Alexander Palace Forum

Discussions about the Imperial Family and European Royalty => The Myth and Legends of Survivors => Topic started by: ordino on March 31, 2006, 08:38:26 AM

Title: Anna = Anastasia
Post by: ordino on March 31, 2006, 08:38:26 AM
I believe that Anna was Anastasia
Title: Re: Anna = Anastasia
Post by: Kimberly on March 31, 2006, 01:52:10 PM
I don't ;D
Title: Re: Anna = Anastasia
Post by: Margarita Markovna on April 04, 2006, 08:26:13 PM
With Kim on this one.
Title: Re: Anna = Anastasia
Post by: Romanov_Fan19 on April 05, 2006, 07:07:27 PM
Not sure  :-/  I Want to belive one survived   But also  That  they went to Heaven that night after that brutality,  who knows??   I Guess I Belive the Offical Story    as sad as it is :'(
Title: Re: Anna = Anastasia
Post by: Grand Duchess Kimbo on April 06, 2006, 03:24:46 AM
Quote
I don't ;D



Agreeing with Pommie Kim on this one
Title: Re: Anna = Anastasia
Post by: Ra-Ra-Rasputin on April 06, 2006, 04:53:58 AM
There is absolutely no way Anna Anderson was Anastasia.

Look at the photos, people! The photos! You don't even need the DNA, the photos don't lie.  ZERO resemblance, and how anyone can think so is beyond my comprehension.

Rachel
xx
Title: Re: Anna = Anastasia
Post by: imperial angel on April 06, 2006, 11:52:20 AM
Well, I second the opinion above me. I would like to keep an open mind, but I suspect most of us say that she wasn't Anastasia, and that we are correct on that.. ;) So No!
Title: Re: Anna = Anastasia
Post by: Annie on April 06, 2006, 02:52:28 PM
Don't worry Angel, it's nothing to do with 'open mind' anymore. The DNA proved her to be an imposter, so we know it's not her now. We have proof.
Title: Re: Anna = Anastasia
Post by: imperial angel on April 09, 2006, 09:08:36 PM
Indeed, there is certainly proof. I don't criticize those who belive in her , or those who still say ''maybe', but to me it's pretty clear.
Title: Re: Anna = Anastasia
Post by: Annie on April 09, 2006, 09:32:03 PM
Quote
Indeed, there is certainly proof. I don't criticize those who belive in her , or those who still say ''maybe', but to me it's pretty clear.

I don't mean to 'criticize,' though I often get accused of that. What I'm trying to say is, this is now proven, so it's not up to your own personal opinion anymore. No one can tell someone what their favorite color is, or what they like best on their pizza, or their best radio station. That is all opinion, all different and all should be respected. But what we have here is an actual scientific and historical fact- AA wasn't AN. Before the DNA, we didn't know. I used to wonder myself. But now there is an answer.
Title: Re: Anna = Anastasia
Post by: zackattack on April 09, 2006, 09:39:52 PM
Quote
Well, I second the opinion above me. I would like to keep an open mind, but I suspect most of us say that she wasn't Anastasia, and that we are correct on that.. ;) So No!

Let me just add to this: the term "open mind" only applies to subjective issues, and there is just no room for subjectivity here, as the issue is totally objective, she was not AN, and 99% likely to be FS.

This is a bit like looking at a chalkboard with the problem 1 + 1=2 written across it and thinking: " I know they say that 2 is the correct answer here, but I'll keep an open mind just in case!"
Title: Re: Anna = Anastasia
Post by: Annie on April 09, 2006, 09:59:31 PM
Quote
Quote
Well, I second the opinion above me. I would like to keep an open mind, but I suspect most of us say that she wasn't Anastasia, and that we are correct on that.. ;) So No!

Let me just add to this: the term "open mind" only applies to subjective issues, and there is just no room for subjectivity here, as the issue is totally objective, she was not AN, and 99% likely to be FS.

This is a bit like looking at a chalkboard with the problem 1 + 1=2 written across it and thinking: " I know they say that 2 is the correct answer here, but I'll keep an open mind just in case!"

Thanks. I was trying to avoid using the 'flat earth' analogy again. ;) Once something has been proven wrong, it's over. No, not just 'to me', but it's actually true, she's not AN, just as the earth is not flat, and 1 +1 =2. Some people still think you can put this is still in the 'what do you want on your pizza' opinion category, but it is not a personal position thing anymore. We have a right answer, and we know that anything else is the wrong answer.
Title: Re: Anna = Anastasia
Post by: hg123 on April 10, 2006, 03:39:06 PM
No. Sorry.

I was a bit doubtful at times, because she knew about Ernie's visit in Russia, and I still have no idea, how Franziska Schabowska of all people should have known about it.

But, even ignoring the DNA, I think there are two many points that point against Anna being Anastasia. Most notably that they don't look alike at all. Anderson also seemed to old to me to be Anastasia.
Title: Re: Anna = Anastasia
Post by: Yseult on April 10, 2006, 04:33:48 PM
I don´t have the deep knowledge on AA issue that all of you have, but, to be honest, I never believed someone could survive to the cellar of Ipatiev House. From the bottom of my heart...I wish that the children could survive, but my mind tells me that it was not possible.
Title: Re: Anna = Anastasia
Post by: ConstanceMarie on April 10, 2006, 04:40:01 PM
Quote
No. Sorry.

I was a bit doubtful at times, because she knew about Ernie's visit in Russia, and I still have no idea, how Franziska Schabowska of all people should have known about it.

The trip was not fact but unproven rumor.

Quote
But, even ignoring the DNA, I think there are two many points that point against Anna being Anastasia. Most notably that they don't look alike at all. Anderson also seemed to old to me to be Anastasia.

She was too old. Fransiska was born in 1896 and Anastasia in 1901 and Fransiska looked much older than her 23 years when fished from that canal.  No way are those the pictures of a girl of 18 which is what Anastasia would have been if she had lived and she doesn't have the same face either. So my vote is no.
Title: Re: Anna = Anastasia
Post by: zackattack on April 10, 2006, 07:43:37 PM
Quote
Quote
No. Sorry.

I was a bit doubtful at times, because she knew about Ernie's visit in Russia, and I still have no idea, how Franziska Schabowska of all people should have known about it.

The trip was not fact but unproven rumor.

Quote


Very true. But let me just add, as Louis_Charles pointed out in another post,  that Grand Duke Ernie, given his hopes of regaining his throne,  would have been just as horrified if he hadn't made the trip to Russia he was accused of making. And this would've been all the proof he would've needed to know that Anna Anderson,sight unseen, was an imposter.
Title: Re: Anna = Anastasia
Post by: zackattack on April 10, 2006, 07:55:14 PM
Quote
Quote
Quote
Well, I second the opinion above me. I would like to keep an open mind, but I suspect most of us say that she wasn't Anastasia, and that we are correct on that.. ;) So No!

Let me just add to this: the term "open mind" only applies to subjective issues, and there is just no room for subjectivity here, as the issue is totally objective, she was not AN, and 99% likely to be FS.

This is a bit like looking at a chalkboard with the problem 1 + 1=2 written across it and thinking: " I know they say that 2 is the correct answer here, but I'll keep an open mind just in case!"

Thanks. I was trying to avoid using the 'flat earth' analogy again. ;) Once something has been proven wrong, it's over. No, not just 'to me', but it's actually true, she's not AN, just as the earth is not flat, and 1 +1 =2. Some people still think you can put this is still in the 'what do you want on your pizza' opinion category, but it is not a personal position thing anymore. We have a right answer, and we know that anything else is the wrong answer.

Or how about...."1 + 1=2? I don't like that answer  :'( :-? ....I'll wait for a second opinion....okay I don't like that answer either  >:(...now I'll wait for a third opinion! >:(....Not good enough! Was there tampering with the teacher's manual?!..... 1+1=2 is just what THEY want you to think! The answer must have been switched! GASP :o :o .....It's a conspiracy! They are all trying to stifle me! They are trying to shut me up :-X, but I won't let them!  I'm calling my attorneys! >:( WWWAAAHHH! WWWAAAHHH! ">:(  

 ::) ::) ::)
Title: Re: Anna = Anastasia
Post by: Rachael89 on April 11, 2006, 04:17:35 AM
What a charming, eloquent, smiley filled impression of an AA suporter ZackAttack  ::).

Rachael

P.S. :Sarcasm Alert:
Title: Re: Anna = Anastasia
Post by: reashka on April 11, 2006, 06:45:31 AM
Quote
I don´t have the deep knowledge on AA issue that all of you have, but, to be honest, I never believed someone could survive to the cellar of Ipatiev House. From the bottom of my heart...I wish that the children could survive, but my mind tells me that it was not possible.

I Agree, and also on Rachel's, AA doesn't resemble AN, and then there's the DNA result, so No.
Title: Re: Anna = Anastasia
Post by: Rebecca on April 11, 2006, 02:03:35 PM
[size=12]No, Anna Anderson was not Anastasia Nicholaievna. She was Franziska Schanzkowska.

I totally agree with many of the previous posts. The DNA results are crucial, but there are other things to. Anna Anderson did not look like Anastasia Nicholaievna. Not at all. There is not even the slightest resemblance, apart from the fact that they are both females, have two eyes, a nose, and so on.

Zackattack's posts gave me a good laugh. They are hilarious. Thank you!  ;D[/size]
Title: Re: Anna = Anastasia
Post by: CorisCapnSkip on May 01, 2006, 01:01:33 AM
I don't know if any expert has compared UNRETOUCHED photos of FS to AA, but what's creepin' me out is if AA has to be either FS or AN, she doesn't look exactly like either one of them to me, but if anything more like AN than FS.

Again, it's possible that FS either had plastic surgery (but who would pay for it?) or just by luck her features altered to further resemble Anastasia when she reemerged as AA--which would explain why no friend or associate of FS recognized her as FS--although how she changed hair color, height, shoe size and characteristics of her hands and feet remain a mystery.

So it seems we have an "unknown third party" planted by space aliens to cause confusion!

THE DARN ALIENS SUCCEEDED ON THIS ONE!   8-)
Title: Re: Anna = Anastasia
Post by: Grand Duchess Kimbo on May 01, 2006, 03:30:28 AM
Quote
Quote
Quote
Quote
Well, I second the opinion above me. I would like to keep an open mind, but I suspect most of us say that she wasn't Anastasia, and that we are correct on that.. ;) So No!

Let me just add to this: the term "open mind" only applies to subjective issues, and there is just no room for subjectivity here, as the issue is totally objective, she was not AN, and 99% likely to be FS.

This is a bit like looking at a chalkboard with the problem 1 + 1=2 written across it and thinking: " I know they say that 2 is the correct answer here, but I'll keep an open mind just in case!"

Thanks. I was trying to avoid using the 'flat earth' analogy again. ;) Once something has been proven wrong, it's over. No, not just 'to me', but it's actually true, she's not AN, just as the earth is not flat, and 1 +1 =2. Some people still think you can put this is still in the 'what do you want on your pizza' opinion category, but it is not a personal position thing anymore. We have a right answer, and we know that anything else is the wrong answer.

Or how about...."1 + 1=2? I don't like that answer  :'( :-? ....I'll wait for a second opinion....okay I don't like that answer either  >:(...now I'll wait for a third opinion! >:(....Not good enough! Was there tampering with the teacher's manual?!..... 1+1=2 is just what THEY want you to think! The answer must have been switched! GASP :o :o .....It's a conspiracy! They are all trying to stifle me! They are trying to shut me up :-X, but I won't let them!  I'm calling my attorneys! >:( WWWAAAHHH! WWWAAAHHH! ">:(  

 ::) ::) ::)





Just read this. Gave me quite a good laugh!!! ;D ;D ;D
Title: Re: Anna = Anastasia
Post by: bookworm857158367 on May 07, 2006, 10:47:14 PM
My vote is still "maybe" but I lean towards "no."  I still have a lot of skepticism that she was the Polish factory worker. Too many people either recognized this woman as Anastasia or said she was a "lady of the best circles." I don't think Franziska had the education or the breeding to pull off that sort of deception, even with coaching. There's also physical similarities -- the similar scars, the foot deformity, the match between her ears and Anastasia's.

Of course the DNA match with Franziska's family members would be the best evidence in favor of her being Franziska. The photos of Anna Anderson also look quite similar to photos posted elsewhere of Franziska's siblings.

I do think there's a strong likelihood that Anastasia and/or Alexei survived the initial massacre. Eye witnesses reported that several of the children were still alive when they were carrying the bodies out to the truck. There were also a few minutes when the bodies were lying unattended and guards who had not been involved in the killings were left alone with them while the others were looting or being sick or loading the dead onto a truck. There was a witness at one of the Anna Anderson trials in the 50s who reported seeing an injured girl being cared for by his land lady at a boarding house near the Ipatiev home. Then Red soldiers came to take this injured girl, supposedly Anastasia, away. Anastasia and Alexei are missing from that grave and I don't think it's plausible they could have been burned without physical evidence being left behind. They've combed that area in the years since and found no sign of those missing bodies.

 I think Anastasia survived. I don't know what happened to her after that night. Maybe she died a day or two later; maybe she was the claimant who became a nun and died in a convent; maybe she was the poor Anastasia claimant whom the Soviets sent to an insane asylum. Maybe she was Anna Anderson after all and the DNA testing was faulty in some way, maybe because someone succeeded in fixing them. I don't think that's likely, but it's an outside possibility.
Title: Re: Anna = Anastasia
Post by: Annie on May 17, 2006, 09:13:01 PM
Quote
I absolutely believe the late Anna Anderson was Anastasia. She posessed information that no one on the outside could have possibly know,

1. Like what?
2. HOW could this be verified, since 'no one outside the family could possibly know' and they were all dead?!

Quote
and it was confirmed many times by Lili Dehn,

Oh you mean the get your coat comment? The one that was in Sophie Buxhoevedon's 1920's book that AA mentioned in the 1950's? Sure, anyone who read the book would know that! And as far as 'goodbyegoodbye' 'my Empress said that' ANYBODY who knew Alexandra could have told her this!


Quote
Xenia Leeds,

Not very close to the family and only met her a couple times as a young child. What could she possibly prove?


Quote
Tatiana Botkin,

A likely suspect in the feeding of info to AA, along with her brother. I don't believe anything she 'verified', she probably told her to say it!

Quote
and even the Crown Princess Cecile.

Please tell me what she knew! Fifteen years older than AN, they did not grow up together, and by the time AN was 3, Cecile was married and moved to Germany. In the few visits home she made, her very young second cousin was not likely around, seeing as kids under 15 were not even allowed to attend adult parties or functions. Then by 1914, war broke out, and Cecile, being married to the German heir, could not go home again. I don't see how Cecile is such an authority. Also, she and her husband the Crown Prince were known to have gone eccentric after they lost their titles after the war.

Quote
I question the antics of Pierre Gilliard as he always came across as a sneaky little liar in the way that people would always point out how he was lieing.

You disregard him because you don't like him and don't like what he has to say. He knew AN much better than those you mention about.



Quote
Besides that, the things she told to people like Lili, Xenia, and Gleb Botkin as well as Dr. Rudnev were not things she could have known unless someone very close to Russia's imperial family was feeding her.

And they were.

 
Quote
When Alexandra Tegleva and Alexei Volkov went to see her in a hospital in 1925, they both sobbed and burst into tears.


Someone posted a quote from Volkov just the other day that said he said she was obviously being coached and was not AN. If he 'cried' it was out of disappointment that AN wasn't really alive.

posted by Stepan in "Final Frontier" thread:

Quote

In an interview with  the Russian newspaper Poslednie Novosti published in Tallin,  Volkov denied that AA was Anastasia. Volkov commented negatively on the people who surrounded Madame Tshaikovsky during his visit. "The conduct of the people who surrounded Madame Tshaikowsky seemed to me very suspect.They intervened all the time,completed her inadequate answers and excused all her errors under the pretext that she was ill."  I suppose one of these people was Harriet von Rathlef-Keilman who took care of her during this time 1925- 26.  Gilliard called her AA´s impresario.

So if he cried, it was because he was disappointed AN was not really alive, and someone was shadowing her memory by faking her identity.
Title: Re: Anna = Anastasia
Post by: Annie on May 18, 2006, 09:14:53 PM
I have recently checked those books out and am reading them again, but now that I know she's not AN I only see how hilarious she is biting those lips, and little clues sneak in that add up- like Tatiana Botkin hanging out with her earlier than I thought- it's fun now, like pieces of the puzzle coming together, seeing how the stuff I used to wonder about makes sense now, I can see how FS pulled this off, though we'll never know who all helped her.

Just because Gilliard said she didn't know German doesn't mean a thing, maybe he didn't know or forgot, they didn't learn or know much, and maybe the classes were when he wasn't around. He was correct to say he never heard them speak it, they spoke Russian, and English because it was Alexandra's main language, and French for the court. Who would they speak German with? Even Ella, Ernie and the Kaiser spoke and wrote to them in English.  German would have been AN's worst language, yet it was AA's best? What's wrong here? That's another thing that really nailed it for me, AA didn't speak English very well, and AN grew up with parents who spoke it well to each other every day. Her accent sounds like somebody who strugggled to learn it late in life, which FS did. i don't know why it means so much to you bigbee, she just wasn't AN and it's not that big of a deal, really. The sun will come up tommorrow and it doesn't affect your life at all.
Title: Re: Anna = Anastasia
Post by: Annie on May 18, 2006, 09:48:58 PM
My opinion is not my opinion, it IS fact. Once something is proven, it's not an 'opinion' anymore, it's history. If you can't come up with a reasonable excuse for why AA's DNA matched FS's family and not Alexandra's then it's really over. You know, even if the DNA didn't match either family, you might have some hope of a mistake, but what are the odds it didn't match the royal family and did match FS's family? That's pretty conclusive.

It's like guys getting accused of being a baby's daddy, and they get a DNA test, they know it's their kid even if it's only 97% not 99% like AA was. That does affect their life and even they don't think the DNA was wrong, tampered with, planted by the other guy she slept with, etc. So why would it matter to you if a person you don't even know isn't who you hoped she'd be? I hoped AN survived too, but she didn't. She wouldn't want us to get nasty over it (and I mean the other forum too!)
Title: Re: Anna = Anastasia
Post by: Annie on May 18, 2006, 09:50:30 PM
Quote
I think it's ironic how you say that Gilliard knew Anastasia so well but you think he just 'forgot' what languages they spoke.

It's very realistic to think that he never heard them speak German since they did not use it. He may not have known of the lessons, the kids didn't have a school where all the teachers knew each other, each were tutors and the German tutor could have come in at a different time, and likely less frequently.

But even if he did lie it doesn't mean he thought AA was AN, it meant that, like the LAPD and OJ, he tried so hard to make his case that he hurt it by adding stuff that made him look bad. But he knew AA was not AN.

Quote
You see, where we part ways on this is that your entire concept is based on the people who confirmed her memories as being in a huge plot to raise up a fraud while I see absolutely not a shread of evidence to support that theory.[/color]

So I suppose you believe all those who supported AA were always perfect, never lied, never made a mistake, never recalled anything incorrectly? If you put it off on one you have to consider it could have happened with anybody.

And my entire concept is NOT based on those confirming her memories, quite the opposite, I always say he said she said doesn't count because everyone conflicted and none of it can be proven.
Title: Re: Anna = Anastasia
Post by: ChatNoir on May 18, 2006, 10:15:06 PM
Quote
 It's very realistic to think that he never heard them speak German since they did not use it. He may not have known of the lessons, the kids didn't have a school where all the teachers knew each other, each were tutors and the German tutor could have come in at a different time, and likely less frequently.  

How many times must I repeat that Gilliard himself scheduled the Grand Duchesses for German lessons in Tobolsk?

Kind regards
Chat Noir
Title: Re: Anna = Anastasia
Post by: Ra-Ra-Rasputin on May 19, 2006, 07:57:44 AM
Anna Anderson was so obviously not Anastasia it's not even funny.

What I want to know is why there's even a conspiracy about it.  She looked nothing like Anastasia, sounded nothing like Anastasia, couldn't speak the languages Anastasia spoke, could speak a language Anastasia couldn't (German), was denied as being Anastasia by the people closest to the real Anastasia and was proven by DNA testing to not be Anastasia.

So, do tell, where is the conspiracy? I fail to see it.

I KNOW it's hard to accept that something you believe in so vehemently is wrong, but you've got to accept it.  Yes, there is some evidence to suggest that AA could have been AN, but that evidence is far outweighed by the evidence on the opposite side of the fence.  DNA being the main player, not to mention the denials by the people closest to the real Anastasia; Anastasia's own FAMILY, her aunts and uncles, grandmother, etc, said she wasn't Anastasia, and they should have known.  Much more so than distant relatives who probably saw Anastasia about 3 times in her lifetime wanting their fifteen minutes of fame when it came to the case.

There simply wasn't the motive or the opportunity to fake the DNA tests.  Funnily enough, the world doesn't revolve around Anna Anderson or the royal family.  The results weren't going to be THAT earth shattering or THAT interesting to very many people to bother inventing some elaborate plan to switch DNA samples and fake tests.  Scientists value their reputation too much to want to get involved in the silly plots you're suggesting, 'Anna Sue'.

AA wasn't AN.  End of story.

Rachel
xx

Title: Re: Anna = Anastasia
Post by: OlgaNRomanovaFan on May 19, 2006, 09:36:37 AM
Plus the DNA tests were carried out by four independent labs who all returned the same result that AA was not AN, making conspiracy even less likely.
Title: Re: Anna = Anastasia
Post by: GD_Sasha on June 11, 2006, 09:15:25 AM
Quote
She was too old. Fransiska was born in 1896 and Anastasia in 1901 and Fransiska looked much older than her 23 years when fished from that canal.  No way are those the pictures of a girl of 18 which is what Anastasia would have been if she had lived and she doesn't have the same face either. So my vote is no.
Exactly. I'm wondering if an age difference was ever even brought up in the investigation.
It's so obvious FS/AA(whatever you prefer) wasn't Anastasia. I find no resemblance(sp?) between the two at all. Okay, so she too had some foot problem that AN had. I could be a hemophiliac and say I'm Alexei. The fact is, society will at times believe anything.
  AA wasn't Anastasia. Case solved. Lock all the doors on this story and haul it away.
Title: Re: Anna = Anastasia
Post by: GD_vassily on June 19, 2006, 01:59:52 PM
i in my personal opinion do not believe Anna Anderson was GD Anastasia, but i may well be wrong. on the other hand, although that murderous night is a true travesty, it gives me a tiny bit of comfort to know, that such a close family was together with each other, right untill the end, and that they went to Heaven together. that in itself is a blessing.
Title: Re: Anna = Anastasia
Post by: Princess_Olishka on June 19, 2006, 05:56:44 PM
I personally do not believe that Anna Anderson was Anastasia. The DNA tests proved her to be false and DNA tests are usually to be over 90% correct. And I also agree - since Anna claimed to be Anastasia, she definitely looked much older than what the Grand Duchess would be. A doctor, when looking at her, said for her to be Franziska's age. I've looked at photos, and Anna looks more like Franziska than she does of Anastasia (I think the lips, nose and eyebrows are different). As for Franziska's photos, I've only seen one where she has her hands together, standing up. It is said that Anastasia's uncle, Grand Duke Ernst, may have touched the photograph to make it look more like Anna, as he was furious for Anna saying that he made a private visit to the Imperial Family to sign a peace treaty with Germany. Franziska's siblings visited Anna to see if she could be their missing sister, at first one of them (Felix??? :-/) looked at her and said she was, but then later changed his mind after they talked a little. The other siblings came along, too, but said no. I do not know what to make out of this case. If Anna was Franziska, then maybe they all did that to make their sister happy - just an opinion of mine. I have read Anastasia: The Riddle Of Anna Anderson and The Romanovs: The Final Chapter. Both held a lot of interesting information. From the book by Massie, he writes quite about Franziska. It says that there was a grenade explosion. This would have left scars on her body, and when Anna came forward claiming to be the princess, these injuries - which is said to be from gunshots and bayonet wounds - may have very possibly been from the grenade explosion. Also, the closest person to Anastasia who was still ALIVE, was Olga Alexandrovna. I think at first she claimed for her to be her niece, but then said no and that they were both "very similar." She also said that the public just simply wants to believe the mystery. I think she carries a very strong point there! I also say that it is highly unlikely that anyone could have survived the execution. As for the missing bodies, I believe that Anastasia is present ... instead I say it is her sister Marie who is missing, along with Alexey.

Anna Anderson may have known she was not Anastasia, but then yet again she could have well and truly believed she was Anastasia. As for the languages spoken, Anna saying that she would not speak Russian as it was "the language spoken by her executioners" - is quite a silly reason if you ask me! It was Anastasia's language, too! ;D I do not know how Anna knew all the personal details of Anastasia's life ... it could have all been a coincidence!

But - overall - I say NO.      
Title: Re: Anna = Anastasia
Post by: David_Pritchard on June 19, 2006, 06:32:09 PM
No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No!
Title: Re: Anna = Anastasia
Post by: anna on June 19, 2006, 06:40:07 PM
Oké oké, got the message!
Title: Re: Anna = Anastasia
Post by: Belochka on June 19, 2006, 06:44:34 PM
[size=10]Is there any cogent reason why the same question keeps surfacing on this forum?

Just to add to David's posting:

ABSOLUTELY NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
[/size]
Title: Re: Anna = Anastasia
Post by: Princess_Olishka on June 19, 2006, 06:50:33 PM
Quote
Oké oké, got the message!

 ;DYeah, I agree, Anna! [smiley=huh.gif] :-/
Title: Re: Anna = Anastasia
Post by: Tania+ on June 19, 2006, 07:57:45 PM
[size=10]Oh boy, you have saved me time and effort typing for the next 60 years David! You are every mother's prayer to an age old answer of reply to their children. Next time my daughter asks me for something, and says she did not hear me, I will just have this copy nearby to place in her hand.

 ;D  1,375 no's ....   ;D  Sorry, it just cracks me up    ;D  ;D  ;D


Thanks !


Tatiana+[/size]
Title: Re: Anna = Anastasia
Post by: ChatNoir on June 19, 2006, 10:44:14 PM
Quote
Is there any cogent reason why the same question keeps surfacing on this forum?

Maybe you haven't discovered it yet, but this is a discussion forum. And what makes a good discussion, is a difference of opinions. I am so sorry that the whole world does not agree with you, but it is something you have to live with.  My apologies for being so contrary.

Kind regards,
ChatNoir
Title: Re: Anna = Anastasia
Post by: Annie on June 20, 2006, 11:41:05 AM
Since you like to discuss, please explain why it is your 'opinion' that four independant labs who found AA to be not AN and 99% FS are all wrong and you are right? There are several threads here explaining the processes used by the scientists, they are pinned at the top of this page. Of course, this is a poll thread, so this is not the proper place, as if that's every stopped you before from pushing your worn out, already lost cause in every single thread here regardless of the title.
Title: Re: Anna = Anastasia
Post by: David_Pritchard on June 20, 2006, 01:43:59 PM
Dear Annie,

When I read your post above, it seemed as if I had written it myself. We are in full agreement on this topic and those who cannot manage to see the truth in front of them. Do remember that not everyone comes to this forum with the intent to debate and discuss but rather to amuse themselves by inflaming the discussion. On other forums they are known as trolls. If the subject of your response does not present their opinions in a well thought out manner but rather continues to espouse and adhere to unsubtantiated claims, then they may just be Internet trolls.

David
Title: Re: Anna = Anastasia
Post by: Annie on June 20, 2006, 03:22:34 PM
Quote
Dear Annie,

When I read your post above, it seemed as if I had written it myself. We are in full agreement on this topic and those who cannot manage to see the truth in front of them. Do remember that not everyone comes to this forum with the intent to debate and discuss but rather to amuse themselves by inflaming the discussion. On other forums they are known as trolls. If the subject of your response does not present their opinions in a well thought out manner but rather continues to espouse and adhere to unsubtantiated claims, then they may just be Internet trolls.

David

Thank you David, I completely agree. I am so glad there are a few people here who aren't afraid, or intimidated, or fed up, enough to continue to call these people on their actions, because their blatant misleading of innocent children and newbies should not be allowed to stand. They ARE trolls, every single thread, regardless of name or topic, or pleas to stay on topic, always turn into a list of reasons why AA was AN, over and over.This is not an 'opinion,' the fact that AA was not AN is now historical and scientific fact. I have never seen anyone challenge anything like this! Even men who are stuck with the paternity of a child they don't want to pay for still don't try to say the other prospective father switched the blood samples? And just think, that directly affects his life!


Which brings me to an epiphany had about "Chat Noir' and his obsession of this subject. What do he, and his supporters, always say is the reason that the intestines wereswitched/results rigged? They claim it's because the royal family doesn't want to be HUMILIATED for being WRONG about Anastasia. (they weren't, of course) How ironic, since that seems to be exactly what "Chat Noir" is doing! I guess that's where he got the idea from! Even though the case is closed and most rational people accept the conclusion, whether or not it is what they wanted to hear, he continues to drag this dead horse around behind his car honking the horn. Since he has devoted so much of his life to proving AA was AN, he must feel reality somehow invalidates his life's work and his legacy that he turned out to be wrong and he can't deal with the humilation. Therefore he has to continue to pretend it's true, to try to make others believe in something that doesn't exist, and I really don't think he'd stop at anything to try to prove he was still right after all. However, this is not fair to the world, who deserves to know the real truth. One man's obsession (and that of his few but vocal followers) really isn't worth it. He needs to know that even though he was wrong, his work is still very interesting and will be remembered, and it's going to be okay that AA was not AN. It really is time to let go and get over it, for everyone's sake, most of all, for truth and integrity in history, and for the memories of the real Anastasia, and Franziska. Let them rest in peace!

Do the Right Thing- a parable and analogy to the AA case- it takes a bigger man to admit he made a mistake, for the good of all, more than himself- A lesson learned
I remember watching a documentary on the Donner Party and it mentioned that they had followed an alternate path west, avoiding the Oregon trail, because a man had written a book describing a new way to go that was better. When the party got out there, they saw that there were mountains and obsticles the book didn't mention. They knew what town the author was in, and sought him out to ask him what to do next. The man told them straight out that he had been wrong, he had miscalcuated, and to please not follow his book any longer as it was the wrong path. He was very honorable to admit he was wrong, for the good of all, rather than to lead them blindly down a trail that led in the wrong direction just to spare himself humiliation since his book had claimed otherwise. He did the right thing. It would be a very great thing if everyone could do the same.
Title: Re: Anna = Anastasia
Post by: ChatNoir on June 20, 2006, 07:04:01 PM
Quote
Since you like to discuss, please explain why it is your 'opinion' that four independant labs who found AA to be not AN and 99% FS are all wrong and you are right? There are several threads here explaining the processes used by the scientists, they are pinned at the top of this page. Of course, this is a poll thread, so this is not the proper place, as if that's every stopped you before from pushing your worn out, already lost cause in every single thread here regardless of the title.


My dear Annie:
If you READ my posts, you will find that what I mostly do, is present facts about the case. I am not saying I am right or wrong, I just find that very many people on this forum are unaware of what happpened back then. So relax, you may be right after all, but in the meantime, I always welcome a good argument. And nobody is asking you to participate if you don't want to.

Kind regards
ChatNoir

PS: I have just been mad aware of the fact that some on this board think I'm Peter Kurth. Thank you all, I am very flattered. But unfortunately for you, I am not.
Title: Re: Anna = Anastasia
Post by: Annie on June 20, 2006, 09:30:21 PM
How many times do you ever post 'facts' that support AA NOT being AN? It's clear which side you are on, and trying to support.
Title: Re: Anna = Anastasia
Post by: ChatNoir on June 20, 2006, 09:47:30 PM
Quote
How many times do you ever post 'facts' that support AA NOT being AN? It's clear which side you are on, and trying to support.

And what is wrong with that? Am I not allowed to have an opinion? You have made it very clear what side you are on, and I don't for a second chide you for that. I just find you rather repetetive and ill informed, and that has nothing to do with whether AA was AN of FS.

Kind regards
ChatNoir

Title: Re: Anna = Anastasia
Post by: Annie on June 20, 2006, 10:53:02 PM
The difference is I don't claim to be fair to both sides, but it seemed you did claim that, though it's not true. Talk about repetitive, you just keep saying the same things over and over, the old stuff that's never going to change, and has already been proven to have been wrong. At least I keep coming up with new ideas to fill in the blanks for things we will never find the answers to. If you're only going to quote the same book over and over, you're just chasing your tail.

And I guess FA has already backed down on his ban of the discussion of AA being AN without proof the DNA was wrong.
Title: Re: Anna = Anastasia
Post by: ChatNoir on June 20, 2006, 11:05:23 PM
Quote
The difference is I don't claim to be fair to both sides, but it seemed you did claim that, though it's not true.

It seemed? Facts, miss Annie, facts please. You have already accused me of quite a few things. I think it is time to back up your allegations or stop this ridiculous attack on a person just because he happens to have a different view of this matter than you. It's rather embarrassing behaviour.

Disgustingly yours
ChatNoir
Title: Re: Anna = Anastasia
Post by: Annie on June 20, 2006, 11:09:42 PM
You posted that all you ever did was list facts, which left the impression you were fair about the issue on both sides. If you admit you are not, then there is no issue here.

Please tell me what is in this for you, what difference does it make to you who she was? Is it really that big of a thing that AN died with the family and that AA was FS? I've known people to care less about their own relatives, why are you so obsessed with this woman's fraudulent claim?!

I will not post in this thread anymore, since it is a POLL thread, and you have derailed it with your redundant AA sludge like all the others. I will no longer be a pert of this thread being OT.
Title: Re: Anna = Anastasia
Post by: ChatNoir on June 20, 2006, 11:32:55 PM
And now, back to the polls.

Kind regards
ChatNoir
Title: Re: Anna = Anastasia
Post by: Holly on June 21, 2006, 12:13:34 AM
No, I don't think AA was Anastasia. I have a feeling in my heart that Anastasia Nicholaievna lost her life on July 16/17. I have seen hundreds of pictures of Anastasia and don't you think when one sees a person so many times that they would at least recognize them a TINY bit?? AA doesn't look like Anastasia at all! That alone is proof enough for me.  :)
                           Holechka.
Title: Re: Anna = Anastasia
Post by: Justine on June 21, 2006, 01:22:54 AM
I don't think AA was AN. No one survived that night. DNA test say she wasn't AN. AA even doesn't look like Anastasia.
Title: Re: Anna = Anastasia
Post by: Raegan on June 21, 2006, 08:38:56 AM
No, I do NOT believe Anna Anderson was Anastasia. I believe Anna Anderson was Franziska Schanzkowska.
Title: Re: Anna = Anastasia
Post by: Valmont on June 21, 2006, 09:39:54 AM
I believe she was Franziska too. ...

Arturo Vega-Llausás