Anna Anderson's claim to be Grand Duchess Anastasia

[ChatNoir]

But your version of 'facts' is only a quote from Kurth's book by one of her supporters. You deny everything else. This is not 'facts.'


Then why do you still keep defending her claim?

You latch onto this and make a big deal out of it while ignoring all the scientific proof. I'm sure he never meant for it to be taken that way. You also need to explain why the hair also matched the intestines. The odds of both of them matching on two different switches/errors is impossible, therefore perhaps you lean toward intentional wrongdoing? By who? Please give facts to explain why you would feel this way.

When the scientific results on the new bodies come in at the end of this month, will you finally admit there were no survivors?

Is there ANYTHING that will ever make you admit she was FS? People have told me that if AA came back from the dead and told you herself she wasn't AN you still wouldn't believe it. What would it take?

May I ask you: Why is this so important to you?

[ChatNoir]

We don't know that at all. Her DNA matched theirs 99.9%. According to all the news services whenever a new story comes out, 'A woman named AA claimed for decades to be AN, but was later proven by DNA testing to be a Polish factory worker named FS.' It's pretty much accepted fact and common knowledge now save conspiracy theorists.

And just because several news services claim a thing, I am automatically supposed to believe it?

[ChatNoir]

But your version of 'facts' is only a quote from Kurth's book by one of her supporters. You deny everything else. This is not 'facts.'

As you may have noted, I quote from several sources. And I do not deny everything else, I simply try to decide if it is true or not.

Then why do you still keep defending her claim?

I am just sticking to the known facts. That they happen to be in her favor, is not my fault.

You latch onto this and make a big deal out of it while ignoring all the scientific proof. I'm sure he never meant for it to be taken that way. You also need to explain why the hair also matched the intestines. The odds of both of them matching on two different switches/errors is impossible, therefore perhaps you lean toward intentional wrongdoing? By who? Please give facts to explain why you would feel this way.

As Ibsen said: Jeg svarer ei, mitt kall er kun at spørge.

When the scientific results on the new bodies come in at the end of this month, will you finally admit there were no survivors?

Let's see what happens.

Is there ANYTHING that will ever make you admit she was FS? People have told me that if AA came back from the dead and told you herself she wasn't AN you still wouldn't believe it. What would it take?

Why is my opinion so important to you?

[Anna was Franziska]

Originally Posted by ChatNoir

As you may have noted, I quote from several sources. And I do not deny everything else, I simply try to decide if it is true or not.

I am just sticking to the known facts. That they happen to be in her favor, is not my fault.

I keep saying, they're not necessarily 'facts' and you disregard all other 'facts' as lies. This is why it's so frustrating. No matter what I say you only say the same things over and over.

As Ibsen said: Jeg svarer ei, mitt kall er kun at spørge.

I don't think Ibsen has anything to do with AA. Remember, you like 'sticking to facts' so let's have some about why the DNA is wrong and why the sample is not AA's. Stick to the facts now!

Let's see what happens.

I will be interested to see what you say.

Why is my opinion so important to you?

Because it bothers me that you so strongly press her case and it sometimes misleads innocent people. They need to know the real facts, that dna proved AA wasn't AN.

[Anna was Franziska]

One more thing I wanted add on the subject of AA and languages- she had that one rugged sounding accent, yet the real AN was known for her skill in picking up not only languages but accents. Her special gift was she was able t mimic anyone and their accent perfectly and entertain the other children guessing who she was imitating. AN would have spoken much better than AA.

Also one member on the AP whose husband is Russian said that AA's accent sounded Polish to him and he, being Russian, couldn't understand how anyone could think it was Russian.

[Anna was Franziska]

Originally Posted by ChatNoir

May I ask you: Why is this so important to you?

Remember, you like to stick to the facts. So let's hear them. If you have no facts to tell us explaining why the DNA tests don't count, I suppose you don't have a case. May I have your sources, please?

[ChatNoir]

Remember, you like to stick to the facts. So let's hear them. If you have no facts to tell us explaining why the DNA tests don't count, I suppose you don't have a case. May I have your sources, please?

I think I have already covered this.

[ChatNoir]

I keep saying, they're not necessarily 'facts' and you disregard all other 'facts' as lies. This is why it's so frustrating. No matter what I say you only say the same things over and over.

Of course I say the same things over and over. I don't change anything.

I don't think Ibsen has anything to do with AA. Remember, you like 'sticking to facts' so let's have some about why the DNA is wrong and why the sample is not AA's. Stick to the facts now!

I don't speculate.

I will be interested to see what you say.

Then you will have to wait and see, won't you.

Because it bothers me that you so strongly press her case and it sometimes misleads innocent people. They need to know the real facts, that dna proved AA wasn't AN.

Mislead innocent people? Pleeeeze, I think the innocent masses are intelligent enough to make up their own mind. Besides, how many people read my posts anyway?

[ChatNoir]

One more thing I wanted add on the subject of AA and languages- she had that one rugged sounding accent, yet the real AN was known for her skill in picking up not only languages but accents. Her special gift was she was able t mimic anyone and their accent perfectly and entertain the other children guessing who she was imitating. AN would have spoken much better than AA.

She would, wouldn't she. According to her childhood friend, Gleb Botkin, the children had a Russian accent when speaking English, and an English accent when speaking Russian. An accent quite their own.

Also one member on the AP whose husband is Russian said that AA's accent sounded Polish to him and he, being Russian, couldn't understand how anyone could think it was Russian.

And another member, whose husband was from St. Petersburg, swore that she had a St. Petersburg accent.

[Menarue]

Originally Posted by ChatNoir

Mislead innocent people? Pleeeeze, I think the innocent masses are intelligent enough to make up their own mind. Besides, how many people read my posts anyway?

I am interested in this case, I have had my thoughts about it but I must say that the photographs pasted by Anastasia have clinched the matter for me, I have great faith in DNA and the likeness between these people has made up my mind forever. In this thread a lot of emphasis has been put on ears, eyes etc. These photographs show me, and I have no doubt about it, FS is AA.
I have noticed over the years that young people can be considered different in looks from their parents and siblings but as they get older they seem to become more like them and sometimes show more clearly ethnical origins.
I remember something written about the Jerome grandmother of Winston Churchill who became more native Indian looking in her old age. I believe her grandchildren nicknamed her Sitting Bull. The two old ladies in these photographs could be one and the same person.
I am completely convinced.
(but still interested in the subject).

[ferrymansdaughter]

Originally Posted by Menarue

I have noticed over the years that young people can be considered different in looks from their parents and siblings but as they get older they seem to become more like them ...

Indeed - which might explain the fact that as an old lady, AA looked incredibly like Anastasia's Aunt Xenia.

[ferrymansdaughter]

Originally Posted by Anna was Franziska

But your version of 'facts' is only a quote from Kurth's book by one of her supporters. You deny everything else. This is not 'facts.'?

Peter's book is the most thorough about AA - he researched for seven years. It includes extensive footnotes so that we can ascertain sources, etc. Many of the books you mentioned do not do this - Klier & Mingay in particular is hopeless in this regard. If you want to know who said what and when, Peter's book is the quickest way to track down that source.

Originally Posted by Anna was Franziska

When the scientific results on the new bodies come in at the end of this month, will you finally admit there were no survivors?

And if the results show that there is doubt that these are the bodies of Alexei and Anastasia, what will you say?

[ferrymansdaughter]

Originally Posted by Anna was Franziska

that Gleb had written a novel called "The Baron's Fancy" that seemed to tell out the AA story before it happened
.

This was published in 1930 so how could it "tell out the whole AA story before it happened" when AA appeared in 1920? Incidentally, is this a book you have actually read? If so, can you tell us the plot?

[ferrymansdaughter]

Originally Posted by Anna was Franziska

A supporters really push this a bit too hard. I realize they are desperate to do so since those who knew AN well said she did NOT use German and you're trying to come up with excuses why she could have, but if you're going to go by quotes from eyewitnesses you have to accept theirs, too, even though they disagree with your perceived view..

I'm not desperate at all - in fact you appear so desperate to "prove" that AA knew no German that you are the one ignoring proven FACTS - Anastasia did know German and the schoolbooks produced as evidence during the court cases prove it was better than her Russian. Just because she didn't chat with Sophie Buxhoevden or Auntie Olga in German doesn't mean she couldn't speak it if she had to!

Originally Posted by Anna was Franziska

but if you're going to go by quotes from eyewitnesses you have to accept theirs, too, even though they disagree with your perceived view...

Pot and kettle comes to mind.

Originally Posted by Anna was Franziska

Massie's book, Godl's site, and other books I no longer have handy. I have been reading on this subject for 32 years now, I see a lot, don't always have a page number handy. ...

If you can't quote sources but merely gossip and speculation, why would we believe that you know what you are talking about? Are you sure you have actually read all the books you are quoting?

Originally Posted by Anna was Franziska

Obviously? That's not the way it was quoted in Klier's book.....

I thought you had been reading on this subject for 32 years - you must have come across this letter in other books. Also, I have read Klier's book fairly recently and it came across in that book exactly the way I understand it, so it must be your personal interpretation.

Originally Posted by Anna was Franziska

In the end you can never trump the truth. History and science have spoken. The DNA tests proved AA was not AN and matched FS's family. ...

What about the DNA tests done on AA's blood (which had a clear and proven custody trail from her doctor )which said that she was not AN but definitely not FS either? This shows there are anomalies when dealing with DNA.

Originally Posted by Anna was Franziska

Now the bones found last summer are proven to be the last two missing kids, whichever daughter it is, they are now all accounted for. .

The complete test results have still to be announced.

[Menarue]

Can anyone tell me anything about the Grand Duke Michael Alexandrovich, uncle of Nicholas II and his descendants if any? Also who was Snetkova.
I am very curious about these people.

[Anna was Franziska]

Originally Posted by ferrymansdaughter

I'm not desperate at all - in fact you appear so desperate to "prove" that AA knew no German that you are the one ignoring proven FACTS - Anastasia did know German and the schoolbooks produced as evidence during the court cases prove it was better than her Russian. Just because she didn't chat with Sophie Buxhoevden or Auntie Olga in German doesn't mean she couldn't speak it if she had to!

This is quite a stretch, and pure speculation.

If you can't quote sources but merely gossip and speculation, why would we believe that you know what you are talking about?

This is exactly what I'm trying to say about the position held by you and Chat. We now have scientific proof that AA was not AN and that the entire family died in 1918, making all the survivor stories impossible. Therefore if you cannot produce a source proving that the intestines were not AA's, or that the tests were rigged, you have nothing to stand on, other than, well, rumors and speculation.

AA supporters love to drag out lists of quotes from Kurth's book, this person said this or that (though in almost every case it was refuted by conveniently ignored comments from those on the other side) yet none of this matters anymore since we know that AA was not AN. We will never be able to prove who all helped AA with what but we know they had to because she wasn't AN. This is NOT speculation, this is logical deduction.

So, if you can't produce any proof that the intestine labeled as AA's was not hers, or that the hair labeled as AA's which perfectly matched the intestines was not hers, there's no case here. Come on, sources, proof, names and dates, who switched it, with what, when how and why. If you believe the swap happened during the 'chain of custody' please tell us how. If you believe the rigging was done in the labs, please tell us the names of the scientists who are guilty and who paid them off, and why. If all you have is a theory this 'may' have happened, then there is nothing there. The test results stand, and AA not AN so the rest is pointless.

I will not waste my time matching 75 year old quotes with any of you until you are able to do this.

Happy 4th of July weekend all Americans