, was almost broken by such attempts. Prince Andrew, found solace well away from the family and caught himself tangled in a broken marriage as well and as we also all know, was his indomitable sister Anne. Anybody who has tangled with the Princess Royal can vouch for her no nonsense stand and it is not difficult to see who she got it from. Much has been said about the Royal choices, but I now firmly believe that it was not a question of the choosing of the wrong spouses but the sheer incompatibility of ordinary human sentiments with the physical and psychological demands of being a stressed member of the world´s most famous and influential family. Prince Charles therefore, did no more than Princes (and Crown Prince at that), have done throughout the whole of history - given their personal relations a good second place within the demands of the State. The so called neglected Princess who technically benefitted from the association with the Crown to the point of being able to find vent for her passions and altruism, obviously had other concepts of reality. If she had not been the wife of the crown prince she would have not been able to do all those things or perhaps even given much attention and that is a fact tha tmnay people conveniently forget.

Had I not known that there was real conflict and incompatability between them, I could have even imagined that it was all a part of a theatrical act that wins public attention to a cause that thrives on it. It does not take divine inspiration to work that one out. The real problem was not Camilla, who could and would have kept herself in the background like most secret lovers, but Princess Diana´s exaggerated self esteem. Under the circumstances, given such provocation, she was out to prove her own damaged exclusivity, determined to save her pride and private war against those who sought to monopolise or perhaps alienate her father´s love. Perhaps it was not the public at large that worried her, but those within her family who may have made her feel that she was unduly and unreasonably sensitive. Diana did not get on with most members of her family, but it does not mean that she was not an outstandingly affectionate and valuable person. As far as Prince Charles is concerned however, even a cursory glance at Camilla´s acutely apprehensive features, during the recent BBC interview over his military friend´s death in Afghanistant, says it all. She saw through the words and was all too ready to stop him from getting unduly upset. Diana would have been incapable of any of this. Again, perhaps it was not in her nature to show her affecton in this way.

The predatory writers.

When Andrew Morton was sent to me by a variety of press representatives who mistakenly thought I was “well in” with the Royals, it was done with the sort of malice calculated to produce scandalous material avidly sought by gossip column readers. The marriage breakdown, it seemed, was probably the highest level of such material ever and the intrepid Mr. Morton was sent packing without a note. I knew what he was after however and I noted his movements and contacts during that particular tour. I was not surprised therefore to discover that the very first direct hit took him to one of the contacts that he managed to make that same day. He chatted through the early hours of the night with someone who had cause to want to harm Prince Charles and without doubt had a very direct line to the ingenuous Princess Diana who was going through the worst part of her ordeal in this highly public marriage.

 

When Diana started to sleep around, she did it with the conviction that what was good for the goose, was good for the gander. Essentially, she was not that sort of person, however frustrated she felt at the inability to make her own sex life meet her needs. Everyone knows that the odd encounter can and does turn up in most people´s lives and that few are the ones to put a stop to them. Prince Charles had been brought up to do a job no matter what and in his mind, his private life had little or nothing to do with it but what he was not interested in, was the odd encounter. His interest in women had always been something that even staged public relations exercises could not put across effectively. A state that demands “normal” behaviour, including treatment of women as sex objects, would find it very difficult to put a man of the people in that role. In this case, it tried and failed. What Prince C harles needed was a solid counterpart who could share his fears and sentiments and leave him free to roam. He needed a stability which a theatrically passionate, demanding wife with wires crossed, could not provide. When he continued with his relationship with Camilla, despìte teh threats, he did it, I feel, because that was where he felt protected and relaxed in an atmosphere that he understood.. There were no demands – just those that the very nature of the closeness provoked. If he had managed to get this at home, this relationship would not have prospered. The Prince had fought his way through a very wide variety of situations which went against his ambitions. He had been denied a useful job and like his father had often been told off indirectly by a censorious media eager to show him up. “Make them laugh” said Prince Phillip once, a little indiscreetly “and you have them on your side. It does however make sense when after all, trying to establish a balanced relationship within thirty second with thousand you shake your hands, is hardly a formula for acclaim. I once asked a similar question to a Governor of a Crown Territory who had little if anything in common with the local residents. He went a bright pink to start off with and when I continued to try and explain what I meant. “ How can you really communicate meaningfully with all those people and not upset the ones who feel slighted ? “ I finally got the answer “A matter of technique”. And thereby hangs the tail. A technique to do in minutes what it takes most of us to establish in hours. Royals therefore make up their own rules as they go along and sometimes going against what has been drilled into them over the decades by overcautious and often unworldly advisors. I was asked questions every now and then by close aides like “Are these tours worth it ?” (during the bad press period of the Moroccan tour) and “Is it time to get closer to the people ?” Both instinctive, emphatic yeses from me with notes of caution. I suspected that the final recipient was not around. I was always taken aback at sudden demands for what appeared to be instant answers and I took note of the direction from which they appeared to come. I could not but feel the strong winds of change that was causing the Institution to shiver with apprehension. I also noted just how firm was the wish to do things the way the public wanted them done and the signs of the beginning of a new approach. The changes that have taken place since then are worthy of their own awards and very much as I would have wanted to see them done. When asked how and when changes should take place, I volunteered to say “through a family and expert committee” which I must say, produced the sort of hands up and shrug shoulder response that often made me feel that I could not be taken seriously.

An outsider from the start.

Princess Diana could not show the way and was an outsider however much she played with the young Royals in her youth. Her family insistance that she was a Royal in her own right and a Princess by birth is not strictly correct in so far as this could apply to millions of others who can trace their descent from distant crowns. It may however have meant much to her through family upbringing, bearing in mind that she was a Spencer, but her worldly unrestraint drew on her need to demonstrate it in a form that was to lead to the colourful and dangerous game that would eventually pawn her life. Diana was no stranger to the thoughts and behaviour of her immediate Royal family. The only one who made her nervous and understandably, was the Queen mother who no doubt wanted to work out for herself just what sort of person had got into the household. The widowed Queen, basking in the sort of upbringing and sense of political correctness that had endeared her to the nation, could have little regard for anyone putting her own daughter and her very close grandson in the shade. Anyone who tendered this poisoned cup could not but be an object of close study. There is no record of her comments with respect to this issue, but the Queen Mother and Princess Margaret had little time for the show girl princess. If we bear in mind that the Queen Mother had given up everything she knew and understood in a happy and successful family life away from the rigours of the Royal frontline. She had tolerated the whims and fancies of “Wallis” and it is easy to see how the horrors of the past had come back to haunt her. If we also bear in mind that she told the Queen herself to sit down and act like one, during the shooting of one of the Royal films, it falls into place even better. I once had a curious experience with respect to how the dramatic change in the Queen´s relatively ordinary life at the home in Piccadilly, was to mark her forever. I caught a strong sense of nostalgia bordering on distress, when an insensitive enquirer formulated a question in this respect. I caught it again on another occasion on a more personal note that left me pensive for weeks to come. The Queen was an incredibly sensitive person who wanted to be kept well informed about the feelings of the people around her and she was quite capable of making up her own mind about things in a very worldly way. Above all, she had every reason to be a very affectionate and grateful person who could see meaning under the layers. The Queen Mother was a different order of things and one day whilst I was standing chatting endlessly to a Scottish weaver at an exhibition in London, I neglected what seemed like a rude pulling of my armsleeves by a boisterous big lady towering over me. Only after several attempts did I catch the full implication of what she was trying to say in mangled words – about keeping her waiting. Startled, I looked around to find The Queen mother on my other side with a wide grin, begging me to go on because she found it all so interesting. It is but a glimpse, but it does show that however impulsive, she was also a sensitive person who would have never allowed herself to be caught in anything as inelegant as aggression. Given the opportunity, she would have without doubt taught Princess Diana a thing or two. I suspect also that she was probably the key figure in the organising and successful culmination of the relationship and that she was more than saddened by its failure.

The birth of a purpose

Princess Diana knew of no other way to counteract what seemed like abuse of her role as a successful claimant to the throne if not the crown. No cloud was going to darken that achievement which she took in her father´s family name. Whereas at one point of time, the glory was hers, the role of the heir producer was not sufficient in itself to mitigate what was unmistakably the star role in a world mission. The vision had a flaw and the platform from which she drew the inspiration was threatened. Her sense of destiny and strange enlightenment was geared to becoming the centre of every glance and thought and if it had to come through her husband, then he too, had to be part and parcel of that ecosystem – a mistake that she proved unwittingly by scoring with the media in her rebel role with much greater ferocity. The plot that she had concocted in her mind did not come to her all of a sudden, but looked at in perpective and hindsight, it may well be that there were other advisors sharing the dream, in the background. She would show that as the mother of a Crown Head, she could extend her powers to encompass other nations and other dynasties much as Cleopatra had tried to do before. Like her, it was to prove her undoing but nothing that she did, however apparently socially unacceptable, was any different to hundreds of things Royal families and personages had done through the millenia in the quest for world influence. After all, Royal rules are not quite the same as those that bind local social structures and limited aspirations. If so, there would be no treaties, diplomatic climbdowns or mergers of interests which, behind the scenes, trade on power balances and always at a price to one or the other or both. This bears a little thinking about.

Diana began to show signs of illumination when she first started to mix in the Aids community. She often remarked about her healing powers and she shared the limelight with giants like Mother Theresa when the plastic Margaret Thatcher dismissed her with scorn. Diana cavorted with astrologers and Tarot readers and handled African children like stage props always keeping her eyes on the camera. And she did a lot of good in focussing public attention on this sordid neglect of human heritage. But it all fell to bits when viewed against the glamour and expensive costumes that brought the cameras clicking on her like tropical storms. She was convinced that she had powers, given to her by destiny and hidden forces. She was also out to identify with the world of massive populations and potentially important economies like that of India and Egypt. It is not suprising to me therefore that she chose two very public lovers in those ethnic communities. She asked someone about how those Arab men were. This was hardly something to do with love at first sight or sudden flushes of self consciousness when she had already treaty lovers like Charles Hewitt to every present she could please him with. It sounds more like the start of a mission that was planned and motivated by a desire to do things properly.

Some idea of what was crossing Princess Diana´s mind began to emerge with the Taj Mahal event which brought the lonely Princess in touch with the nostalgic stories of ancient India. The identification was not lost on the paparazzi who shot their way through it driven by this instinctive sense of identity. Funnily enough, most of the shots were as empty as Christmas calender shots, devoid of the real meaning that the juxtaposition of monument and live princess could have captured. Doubtlessly, this modern version of the Asian tale, reflected a state of mind that was nurtured by ideas of glories much greater than boring, modern day, constitutional monarchy. Princess Diana saw herself in the role of mother to future monarchs in these countries and comments made to close friends about past lives, bear this out.

Just after the accident, Egypt was paralysed with Diana and Doddi fervour and one thing became very obvious - that the issue of that relationship could have very easily displaced the Farouk dynasty.

 

 

 

About the Author

Parliamentary correspondentage at 15. Royal touring writer. Agency Commonwealth writer Publisher Britain's first trade journal for drivers. Travel writer and millionaire businessman, hotelier, restauranteur. Contributor to Holy Blood and Holy Grail. Messianic Legacy. Sword and the Seal. Articles published in wide variety of British and Commonwealth Journals. Author Al Andalus * a trail of discovery. Lulu

living with the dead, night vision cameras?

just watching living with the dead and when they are filming in night vision all their eyes are slightly dark where the iris is but bright white at the pupil, the same as in most haunted, but the ghost catcher lady, jonny, who is black, has white irises and black pupils. i have never seen the eyes look that way, are all coloured peoples eyes made up differently or just this ladys. the question may sound odd but it is puzzling me.
25 minutes ago - 3 days left to answer.

i watched it to and asked that same question what i thought it could be is could she be wearing contact lenses just a thought

Film Night Vision