Who Killed Diana, and Why? Citizens Electoral Council of Australia

5

Initial British press headlines about Jon Conway’s 

play Truth, Lies, Diana, which opened 9 Jan. in Lon-

don’s West End, chiefly highlighted its strong insin-

uation that Prince Harry was fathered not by Prince 

Charles, but by James Hewitt, one-time lover of Har-

ry’s mother, Diana, Princess of Wales. That soap-op-

era aspect of the drama, however, is not what is most 

likely to have sparked hysteria at Buckingham Palace. 

Far more explosive for the British monarchy, is the 

play’s presentation of the investigation by Australian 

researcher and author John Morgan into the 31 Aug. 

1997 deaths of Diana and her boyfriend, Dodi Fayed, 

in the crash of their car in the Pont d’Alma road tun-

nel in Paris. Morgan has assembled and published evi-

dence in support of the charge that the Queen ordered 

the assassination of Diana, and that the British for-

eign intelligence agency MI6 carried it out. Conway 

credits Morgan with inspiring his play, even work-

ing him into the script as an adviser to the investiga-

tor (played by himself) who is the central character.

After the show had started its run, major press in 

the UK did acknowledge that its main subject was, 

as The Times wrote on 15 Jan., an “attempt to get 

to the bottom of the murky events in Paris in August 

1997”, using the results of new research. Calling it 

“a little David of a play that the Goliath of the estab-

lishment would probably rather didn’t exist”, Do-

menic Cavendish wrote in The Telegraph, “The pic-

ture formed gives an unnerving amount of plausibili-

ty to those who maintain that MI6 were involved and 

that there was a cover-up…. I think [the play’s] heart 

is in the right place, trying to do justice by ‘the Peo-

ple’s Princess’.”

Truth, Lies, Diana had been showing off-Broadway 

for a month. Conway has said that he took it first to 

New York, out of apprehension about reactions in the 

UK. He was emboldened to bring it to London, how-

ever, by a new eruption of opposition to the British 

Royals within the UK itself. This has been caused not 

only by multiple scandals implicating the degener-

ate Royal family, but also by the British Crown’s cru-

cial role in war-mongering and international terror-

ism. The wave of openly expressed disgust with the 

Royals is rising toward levels as high as in 1997-99, 

immediately after Diana’s death. 

Storms over the House of Windsor

First and foremost is the ties of Charles, heir to the 

throne, with the Saudi sponsors of Wahhabite terror-

ism worldwide. With momentum building in the USA 

for disclosure of the 28 suppressed pages of the Con-

gressional Joint In-

quiry into the 9/11 

terrorist attacks

1

, 

concerning the re-

lationship of the 

Saudi royal fami-

ly to those crimes, 

Charles cannot 

escape attention 

to his Saudi con-

nections: not only 

did Prince Bandar 

bin Sultan, Sau-

di Ambassador to 

the USA in 2001 

and undoubtedly 

a subject of the 28 

pages, pour tens 

of millions of dollars into Charles’s private “charities” 

and the Oxford Centre for Islamic Studies (known as 

“Charles’s OCIS”, because of his active patronage), but 

Charles himself negotiated megadeals within the An-

glo-Saudi arms trade.

2

 Bandar’s brother-in-law Prince 

Turki bin Faisal, who resigned as director of Saudi 

General Intelligence ten days before 9/11, is a mem-

ber of the Board of Trustees of the OCIS and chairs its 

Strategy Advisory Committee. The pair were among 

the only eight foreign royals, whom Charles invited to 

his wedding to Camilla Parker-Bowles in 2005. Both 

are named in the 4,000-page lawsuit filed on 4 Feb. 

in New York by the families of 9/11 victims. 

Already in 2005, a book co-authored by British 

former prisoner of the Saudi regime Sandy Mitchell 

pointed out that “Prince Charles’s relationships with 

prominent House of Saud members have created se-

rious problems and obstacles to UK agencies investi-

gating claims of Saudi financing of international ter-

rorism, according to Special Branch sources”, citing 

how lawyers for 9/11 families encountered such a 

stone wall on a visit to the UK in 2003.

3

Outrage at the Windsor-Saud connection is now 

spreading. Human rights activist Joan Smith, for ex-

ample, blasted Charles in a 25 Jan. column in The 

1.  Declassification of the 28 pages was finally achieved in July 

2016. They are reproduced in full in the CEC pamphlet To Stop 

a Near-term Terror Attack, Read the ‘28 Pages’!

2.  Richard Freeman and William F. Wertz, Jr., “Charles of Ara-

bia. The British Monarchy, Saudi Arabia, and 9/11”, EIR, 23 May 

2014; and Richard Freeman, “King Faisal and the Forging of the 

Anglo-Saudi Terror Alliance”, EIR, 27 June 2014, document ties 

between the Saudi and British Royals, particularly Charles. 

3. Mark Hollingsworth with Sandy Mitchell, Saudi Babylon: 

Torture, Corruption and Cover-Up Inside the House of Saud, 

(Edinburgh and London: Mainstream Publishing, 2005).

British Royals Feel Heat  

over Diana’s Assassination 

From EIR, 3 February 2015 

Queen Elizabeth II, of whom John Mor-

gan writes, “Only she could authorise the 

assassination of the most famous and 

photographed person in the world, the 

mother of the future King of England, the 

increasingly powerful Princess Diana”. 

The articles reprinted on p. 5-16, written by Citizens Electoral Council of Australia 

executive member Robert Barwick, were first published in the U.S. weekly Executive 

Intelligence Review. They have also appeared in the CEC’s Australian Alert Service.

---