Thread Rating:
  • 2 Vote(s) - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
The BBC, The Deceit & The Dyson Report.
#1
In 1995, Princess Diana -the estranged wife of Prince Charles, Prince of Wales and heir apparent to the British throne,
held an interview with BBC Journalist Martin Bashir on a weekly current affairs programme called 'Panorama'.

During the 'tell-all' discussion, the public learned of Princess Di's torment of discovering her husband's tryst with an older
woman - Camilla Parker Bowles. This half-hidden relationship had been going on before, during Prince Charles' courtship
of the shy nineteen year-old and into the eventual marriage to Princess Diana.

Martin Bashir, known for his controversial interview with Michael Jackson, had offered Princess Diana's brother -Earl
Spencer, evidence that those who worked with and around his sister were being paid to spy on her. Such evidence was
enough to convince Earl Spencer that a interview was necessary to show Princess Di's side of the situation and how the
Royal Family maintained control of information regarding the once-next Queen of England.

This physical proof was in the form of copies of bank statements to senior aides and also suggested that Diana was being
bugged by security services. One of the bank statements was labelled to the Princess' health and fitness coaches and another
to News International. Penfolds Consultants was also a company that was supposed to be in on the secret surveillance.
Bashir also hinted that telephone lines at Kensington Palace -where Diana was living, were bugged.

The interview was a sensation and Martin Bashir received a BAFTA award for his Journalism. An estimated twenty-three million
viewers watched the interview with a sad, paranoid woman relating her ousting from the British Royal family and how she felt
about the romantic relationships that had gone on behind her back. Camilla Bowles was not the only one mentioned during the
discussion, Tiggy ­Legge-Bourke, the nanny for Charles and Diana's children was also offered as a possible lover.

However, the basis of the interview was fake.
....................................................................

Weeks before all of this, Martin Bashir had approached a BBC Graphic Artist to fabricate documents and bank statements in
order to dupe Earl Spencer into convincing his sister -Princess Diana, to hold the interview. Armed with these fake papers and
a host of suggestive comments, the Panorama programme went ahead with their scheme. Disguising themselves as tradesmen,
they sneaked into Kensington Palace in preparations for the one-to-one with the woman who was loved by the British public.
Odd... why were they disguised?

Princess Diana spilled her heart out to the millions viewers and the negative effect towards the Royal family was so damning,
that her security protection -supplied by the same organisation that she had accused of involvement in her marital break-up,
was withdrawn. In Bashir's words, Diana was 'cast adrift'.

In 1996, the terms of divorce with Charles were finalised. Diana lost her HRH title but was given a £17million settlement plus
£400,000 a year and allowed to remain at Kensington Palace. In this same year, the BBC were busy holding a 'keep-it-quiet'
investigation into Martin Bashir's underhanded tactics after the scheme to hoodwink Diana's brother came to light.

[Image: attachment.php?aid=9395]

Bashir first assured his bosses that he hadn't shown the false bank statements to Earl Spencer, but later admitted he had.
The BBC Managers had gone along with trusting this Journalist and took the decision to believe Bashir and not contact
Earl Spencer for an alternative narrative,

In 1997, Diana Spencer and Dodi Fayed sat in the rear of their Mercedes Benz with Diana's bodyguard, Trevor Rees-Jones
in the front with driver Henri Paul. Diana, Dodi and the driver all died in a collision with a concrete pillar beneath the Alma
tunnel outside of Paris, France.

In regards of Bashir's conduct in tricking people for an interview, lies, corruption and cover-up became words regularly used
in shadowy boardrooms of the BBC for the next twenty-five years until today. 



Quote:The Dyson Report:

The BBC has today published the Rt Hon Lord Dyson’s independent investigation into the circumstances around the 1995
Panorama interview with Diana, Princess of Wales.

'The report and associated annexes are published here.

The BBC Board appointed Lord Dyson to lead the investigation on 18 November 2020. Lord Dyson examined documents and
records from the time and interviewed a wide range of people involved in the making of the programme.

Lord Dyson says: “The report demonstrates, I believe, that this has been the thorough and fair investigation I set out to do.
 All key individuals gave comprehensive testimony and I am grateful for their cooperation. It enabled my investigation to establish
facts based on evidence and for me to draw the detailed conclusions that have been set out today.”

BBC Director-General, Tim Davie says: “I would like to thank Lord Dyson. His report into the circumstances around the 1995 interview
is both thorough and comprehensive. The BBC accepts Lord Dyson’s findings in full.

“Although the report states that Diana, Princess of Wales, was keen on the idea of an interview with the BBC,
it is clear that the process for securing the interview fell far short of what audiences have a right to expect.
We are very sorry for this. Lord Dyson has identified clear failings.

“While today’s BBC has significantly better processes and procedures, those that existed at the time should have
prevented the interview being secured in this way. The BBC should have made greater effort to get to the bottom
of what happened at the time and been more transparent about what it knew.

“While the BBC cannot turn back the clock after a quarter of a century, we can make a full and unconditional apology.
The BBC offers that today.”

BBC Chairman, Richard Sharp says: “The BBC Board welcomes the publication of Lord Dyson’s report which it unreservedly accepts.
There were unacceptable failures. We take no comfort from the fact that these are historic. The BBC must uphold the highest possible
standards. I want to thank Lord Dyson for the thoroughness and diligence of his work.”

The BBC is today writing to a number of individuals involved or linked to these events to apologise directly. We recognise that it has
taken far too long to get to the truth.

The 1995 Panorama interview received a number of awards at the time. We do not believe it is acceptable to retain these awards
because of how the interview was obtained.

Notes to editors
The terms of reference for the report were as follows:

What steps did the BBC and in particular Martin Bashir take with a view to obtaining the Panorama interview on 20 November 1995 with
Diana, Princess of Wales?

This will involve a consideration of all the relevant evidence including
(i) the mocked up bank statements purporting to show payments to a former employee of Earl Spencer
(ii) the purported payments to members of the Royal Households; and
(iii) the other matters recently raised by Earl Spencer not limited to the matters published in the Daily Mail on 7 November 2020.

[Image: attachment.php?aid=9396]
[Inserted By Rogue Nation Author]

Were those steps appropriate, having regard in particular to the BBC’s editorial standards prevailing at the time?
To what extent did the actions of the BBC and in particular Martin Bashir influence Diana, Princess of Wales’s decision to give an interview?
What knowledge did the BBC have in 1995 and 1996 of the relevant evidence referred to at paragraph 1 above?

Having regard to what was known at the time of its investigation in 1995 and 1996, how effectively did the BBC investigate the circumstances
leading to the interview? While the processes and procedures that existed at the time should have prevented the interview being secured in
this way, there have been significant changes in the past quarter of a century.

These are outlined at Annex A. They include:
*making significant changes to the editorial guidelines, including the introduction of mandatory rules around the handling of
sensitive information, a comprehensive training programme for all editorial staff, and a ‘red flag’ process to engage senior
editorial leaders in potentially controversial programmes

*introducing a thorough and industry-leading whistleblowing scheme,
which provides clear and independent routes to raise concerns and, if necessary, direct access for whistle-blowers to a
non-executive director on the BBC Board

*overhauling the BBC’s complaints processes, including the introduction of an expert team of editorial complaints handlers
who sit outside of the content-making divisions, reporting directly to the Director-General

*being party to the introduction of a new governance system with clearer responsibilities around editorial accountability and
external regulation from the industry regulator, Ofcom

The report and related costs are expected to total around £1.4million. The BBC funded reasonable legal costs for BBC figures
giving evidence.'
BBC Source:

The BBC are not trustworthy, this incident isn't the first and realising the fact that quarter of a century had to pass before the
who truth was revealed, it's an indicator of how far and deep this publically-funded news British monopoly will go to hide their
dirty laundry.

Jimmy Savile, Cyril Smith and countless others have been saved because of the BBC's supercilious and arrogant view on
those they dare call customers.


Attached Files Thumbnail(s)
       
Edith Head Gives Good Wardrobe. 
#2
I would not bat a fucking eye lid if the BBC was de-funded and left to itself. It's about time tbh!
I was born with a Thorn in my Soul, sometimes it hurts.


Nature gave us one tongue and two ears so we could hear twice as much as we speak.

- Epictetus






#3
A curious twist on this topic is that the BBC's "Royal Correspondent" Nicholas Witchell appeared on BBC TV this morning, stating that he worked on BBC Panorama programmes and that he had already been given the firm impression from Lady Diana herself that she would be more than willing to give him an interview relating to the very same topics that Bashir later covered in his interview with her... So why did the Panorama bosses decide to go with Bashir and the underhand, lies/deceit rather than with their respected correspondent Witchell and his above-board, with-consent and approval approach?????

Witchell himself seemed to be completely at a loss to understand why his own bosses (at BBC Panorama) told him to back off, when he had already secured Diana's willingness to participate in a one-to-one with him.
[Image: CoolForCatzSig.png]
#4
Was Princess Diana informed of the deception/s?
If so - when?
If not - it seems there could be a number of legal wranglings that remain to be unwrangled.


"Good judgment comes from experience...
Experience...? Well, that comes from poor judgment."
~ Dean Martin ~




#5
(05-21-2021, 12:21 PM)Moonmagic Wrote: I would not bat a fucking eye lid if the BBC was de-funded and left to itself. It's about time tbh!

If BIAD had eyelids, he too wouldn't bat them if this corrupt corporation was closed down.
Fines...? It's public money, what would they care?
tinyok
Edith Head Gives Good Wardrobe. 
#6
(05-21-2021, 01:14 PM)gordi Wrote: ...Witchell himself seemed to be completely at a loss to understand why his own bosses (at BBC Panorama)
told him to back off, when he had already secured Diana's willingness to participate in a one-to-one with him.

Those same BBC bosses may have been reminded of Prince Charles' comment to his sons regarding Witchell,
when they were on a skiing holiday in 2005.


Quote:'...The incident happened in 2005, at a photo session in Klosters ski resort in the Swiss Alps,
just days before Charles' wedding to Camilla.

The future king was posing with sons Prince Harry and Prince William when the BBC's
seasoned royal correspondent Witchell asked how Charles was feeling about his upcoming
nuptials.

Somewhat cheekily, the Prince of Wales replied: "I'm very glad you heard of it anyway," before
his face contorted into an awkward, somewhat exasperated grin.
And then, through gritted teeth, Charles made his feelings about the reporter known and
muttered under his breath: "Bloody people. I can't bear that man. He's so awful. He really is."...'
SOURCE:
tinyhuh
Edith Head Gives Good Wardrobe. 
#7
(05-21-2021, 04:22 PM)Minstrel Wrote: Was Princess Diana informed of the deception/s?
If so - when?
If not - it seems there could be a number of legal wranglings that remain to be unwrangled.

I believe she was unaware of the deception until Bashir was investigated.



Quote:'...It comes as a letter which Diana wrote over a month after the programme aired has
been published by the inquiry for the first time.

In the note, she defended her decision to be interviewed by Mr Bashir and she had "no regrets".
The letter, dated 22 December 1995, said: "Martin Bashir did not show me any documents, nor
give me any information that I was not previously aware of.

"I consented to the interview on Panorama without any undue pressure and have no regrets
concerning the matter." 

The note was written after Mr Bashir was asked by BBC executives to provide evidence Diana
had not been shown fake bank statements as he tried to gain access to her...'
SKY News:
Edith Head Gives Good Wardrobe. 
#8
(05-21-2021, 07:22 PM)BIAD Wrote: ...Somewhat cheekily, the Prince of Wales replied: "I'm very glad you heard of it anyway," before
his face contorted into an awkward, somewhat exasperated grin.
And then, through gritted teeth, Charles made his feelings about the reporter known and
muttered under his breath: "Bloody people. I can't bear that man. He's so awful. He really is."...'

Oooooh, I'd forgotten about THAT one!!!!
Yeah.
G
[Image: CoolForCatzSig.png]


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)