Is it accepted that Diana was assassinated?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m trying to understand being a mom to two young children and not wearing a seatbelt. Nope. Can’t do it.

A terrible accident exacerbated by multiple irresponsible decisions (on multiple people’s parts).

It was 1997. Seatbelts in the backseat were really not the norm then, hard as that may be to believe.

What? I was 17 in 1997 and seatbelts were 100% “the norm” as they were my entire life.

+1. That's a ridiculous statement. I was 14 in 1997 and we wouldn't pull out of the driveway my entire life without being buckled in. We also had carseats. Not the "carseats until you're 12" thing people are doing now, but they existed. It was totally expected to buckle up when getting in the back of a car in 1997.

Yes, I was in LAW SCHOOL in 1997. Seatbelts were absolutely the norm 100% of the time for anyone with half a brain. Not necessarily in a cab in a city (in part because the cab seatbelts were kind of dirty), but NYC did have a major "buckle up in cabs" campaign in the mid-90's, because they put in plexiglass dividers in order to protect the cab drivers, which then led to a ton of people smashing their noses against plexiglass dividers when the cabbies hit the brakes to avoid hitting a rollerblader.

[Anonymous]

In US depends on your state when it became law.most starte in 1980’s through late 1990’s. Georgia 2021!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I should preface this question with saying that my husband and I are not conspiracy theorists nor are we particularly drawn to outlandish conclusions about much of anything. But when we were discussing the queens death with my parents the other day I offhandedly made the remark that it’s a complicated family for many reasons, one being that they like to off the women who arent behaving. It was meant sort of as a dark joke but also I do think they killed Diana and it wasn’t an accident. My husband joined me and thinking this was very obvious and then my parents basically fell over with shock that we would believe such an outlandish thing. It’s not a topic I haven’t thought much about this in years but now gets me wondering, do most people agree that Diana’s death wasn’t an accident or is it truly one of those outlandish things that the general public accepts that she was chased by paparazzi and killed accidently?

Diana killed herself by not fastening her seat belt. The only person who survived was a body guard who did fasten his seat belt .

Her death was investigated by the France and Britain not to mention all the other idiots who said the "Omnipotus They" killed her because she was pregnant with Didi's child!

Let this poor woman rest in peace!!!!!

[Anonymous]

Diana didn’t wear her seatbelt, if she had she wouldn’t have suffered her fatal injury which was caused by shearing inside from being unrestrained in the vehicle. Her bodyguard, who was the only one wearing a belt, survived.

It was a tragic death caused by a drunk driver and a foolish decision not to buckle up. The royal family’s hand was in it insofar as they failed to insist she continue to have a detail provided by the UK security service.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It was proven by the French government that the driver had illegal levels of alcohol in his system and that Diana and Dodi were not wearing seatbelts. While it's possible someone could have deliberately hit them, the reality is those two factors are what caused their deaths: they would have lived if they had buckled up!

The bodyguard who was wearing his seat belt did survive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Student of English history here. On the one hand, there's no proof it was an execution. OTOH, Queens who piss off the royal family often meet a bad end. It's a neat coincidence that Diana died in an accident before marrying her Muslim lover. Imagine the King of England with a Muslim step father.

I think we view the Monarchy as quaint, outdated, silly... there is some serious money and therefore power involved and, stranger things have happened.

They can't just chop off your head on trumped up charges anymore, but a wise woman 1) would never expect to be made happy by being Queen and 2) would be wise enough to know to play the game for her own safety and well being, as well as her children's.

IMHO

Diana had absolutely no intention of marrying Dodi.

In the unlikely event she would have, he would have never had a stepfather-y relationship with her children. He'd be simply her husband.

But again, she did not plan to marry him.

Finally, with Dodi's drinking and drugging habits combined with the iron, live-till-96 Windsor genes, it's a virtual certainty Dodi would have been pushing up daisies by the time William was king.

Google suggests there are rumors he was going to propose. How do you know he wasn't?

He bought an engagement ring.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It was proven by the French government that the driver had illegal levels of alcohol in his system and that Diana and Dodi were not wearing seatbelts. While it's possible someone could have deliberately hit them, the reality is those two factors are what caused their deaths: they would have lived if they had buckled up!

Have you spent much time around people who regularly use drivers and big cars? I don't mean that in a snarky way. I have for work reasons, and I'm always stunned by how few of them wear seatbelts while also having bodyguards, home security, etc. Even sometimes tell me that I don't need to use a seatbelt. Uhh......I kinda do if I want to survive any sort of crash. It's bizarre, frankly.

This. Cabs and rideshares, too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m trying to understand being a mom to two young children and not wearing a seatbelt. Nope. Can’t do it.

A terrible accident exacerbated by multiple irresponsible decisions (on multiple people’s parts).

It was 1997. Seatbelts in the backseat were really not the norm then, hard as that may be to believe.

What? I was 17 in 1997 and seatbelts were 100% “the norm” as they were my entire life.

+1. That's a ridiculous statement. I was 14 in 1997 and we wouldn't pull out of the driveway my entire life without being buckled in. We also had carseats. Not the "carseats until you're 12" thing people are doing now, but they existed. It was totally expected to buckle up when getting in the back of a car in 1997.

Nope, not in the backseat. I was in my 30s back then and wouldn’t have worn my seatbelt in the backseat.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It was proven by the French government that the driver had illegal levels of alcohol in his system and that Diana and Dodi were not wearing seatbelts. While it's possible someone could have deliberately hit them, the reality is those two factors are what caused their deaths: they would have lived if they had buckled up!

Have you spent much time around people who regularly use drivers and big cars? I don't mean that in a snarky way. I have for work reasons, and I'm always stunned by how few of them wear seatbelts while also having bodyguards, home security, etc. Even sometimes tell me that I don't need to use a seatbelt. Uhh......I kinda do if I want to survive any sort of crash. It's bizarre, frankly.

Fair point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It was proven by the French government that the driver had illegal levels of alcohol in his system and that Diana and Dodi were not wearing seatbelts. While it's possible someone could have deliberately hit them, the reality is those two factors are what caused their deaths: they would have lived if they had buckled up!

Have you spent much time around people who regularly use drivers and big cars? I don't mean that in a snarky way. I have for work reasons, and I'm always stunned by how few of them wear seatbelts while also having bodyguards, home security, etc. Even sometimes tell me that I don't need to use a seatbelt. Uhh......I kinda do if I want to survive any sort of crash. It's bizarre, frankly.

Fair point.

+1 and seatbelts we're definitely the norm for regular driving but a ton of ppl weren't using them in the backseat of cabs etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m trying to understand being a mom to two young children and not wearing a seatbelt. Nope. Can’t do it.

A terrible accident exacerbated by multiple irresponsible decisions (on multiple people’s parts).

It was 1997. Seatbelts in the backseat were really not the norm then, hard as that may be to believe.

What? I was 17 in 1997 and seatbelts were 100% “the norm” as they were my entire life.

+1. That's a ridiculous statement. I was 14 in 1997 and we wouldn't pull out of the driveway my entire life without being buckled in. We also had carseats. Not the "carseats until you're 12" thing people are doing now, but they existed. It was totally expected to buckle up when getting in the back of a car in 1997.

Yes, I was in LAW SCHOOL in 1997. Seatbelts were absolutely the norm 100% of the time for anyone with half a brain. Not necessarily in a cab in a city (in part because the cab seatbelts were kind of dirty), but NYC did have a major "buckle up in cabs" campaign in the mid-90's, because they put in plexiglass dividers in order to protect the cab drivers, which then led to a ton of people smashing their noses against plexiglass dividers when the cabbies hit the brakes to avoid hitting a rollerblader.

Also a New Yorker. I was in elementary school in the 90s, but I also recall that seat belts were not a huge thing in taxis at the time, for years after, and to a lesser degree, still today. Definitely odd because we wore seatbelt in our own cars.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Student of English history here. On the one hand, there's no proof it was an execution. OTOH, Queens who piss off the royal family often meet a bad end. It's a neat coincidence that Diana died in an accident before marrying her Muslim lover. Imagine the King of England with a Muslim step father.

I think we view the Monarchy as quaint, outdated, silly... there is some serious money and therefore power involved and, stranger things have happened.

They can't just chop off your head on trumped up charges anymore, but a wise woman 1) would never expect to be made happy by being Queen and 2) would be wise enough to know to play the game for her own safety and well being, as well as her children's.

IMHO

Diana had absolutely no intention of marrying Dodi.

In the unlikely event she would have, he would have never had a stepfather-y relationship with her children. He'd be simply her husband.

But again, she did not plan to marry him.

Finally, with Dodi's drinking and drugging habits combined with the iron, live-till-96 Windsor genes, it's a virtual certainty Dodi would have been pushing up daisies by the time William was king.

Google suggests there are rumors he was going to propose. How do you know he wasn't?

He bought an engagement ring.

According to his crazy dad. Diana’s friends who she spoke to from that fateful vacation insist she was not in love with Dodi and still pinned for Hasnat.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m trying to understand being a mom to two young children and not wearing a seatbelt. Nope. Can’t do it.

A terrible accident exacerbated by multiple irresponsible decisions (on multiple people’s parts).

It was 1997. Seatbelts in the backseat were really not the norm then, hard as that may be to believe.

What? I was 17 in 1997 and seatbelts were 100% “the norm” as they were my entire life.

+1. That's a ridiculous statement. I was 14 in 1997 and we wouldn't pull out of the driveway my entire life without being buckled in. We also had carseats. Not the "carseats until you're 12" thing people are doing now, but they existed. It was totally expected to buckle up when getting in the back of a car in 1997.

Nope, not in the backseat. I was in my 30s back then and wouldn’t have worn my seatbelt in the backseat.

Then you were just stupid. I was 19 in 1997 and had been wearing a seatbelt in the back for at least a decade, maybe more. To be fair, I remember not wearing in the early 80s, but by the early 90s, everyone I knew wore a seatbelt no matter where they sat in the car.

[Anonymous]

I can remember being inHS in the 80s and if we squeezed extra people in the back seat, the two skinniest (or the ones dating) would share a seatbelt. Even as crazy teens driving around with four kids in the backseat of a car, we were all belted!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m trying to understand being a mom to two young children and not wearing a seatbelt. Nope. Can’t do it.

A terrible accident exacerbated by multiple irresponsible decisions (on multiple people’s parts).

It was 1997. Seatbelts in the backseat were really not the norm then, hard as that may be to believe.

What? I was 17 in 1997 and seatbelts were 100% “the norm” as they were my entire life.

+1. That's a ridiculous statement. I was 14 in 1997 and we wouldn't pull out of the driveway my entire life without being buckled in. We also had carseats. Not the "carseats until you're 12" thing people are doing now, but they existed. It was totally expected to buckle up when getting in the back of a car in 1997.

Nope, not in the backseat. I was in my 30s back then and wouldn’t have worn my seatbelt in the backseat.

My kid was born in 1996. We couldn't leave the hospital without a carseat. Everyone was seat belted in.