From: banana@REMOVE_THIS.borve.demon.co.uk   
      
   In article <1165772583.041095.307960@j44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,   
   Steve  writes   
      
   >cromwell wrote:   
   >> "Steve"  wrote in message   
   >> news:1165717598.013776.326020@79g2000cws.googlegroups.com...   
   >>   
   >>    
   >>   
   >> >Not really the levelsof CO you quoted for Paul would have rendered him   
   >> >incapable of driving in fact he would be dead before he even got in the   
   >> >car.   
   >> >2% is a lethal dose. If air bags poisoned the imact victims of a car   
   >> >crash there would be little point in them.   
   >>   
   >> I have no idea if you are a long time patron of this NG or the case, but it   
   >> is blindingly obvious, that your knowledge of CO poisoning is woefully   
   >> inadequate.  Where did you obtain such misinformation?  The web is teaming   
   >> with websites devoted to the medical affects of carbon monoxide.  Did you   
   >> visit any of them?  Have you consulted some form of specialised book, if so,   
   >> take it back to the bookseller immediately, you've been conned.   
   >>   
   >> '2% is a lethal dose' must be a typo on your part.   
   >>   
   >> As for Fayed's 'experts', all I can say is that he must have paid them well.   
   >   
   >They are qualified and respected experts.   
      
   'Cromwell' is not bona fide. He's so proud of himself for this   
   whoopsadaisyist 'huge amounts of CO are harmless' nonsense that he keeps   
   on posting it every so often. He likes to do this especially when new   
   readers can be expected on the newsgroup following a spate of press   
   interest in the Paris crash. E.g. some new news, perhaps new witness   
   evidence, or a TV documentary. The last thing people like him want is   
   new people coming here and sharing ideas in a fresh and open way. Let's   
   recall that no sensible person who has considered the crash would   
   disagree that the official stories since day one have stunk to high   
   heaven.   
      
   At one time, whoopsadaisyist headbangers were even saying Henri Paul   
   must have got the CO from the airbag. Which I suppose is a bit like   
   being strangled by a firefighter when he carries you down a ladder away   
   from a fire. Complete hooey. Airbags don't poison people any more than   
   firefighters strangle them.   
      
   As for 'experts', most lawyers rightly despise 'expert witnesses' of any   
   kind. They all bullshit for money. (As for their hourly rate and travel   
   expenses! :-) ).   
      
   In this instance, though, it was established long ago that such a high   
   level of CO would have rendered Henri Paul obviously ill during the time   
   that he was filmed being as fit as a fiddle. There is NO credible   
   whoopsadaisyist explanation for how it might have got into his blood.   
      
   I saw some of yesterday's crappy BBC documentary ('Conspiracy Files',   
   about the Paris crash) at a friend's house. Aside from being surprised   
   at how young Gerald Posner looked (!), I saw that people like Nicholas   
   Davies contributed, ostensibly from the 'assassinationist' side, using   
   terms such as 'the security services', which is an extremely woolly way   
   of saying 'SIS', aka MI6.   
      
   Note carefully what was NOT mentioned (unless it was shown during the   
   minutes when I wasn't watching, which is very unlikely, but if anyone   
   knows different, I will stand corrected!) Such as:   
      
   The then SIS Director of Operations, David Spedding, was in Paris around   
   that time. What for?   
      
   Nicholas Langman and Richard Spearman, SIS officers in Paris, were said   
   to have been in Paris too. They managed to avoid giving evidence to the   
   French inquiry on this point. Will they be giving evidence, allowing   
   themselves to be cross-examined, at the inquest?   
      
   And it has been reported that a member of staff at the British embassy   
   in Paris was chucked out of the communications room very shortly before   
   the crash by...none other than Robert Fellowes, the 'queen's' private   
   secretary. He apparently says he was elsewhere in France on a private   
   holiday.   
      
   Odd, eh, that he'd go off to a foreign country on a private holiday, so   
   soon before the meeting at Balmoral of the 'royal' family's 'Way Ahead   
   Group' to discuss the SIS report on the relationship between Princess   
   Diana and Dodi Fayed. Weren't there any papers to prepare? Or was he   
   going to leave that to his deputy Robin Janvrin - a man whose SIS   
   involvement BTW is on the record.   
      
   And let's not forget what the post of 'PRIVATE SECRETARY TO THE   
   SOVEREIGN' involved. He is the SENIOR OPERATIONAL MEMBER OF THE ROYAL   
   HOUSEHOLD.   
      
   There's that word again: OPERATIONAL.   
      
   What operation might have been going on in Paris that required such   
   high-level involvement on the ground? The answer is obvious, and it's   
   not 'surveillance'.   
      
   WHAT WERE THE MOVEMENTS OF SPEARMAN, LANGMAN, SPEDDING, FELLOWES, and   
   DEARLOVE?   
      
   WILL THEY GIVE EVIDENCE AT THE INQUEST IN OPEN COURT?   
      
   WILL 'BARONESS' BUTLER-SLOSS ALLOW THEM TO BE CROSS-EXAMINED BY MOHAMED   
   AL-FAYED'S LAWYERS?   
      
   --   
   banana     "The thing I hate about you, Rowntree, is the way you   
               give Coca-Cola to your scum, and your best teddy-bear to   
               Oxfam, and expect us to lick your frigid fingers for the   
               rest of your frigid life." (Mick Travis, 'If...', 1968)   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)