Connect with us

Final Word on the Grail Family

Benson C Saili

This week we answer questions about the Jesus dynasty

The term “Holy Grail”   derives from the French word Sangreal, which means “Blood Royal” or, the other way round, “Royal Blood”. It referred to the House of Judah, the Jewish royal line that progressed through King David and onward through Jesus and Mary Magdalene and their offshoots. In English, Sangreal was translated as “Saint Grail”. Since the word “Saint” meant “Holy”, Saint Grail was fashionably rendered as “Holy Grail”.   The remnants of the Sangreal family, or the Grail Family, are descended from the conjoined line of Jesus and his brother James the Just. In the first century and until medieval times, the Sangreal were known as the Desposyni. In the first century and early second century in particular, the Desposyni included the families of Jesus’s other brothers, namely Jude, Simon, and Joseph.

Luke was certainly at fault but as a researcher he was using records that were available to him at the time. He couldn’t have known they were faulty in ways because they were found in the Old Testament scriptures. True, Genesis suggests that the Grail Kings (the ruling line of Judah) began with Seth. That is a contrived lie. The lie was manufactured by the Levites, the compilers of the Pentateuch (the first five books of the Old Testament). The Anunnaki god of the Levites was Enlil, called Jehovah in the Bible. As such, the Levites didn’t want to make it plain that the Jews were in fact descended from Enki, the archrival of Enlil. Sumerian records, which predated the old Testament by at least 2000 years, make it crystal-clear that the Grail Kings are descended from Cain, not Seth. The same Sumerian records are categorical that Cain was not the son of Adam: he was the son of Enki. Enki, the Serpent of Genesis who genetically engineered us into existence and was notorious for his philanderings despite his surpassing genius,   produced Cain when he slept with Adam’s wife Eve. When GENESIS 4:1 is properly translated, Eve is saying, “I have produced a son (Cain) by my Lord Enki”.  Since Cain was half “god” (as the Anunnaki were referred to) and half human, he was superior to both Abel and Seth, who were full humans. I will develop this theme further in the forthcoming series but suffice it to say for now that Jesus arose through the line not of Seth but of Cain.

Jesus and Mary Magdalene had three kids, two boys and a daughter.  Their firstborn was a daughter. They named her Tamar (Damaris in Greek), meaning Palm Tree.  Tamar was a prominent name in the Davidic lineage. The original patriarch of the royal House of Judah was called Tamar (GENESIS 37-38 and MATTHEW 1:3). King David’s sister (2 SAMUEL 13:1) was known as Tamar. Furthermore, King David’s scrupulous virgin  daughter who was raped by her half-brother Amnon (2 SAMUEL 3) also went by the name Tamar.  Tamar the daughter of Jesus was born in September AD 33, when Jesus was 39 years old. As we demonstrated in the concluding articles, Jesus did survive the crucifixion and went on to live to a ripe old age. The second-born was Jesus Jr (the heir). He was born in September AD 37. The third-born (the spare) was named Joseph, after Jesus’s father.  Joseph was born in Marseille, France, in September AD 44. Having been born in the wrong month himself for a dynastic heir (March 7 BC), Jesus ensured that all his kids were born in the holy month of September. He also rigidly followed the sexual regimen for a dynastic heir. He waited for the prescribed three years of abstinence after the birth of a daughter and six years of mandatory abstinence after the birth of a son as per dynastic procreational rules.

Firstly, you ought to familiarise with the pesher technique, in which the gospels and the epistles were largely written, to grasp this point. ACTS 6:7 says, “The Word of God increased”. In pesher, “Word of God” stood for Jesus and to “increase” was to be fruitful, the same thing as having a kid, most notably a son.  ACTS 6:7 is therefore a cryptic reference to the birth of Jesus Jr in AD 37.  The birth of his younger brother Joseph in AD 44 is cryptically recorded in ACTS 12:24 (“The Word of God grew and multiplied”).  ACTS 3:20-21 also talks about Jesus entering “Heaven” till the “times of restitution”. We know that after his make-believe crucifixion, Jesus was reinstated to the Essene top brass, whose pesher name was “Heaven”. He was to be in ecclesiastical ministry for three years, during which he would stay celibate. This was because he had had a daughter in September AD 33 and as a dynastic heir, he had to abstain from sexual relations with Mary for three years.  At the expiry of these three years, he was to resume sexual relations with his wife with a view to produce a heir. The dynastic prince’s resumption of sexual intimacy with his wife was in pesher language known as “restitution”. When Jesus Jr was born in AD 37, he became Jesus’s heir, that is, the Crown Prince. Before the birth of Jesus Jr, the Crown Prince was James, the immediate younger brother to Jesus. The title of the Davidic Crown Prince was “The Just”, “Justus”, or “The Righteous”, what in our day we would also refer to as “Right Honourable” or “His Honour”. This explains why in much of extra-biblical literature, James is addressed as James the Just or James the Righteous. At his birth, Jesus Jr replaced James as the Crown Prince and so became known as Jesus Justus. In COLOSSIANS 4:11, Paul says, “Jesus, who is also called Justus, sends his greetings”. It is clear here that Paul is notifying the people of Colossae that at the time he wrote this letter (whilst in Rome), he was with the son of Jesus!

I’ll begin with the heir Jesus Jr, also known as Jesus II and Jesus Justus (in France, he was called Gais or Gesu, which is Jesu in Setswana and Yesu in some other Bantu languages).  In AD 46 at age 9, Jesus Jr began schooling in Caesarea and not at Qumran as had been the case with his father. When he attained 12 years of age, he underwent the coming-of-age Bar-Mitzvah ceremony in Provence, France. Shortly thereafter, his uncle James the Just took him on a tour of England as the Anunnaki had earmarked the country as the future geopolitical capital of the world. In AD 53, upon his attainment of the majority age of 16, Jesus Jr officially took over from his uncle James as Crown Prince to the Davidic title, which was still held by Jesus, who was still alive at the time. It was then that Jesus Jr formally became known as Jesus Justus, meaning Crown Prince Jesus, although he had all long been loosely called by that name.  Early in AD 73, Jesus Jr married a granddaughter of  Theudas Barabbas (also known as Nicodemus in the Bible). He sired only one child, a son called Galains in French but who also went by the name Jesus III (he never got to see his son though as he was crucified by Roman general and procurator of Judea Flavius Silva during the siege of  Masada in AD 74).  But Galains opted for a monastic life: he never married and therefore died without issue. Consequently, the Davidic succession passed from Jesus Jr to his younger brother Joseph. Joseph was educated at a druidic college in England and settled in France. He too sired only one child, called Josue. Following the death of Galains, Josue became the David. Tamar, the firstborn-daughter of Jesus, married the apostle Paul in September AD 53. After her marriage, she changed her name to the Greek Phoebe. Besides being Paul’s wife, she served as a deaconess in the ministry of her husband.  

Dan Brown did quite splendid research when he wrote The Da Vinci Code. Mary Magdalene did indeed settle in Marseille, France, in AD 44. Two seismic events happened that year in Judea. First, the apostle James (the “Son of Zebedee”) was executed by King Herod Agrippa I. Now, James and his brother John were adopted sons of Simon Zelotes, who was also known as Zebedee. Understandably therefore, Simon Zelotes, a Zealot, struck back almost immediately: he had Agrippa I assassinated through food poisoning. Agrippa’s brother King Herod of Chalcis (in modern-day Syria) reacted by launching a manhunt for Simon Zelotes and the Zealot top-brass. You will be aware by now that Simon Zelotes was the foster father of  Mary Magdalene. Wary that she might be associated with the assassination, Mary Magdalene  appealed for protection from Herod Agrippa II, who was only 17 years old at the time and who as a former student of the apostle Paul was sympathetic to Jesus and his family. Agrippa II duly arranged her passage to Vienne, north of Marseille, in France.  Also on the voyage were Simon Zelotes; her mother Helena-Salome; and Jesus’s sisters Mary and Sarah. On arrival in France, they were first hosted by Herod Archelaus at the Herodian Estate. Archelaus had been exiled to France since AD 6, when he was deposed as ethnarch of  Samaria, Judea, and Idumea by Roman Emperor Caesar Augustus.     

He almost never did. As the Davidic King, he was only supposed to live with his family when he had to sire a child. This period was known as the Days of Restitution. The moment his wife became pregnant, he left to immerse himself in evangelistic pursuits according to Essene dynastic rules. He would return to see the newly born kid but he would promptly set off and be away from his wife for between three to six years.  At some stage though, Jesus did take a second wife. Her name was Lydia (ACTS 16:14-15 & 40).  Lydia is described as a “seller of purple” (a coded term for her royal status having been married to Jesus) and one “whose heart the Lord opened” (pesher term for hitching somebody into marriage). Jesus’ marriage to Lydia in AD 50 did not sit well with the Qumran sages. The Damascus Document (one of the Dead Sea Scrolls) hints at this when it makes mention of an eminent personality who was “caught in fornication” by “taking a second wife while a second is alive”. The Essenes did allow polygamy but not for a dynastic heir. But the same Damascus Document passage advances mitigating arguments that King David was polygamous too.  As to the early church, the matter was  a hot potato as it was regarded as a virtual divorce from Mary Magdalene (some members of the early church were aware that Jesus was around) considering  that as Priest-King, Jesus  was not permitted to take a second wife. Paul was therefore at pains to dwell at length on the subject of divorce and why it was immoral (1 CORINTHIANS 7:10-16).  Paul made it a point to underline that in addressing this subject, he was not speaking for himself but “for the Lord”, that is, Jesus, who did not embrace the idea of divorce.     

Your question is not very clear but I take it you are referring to how and when they died. Mary Magdalene died in Aix-en-Provence, France, in AD 63. She was buried at Saint-Maximin-la-Sainte-Baume, about 40 km east of Aix-en-Provence. Jesus travelled extensively, venturing as far as India and Pakistan but generally incognito. In Rome in particular, very few were aware that he was still in circulation. When the Zealots rose up against the Romans in AD 66, Jesus was called upon to come and assume command as the Davidic Messiah. At first he was reluctant as he did not believe in a forceful overthrow of the Romans, but in AD 73 he was persuaded by Eleazar ben Yair, the commander of the Sicarii, an elite wing of the Zealots who were holding out at the mountain-top Fortress of Masada.  Jesus arrived there before the Romans surrounded it, not to fight but to spiritually uplift his people.  On hearing that his father was at Masada, Jesus Jr decided to follow after him (most likely to substitute for his father, who was 80 years of age at the time). By then, however, the Romans had already surrounded Masada and Jesus Jr was captured and crucified on the plain below in full view of Jesus and the Sicarii. Flavius Josephus records that the Sicarii, who numbered 967 including non-combatants, committed suicide, with only 7 found alive. But it seems Jesus slipped through the dragnet alive as a scroll (now lost) that he wrote whilst at Masada was discovered there during excavations in the 1960’s and part of what happened at Masada is cryptically recorded in REVELATION chapters 15 and 16.  The fact that his burial site is at Shrinagar in Kashmir also attests to his having survived the Masada siege, which lasted from late 73 to early 74 AD. That Jesus is buried in Kashmir is not surprising at all: he had a strong attachment to India because Abraham, the father of the Jewish nation, came from there.

 I recommend two books by Barbara Theiring titled Jesus the Man and  Jesus of the Apocalypse. The others are Bloodline of the Holy Grail and The Magdalene Legacy, both by Lawrence Gardner; The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail by Michael Baigent; and The Jesus Scroll  by Donovan Joyce. Lastly, I recommend the biblical book of REVELATION. Very few people are aware that it is actually a coded account of the life of Jesus and his family! It has very little to do with eschatological (futuristic) events as your pastor will avidly preach.   


Continue Reading



10th February 2023

Speaking at a mental health breakfast seminar last week I emphasised to the HR managerial audience that you cannot yoga your way out of a toxic work culture. What I meant by that was that as HR practitioners we must avoid tending to look at the soft options to address mental health issues, distractions such as yoga and meditation. That’s like looking for your lost bunch of keys, then opening the front door with the spare under the mat.  You’ve solved the immediate problem, but all the other keys are still missing.   Don’t get me wrong; mindfulness practices, yoga exercise and taking time to smell the roses all have their place in mental wellness but it’s a bit like hacking away at the blight-ridden leaves of the tree instead of getting to the root cause of the problem.

Another point I stressed was that mental health at work shouldn’t be looked at from the individual lens – yet that’s what we do. We have counselling of employees, wellness webinars or talks but if you really want to sort out the mental health crisis that we face in our organisations you HAVE to view this more systemically and that means looking at the system and that starts with the leaders and managers.

Now. shining a light on management may not be welcomed by many. But leaders control the flow of work and set the goals and expectations that others need to live up to. Unrealistic expectations, excessive workloads and tight deadlines increase stress and force people to work longer hours … some of the things which contribute to poor mental health. Actually, we know from research exactly what contributes to a poor working environment – discrimination and inequality, excessive workloads, low job control and job insecurity – all of which pose a risk to mental health. The list goes on and is pretty exhaustive but here are the major ones: under-use of skills or being under-skilled for work; excessive workloads or work pace, understaffing; long, unsocial or inflexible hours; lack of control over job design or workload; organizational culture that enables negative behaviours; limited support from colleagues or authoritarian supervision; discrimination and exclusion; unclear job role; under- or over-promotion; job insecurity.

And to my point no amount of yoga is going to change that.

We can use the word ‘toxic’ to describe dysfunctional work environments and if our workplaces are toxic we have to look at the people who set the tone. Harder et al. (2014) define a toxic work environment as an environment that negatively impacts the viability of an organization. They specify: “It is reasonable to conclude that an organization can be considered toxic if it is ineffective as well as destructive to its employees”.

Micromanagement and/or failure to reward or recognize performance are the most obvious signs of toxic managers. These managers can be controlling, inflexible, rigid,  close-minded, and lacking in self-awareness. And let’s face it managers like those I have just described are plentiful. Generally, however there is often a failure by higher management to address toxic leaders when they are considered to be high performing. This kind of situation can be one of the leading causes of unhappiness in teams. I have coached countless employees who talk about managers with bullying ways which everyone knows about, yet action is never taken. It’s problematic when we overlook unhealthy dynamics and behaviours  because of high productivity or talent as it sends a clear message that the behaviour is acceptable and that others on the team will not be supported by leadership.

And how is the HR Manager viewed when they raise the unacceptable behaviour with the CEO – they are accused of not being a team player, looking for problems or failing to understand business dynamics and the need to get things done.  Toxic management is a systemic problem caused when companies create cultures around high-performance and metrics vs. long-term, sustainable, healthy growth. In such instances the day-to-day dysfunction is often ignored for the sake of speed and output. While short-term gains are rewarded, executives fail to see the long-term impact of protecting a toxic, but high-performing, team or employee. Beyond this, managers promote unhealthy workplace behaviour when they recognize and reward high performers for going above and beyond, even when that means rewarding the road to burnout by praising a lack of professional boundaries (like working during their vacation and after hours).

The challenge for HR Managers is getting managers to be honest with themselves and their teams about the current work environment. Honesty is difficult, I’m afraid, especially with leaders who are overly sensitive, emotional, or cannot set healthy boundaries. But here’s the rub – no growth or change can occur if denial and defensiveness are used to protect egos.  Being honest about these issues helps garner trust among employees, who already know the truth about what day-to-day dynamics are like at work. They will likely be grateful that cultural issues will finally be addressed. Conversely, if they aren’t addressed, retention failure is the cost of protecting egos of those in management.

Toxic workplace culture comes at a huge price: even before the Great Resignation, turnover related to toxic workplaces cost US employers almost $50 billion yearly! I wonder what it’s costing us here.


We can use the word ‘toxic’ to describe dysfunctional work environments and if our workplaces are toxic we have to look at the people who set the tone. Harder et al. (2014) define a toxic work environment as an environment that negatively impacts the viability of an organization. They specify: “It is reasonable to conclude that an organization can be considered toxic if it is ineffective as well as destructive to its employees”.

Continue Reading


Heartache for Kelly Fisher

9th February 2023

o date, Princess Diana, General Atiku, had destroyed one marriage, come close to ruining another one in the offing, and now was poised to wreck yet another marriage that was already in the making. This was between Dodi Fayed and the American model Kelly Fisher.

If there was one common denominator about Diana and Dodi besides their having been born with a silver spoon in their mouths, General, it was that both were divorcees. Dodi’s matrimonial saga, however, was less problematic and acrimonious and lasted an infinitesimal 8 months. This was with yet another American model and film actress going by the name Susanne Gregard.

Dodi met Susanne in 1986, when she was only 26 years old. Like most glamourous women, she proved not to be that easy a catch and to readily incline her towards positively and expeditiously responding to his rather gallant advances, Dodi booked her as a model for the Fayed’s London  mega store Harrods, where he had her travel every weekend by Concorde.  They married at a rather private ceremony at Dodi’s Colorado residence in 1987 on New Year’s Day, without the blessings, bizarrely, of his all-powerful  father.  By September the same year, the marriage was, for reasons that were not publicised but likely due to the fact that his father had not sanctioned it,  kaput.

It would take ten more years for Dodi to propose marriage to another woman, who happened to be Kelly Fisher this time around.




Kelly and Dodi, General, met in Paris in July 1996, when Kelly was only 29 years old. In a sort of whirlwind romance, the duo fell in love, becoming a concretised item in December and formally getting  engaged in February 1997.

Of course the relationship was not only about mutual love: the material element was a significant, if not vital, factor.  Kelly was to give up her modelling  job just  so she could spend a lot more time with  the new man in her life and for that she was to be handed out a compensatory reward amounting to   $500,000. The engagement ring for one, which was a diamond and sapphire affair, set back Dodi in the order of    $230,000. Once they had wedded, on August 9 that very year as per plan, they were to live in a $7 million 5-acre  Malibu Beach mansion in California, which Dodi’s father had bought him for that and an entrepreneurial purpose.  They were already even talking about embarking on making a family from the get-go: according to Kelly, Dodi wanted two boys at the very least.

Kelly naturally had the unambiguous blessings of her father-in-law as there was utterly nothing Dodi could do without the green light from the old man. When Mohamed Al Fayed was contemplating buying the Jonikal, the luxurious yacht, he invited Dodi and Kelly to inspect it too and hear their take  on it.

If there was a tell-tale red flag about Dodi ab initio, General, it had to do with a $200,000 cheque he issued to Kelly as part payment of the pledged $500,000 and which was dishonoured by the bank. Throughout their 13-month-long romance, Dodi made good on only $60,000 of the promised sum.  But love, as they say, General, is blind and Kelly did not care a jot about her beau’s financial indiscretions. It was enough that he was potentially a very wealthy man anyway being heir to his father’s humongous fortune.


                                              KELLY CONSIGNED TO “BOAT CAGE”                 


In that summer of the year 1997, General, Dodi and Kelly were to while away quality time  on the French Rivierra as well as the Jonikal after Paris. Then Dodi’s dad weighed in and put a damper on this prospect in a telephone call to Dodi on July 14. “Dodi said he was going to London and he’d be back and then we were going to San Tropez,” Kelly told the interviewer in a later TV programme.  “That evening he didn’t call me and I finally got him on his portable phone. I said, ‘Dodi where are you?’ and he said he was in London. I said, ‘Ok, I’ll call you right back at your apartment’. He said, ‘No, no, don’t call me back’. So I said, ‘Dodi where are you?’ and he admitted he was in the south of France. His father had asked him to come down and not bring me, I know now.”

Since Dodi could no longer hide from Kelly and she on her part just could not desist from badgering him, he had no option but to dispatch a private Fayed  jet to pick her up so that she join him forthwith in St. Tropez.  This was on July 16.

Arriving in St. Tropez, Kelly, General, did not lodge at the Fayed’s seaside villa as was her expectation but was somewhat stashed in the Fayed’s maritime fleet, first in the Sakara, and later in the Cujo, which was moored only yards from the Fayed villa. It was in the Cujo Kelly  spent the next two nights with Dodi.  “She (Kelly) felt there was something strange going on as Dodi spent large parts of the day at the family’s villa, Castel St. Helene, but asked her to stay on the boat,” writes Martyn Gregory in The Diana Conspiracy Exposed. “Dodi was sleeping with Kelly at night and was courting Diana by day. His deception was assisted by Kelly Fisher’s modelling assignment on 18-20 July in Nice. The Fayed’s were happy to lend her the Cujo and its crew for three days to take her there.”

Dodi’s behaviour clearly was curious, General. “Dodi would say, ‘I’m going to the house and I’ll be back in half an hour’,” Kelly told Gregory. “And he’d come back three or four hours later. I was furious. I’m sitting on the boat, stuck. And he was having lunch with everyone. So he had me in my little boat cage, and I now know he was seducing Diana. So he had me, and then he would go and try and seduce her, and then he’d come back the next day and it would happen again. I was livid by this point, and I just didn’t understand what was going on. When he was with me, he was so wonderful. He said he loved me, and we talked to my mother, and we were talking about moving into the house in California.”

But as is typical of the rather romantically gullible  tenderer sex, General, Kelly rationalised her man’s stratagems. “I just thought they maybe didn’t want a commoner around the Princess … Dodi kept leaving me behind with the excuse that the Princess didn’t like to meet new people.” During one of those nights, General, Dodi even had unprotected sexual relations with Kelly whilst cooing in her ear that, “I love you so  much and I want you to have my baby.”




On July 20, General, Diana returned to England and it was only then that Dodi allowed Kelly to come aboard the Jonikal.  According to Debbie Gribble, who was the Jonikal’s chief  stewardess, Kelly was kind of grumpy. “I had no idea at the time who she was,  but I felt she acted very spoiled,” she says in Trevor Rees-Jones’ The Bodyguard’s Story. “I remember vividly that she snapped, ‘I want to eat right now. I don’t want a drink, I just want to eat now’. It was quite obvious that she was upset, angry or annoyed about something.”

Kelly’s irascible manner of course was understandable, General,  given the games Dodi had been playing with her since she pitched up in St. Tropez. Granted, what happened to Kelly was very much antithetical to Dodi’s typically well-mannered nature, but the fact of the matter was that she simply was peripheral to the larger agenda, of which Dodi’s father was the one calling the shots.

On July 23, Dodi and Kelly flew to Paris, where they parted as Kelly had some engagements lined up in Los Angeles. Dodi promised to join her there on August 4 to celebrate with her her parents’ marriage anniversary.  Dodi, however, General, did not make good on his promise: though he did candidly own up to the fact that he was at that point in time again with Diana, he also fibbed that he was not alone with her but was partying with her along with Elton John and George Michael. But in a August 6 phone call, he did undertake to Kelly that he would be joining her    in LA in a few days’ time. In the event, anyway, General, Kelly continued to ready herself for her big day, which was slated for August 9 – until she saw “The Kiss”.




“The Kiss”, General, first featured in London’s Sunday Mirror on August 10 under that very headline. In truth, General, it was not a definitive, point-blank kiss: it was a fuzzy image of Diana and Dodi embracing on the Jonikal. A friend of Kelly faxed her the newspaper pictures in the middle of the night and Kelly was at once  stunned and convulsed with rage.

But although Kelly was shocked, General, she was not exactly surprised as two or three days prior, British tabloids had already begun rhapsodising on a brewing love affair between Dodi and Diana. That day, Kelly had picked up a phone to demand an immediate explanation from her fiancé. “I started calling him in London because at this time I was expecting his arrival in a day. I called his private line, but there was no answer. So then I called the secretary and asked to speak to him she wouldn’t put me on. So Mohamed got on and in so many horrible words told me to never call back again. I said, ‘He’s my fiancé, what are you talking about?’ He hung up on me and I called back and the secretary said don’t ever call here again, your calls are no longer to be put through. It was so horrible.”

Kelly did at long last manage to reach Dodi but he was quick to protest that, “I can’t talk to you on the phone. I will talk to you in LA.” Perhaps Dodi, General, just at that stage was unable to  muster sufficient  Dutch courage to thrash out the matter with Kelly but a more credible reason he would not talk had to do with his father’s obsessive bugging of every communication device Dodi used and every inch of every property he owned.  The following is what David Icke has to say on the subject in his iconic book The Biggest Secret:

“Ironically, Diana used to have Kensington Palace swept for listening devices and now she was in the clutches of a man for whom bugging was an obsession. The Al Fayed villa in San Tropez was bugged, as were all Fayed properties. Everything Diana said could be heard. Bob Loftus, the former Head of Security at Harrods, said that the bugging there was ‘a very extensive operation’ and was also always under the direction of Al Fayed. Henry Porter, the London Editor of the magazine Vanity Fair, had spent two years investigating Al Fayed and he said they came across his almost obsessive use of eavesdropping devices to tape telephone calls, bug rooms, and film people.”

Through mutual friends, General, Porter warned Diana about Al Fayed’s background and activities ‘because we thought this was quite dangerous for her for obvious reasons’ but Diana apparently felt she could handle it and although she knew Al Fayed could ‘sometimes be a rogue’, he was no threat to her, she thought. “He is rather more than a rogue and rather more often than ‘sometimes,” she apparently told friends. “I know he’s naughty, but that’s all.” The TV programme  Dispatches said they had written evidence that Al Fayed bugged the Ritz Hotel and given his background and the deals that are hatched at the Ritz, it would be uncharacteristic if he did not. Kelly Fisher said that the whole time she was on Fayed property, she just assumed everything was bugged. It was known, she said, and Dodi had told her the bugging was so pervasive.




To his credit, General, Dodi was sufficiently concerned about what had transpired in St. Tropez to fly to LA and do his utmost to appease Kelly but Kelly simply was not interested as to her it was obvious enough that Diana was the new woman in his life.

On August 14, Kelly held a press conference in LA, where she announced that she was taking legal action against Dodi for breach of matrimonial contract. Her asking compensation price was £340,000. Of course the suit, General, lapsed automatically with the demise of Dodi in that Paris underpass on August 31, 1997.

Although Kelly did produce evidence of her engagement to Dodi in the form of a pricey and spectacular engagement ring, General, Mohamed Al Fayed was adamant that she never was engaged to his son and that she was no more than a gold digger.

But it is all water under the bridge now, General: Kelly is happily married to a pilot and the couple has a daughter. Her hubby  may not be half as rich as Dodi potentially was but she is fully fulfilled anyway. Happiness, General, comes in all shades and does not necessarily stem from a colossal bank balance or other such trappings of affluence.

Pic Cap

THE SHORT-LIVED TRIANGLE: For about a month or so, Dodi Al Fayed juggled Princess Diana and American model Kelly Fisher, who sported Dodi’s engagement ring.  Of course one of the two had to give and naturally it could not be Diana, who entered the lists in the eleventh hour but was the more precious by virtue of her royal pedigree and surpassing international stature.


Continue Reading


EXTRAVAGANCE One of The Scourges in Society.

9th February 2023

Extravagance in recent times has moved from being the practice of some rich and wealthy people of society in general and has regrettably, filtered to all levels of the society. Some of those who have the means are reckless and flaunt their wealth, and consequently, those of us who do not, borrow money to squander it in order to meet their families’ wants of luxuries and unnecessary items. Unfortunately this is a characteristic of human nature.

Adding to those feelings of inadequacy we have countless commercials to whet the consumer’s appetite/desire to buy whatever is advertised, and make him believe that if he does not have those products he will be unhappy, ineffective, worthless and out of tune with the fashion and trend of the times. This practice has reached a stage where many a bread winner resorts to taking loans (from cash loans or banks) with high rates of interest, putting himself in unnecessary debt to buy among other things, furniture, means of transport, dress, food and fancy accommodation, – just to win peoples’ admiration.

Islam and most religions discourage their followers towards wanton consumption. They encourage them to live a life of moderation and to dispense with luxury items so they will not be enslaved by them. Many people today blindly and irresponsibly abandon themselves to excesses and the squandering of wealth in order to ‘keep up with the Joneses’.

The Qur’aan makes it clear that allowing free rein to extravagance and exceeding the limits of moderation is an inherent characteristic in man. Allah says, “If Allah were to enlarge the provision for his servants, they would indeed transgress beyond all bounds.” [Holy Qur’aan 42:  27]


Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) said, “Observe the middle course whereby you will attain your objective (that is paradise).” –  Moderation is the opposite of extravagance.

Every individual is meant to earn in a dignified manner and then spend in a very wise and careful manner. One should never try to impress upon others by living beyond one’s means. Extravagance is forbidden in Islam, Allah says, “Do not be extravagant; surely He does not love those who are extravagant!” [Holy Qur’aan 7: 31]

The Qur’aan regards wasteful buying of food, extravagant eating that sometimes leads to throwing away of leftovers as absolutely forbidden. Allah says, “Eat of the fruits in their season, but render the dues that are proper on the day that the harvest is gathered. And waste not by excess, for Allah loves not the wasters.” [Holy Qur’aan 6:  141]

Demonstrating wastefulness in dress, means of transport, furniture and any other thing is also forbidden. Allah says, “O children of Adam! Wear your apparel of adornment at every time and place of worship, and eat and drink but do not be extravagant; surely He does not love those who are extravagant!” [Holy Qur’aan 7:  31]

Yet extravagance and the squandering of wealth continue to grow in society, while there are many helpless and deprived peoples who have no food or shelter. Just look around you here in Botswana.

Have you noticed how people squander their wealth on ‘must have’ things like designer label clothes, fancy brand whiskey, fancy top of the range cars, fancy society parties or even costly weddings, just to make a statement? How can we prevent the squandering of such wealth?

How can one go on spending in a reckless manner possibly even on things that have been made forbidden while witnessing the suffering of fellow humans whereby thousands of people starve to death each year. Islam has not forbidden a person to acquire wealth, make it grow and make use of it. In fact Islam encourages one to do so. It is resorting to forbidden ways to acquiring and of squandering that wealth that Islam has clearly declared forbidden. On the Day of Judgment every individual will be asked about his wealth, where he obtained it and how he spent it.

In fact, those who do not have any conscience about their wasteful habits may one day be subjected to Allah’s punishment that may deprive them of such wealth overnight and impoverish them. Many a family has been brought to the brink of poverty after leading a life of affluence. Similarly, many nations have lived a life  of extravagance and their people indulged in such excesses only to be later inflicted by trials and tribulations to such a point that they wished they would only have a little of what they used to possess!

With the festive season and the new year holidays having passed us, for many of us meant ‘one’ thing – spend, spend, spend. With the festivities and the celebrations over only then will the reality set in for many of us that we have overspent, deep in debt with nothing to show for it and that the following months are going to be challenging ones.

Therefore, we should not exceed the bounds when Almighty bestows His bounties upon us. Rather we should show gratefulness to Him by using His bestowments and favours in ways that prove our total obedience to Him and by observing moderation in spending. For this will be better for us in this life and the hereafter.

Continue Reading