Squidgygate - Revision history

WikiSysop at 16:07, 11 January 2017

2017-01-11T16:07:21Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:07, 11 January 2017
Line 14:		Line 14:
	An analysis of the Reenan-Tape by Crew Green Consulting Ltd., however, proved that it was technically impossible to obtain such a recording with the equipment that was used by Cyril Reenan. Its sound quality was within certain wavelengths unobtainable for the receiver in use of Reenan, additionally a 50Hz ’hum’ could be heard on the tape, making it much more feasible that a direct tap or ‘bug’ was used to record the conversation. Furthermore it was evident that the tape was doctored to make it look like it was recorded on the side of James Gilbey, who was using a cell phone. The data bursts on the tape could not have been transmitted by the network used by Gilbey (Crew Green Consulting Ltd.). Thus it seems that the recording was indeed made by the GCHQ, the Government Communications Headquarters, but why the tape was made to look like an accidental recording of a mobile phone call and how Mr Reenan obtained it remains a mystery.		An analysis of the Reenan-Tape by Crew Green Consulting Ltd., however, proved that it was technically impossible to obtain such a recording with the equipment that was used by Cyril Reenan. Its sound quality was within certain wavelengths unobtainable for the receiver in use of Reenan, additionally a 50Hz ’hum’ could be heard on the tape, making it much more feasible that a direct tap or ‘bug’ was used to record the conversation. Furthermore it was evident that the tape was doctored to make it look like it was recorded on the side of James Gilbey, who was using a cell phone. The data bursts on the tape could not have been transmitted by the network used by Gilbey (Crew Green Consulting Ltd.). Thus it seems that the recording was indeed made by the GCHQ, the Government Communications Headquarters, but why the tape was made to look like an accidental recording of a mobile phone call and how Mr Reenan obtained it remains a mystery.

	Sources:		'''Sources:'''

	Alder, Garrick. "Squidgygate revisited." nthposition online magazine. february 2004 [http://www.nthposition.com/squidgygate.php]		Alder, Garrick. "Squidgygate revisited." nthposition online magazine. february 2004 [http://www.nthposition.com/squidgygate.php]

WikiSysop at 16:06, 11 January 2017

2017-01-11T16:06:46Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:06, 11 January 2017
Line 1:		Line 1:
	A Media "scandal" (the suffix -gate relates to “Watergate”) involving a recorded telephone conversation between [[Princess Diana]] and her alleged lover James Gilbey. The leak of the tape is part of the battle between Diana and [[Prince Charles]] at the end of their marriage.		A Media "scandal" (the suffix -gate relates to “Watergate”) involving a recorded telephone conversation between [[Princess Diana]] and her alleged lover James Gilbey. The leak of the tape is part of the battle between Diana and [[Prince Charles]] at the end of their marriage.


	== The Tape ==		== The Tape ==

	The tape was a recording of a conversation between Princess Diana and her alleged lover James Gilbey. The context and content of the conversation placed it to have been held on New Year’s Eve of 1989. On it, Gilbey calls Diana “darling” 14 times and the name-giving “Squidge” or “Squidgy” 53 times (Syson). This placed the conversation just shortly after the infamous [[Camillagate]] phone call between her husband [[Prince Charles]] and his mistress [[Camilla Parker Bowles]]. Both tapes however, were published years after they had been recorded. (See the [[Camillagate]] article for further information.)		The tape was a recording of a conversation between Princess Diana and her alleged lover James Gilbey. The context and content of the conversation placed it to have been held on New Year’s Eve of 1989. On it, Gilbey calls Diana “darling” 14 times and the name-giving “Squidge” or “Squidgy” 53 times (Syson). This placed the conversation just shortly after the infamous [[Camillagate]] phone call between her husband [[Prince Charles]] and his mistress [[Camilla Parker Bowles]]. Both tapes however, were published years after they had been recorded. (See the [[Camillagate]] article for further information.)


	== Publication ==		== Publication ==

	The tape was first published by the yellow press newspaper ''The Sun'' on 23 August 1992. ''The Sun'' obtained the tape from Cyril Reenan, who claimed to have accidentally recorded the conversation on 4 January 1990, four days after the conversation had taken place. However, a technical analysis of the tape proved otherwise (see Origins of the Tape). Lady Diana herself confirmed the authenticity of the tapes, phoning a hotline where interested people could listen to the 30 minute tape for ~~36pence~~ per minute (Alder).		The tape was first published by the yellow press newspaper ''The Sun'' on 23 August 1992. ''The Sun'' obtained the tape from Cyril Reenan, who claimed to have accidentally recorded the conversation on 4 January 1990, four days after the conversation had taken place. However, a technical analysis of the tape proved otherwise (see Origins of the Tape). Lady Diana herself confirmed the authenticity of the tapes, phoning a hotline where interested people could listen to the 30 minute tape for 36 pence per minute (Alder).


	== Origins of the Tape ==		== Origins of the Tape ==

	Sources about how the recording could have reached Cyril Reenan or Jane Norgrove are ambiguous. The Princess’s former bodyguard Ken Wharfe "believed the 'Squidgy' tapes were recorded by GCHQ at Cheltenham on New Year's Eve 1989 and then broadcast on a 'loop' until they were picked up separately by two radio hams" (Allen and Rayner). In his assessment this was done in order to "interact a possible IRA threat" (ibid.). This was supposedly done with a number of members of the royal family (Alder).		Sources about how the recording could have reached Cyril Reenan or Jane Norgrove are ambiguous. The Princess’s former bodyguard Ken Wharfe "believed the 'Squidgy' tapes were recorded by GCHQ at Cheltenham on New Year's Eve 1989 and then broadcast on a 'loop' until they were picked up separately by two radio hams" (Allen and Rayner). In his assessment this was done in order to "interact a possible IRA threat" (ibid.). This was supposedly done with a number of members of the royal family (Alder).
	An analysis of the Reenan-Tape by Crew Green Consulting Ltd., however, proved that it was technically impossible to obtain such a recording with the equipment that was used by Cyril Reenan. Its sound quality was within certain wavelengths unobtainable for the receiver in use of Reenan, additionally a 50Hz ’hum’ could be heard on the tape, making it much more feasible that a direct tap or ‘bug’ was used to record the conversation. Furthermore it was evident that the tape was doctored to make it look like it was recorded on the side of James Gilbey, who was using a cell phone. The data bursts on the tape could not have been transmitted by the network used by Gilbey (Crew Green Consulting Ltd.). Thus it seems that the recording was indeed made by the GCHQ, the Government Communications Headquarters, but why the tape was made to look like an accidental recording of a mobile phone call and how Mr Reenan obtained it remains a mystery.		An analysis of the Reenan-Tape by Crew Green Consulting Ltd., however, proved that it was technically impossible to obtain such a recording with the equipment that was used by Cyril Reenan. Its sound quality was within certain wavelengths unobtainable for the receiver in use of Reenan, additionally a 50Hz ’hum’ could be heard on the tape, making it much more feasible that a direct tap or ‘bug’ was used to record the conversation. Furthermore it was evident that the tape was doctored to make it look like it was recorded on the side of James Gilbey, who was using a cell phone. The data bursts on the tape could not have been transmitted by the network used by Gilbey (Crew Green Consulting Ltd.). Thus it seems that the recording was indeed made by the GCHQ, the Government Communications Headquarters, but why the tape was made to look like an accidental recording of a mobile phone call and how Mr Reenan obtained it remains a mystery.




	Sources:		Sources:


	Alder, Garrick. "Squidgygate revisited." nthposition online magazine. february 2004 [http://www.nthposition.com/squidgygate.php]		Alder, Garrick. "Squidgygate revisited." nthposition online magazine. february 2004 [http://www.nthposition.com/squidgygate.php]

Pankratz at 09:34, 13 December 2011

2011-12-13T09:34:04Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:34, 13 December 2011
Line 1:		Line 1:
	A Media "scandal" (the suffix ~~–gate~~ relates to “Watergate”) involving a recorded telephone conversation between [[Princess Diana]] and her alleged lover James Gilbey. The leak of the tape is part of the battle between Diana and [[Prince Charles]] at the end of their marriage.		A Media "scandal" (the suffix -gate relates to “Watergate”) involving a recorded telephone conversation between [[Princess Diana]] and her alleged lover James Gilbey. The leak of the tape is part of the battle between Diana and [[Prince Charles]] at the end of their marriage.


Line 9:		Line 9:
	== Publication ==		== Publication ==

	The tape was first published by the yellow press newspaper ''The Sun'' on 23 August 1992. ''The Sun'' obtained the tape from Cyril Reenan, who claimed to have accidentally recorded the conversation on 4 January 1990, four days after the conversation had taken place. However, a technical analysis of the tape proved otherwise (see Origins of the Tape). Lady Diana herself confirmed the authenticity of the tapes, phoning a hotline where interested people could listen to the ~~30minute type~~ for 36pence per minute (Alder).		The tape was first published by the yellow press newspaper ''The Sun'' on 23 August 1992. ''The Sun'' obtained the tape from Cyril Reenan, who claimed to have accidentally recorded the conversation on 4 January 1990, four days after the conversation had taken place. However, a technical analysis of the tape proved otherwise (see Origins of the Tape). Lady Diana herself confirmed the authenticity of the tapes, phoning a hotline where interested people could listen to the 30 minute tape for 36pence per minute (Alder).


	== Origins of the Tape ==		== Origins of the Tape ==

	Sources about how the recording could have reached Cyril Reenan or Jane Norgrove are ambiguous. The Princess’s former bodyguard Ken Wharfe "~~[…]~~ believed the 'Squidgy' tapes were recorded by GCHQ at Cheltenham on New Year's Eve 1989 and then broadcast on a 'loop' until they were picked up separately by two radio hams~~[…]~~ (Allen and Rayner).” In his assessment this was done in order to ~~counteract~~ a possible IRA threat" (ibid.). This was supposedly done with a number of members of the royal family (Alder).		Sources about how the recording could have reached Cyril Reenan or Jane Norgrove are ambiguous. The Princess’s former bodyguard Ken Wharfe "believed the 'Squidgy' tapes were recorded by GCHQ at Cheltenham on New Year's Eve 1989 and then broadcast on a 'loop' until they were picked up separately by two radio hams" (Allen and Rayner). In his assessment this was done in order to "interact a possible IRA threat" (ibid.). This was supposedly done with a number of members of the royal family (Alder).
	An analysis of the Reenan-Tape by Crew Green Consulting Ltd., however, proved that it was technically impossible to obtain such a recording with the equipment that was used by Cyril Reenan. Its sound quality was within certain wavelengths unobtainable for the receiver in use of Reenan, additionally a 50Hz ’hum’ could be heard on the tape, making it much more feasible that a direct tap or ‘bug’ was used to record the conversation. Furthermore it was evident that the tape was doctored to make it look like it was recorded on the side of James Gilbey, who was using a cell phone. The data bursts on the tape could not have been transmitted by the network used by Gilbey (Crew Green Consulting Ltd.). Thus it seems that the recording was indeed made by the GCHQ, the Government Communications Headquarters, but why the tape was made to look like an accidental recording of a mobile phone call and how Mr Reenan obtained it remains a mystery.		An analysis of the Reenan-Tape by Crew Green Consulting Ltd., however, proved that it was technically impossible to obtain such a recording with the equipment that was used by Cyril Reenan. Its sound quality was within certain wavelengths unobtainable for the receiver in use of Reenan, additionally a 50Hz ’hum’ could be heard on the tape, making it much more feasible that a direct tap or ‘bug’ was used to record the conversation. Furthermore it was evident that the tape was doctored to make it look like it was recorded on the side of James Gilbey, who was using a cell phone. The data bursts on the tape could not have been transmitted by the network used by Gilbey (Crew Green Consulting Ltd.). Thus it seems that the recording was indeed made by the GCHQ, the Government Communications Headquarters, but why the tape was made to look like an accidental recording of a mobile phone call and how Mr Reenan obtained it remains a mystery.

Pankratz at 08:01, 21 June 2010

2010-06-21T08:01:24Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:01, 21 June 2010
Line 4:		Line 4:
	== The Tape ==		== The Tape ==

	The tape was a recording of a conversation between Princess Diana and her alleged lover James Gilbey. The context and content of the conversation placed it to have been held on New Year’s Eve of 1989. On it, Gilbey calls Diana “darling” 14 times and the name-giving “Squidge” or “Squidgy” 53 times(Syson). This placed the conversation just shortly after the infamous [[Camillagate]] phone call between her husband Prince Charles and his mistress Camilla Parker Bowles. Both tapes however, were published years after they had been recorded. (See the [[Camillagate]] article for further information.)		The tape was a recording of a conversation between Princess Diana and her alleged lover James Gilbey. The context and content of the conversation placed it to have been held on New Year’s Eve of 1989. On it, Gilbey calls Diana “darling” 14 times and the name-giving “Squidge” or “Squidgy” 53 times (Syson). This placed the conversation just shortly after the infamous [[Camillagate]] phone call between her husband [[Prince Charles]] and his mistress [[Camilla Parker Bowles]]. Both tapes however, were published years after they had been recorded. (See the [[Camillagate]] article for further information.)


	== Publication ==		== Publication ==

	The tape was first published by the yellow press newspaper The Sun on 23 August 1992. The Sun obtained the tape from Cyril Reenan, who claimed to have accidentally recorded the conversation on 04 January 1990, four days after the conversation had taken place. However, a technical analysis of the tape proved otherwise (see Origins of the Tape). Lady Diana herself confirmed the authenticity of the tapes, phoning a hotline where interested people could listen to the 30minute type for 36pence per minute (Alder).		The tape was first published by the yellow press newspaper ''The Sun'' on 23 August 1992. ''The Sun'' obtained the tape from Cyril Reenan, who claimed to have accidentally recorded the conversation on 4 January 1990, four days after the conversation had taken place. However, a technical analysis of the tape proved otherwise (see Origins of the Tape). Lady Diana herself confirmed the authenticity of the tapes, phoning a hotline where interested people could listen to the 30minute type for 36pence per minute (Alder).


	== Origins of the Tape ==		== Origins of the Tape ==

	Sources about how the recording could have reached Cyril Reenan or Jane Norgrove are ambiguous. The Princess’s former bodyguard Ken Wharfe ”[…] believed the "Squidgy" tapes were recorded by GCHQ at Cheltenham on New Year's Eve 1989 and then broadcast on a "loop" until they were picked up separately by two radio hams[…] (Allen and Rayner).” In his assessment this was done in order to counteract a possible IRA threat (ibid.). This was supposedly done with a number of members of the royal family (Alder).		Sources about how the recording could have reached Cyril Reenan or Jane Norgrove are ambiguous. The Princess’s former bodyguard Ken Wharfe "[…] believed the 'Squidgy' tapes were recorded by GCHQ at Cheltenham on New Year's Eve 1989 and then broadcast on a 'loop' until they were picked up separately by two radio hams[…] (Allen and Rayner).” In his assessment this was done in order to counteract a possible IRA threat" (ibid.). This was supposedly done with a number of members of the royal family (Alder).
	An analysis of the Reenan-Tape by Crew Green Consulting Ltd., however, proved that it was technically impossible to obtain such a recording with the equipment that was used by Cyril Reenan. Its sound quality was within certain wavelengths unobtainable for the receiver in use of Reenan, additionally a 50Hz ’hum’ could be heard on the tape, making it much more feasible that a direct tap or ‘bug’ was used to record the conversation. Furthermore it was evident that the tape was doctored to make it look like it was recorded on the side of James Gilbey, who was using a cell phone. The data bursts on the tape could not have been transmitted by the network used by Gilbey (Crew Green Consulting Ltd.). Thus it seems that the recording was indeed made by the GCHQ, the Government Communications Headquarters, but why the tape was made to look like an accidental recording of a mobile phone call and how Mr Reenan obtained it remains a mystery.		An analysis of the Reenan-Tape by Crew Green Consulting Ltd., however, proved that it was technically impossible to obtain such a recording with the equipment that was used by Cyril Reenan. Its sound quality was within certain wavelengths unobtainable for the receiver in use of Reenan, additionally a 50Hz ’hum’ could be heard on the tape, making it much more feasible that a direct tap or ‘bug’ was used to record the conversation. Furthermore it was evident that the tape was doctored to make it look like it was recorded on the side of James Gilbey, who was using a cell phone. The data bursts on the tape could not have been transmitted by the network used by Gilbey (Crew Green Consulting Ltd.). Thus it seems that the recording was indeed made by the GCHQ, the Government Communications Headquarters, but why the tape was made to look like an accidental recording of a mobile phone call and how Mr Reenan obtained it remains a mystery.

Line 25:		Line 25:
	Alder, Garrick. "Squidgygate revisited." nthposition online magazine. february 2004 [http://www.nthposition.com/squidgygate.php]		Alder, Garrick. "Squidgygate revisited." nthposition online magazine. february 2004 [http://www.nthposition.com/squidgygate.php]

	Allen, Nick and Gordon Rayner. "Diana's Squidgygate tapes 'leaked by GCHQ'." The Telegraph. 9th January 2008 [http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1575117/Dianas-Squidgygate-tapes-leaked-by-GCHQ.html]		Allen, Nick and Gordon Rayner. "Diana's Squidgygate tapes 'leaked by GCHQ'." ''The Telegraph.'' 9th January 2008 [http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1575117/Dianas-Squidgygate-tapes-leaked-by-GCHQ.html]

	Crew Green Consulting Ltd. "The 'Squidgygate' tape: a technical analysis." crew-green.com. 1993 (2004) [http://www.crew-green.com/Diana.htm]		Crew Green Consulting Ltd. "The 'Squidgygate' tape: a technical analysis." crew-green.com. 1993 (2004) [http://www.crew-green.com/Diana.htm]

	Syson, Neil. "Di rang Sun Squidgygate line." The Sun. 10th January 2008 [http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/royals/article671002.ece]		Syson, Neil. "Di rang Sun Squidgygate line." ''The Sun''. 10th January 2008 [http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/royals/article671002.ece]

WikiSysop at 11:53, 20 June 2010

2010-06-20T11:53:05Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:53, 20 June 2010
Line 30:		Line 30:

	Syson, Neil. "Di rang Sun Squidgygate line." The Sun. 10th January 2008 [http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/royals/article671002.ece]		Syson, Neil. "Di rang Sun Squidgygate line." The Sun. 10th January 2008 [http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/royals/article671002.ece]

	~~[[Category:Expansion]]~~

Cremejk5 at 19:48, 19 June 2010

2010-06-19T19:48:43Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:48, 19 June 2010
Line 1:		Line 1:
	~~== Squidgygate ==~~



	A Media "scandal" (the suffix –gate relates to “Watergate”) involving a recorded telephone conversation between [[Princess Diana]] and her alleged lover James Gilbey. The leak of the tape is part of the battle between Diana and [[Prince Charles]] at the end of their marriage.		A Media "scandal" (the suffix –gate relates to “Watergate”) involving a recorded telephone conversation between [[Princess Diana]] and her alleged lover James Gilbey. The leak of the tape is part of the battle between Diana and [[Prince Charles]] at the end of their marriage.


	=== The Tape ===		== The Tape ==

	The tape was a recording of a conversation between Princess Diana and her alleged lover James Gilbey. The context and content of the conversation placed it to have been held on New Year’s Eve of 1989. On it, Gilbey calls Diana “darling” 14 times and the name-giving “Squidge” or “Squidgy” 53 times(Syson). This placed the conversation just shortly after the infamous [[Camillagate]] phone call between her husband Prince Charles and his mistress Camilla Parker Bowles. Both tapes however, were published years after they had been recorded. (See the [[Camillagate]] article for further information.)		The tape was a recording of a conversation between Princess Diana and her alleged lover James Gilbey. The context and content of the conversation placed it to have been held on New Year’s Eve of 1989. On it, Gilbey calls Diana “darling” 14 times and the name-giving “Squidge” or “Squidgy” 53 times(Syson). This placed the conversation just shortly after the infamous [[Camillagate]] phone call between her husband Prince Charles and his mistress Camilla Parker Bowles. Both tapes however, were published years after they had been recorded. (See the [[Camillagate]] article for further information.)


	=== Publication ===		== Publication ==

	The tape was first published by the yellow press newspaper The Sun on 23 August 1992. The Sun obtained the tape from Cyril Reenan, who claimed to have accidentally recorded the conversation on 04 January 1990, four days after the conversation had taken place. However, a technical analysis of the tape proved otherwise (see Origins of the Tape). Lady Diana herself confirmed the authenticity of the tapes, phoning a hotline where interested people could listen to the 30minute type for 36pence per minute (Alder).		The tape was first published by the yellow press newspaper The Sun on 23 August 1992. The Sun obtained the tape from Cyril Reenan, who claimed to have accidentally recorded the conversation on 04 January 1990, four days after the conversation had taken place. However, a technical analysis of the tape proved otherwise (see Origins of the Tape). Lady Diana herself confirmed the authenticity of the tapes, phoning a hotline where interested people could listen to the 30minute type for 36pence per minute (Alder).


	=== Origins of the Tape ===		== Origins of the Tape ==

	Sources about how the recording could have reached Cyril Reenan or Jane Norgrove are ambiguous. The Princess’s former bodyguard Ken Wharfe ”[…] believed the "Squidgy" tapes were recorded by GCHQ at Cheltenham on New Year's Eve 1989 and then broadcast on a "loop" until they were picked up separately by two radio hams[…] (Allen and Rayner).” In his assessment this was done in order to counteract a possible IRA threat (ibid.). This was supposedly done with a number of members of the royal family (Alder).		Sources about how the recording could have reached Cyril Reenan or Jane Norgrove are ambiguous. The Princess’s former bodyguard Ken Wharfe ”[…] believed the "Squidgy" tapes were recorded by GCHQ at Cheltenham on New Year's Eve 1989 and then broadcast on a "loop" until they were picked up separately by two radio hams[…] (Allen and Rayner).” In his assessment this was done in order to counteract a possible IRA threat (ibid.). This was supposedly done with a number of members of the royal family (Alder).

Cremejk5 at 19:47, 19 June 2010

2010-06-19T19:47:50Z

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-Media "scandal" involving a tape of a phone conversation between [[Princess Diana]] and her friend (or maybe lover) James Gilbey, in which the Princess is affectionately called "Squidgy". The leak of the tape is part of the battle between Diana and [[Prince Charles]] at the end of their marriage.
+== Squidgygate ==
 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1575117/Dianas-Squidgygate-tapes-leaked-by-GCHQ.html
 [[Category:Expansion]]

Pankratz at 08:11, 16 June 2010

2010-06-16T08:11:49Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:11, 16 June 2010
Line 4:		Line 4:

	http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1575117/Dianas-Squidgygate-tapes-leaked-by-GCHQ.html		http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1575117/Dianas-Squidgygate-tapes-leaked-by-GCHQ.html

			[[Category:Expansion]]

Pankratz: Created page with 'Media "scandal" involving a tape of a phone conversation between Princess Diana and her friend (or maybe lover) James Gilbey, in which the Princess is affectionately called "…'

2010-06-16T08:11:08Z

Created page with 'Media "scandal" involving a tape of a phone conversation between Princess Diana and her friend (or maybe lover) James Gilbey, in which the Princess is affectionately called "…'

New page

Media "scandal" involving a tape of a phone conversation between [[Princess Diana]] and her friend (or maybe lover) James Gilbey, in which the Princess is affectionately called "Squidgy". The leak of the tape is part of the battle between Diana and [[Prince Charles]] at the end of their marriage.

Source:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1575117/Dianas-Squidgygate-tapes-leaked-by-GCHQ.html