On the 25th anniversary of the death of Princess Diana, frustrated queen of Great Britain, former Her Royal Highness, on the Alma de Paris bridge with Dodi Al Fayed, her summer adventure on the Côte d’Azur, there is not a single official celebration in Great Britain. Neither the Royal House, nor the Conservative government nor Princes Harry and William, her sons, will publicly remember her at a church service, or at a visit to her grave in her town chapel or on Twitter. . Diana, Princess of Wales, she is the first disappeared of the Royal Family, ignored by all, feared as a ghost.
As then, the Royal Family continues its summer vacations at Balmoral Palace, the Scottish “estate” that found Queen Elizabeth, the Queen Mother, Prince Philip, Prince Charles and William and Harry, their two sons, when She died at dawn in a disputed car accident on the bridge in front of the Eiffel Tower in Paris.
For the first 20 years no one talked to their children about what happened to their mother. It was the chief of police, Lord Lawrence, who, in a 50-minute interview, explained to Harry and William what had happened to their mother, in a police report, undermining a £45 million police investigation.
No one from the Royal Family had spoken about the issue and the official view of the princess’s children is none other than the official story of the Scotland Yard investigation.
A statue of Lady Di, in London. AP Photo
Prince Harry, youngest son, was on the verge of “break Down”. His mother’s psychoanalyst saved him. He left the army and his role as a helicopter fighter pilot and married Meghan Markle, a mixed-race American.
William, the heir and older brother, never spoke of the subject officially. His father, Prince Charles and future king, remarried his mistress and the reason for his divorce, Camilla Parker Bowles, today designated queen consort.
Elizabeth II is on the brink of the end of her kingdom, with serious mobility problems and very few public appearances. The Royal Family has broken off relations with Harry and Meghanwho return to Great Britain on September 5 to fulfill their benefit. Will they or will they not go to Balmoral Palace, where they have been invited by the queen?
Only one hideous statue of Diana in Kensington Palace exists and it was unveiled by her children. However, the conspiracy theories about the death of Princess Diana do not die.
Was it a fortuitous accident? Did the British establishment kill her? Was it a problem for The Firm? Who gave the order? Why didn’t the Royal Family come down from Balmoral to remember her on the streets of London and that indifference almost cost the queen her crown?
To what extent does the official British investigation use English cultural precepts, to shape what happened to its public opinion, as a completely drunk Ritz hotel chauffeur and head of security, when the french don’t drink like a british?
Why is Trevor Rees Jones, Diana’s custodian who was saved in the accident and lost his memory, the head of security for AstraZeneca today, under Russian siege to steal vaccine formulas?
Devorik and the documentary
This Wednesday will be broadcast “Diane, the Ultimate Truth”, a documentary made by a former British detective turned journalist, who reconstructed the accident and involved the French police who investigated. He spoke with the French police chief, who discovered that a white Fiat had touched the Mercedes Benz carrying Diana before hitting the tunnel pillar and ruled out the role of photographers in the unfolding of the accident.
The Argentinian Robert Devorik, one of the best living friends of the princess and who took her on her only trip to Buenos Aires, participated in the documentary. It was to him that Diana repeated her “premonitions” that she might “die in a helicopter car or plane crash” and asked them not to go up with her.
In July 1981, Carlos and Diana got married. AFP photo
From his home in Vienna, this was the dialogue with Clarionahead of the documentary’s broadcast tomorrow in Britain, the US and Europe.
“Good morning can not say. But we are facing a historic day for the 25th anniversary of the death of the princess of the English people, ”said Devorik as a greeting, this itinerant traveler and opera fan who came to Austria to attend the Salzburg festival.
-It is 25 years since the death of Princess Diana and there is not a single tribute in the English people, nor in the Royal Family. Why?
-I think that in the English town the celebrations are in each one. Everyone must have it in their feelings. In the Royal Family it is another story. I have told the press in general: Diana’s ghost cannot be gotten rid of because they created it. That is to say: they continue to be afraid of the power that she had and of everything that she summoned, did and brought into the world, with her hope, with her labor of love and with everything that favored the crown and the crown. he couldn’t see it.
-The children are fighting. But at the same time they don’t celebrate the death of their mother either, about whom they know very little.
-I think there is a topic that we don’t know about either because none of us who have been Diana’s friends have called us. They have made a separation. There is like a very strange spectrum about honoring a character as extraordinary as she was. There is no character in the history of humanity who has tried to eliminate it after death as well. It is a double death that Diana had. Death as a human being and immortal: they have erased it from history, from British daily life.
-You talked about the fear they have of Diana. We are talking today about the ghost, the spirit of Diana. Are you afraid of the change that she implied? Are they afraid of things like what happened with Harry marrying a half-breed and leaving the monarchy? Are you afraid that today, after so many years and with the sick queen, and a royal house stuck with pins, it will fall apart?
-I do not think so. I think the queen is not sick. She is in the last days of her life because of her longevity. Precisely what maintains the Royal House at this time is the queen, with all the strength of her that she has left. I think that the rest of the characters in the royal family have shown that they are second-rate actors.
Tribute to Diana in London, last year. Photo EFE
William, the young king that is needed
-Although they are second-rate actors, they are going to be the first actors when the queen disappears. Is it a solid line between Prince Charles and his son William or is it somehow a line of necessity?
-It’s a line of necessity. If Prince Charles were a little less selfish and a lot smarter, he would leave the chance to his son, who is just the right age to be king in Europe right now. He could be a character such as the prime minister of Canada or the new prime ministers of the world, who are young people, with energy and blood and not a man, who is 74 years old, practically defeated by the vicissitudes of everything he lived through and in a certain way he suffered for being such a selfish being.
-Is it going to be another Royal House after the queen or is he going to try to repeat history?
-No, you will not be able to repeat history because history does not repeat itself. They could be similar. But he does not have the strength, nor the discipline, nor the greatness of the queen. The queen was wrong about Diana: she did not know how to handle the situation, err humanum est. But the queen has been a great Regent. She has been an example for Britain. She thing that her son at this point is not and he can not be and he will not be. Final point.
And William?
-William, we have to see how far Buckingham Palace’s machinery lets him work and how far it goes. It is not the function of a human being, but it is a whole machine.
“Is Harry coming back or not coming back?” Is he going to reconcile or not with his father?
-That doesn’t change the story, because Harry is a minor Royal.
-But when the father is king, he will be second in line.
Nope.
He’s going to be a prince, son of the king. And what changes?
-Nothing changes because William’s son is next. Harry is never going to have the power of first figure. He will always be a supporting actor.
And that was the crisis.
-The crisis was not about Harry. The crisis was due to everything that Harry and his wife opened their mouths, their irreverent behavior in front of the queen, which had never happened before. But it is not because of the hierarchical and constitutional importance of Prince Harry.
-Meghan just spoke up and said that they left because they had become irrelevant and annoyed others.
-That’s exactly what I’m saying. But they were irreverent towards the queen and towards the crown. The crown is an institution, like it or not. It has survived wars, economic vicissitudes, political crises. The only person who shook the crown in its years and centuries of history has been the death of the Princess of Wales.
-But why? Are people suspicious? Are there conspiracy theories?
-Let’s leave all that aside and everything that was talked about. You don’t kill a person in a car or plane accident: you can kill them alive. The crown killed Diana in life, leaving her alone, emptying her, calling her ridiculous, telling her that she had to go psychologically to a doctor, denying her public appearances and calling her when some world leader asked for her. The crown left her aside. The Royal Family cast her aside and she was left with her strength going forward. But a person is killed while still alive, it is not necessary to kill him.
-Twenty-five years after her death, how would the crown have been with Diana alive?
-If they had been negative like until today, they would continue fighting against her. Stupidly because she would still shine. If they had been a little intelligent or smart, better said, today she would be the itinerant ambassador helping England to remain a world power, giving it a modernity that she still does not have. There would not have been so many problems, with both Brexit and non-Brexit and other things if Diana had existed. Because Diana had an extraordinary vision of the future.
-You participated in a documentary that will be released tomorrow in Great Britain. What is the conclusion of that documentary?
-The conclusion is that there is no conclusion. There are reasons to think that she was killed and there are reasons to say that it was an accident. I have my own reasons and it is that an accident happens for something and is induced, and leads to an accident.
The conclusion will be drawn by history. I will not be alive at the time or it will never be deduced, as many things remained a mystery. Diana, as her name goes “Queen of the Hunters”, was hunted down. She was badly married to Prince Charles and manhunted and that’s what makes me sad for the rest of my life.
If they hadn’t taken him out of custody, when they took away his title of His Royal Highness. If he had had that personal custody, which was selfish to have taken away from him, they would have protected her and she would be alive.
PB
.
