To thine own self be true

What conspiracy?

Posted by Polonius on 15 December, 2006

Mohammed Fayed refuses to accept the conclusions of Lord Stevens’ report into the accident that killed his son. I’m a firm believer in Occam’s Razor, entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem, which translates roughly as “Keep it simple, Stupid!” If you get into a car with a driver who’s so pissed he thinks he has a chance of out-running motor-bikes on a dry road, it would be prudent to wear a seat-belt. The facts speak for themselves; there is simply no need for any conspiracy theory.

Now, I don’t seek out royal stories. I’ve gone slightly off The Independent in recent years, but I’ve always been impressed by their attitude towards royal trivia. But this story’s been hard to avoid. Another aspect of it that made headlines even before the publication of the report was the one about the bugged telephones. According to The Observer‘s account, “The American secret service was bugging Princess Diana’s telephone conversations without the approval of the British security services on the night she died”. Perhaps the most bizarre aspect of this story is the implication that US authorities need British approval to conduct ops in France. Does anybody seriously believe that?


One Response to “What conspiracy?”

  1. Home said

    Thanks for sharing this information. Really is pack with new knowledge. Keep them coming.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: