She was the world’s most recognisable face since Muhammad Ali and Michael Jackson and was tipped to be the symbolic heir to Mother Theresa on account of her scintillating philanthropic passion. About 20 years ago, Diana Princess of Wales met her fate in a road mishap in a Paris underpass.
Was it really an accident or a tactical elimination? In a new series titled Lady Die, BENSON C SAILI with typical meticulous research peers behind the veil to expose a sophisticated plot woven together by British and French intelligence and aided and abetted by Mossad and the CIA.
Dear General Atiku,
It is said the good die young. Jesus, according to the dud, mainstream version, was nailed to the stake at 33. Alexander the Great too shuffled off his mortal coil at age 33. Thomas Sankara, Africa’s greatest son as you may be aware General, was cruelly cut down by the Devil-Incarnate Blaise He-Will-Go-To-Blazes Compaore two months before he turned 37.
Ernesto Che Guevara, forever the gold standard of revolutionary fortitude and zealotry, was killed in cold blood at the behest of the CIA barely four months after he attained his 39th birthday. Jack Kennedy, America’s finest president ever, was dispatched in a hail of gunfire when he was only 48 years old, still a spring chicken really. My own personal hero, Christopher Hani, was just on the cusp of 51 when he met his fate at the hands of that diabolical Pole whose name I will not deign to mention.
The subject at issue, Princess Diana Spencer, was sacrificed at age 36. The emphasis is deliberate General. Of course you may wonder, General, at my employment of the term “sacrifice”. Granted, it is a bold and audacious assertion. Am I laying it on a little too thick General? Am I recklessly stretching the truth? Is it all mumble jumbo, nothing more than unanchored speculation? Is it a classic case of peddling the sensational and the superficial?
Well, General, I elect not to go into the polemics of my standpoint, particularly at this early stage of the narrative when I’m just getting on my marks, when I’m just about to shoot off from the blocks. Rather, I leave it to you, and indeed to the wider readership, to draw your own, considered conclusions on the basis of the perspective I am about to set down. Just as beauty, General, is in the eyes of the beholder, whether a view that has been posited makes sense or belongs to the refuse bin is all up to the discerning, objective, and level-headed observer.
You will agree with me, General, that the death of any young person, particularly in chillingly tragic circumstances, is an apocalypse. The Bible, which I reference purely from a philosophical point of view and not as the inerrant and infallible “Word of God”, says, “The Lord giveth, the Lord taketh”. It is said the “Good Lord” often or invariably withdraws a soul from this reality when it has fulfilled its purpose early and not necessarily when it has attained the allotted Three-Score-And-Ten. Talk about hogwash!
Princes Diana as you well know General was a marvellous human being, arguably the sweetest soul amongst the ranks of people of her generation who strutted the public stage. True, she was not a Mother Theresa or a Dalai Lama: like you and I General, she was fraught with a whole host of shortcomings. A martyr she was; a saint she wasn’t. Pulchritudinally, she wasn’t even half as gorgeous as your greatest obsession Marilyn Monroe, nor was she a fraction the enchantress that is the inimitable Beyonce Knowles Carter.
Yet there’s no denying the fact that she simply was one of a kind. A legacy is etched into the hearts of others and the stories they share about you. Princes Diana was truly the Queen of Hearts: she carved her name not on tombstones, like George W Bush and Antony Blair, but on our hearts. Sadly, she was a flower that bloomed just as it wilted, that began its life with an all too early ending. Having burnt so brightly before she went to Glory, her brightness shines for all time anyway.
Certainly, by dying young, a person stays young in peoples’ memories. This is one of the most memorable moral precepts she enunciated forth: “Carry out a random act of kindness, with no expectation of reward, safe in the knowledge that one day someone might do the same for you.” The acts of kindness she wrought were multifarious, multifaceted, and therefore priceless. She had many more such acts to edify the world with in the fullness of time. She went too soon General. If there is a god who as some suppose prised her from the world when she hadn’t even reached the noon of her life, I’m afraid that god is a Devil finish and klaar.
Everyone, including you General, plays their own song in their pilgrimage in life. They sing their story to the world and leave behind a melody of memories. Diana left such memories galore General. To me, and possibly to you too General, her death was such a loss it remains an enduring bereavement: she was such a ray of sunshine who illuminated and buoyed up the spirits of many a depressed, dejected, and downtrodden people from across the length and breadth of the globe. Indeed, she was a beacon of genuine goodness that tragically is “frowned upon by people who reside on the opposite side of the moral spectrum”.
Yet I must hasten to underscore, General, that this series is not meant to canonise or otherwise deify her, that it is far from her apotheosis. In fact, it is not so much about her as about the intrigues of the Illuminati – the archontic forces who rule the world from behind the drapes. And since it is you General who proposed the series, I have the pleasure of informing you that it is not only dedicated to you: it is also addressed to you!
If you recall General, I did undertake to you during our brief dialogue on social media that in penning the saga and fate of the great Princess, I would sing like a canary. Well, here is my song General …
I remain General, Ever Your Boon Companion, Benson C Saili, Gaborone. January 2020
“MY HUSBAND WANTS ME DEAD”
You will be aware, General, that when the curtain closed on the infuriatingly short life of Princess Diana on August 31, 1997, it was in the context of a car accident. As she drew her last breath, the princess must have mentally sighed, “Well, it was certain to end like this wasn’t it?”
I intuit as such, General, because ten months before she died, Diana had been secretly tipped as to how her demise might unfold. In October 1996, exactly ten months after her divorce from Princes Charles was finalised, she wrote a note to her butler Paul Burrell in which she expressed anxiety that Charles was plotting her death. “This particular phase in my life is the most dangerous,” she despaired in the note. “My husband is planning an accident in my car – brake failure and serious head injury.”
Even earlier, in 1995, the princess had in a soul-baring note to her solicitor, Lord Mishcon, expressed the same fears: she forecast that she would die in a planned road crash in 1996. Lord Mishcon passed the note to Lord Paul Condon, the Metropolitan Police Commissioner, who sadly but deliberately sat on it. Charles wanted her dead, the princess went on in the Paul Burrell note, “in order to make the path clear for him to marry Tiggy.”
Tiggy Legge-Bourke was Charles’ royal nanny, curiously hired only a month after he and Diana separated in December 1992. She was employed under the pretext of looking after the young princes William and Harry, then 10 and 8 years respectively, but Diana was aware it was all a smokescreen. She would in due course let it be known through the British media that Tiggy, who openly admitted to having had a “schoolgirl crush” on Charles, had in fact fallen pregnant by him but had aborted the baby.
Of course Diana’s hypothesis, it turned out, was dead wrong: it was Camilla Parker-Bowles Charles was destined to marry after Diana and not Tiggy. In the same note the princess scribbled for her butler, she said she hoped he would guard it jealously and only avail it to the world in the event that her road accident death indeed came to pass. Burrell, however, was not the “rock” she deemed him to be General: when the princess was killed in the Paris car crash, he baulked at fulfilling her wish. It was not until 2003, six years too late, that he made mention of the note in his book A Royal Duty.
Although the accident in which she perished – prima facie, that is – did not happen in exactly the same way she envisaged it, it was close enough. In any case, the end result still was murder. But why was the princess murdered General? What crime did she commit against the forces that hold omnipotent sway in this world?”
DIANA’S BIGGEST SECRET
On March 17, 1997, Princess Diana, then the world’s most famous woman, fulfilled a long-held personal yearning when he met Nelson Mandela, then the most recognisable political face on the globe, at his holiday home in Cape Town. As the two socio-politico celebrities conferred, Diana poured out her heart to Madiba, recounting to him all the trials and tribulations that had been her daily potion since her divorce from Prince Charles.
Touched by what he had heard from the tear-sodden princess, Madiba recommended the great Zulu shaman, Credo Mutwa, for a form of spiritual therapy. Madiba himself had consulted Credo from time to time for spiritual illumination of some sort. No sooner had the princess returned to London than she called the great Zulu sanusi. In doing so, she took care to make the call from a telephone booth at Marks & Spencers, a major UK department store located in the vicinities of Kensington Palace, her home, with a view to circumventing the obviously MI-6-tapped domestic line.
“I was stunned when I got her call,” Credo told a Western journalist. “But the more I listened, the more I realised she needed help.” Exactly what was it, General, that Diana called the then 76-year-old Credo about? According to the prolific British author and researcher David Icke, a long-standing close friend of Credo, Diana told Credo that “she had something to reveal that would shake the world and she wanted his advice on how best to do it”.
When Icke asked Credo as to whether the dirt Diana wanted to dish was about the House of Windsor and its unabashed connection to global trafficking, the Zulu colossus laughed and shook his head. “Oh no, it was much worse than that,” he said. “She was about to tell the world something very important.” In his 1999 book, The Biggest Secret, Icke was guarded about hitting the nail squarely on the head in respect of Credo’s elucidation on the matter but in the closing chapters of the book, he finally came clean on the biggest secret Diana wanted splashed across the front pages of newspapers around the world and for which she had sought the legendary Zulu shaman.
This biggest secret, General, was that the Windsors, the British royal family, were not human but Reptilians. This is what Icke says in Chapter 19 of The Biggest Secret: “While researching this book, I was introduced to Christine Fitzgerald, a brilliant and gifted healer, who was a close friend and confidant of Diana for nine years … It is clear that Diana knew about the true nature of the royal family’s genetic history and the Reptilian control. Her nicknames for the Windsors were ‘The Lizards’ and ‘The Reptiles’ and she used to say in all seriousness: ‘They’re not human’.”
By his own admission, Credo Mutwa had been initiated into secret knowledge about the Reptilians, who he calls the Chitauli, and their covert control of the entire world since days immemorial. It thus was fitting for Diana to seek to consult an expert in the ways of the Chitauli before she spilt the beans. The fact that she didn’t is evidence in itself that Credo warned her about the danger to her life of exposing the Windsors as such. But the mere intimation of having toyed with the idea of exposing them was blasphemy, General. It was one of the many straws that broke their backs: five months later, the princess was no more.
CREDO SEES HORROR IN PRINCESS’ DESTINY
Princess Diana, General, was keen to know precious much about the Reptilian race (humans who carry at least 50 percent of the genes of the Reptoid/Lizard race, originally from the Draco star system, about 100 to 380 light years from Earth). So in April that very year, she flew back to South Africa to meet Credo in person at his home in the Shamwari Game Reserve near Port Elizabeth.
As the shaman tutored her about the Reptilian agenda for global domination and its vampirism of mankind, the princess besought Credo to “cast the bones” to help her find meaning in her life. “Throwing the bones” is a way of divination that is informed by the pattern the bones – in Credo’s case ancient bones of the lion, leopard, and elephant handed down from the legendary Zulu warrior king Shaka of Mfecane fame – form once they are randomly cast on the ground. Credo obliged her and did likewise. The result was at once chilling and uplifting.
"She wanted to know about her future,” Credo, who called Diana “Little Sister”, said to the same Western journalist referred to above. “What I saw in the bones for her was both wonderful and terrifying. It scared the stuffing out of me. First, I saw great happiness for her. She would meet and fall in love with a foreigner. I saw she would leave Britain after they married and she would come to live for part of the year in South Africa. But one of the bones that came up was a battle axe that showed a terrible weapon of destruction was poised upon her. I saw she would die a terrible death, before her happiness would be fulfilled.”
But like every other right-thinking person, General, Credo did not make known to her the nether aspects of what he foresaw. “I certainly could not tell her,” he says. “How could I?” You will agree with me, General, that telling her would simply have exacerbated her misery and possibly made her contemplate suicide as a less grim way out.
The princess was ecstatic that she would at long last find love after years of affairs and flings that led to nowhere and which only served to break her heart to a point where it could no longer mend. Over the next few months, she kept up a steady exchange of discreetly couriered letters with Credo even as she developed a great interest in spiritualism, picking the brains of clairvoyant upon clairvoyant in London.
CREDO PROPHECY COMES TO PASS
In July, the princess and a rich, handsome Arab playboy crossed paths. For the Arab, it was love from the get-go General. In the princess’ case, the first question that obviously came to mind was, “Is this the man Credo alluded to? Is he my knight in shining armour?” Although she too was more than platonically drawn to him, she wanted to size him up first for a reasonable length of time before she snuggled up with him.
But in only a matter of weeks, General, she was head over heels about him: there certainly was love in the air, with the wedding bells set to ring much more sooner than later. The Arab playboy there and then began mending his ways, unceremoniously dumping his celebrity girlfriend of years just by the stroke of a pen. The princess was so impressed with the rapid fulfilment of Credo’s Nostradamus act that she scheduled a personal introduction of her new beau to him for that September.
A reservation for a room with a four-poster bed in the Pretoria Suite of the secluded Shamwari Lodge complex and with the asking price of £524 per night was made by the princess for September 14th. The head chef had even laid up a special African menu for the couple, which included the traditional Kudu Wellington – venison (deer meat) wrapped in pastry.
But there was more. During their trip to South Africa, Diana and her man were to engage in discussions concerning the making of a nature conservation movie titled Mambo, which was about children striving to safeguard an elephant from a culling. The movie would star Gene Hackman and Embeth Davitz of Schindler’s List fame, with Credo himself making a cameo appearance too. Diana’s de facto fiancé, who was a movie producer of some note himself, undertook to bankroll the movie to the tune of £20 million.
A euphoric Credo had even picked an 800-year-old necklace of love beads for a present for the two love birds when they pitched up at his Shamwari compound. Then it all unravelled General. In the early hours of the morning of August 31, 1997, exactly two weeks before the princess and her Arab Romeo were to visit Credo, his wife and high priestess Mama Nobela went into a trance-like state.
“She started screaming and rolling on the ground saying, ‘Ufile, ufile, umfazi we Kiwa!’ (‘She is dead, the white woman! The Princess has gone!’). Just then, there was a knock on our door and a woman told us that Princess Diana was killed in a car accident. I was so stunned my knees just went to water. It was one of the most traumatic moments of my life.” It was all over for the princess, General, who unbeknownst to much of the world was a bloodline descendent of Jesus of Nazareth! Exactly what happened General? How was her death orchestrated? To which god was she sacrificed General?
The past week or two has been a mixed grill of briefs in so far as the national employment picture is concerned. BDC just injected a further P64 million in Kromberg & Schubert, the automotive cable manufacturer and exporter, to help keep it afloat in the face of the COVID-19-engendered global economic apocalypse. The financial lifeline, which follows an earlier P36 million way back in 2017, hopefully guarantees the jobs of 2500, maybe for another year or two.
It was also reported that a bulb manufacturing company, which is two years old and is youth-led, is making waves in Selibe Phikwe. Called Bulb Word, it is the only bulb manufacturing operation in Botswana and employs 60 people. The figure is not insignificant in a town that had 5000 jobs offloaded in one fell swoop when BCL closed shop in 2016 under seemingly contrived circumstances, so that as I write, two or three buyers have submitted bids to acquire and exhume it from its stage-managed grave.
Youngest Maccabees scion Jonathan takes over after Judas and leads for 18 years
Going hand-in-glove with the politics at play in Judea in the countdown to the AD era, General Atiku, was the contention for the priesthood. You will be aware, General, that politics and religion among the Jews interlocked. If there wasn’t a formal and sovereign Jewish King, there of necessity had to be a High Priest at any given point in time.
Initially, every High Priest was from the tribe of Levi as per the stipulation of the Torah. At some stage, however, colonisers of Judah imposed their own hand-picked High Priests who were not ethnic Levites. One such High Priest was Menelaus of the tribe of Benjamin.
Parliament has rejected a motion by Leader of Opposition (LOO) calling for the reversing of the recent appointments of ruling party activists to various Land Boards across the country. The motion also called for the appointment of young and qualified Batswana with tertiary education qualifications.
The ruling party could not allow that motion to be adopted for many reasons discussed below. Why did the LOO table this motion? Why was it negated? Why are Land Boards so important that a ruling party felt compelled to deploy its functionaries to the leadership and membership positions?
Prior to the motion, there was a LOO parliamentary question on these appointments. The Speaker threw a spanner in the works by ruling that availing a list of applicants to determine who qualified and who didn’t would violate the rights of those citizens. This has completely obliterated oversight attempts by Parliament on the matter.
How can parliament ascertain the veracity of the claim without the names of applicants? The opposition seeks to challenge this decision in court. It would also be difficult in the future for Ministers and government officials to obey instructions by investigative Parliamentary Committees to summon evidence which include list of persons. It would be a bad precedent if the decision is not reviewed and set aside by the Business Advisory Committee or a Court of law.
Prior to independence, Dikgosi allocated land for residential and agricultural purposes. At independence, land tenures in Botswana became freehold, state land and tribal land. Before 1968, tribal land, which is land belonging to different tribes, dating back to pre-independence, was allocated and administered by Dikgosi under Customary Law. Dikgosi are currently merely ‘land overseers’, a responsibility that can be delegated. Land overseers assist the Land Boards by confirming the vacancy or availability for occupation of land applied for.
Post-independence, the country was managed through modern law and customary law, a system developed during colonialism. Land was allocated for agricultural purposes such as ploughing and grazing and most importantly for residential use. Over time some land was allocated for commercial purpose. In terms of the law, sinking of boreholes and development of wells was permitted and farmers had some rights over such developed water resources.
Land Boards were established under Section 3 of the Tribal Land Act of 1968 with the intention to improve tribal land administration. Whilst the law was enacted in 1968, Land Boards started operating around 1970 under the Ministry of Local Government and Lands which was renamed Ministry of Lands and Housing (MLH) in 1999. These statutory bodies were a mechanism to also prune the powers of Dikgosi over tribal land. Currently, land issues fall under the Ministry of Land Management, Water and Sanitation Services.
There are 12 Main Land Boards, namely Ngwato, Kgatleng, Tlokweng, Tati, Chobe, Tawana, Malete, Rolong, Ghanzi, Kgalagadi, Kweneng and Ngwaketse Land Boards. The Tribal Land Act of 1968 as amended in 1994 provides that the Land Boards have the powers to rescind the grant of any rights to use any land, impose restrictions on land usage and facilitate any transfer or change of use of land.
Some land administration powers have been decentralized to sub land boards. The devolved powers include inter alia common law and customary law water rights and land applications, mining, evictions and dispute resolution. However, decisions can be appealed to the land board or to the Minister who is at the apex.
So, land boards are very powerful entities in the country’s local government system. Membership to these institutions is important not only because of monetary benefits of allowances but also the power of these bodies. in terms of the law, candidates for appointment to Land Boards or Subs should be residents of the tribal areas where appointments are sought, be holders of at least Junior Certificate and not actively involved in politics. The LOO contended that ruling party activists have been appointed in the recent appointments.
He argued that worse, some had no minimum qualifications required by the law and that some are not inhabitants of the tribal or sub tribal areas where they have been appointed. It was also pointed that some people appointed are septuagenarians and that younger qualified Batswana with degrees have been rejected.
Other arguments raised by the opposition in general were that the development was not unusual. That the ruling party is used to politically motivated appointments in parastatals, civil service, diplomatic missions, specially elected councilors and Members of Parliament (MPs), Bogosi and Land Boards. Usually these positions are distributed as patronage to activists in return for their support and loyalty to the political leadership and the party.
The ruling party contended that when the Minister or the Ministry intervened and ultimately appointed the Land Boards Chairpersons, Deputies and members , he didn’t have information, as this was not information required in the application, on who was politically active and for that reason he could not have known who to not appoint on that basis. They also argued that opposition activists have been appointed to positions in the government.
The counter argument was that there was a reason for the legal requirement of exclusion of political activists and that the government ought to have mechanisms to detect those. The whole argument of “‘we didn’t know who was politically active” was frivolous. The fact is that ruling party activists have been appointed. The opposition also argued that erstwhile activists from their ranks have been recruited through positions and that a few who are serving in public offices have either been bought or hold insignificant positions which they qualified for anyway.
Whilst people should not be excluded from public positions because of their political activism, the ruling party cannot hide the fact that they have used public positions to reward activists. Exclusion of political activists may be a violation of fundamental human or constitutional rights. But, the packing of Land Boards with the ruling party activists is clear political corruption. It seeks to sow divisions in communities and administer land in a politically biased manner.
It should be expected that the ruling party officials applying for land or change of land usage etcetera will be greatly assisted. Since land is wealth, the ruling party seeks to secure resources for its members and leaders. The appointments served to reward 2019 election primary and general elections losers and other activists who have shown loyalty to the leadership and the party.
Running a country like this has divided it in a way that may be difficult to undo. The next government may decide to reset the whole system by replacing many of government agencies leadership and management in a way that is political. In fact, it would be compelled to do so to cleanse the system.
The opposition is also pondering on approaching the courts for review of the decision to appoint party functionaries and the general violation of clearly stated terms of reference. If this can be established with evidence, the courts can set aside the decision on the basis that unqualified people have been appointed.
The political activism aspect may also not be difficult to prove as some of these people are known activists who are in party structures, at least at the time of appointment, and some were recently candidates. There is a needed for civil society organizations such as trade unions and political parties to fight some of these decisions through peaceful protests and courts.