Home Celebrity Princess Diana Conspiracy Film: Mohammed El Fayed Backed it for $5 Mil

“Unlawful Killing,” the film that accuses the British royals of conspiring to kill Princess Diana and her lover Dodi Fayed, screened today in Cannes. This is the film that won’t be shown in the U K.

Filmmaker Keith Allen — father of singer Lily Allen — says the film is “forensic” and shows that the British and French authorities conspired to kill the couple and cover it up. But financing for the film came totally from Dodi Fayed’s father, Mohammed el Fayed, owner of Harrod’s.That fact is not disclosed anywhere in the film or credits. But journalists at today’s press conference asked the question and got their answer–from El Fayed’s pr guy. The whole thing is a vanity project from the  House of Harrod’s.

El Fayed has always accused the royals of killing his son. He gets to tell his story in “Unlawful Killing.” Not only that but he burns the royal crests that used to hang at Harrods in his backyard, for Allen’s cameras. The film plays a long episode of the E! True Hollywood story, with clips and interviews featuring Howard Stern, Robin Quivers and of all people the late Tony Curtis.

These people don’t help, particularly with Curtis defending Dodi. The movie’s main weakness is that Dodi is presented as a saint, with no real examination of his playboy life. As for El Fayed funding the film — Allen admitted that El Fayed was his only backer and paid 5 million dollars. But this not being mentioned in the film,Allen said a press conference this morning: “The Mafia funds American movies and that’s never mentioned.”

By the end of today’s press conference it was clear that “Unlawful Killing” is a waste of time, and resources. For his $5 million, Mohammed el Fayed gets a movie that cannot be taken seriously.

Share and Enjoy !

32 replies to this post
  1. Al Fayed sold Harrods some time ago, so apart from some quirks around Fulham FC, he isn’t active in British society circles any longer. Word to conspiracy theorists out there: Conspiracy theories are for people who are too lazy and dumb to do proper research of all the sources available!

    Actually, in the court trial some witnesses gave to protocol about the Diana/Dodi romance that Diana wanted to make another lover a bit jealous with Dodi and Al Fayed as a father and patriarch just could not bear this thought.

  2. The only point is: did the film prove murder? If murder was proven, why should the film be discredited because it was financed by an unsavory character, or the victims were unsaintly playboys, and neurotic selfish twits? Did they deserve to be murdered?

  3. Epic Fail!

    Keith Allen is considered a small-time Hipster slouch in Hollywood. This was the only way he could get a film funded. It’s a PR attack on the good people of Great Britain by a man named Mohammed.

    How could they have thought for even a moment that any reasonably intelligent person would take it seriously??

  4. the royals hated diana because she didn’t cowtow to their ways.

    namely thinking their shyt doesn’t stink and living off the taxpayers.

    none of them could (or would) get a real job.

    did they kill her? i doubt it.

    however, they’re glad she’s not around. they were never more glad than on the day of william and kate’s wedding.

  5. I think this was nothing more than a tragic accident, but in saying that I see no reason why this movie shouldn’t have been made. Mohammed Al Fayed is a grieving father who believes his son was murdered and wants to get the word out, even if people won’t listen. Before you criticize think about if you were in his position. I understand where he is coming from even if he is wrong about what happened. It is really sad that his son had to be caught up in this mess just because of who he loved.
    I do think he should have included his name on the film (the media NEEDS to be accountable) but at the end of the day it isn’t the end of the world. I am glad he got to offer his opinion on the issue. :-)
    As for the fact that Dodi Al Fayed was portrayed as a saint that was simply the fact that his father loved him very much. Everyone loves their children and wants everyone to see the best in them. He wants to portray all the good things about his son (that no doubt went unnoticed) and I am sure he is sick and tired of hearing people put down his dead son.
    All in all people need to give him a break if he was your son and you had the resources to do so you would be doing the same damn thing! And the fact that the UK refuses to screen it is interesting….

    RIP Diana and Dodi. Gone but not forgotten. You can be together happily in love for all of eternity now with no one trying to take that away!!

  6. Cannes, like the Nobel Peace Prize, is really just a publicity venue for the shallow and untalented. Really, when is the last time that a truly great film (def. — one that people will want to pay money to see 10 or 20 years from now, and which will be the subject of intelligent discussion 50 years from now) get a Cannes debut?

    This is just Mohammed’s Revenge on the Royals. Twit v. Twit. And the idea that there is something worthwhile or creative about incorporating an entire television broadcast into your film speaks volumes about the low standards required for documentary films these days. At the end of the day, this will be seen for what it is — a cut and paste hack job that has no more artistic or social merit than my vacation videos or An Inconvenient Truth [“Oh no, he didn’t say that, did he?”]

  7. More rich muslims making up history to suit themselves. Big deal. She was a conceited twit who married a crazy royal for the conceit of it all, and then was crazy enough to screw around with a filty arab and rub his royal nose in it. Who really cares what happened to them? If it weren’t for the bloodthirsty paparazzi, this story would have been put to bed ages ago. Sing Sir Elton! (yuk)

  8. Funny how she was just about to start campaigning for the Palestinians when she died. What was she thinking dating a muslim? she was obviously attracted to him, you racist. Do you think you are any better? Go continue to be ruled by a family that call themselves royals u fool!! They are nothing but colonialists. They came to my land and proclaimed themselves Kings and Queens! and we kicked them out!! just like the British people should do! you servant!! you slave!! go bow down before your “queen” in her castle and pay her millions to keep her Palaces up and running!! YOU SLAVE

  9. This is a very important documentary, because it will reinforce what
    most people of the world already believe, which is that Princess Diana was
    murdered by England’s German royal family.

  10. Heh, to bad you guys didn’t follow the colonists lead and get rid of all this royalty BS. You wouldn’t have had any of this trouble. Ah well, if the royal family is hip enough to prostrate yourself in front of, you can always do it for the new Eurabian caliphate that you’ve allowed to eat your country from the inside….

  11. Ahh..it is all clear to me now. The British royal family is responsible for global warming, the worldwide economic disaster, WWII,rectal itching, oil spills, world hunger, AIDS, all endangered species, Communism and Lindsey Lohan. In fact they are so devious that they made it appear that George W Bush was the culprit for all of the world’s woes.

    Poor St. Dodi and Diana were just pawns in this web of evil.

  12. Let us put all of tis bad feelings aside

    Let us remember All Our Hope is in God

    The writer believes the deceased are entitled to rest in peace

    Rembmer this the terrible pain an suffering her sons are caused

    You were not there and who are you to criticize

    I wish all glory honor be to the One God of Abraham

    God save the Queen

    Signed Blue Sapphire

  13. Muslims are always complaining about one thing or another. If they’re filthy rich, they can make a conspiracy theory movie and set it forth as fact.

  14. Sounds like the British crown paid reviewers to slam this film. Frankly, it wouldn’t be surprising as they have known to pull these kinds of stunts forever. The Royals are nothing more than leaches and scum of the earth who should be sent packing.

  15. Good job on the reviewer actually doing a review of the film and not spending the entire time badmouthing the guy who lost his son in the accident. Dodi and Diana weren’t saints, but I’m also pretty sure they weren’t taken out by paparazzi since even the French police said there were never any paparazzi following them in the tunnel.

  16. Any “Michael Moore” accusation is wrong, unfair, and pointless. Michael Moore has an agenda and bends rhetoric to fit his agenda. In the Diana problem, no one has to “bend” anything. One merely has to question the facts, not ignore them. You are questioning reasons when the answers are in the physical problems.

  17. Let’s not forget how Mr. Fayed made his pile. He was, I remember, an associate of ‘Papa’ Doc Duvalier in 1960’s Haiti, making money on customs duties on imported goods. He has such a murky background that the UK govt. has repeatedly refused his requests to become a British citizen-doubtless something that rankles with him. You need to be very naughty to be that rich and be refused citizenship in this country!

  18. Just a bunch of static. I seem to recall a story about to blokes fighting over a girl as the Titanic sank. We’re all buggered.

  19. It really surprises me that none of the Diana conspiracies look at Dodi’s link to Adnan Khashoggi (his uncle). Khashoggi was the primary arms dealer in Iran Contra. Daniel Hopsicker (in Welcome to Terrorland) reveals that Khashoggi also had links to 911 – as co-owner of the Florida flight school where 3 of the hijackers trained in aero-terrorism. Khashoggi is also linked to the murder of investigative journalist Danny Casolaro (who was about to expose him for his involvement in BCCI and the Promis software scandal). Apparently even Mohammed Al Fayed believed Diana’s and Casolaro’s deaths were linked, but the CIA stonewalled his FOIA requests when he tried to prove it (see http://dianamurder.wikispaces.com/)

  20. Ok so the big defense of this obsurd piece of second rate propoganda is that the Mafia has in the past financed movies. A perfect anology! The Nazis also financed film and since El Fayeds is one it fits perfectly. Also A franklin save it you over the top conspircy nut job! Move to goatastan or some other Islamic dirthole and don’t let the door hit your ars on the way out wackjob!

  21. I can’t remember that Diana tried to overthrow the British monarchy, Anna Hall?
    Have you seen the film, Friedman? I haven’t, but the filmmaker said somewhere that the only conspiracy would have been after the car crash, when the ambulance transport seems to have been unnecessary delayed. The film would be interesting if indeed it was forensic, I’d for instance like to know why Diana thought she would be murdered. She had premonitions and so had Michael Jackson, and both were brushed off as paranoid neurotics and both died before their time. Which may be coincidences. Still, someone should look into it seriously, if for no other reason than to prove them wrong.

  22. Anna Hall, besides living in a dream world your entire life, what else have you been up to? Since when is it a crime to be a womanizer? Maybe we should slaughter every celebrity (including politicians) for: “neurotic obsession with public adoration” whatever that means. I detect major jealousy here, my guess is you have a bit of a weight issue yourself.
    And, just because an institute of debauchery, inbreeding, and pedophilia has been around for a 1000 years, doesn’t legalize murder.
    Put the ice cream away and start studying.

  23. This is a documentary that would make the likes of Michael Moore proud. Rather than presenting any kind of real evidence, they merely hash and rehash the bad blood between Diana and royals. I hate to break this to the film makers, but motive alone does not make a crime. As typical of these gush fests, Diana and her playboy gigalo come out as nothing less than saints, never mentioning anything about Dodi’s womanizing and drug use, or Diana’s neurotic obsession with public adoration. They never once mention that Diana sought, purposefully, to damage an institution that had existed for 1000 years simply because she was angry. They never remind us that Diana thought that her feelings were more important than the foundation of the British government! What a neurotic, selfish, twit. Had she not been as beautiful as she was, no one would give a damn about her or hardly remember.

  24. What was she thinking dating a Muslim anyways? Good grief woman! You are part of the British Royal Family, you should of had better sense!

  25. good on the filmmaker…the International Insurance RICO conducted out of the city of london is indeed the heart of darkness with its 1000th member of the royal order of the garter (william of orange) and their spiderweb of crime using the Pilgrim society, 1001 nature trust and Le circle to enact terrorism, suicide banking, insurance fraud and any number of ‘adventures’ using the member companys of the livery guild charters to perform catastrophe bonds to fail, buildings to be pre insured, then disastered (911-WTC) or the land mine business Dianna was threatening to end. and there is a pattern in america with these crooks, september 11 1776 and september 11 2001 are all on the same battle fields, battle field of manhattan and Battlefields of fresh kills, then theres september 11 1812 and september 11 1912, the broken peace treaty over trade in 1812, and the centennial dinner celebrating that war in 1912 with House, Morgan, Chase, Wilson, Goldman planning their attack on the Republic to inact the federal reserve act, then bought controlling shares in the FRB of Ny and all the regional FRB’s. and lets not forget september 11 1864 when british paid troops burned Atlanta to the ground – the capital of their merchanitile trading competitior…all about trade…and Insurance…and the RICO that has been going on since Gog and Magog have defended the city of London since 1534 – and Sir GHW Bush’s name at skull and bones was Magog, and the Israelis awarded GW Bush in 2008 as Gog….so it was MaGog that was introducing us to the new world order out of the oval office, not a president of the united states, rather a subject of the English Crown. Rude…Britainnia

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.