Jump to content

Diana: The Witness in the Tunnel


Huguenot

Recommended Posts

With regards the letter, I suspect Prince William wasn't allowed to write it himself, it would've had to be checked by the royal spin doctors first. I'm not a bag royals fan, I just think this is wrong whoever it was dying.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Read a bit more about this in TimeOut on the way home. They put a very positive spin on the whole thing, with the only shot in the programme having already been printed on the front page of a newspaper (which I don't recall causing the same outrage)


The thrust of the programme being that the photographers became the scapegoat at the time, supposedly interfering with the medics trying to attend - something I remember clearly at the time. So if this isn't true (and medics at the scene are interviewed saying that the photographers did NOT impede) then we have an interesting public-interest story - "Mass hysteria at time of death forces a scapegoat mentality which affects many living people's lives for a decade") The photos at the centre of the storm are used to support this argument and do not show any ghoulish images...


So I'm at a loss as to what the fuss is about - if I read what I wrote at the beginning of my first post above it's apparent I fell in line with the pervading mood about how wrong CH4 were. And I might now be falling in line with an article I read in a magazine.. But without watching it I'm not sure we can use the word "wrong" in the moral sense??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did watch it and it was quite interesting in the way it went through the timeline in excrutiating detail. My two-penneth:


1. The photo was up for about 4 seconds, nothing could be seen and it added nothing to the programme. It could easily have been dropped.


2. Diana was mercilessly hounded by the paps but did use them quite a lot to publicise herself.


3. If they'd been wearing seatbelts we wouldn't be having this discussion

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That program was a carefully planned self promoting stunt from Ch 4 executives to increase viewing.

Infact the program has revealed absolutely nothing to its viewers, old story re-edited with no new evidence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • 57% of those who actually lived in the consultation area I believe. Around 3,000. Presumably 2,000 of whom are the ‘supporters of One Dulwich (but not members of One Dulwich? So how does one ‘join’?) So tell us about it. it seems fairly clear that Southwark could have done more first time round as they did open the junction back up to emergency services. I’m not sure why this suggests someone shawdowy is ‘pulling their strings’ though as you suggest. You say read up on it - why not share the evidence that emergency services were knocking on the council’s door for months and months?  You’ve just posted a claim the the LFB haven’t been consulted this time round, yet their spokesman says  “Regarding the FOI, the local authority did consult the Brigade. However, they didn’t initially contact the specific Southwark team, who responded on the FOI saying they hadn’t been contacted.” I have answered all your questions that are actual question. You ducked and deflected my two simple questions for several pages, before awkwardly distancing yourself from the claims made in the missive you shared 😳 A question that says “do you agree with a design that does nothing to stop persistent number plate covering offenders” is what’s called a loaded question. Whether one say yes or no it accepts the premise. It’s the classic ‘when did you stop beating your wife” construction, and it’s not very subtle.    
    • Can someone please explain who "one Dulwich" are?
    • We are actually referred to as "Supporters"...2,100 of us across Dulwich...read and weep! 😉   https://www.onedulwich.uk/supporters   Got it, the one where 64% of respondents in the consultation area said they wanted the measures "returned to their original state". Is that the one you claim had a yes/no response question?   Well I suggest you read up on it as it is an important part of the story of utter mismangement by the councils and this is why so many of us can't work out who is pulling the council's strings on this one because surely you can agree that if the emergency services were knocking on your door for months and months telling you the blocks in the roads were delayihg response times and putting lives at risk you'd do something about it? Pretty negligent not to do so don't you think - if I was a councillor it would not sit well with me?   Careful it could be a Mrs, Miss or Mx One.....   Of course you don't that's because you have strong opinions but hate being asked for detail to.back-up those opinions (especially when it doesn't serve their narrative) and exposes the flaws in your arguments! 😉  As so many of the pro-LTN lobby find to their cost the devil is always in the detail.....
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...