NationStates Jolt Archive

This is not even a joke. Why on earth would the Secret Service bug Princess Di?

Although a more important question should be: why the hell would anyone care what she had to say?

Made me laugh anyway:

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,1968664,00.html

The American secret service was bugging Princess Diana's telephone conversations without the approval of the British security services on the night she died, according to the most comprehensive report on her death, to be published this week.
Among extraordinary details due to emerge in the report by former Metropolitan police commissioner Lord Stevens is the revelation that the US security service was bugging her calls in the hours before she was killed in a car crash in Paris.

Oswald did it, the UFOs were experimental US aircraft, crop circles are made by people, Diana died because her driver was drunk, and 9/11 was caused by terrorists.

Are we clear?

We should especially care what all our public officials have to say. To a lesser degree, we should record what every citizen says to detect crimes and the like. I don't find this an egregious abuse of power at all.

it's cuz she was dating an a-rab and they already had it in for the middle east by then.

i just saw earlier that there was a programme about princess diana on telly. why do people still care about her? she died ages ago, honestly the coverage at the time was severe overkill and yet they're still dragging it all to bang on about it again.

Uh-huh...and bacon is a healthfood.

i never got why people liked her so much. i hate rich people that try and make me give money to charity.

Uh-huh...and bacon is a healthfood.

Yeah, you didn't know that?

I was surprised to see your source wasn't the Daily Express...they have an unhealthy obsession with Diana.

it's cuz she was dating an a-rab and they already had it in for the middle east by then.

i just saw earlier that there was a programme about princess diana on telly. why do people still care about her? she died ages ago, honestly the coverage at the time was severe overkill and yet they're still dragging it all to bang on about it again.
You think it's bad now? Wait 8-and-a-bit months. 10 years on. Would it be in bad taste to throw a celebratory party?

I was surprised to see your source wasn't the Daily Express...they have an unhealthy obsession with Diana.
A highly amusing unhealthy obsession. Seriously. They can't go a week without some headline about it.

Still a better paper than the Mail, though.

A highly amusing unhealthy obsession. Seriously. They can't go a week without some headline about it.

You've seen that ad on the tv for it these days? You know, the one with the self-righteous gits? I'm surprised she isn't mentioned in it.

Still a better paper than the Mail, though.

Yea, but to be fair, I could spend half an hour an evening writing a paper consisting entirely of made-up stories about Jews and obscure references to Hitler, Mein Kampf, and Nazi ideology and it would be an infinitely better, more trustworthy, and less bigoted paper than the Mail.

I was surprised to see your source wasn't the Daily Express...they have an unhealthy obsession with Diana.

Best (real, you can type it into google if you don't believe me) Daily Express headline ever:

Did Diana’s driver have bird flu?

You have to be a genius to write this kind of thing.:D

Best (real, you can type it into google if you don't believe me) Daily Express headline ever:



You have to be a genius to write this kind of thing.:D

That is actually brilliant :D

We should especially care what all our public officials have to say. To a lesser degree, we should record what every citizen says to detect crimes and the like. I don't find this an egregious abuse of power at all.

Oh dear. Sounds like those who are innocent have nothing to fear....Why is it not an 'egregious' use of power? To phonetap anyone is scary; to phonetap this woman was scary AND pointless. Who cares about Diana? I don't; but the US government consider her a security threat? Please. Get your head out your ass and worry about some civil liberties matey-mate.

Yea, but to be fair, I could spend half an hour an evening writing a paper consisting entirely of made-up stories about Jews and obscure references to Hitler, Mein Kampf, and Nazi ideology and it would be an infinitely better, more trustworthy, and less bigoted paper than the Mail.
Sadly, the editors of my university newspaper can't actually put together a better paper than the Mail.

We should especially care what all our public officials have to say. To a lesser degree, we should record what every citizen says to detect crimes and the like. I don't find this an egregious abuse of power at all.

Yes,it is an egregious abuse of power.You're having a conversation with your girlfriend.Do you want the government listening to what you say?
No?
Because I certainly don't.The Government has no place in our private lives.

We should especially care what all our public officials have to say. To a lesser degree, we should record what every citizen says to detect crimes and the like. I don't find this an egregious abuse of power at all.

I'm gonna ignore the obvious flame baiting and just point out the obvious.

She wasn't neither an American public figure nor a citizen of the United States. She was british, after all.

Although a more important question should be: why the hell would anyone care what she had to say?

Yeah, its not as if she was the highly visible public face of a campaign directed against one of the weapons of war that the US uses to spread and maintain its influence abroad or anything. Oh wait...

Methinks 'tis tin foil hat time.

Methinks 'tis tin foil hat time.

*donning stylish new Christmas tin-foil hat* Ah, much better!

Yeah, its not as if she was the highly visible public face of a campaign directed against one of the weapons of war that the US uses to spread and maintain its influence abroad or anything. Oh wait...

Oh, what, now we're going around telling countries, "Obey us or we'll plant land mines on your farms"? Please.

Oh, what, now we're going around telling countries, "Obey us or we'll plant land mines on your farms"? Please.

No, you're invading countries and using FASCAM as you do so.

No, you're invading countries and using FASCAM as you do so.

Yes, well, that invading countries thing will be taken care of fairly soon, not to worry (I voted against him twice, mind you).

FASCAM?

*donning stylish new Christmas tin-foil hat* Ah, much better!
Mine is culturally sensitive.

Mine is culturally sensitive.

You got one of the new ones, huh? I just stick a little tinsel on mine this time of year.

FASCAM?

Field Artillery Scatterable Mines.

Field Artillery Scatterable Mines.

Ain't technology wonderful. Anyway, as I said, that'll be taken care of soon enough. In the meantime, please accept my blanket apology for anything the United States may have done in the past or may do in the future.

Back on the subject, when will that poor woman be allowed to rest? It's been nine years and people insist on going over her death again and again. It's ghoulish and disrespectful.

Field Artillery Scatterable Mines.

Well, war is usually the business of killing people and blowing things up.

Do you think there's a nice way to do that? Would it be ok if we were killing people and blowing things up, without using FASCAM? Or would you find something else to object to other than the "killing people and blowing things up" part?

Uh-huh...and bacon is a healthfood.

I knew it!:D

Well, war is usually the business of killing people and blowing things up.

Do you think there's a nice way to do that? Would it be ok if we were killing people and blowing things up, without using FASCAM?

If the US followed the majority of civilised western nations of the world and signed up to the Ottawa Treaty, rather than clinging to and exploiting the loophole and exception ridden UN Convention I would be a tad happier.

The whole point of these two pieces is that they are attempts to limit civilian collateral damage (particularly those caused after cessation of hostilities), not to limit the 'business of killing people and blowing things up'.

Wait a second - wait a second.

Diana died during the Clinton Administration.

That means that Clinton was bugging Diana (and her male friends) without a fucking warrant.

Oh! The irony!

Wait a second - wait a second.

Diana died during the Clinton Administration.

That means that Clinton was bugging Diana (and her male friends) without a fucking warrant.

Oh! The irony!

See, another instance of everything being Bill Clinton's fault. He set the precedent for warrantless wire-taps. It's amazing how many things are Clinton's fault!

See, another instance of everything being Bill Clinton's fault. He set the precedent for warrantless wire-taps. It's amazing how many things are Clinton's fault!

I dunno. Maybe it was Hillary's idea, and the Mena Drug Cartel...

I dunno. Maybe it was Hillary's idea, and the Mena Drug Cartel...

Could be, maybe Hillary thought Bill was spending too much time looking at the news service photos of Diana. I don't think the Cartel was
involved, though you never know.

Could be, maybe Hillary thought Bill was spending too much time looking at the news service photos of Diana. I don't think the Cartel was
involved, though you never know.

isn't that how all of Bill's other "friends" mysteriously died? the mena drug cartel thing!

Shock! Horror!

although I would love to see a vid of Diana blowing Bill on YouTube...

isn't that how all of Bill's other "friends" mysteriously died? the mena drug cartel thing!

Shock! Horror!

although I would love to see a vid of Diana blowing Bill on YouTube...

I'm sure if you look long enough and diligently enough, you'll find one out there. It's been nine years, there has to be Diana-porn somewhere on the Net. :rolleyes:

This is not even a joke. Why on earth would the Secret Service bug Princess Di?

Although a more important question should be: why the hell would anyone care what she had to say?

Made me laugh anyway:

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,1968664,00.html

What gets me is the whole 'Princess' Diana thing.

She was only a princess as long as she was married to Prince Charles, after their divorce, she was Lady Diana.
As to who cares what she says, or those who insist on annual bloody inquiries into her death, I have no idea and, frankly, it's bloody irritating.