Re: For Serious Claimants, Please

[AGRBear]

The Telegraph newspaper in the UK reported all 3 articles, the DNA conference in Brisbane, plus the Alexei descendant & the 101 year old Anastastia. Among other Romanov articles.

Can we find these stories on-line, if not,  does anyone have time to tell us briefly what was said?

Thanks.

AGRBear

[rskkiya]

AGRBear

Sometimes you just have to do a little research!
Check out "Looking For Anastasia" in your local library- sorry- I don't have the name of the authors... My copy has been borrowed...
You could also locate a microfich of the Telegraph report there too.

R.

[Robert_Hall]

You can search the Telegraph.co.uk for free on line [Untill it is finally decided who is buying it I suppose]. The DNA conference article is by Highfiels, 12/7 but they also list an additional 110 articles on the Romanovs over the past few years. BTW, I read everything, just about from The Times to The Guardian, and yes, they all have their shady sides, Candice.
Cheers
Robert

[Janet_W.]

As a member of the press (albeit a minor one), I have to ask who and/or what doesn't have a "shady side"? Wherever one or more homo sapiens congregrate, you'd better  believe that sooner or later there are going to be complicatons, and very possibly shennanigans!  

A wide variety of people and organizations comprise "the media"--in fact, this website could also be considered media, with all of us as its contributors--and the integrity levels vary, as they do in all professions.

The idea behind a newspaper or other printed medium, however, is that printed word (and since the invention of radio, the broadcast word) can not only inform, question, and serve as a "watchdog," but also bind the reporter to accountability. Most journalists are aware they are being held to a higher standard and will be dismissed if they do not behave in ethical fashion, and they therefore act accordingly.

Perhaps this has been off-topic, but perhaps not . . . because of censorship issues in both Tsarist and post-Tsarist Russia, plus our own questions about reportage re: the assassination of the Tsar and his family, sooner or later journalistic ethics are bound to be part of the discussion.

[rskkiya]

Ok ! Ok...One giant worldwide paranoid conspiracy at a time!

This Giant conspiracy is about the so called Romanov Survivors... (wow-- its the new reality tv show...who will be voted away from the firing squad next...! )

Whether the media is bias, shady, sainty, liberal, conservative or the pawns of the freemasons is another topic!

R.

[AGRBear]

The Reds continued their lies.  On 22 Sept 1918 [p. 178 in File On the Tsar] the Izestiya newspaper published a story that Nicholas II's body was exhumed from the grave in the woods and placed in a zinc coffin....  On the same page of the same book Summers and Mangold tell us that Pravda reported that 28 people were placed on trial for the murder of the "whole Romanov household".  Fourteen were found guilty and executed.  More lies??

What other lies have the USSR officials fed  us which so many people have swallowed hook line and sinker?

Ahhh,  yes,  how about the reports by the eye witnesses that they burned and then buried Alexei and one other person, whom we now debate as to whether it was Marie or Anastasia?  This was obviously a lie. Nothing has been found to prove this part of their story. So  what esle did they lie about?

I for one, know full well, the impact that the CHEKA then the GPU and later the KGB had on people whom they threaten if they didn't keep their silence.  Oh, and, they had many ways to make sure that the silence was kept.  Maybe, they threaten to kill the families of the guards involved.  They had done this before.  Whole families vanished in the night.  Everyone knew this. So, all the guards knew  what would happen if they did not repeat what they were told to say.  Wasn't it Rudolf Lacher who voiced: "I served the Bolsheviks well.  I kept my silence."  This is found on p. 516 in the Fate of the Romanovs by King and Wilson.

Now, don't tell me that I'm parnoid.  There are two real clues which indicate someone was lying.   Two missing bodies are missing in the Koptyaki grave and meadow.

Two bodies didn't just suddenly come alive and walk away...

So, where are they, and why did the witnesses continue to tell us they were buried where they were not?

Please, don't push at me the question:  "If they did survive, why didn't they show their faces after that night?"  Maybe they did, but, we may never know.  The CHEKA then the GPU and the the KGB were very good at keeping secrets.

AGRBear

[Candice]

AGRBear, I don't believe the stories from the Russians either.  I also think you have answered your own questions. I think your looking for clarification in order to continue your line of investigation.  Whether you get it that is another matter.  Most of the information regardless of the documentation is all speculation thanks to the controlling powers in Russia who have benefited well.

[Dashkova]

Russia is a very big country.  The Ural area has wide stretches of wilderness and has been notorious for secreted burials for centuries.

Sure, as long as there are not enough bodies accounted for, there's a chance that two got away.  Now, how far they got is yet another question.  Furthermore, one would have to dig up the entire route traveled by the truck (over two days) to reliably increase the chances of survival.

As to "not believing the Russians," this is just juvenille thinking, and painting the people involved (directly and on the periphery) as nothing but a pack of liars.  For political expediency, sure, plenty of lies must have been told.  Fake "searches" for Romanovs also took place.  

But underlying all of this, the people who left their memories recorded WERE THERE.  We were not.  Embedded within their reports are truths and untruths.  What we have as individuals living today, are only our own speculation.

Historically speaking, those living at the time and participating in one form or another, are the most reliable.  To discriminate against anyone's documented memoirs simply because they are of a particular nationality (Oh, they're Russian...I don't believe *their* stories) is blatantly irresponsible. Not too bright, either.

[AGRBear]

As to "not believing the Russians," this is just juvenille thinking, and painting the people involved (directly and on the periphery) as nothing but a pack of liars.  For political expediency, sure, plenty of lies must have been told.  Fake "searches" for Romanovs also took place.  

---
 To discriminate against anyone's documented memoirs simply because they are of a particular nationality (Oh, they're Russian...I don't believe *their* stories) is blatantly irresponsible. Not too bright, either.

Since all my ancestors were from Russia,  I'd be the last to discriminate against Russians or any person because of his/her nationality, religion or color.

As for believing those involved, well,  since my ancestors were from Russia,  I don't need to explain to my family nor those who suffered under the Bolshviki, CHEKA, GPU, KGB or the Red Army, but to others, let me explain:  There is a saying: When the Soviets wanted to keep a secret,  the best way was to make sure there was only one person left who knew, and,  sometimes it was necessary to eliminate that person for the sake of the Soviet Union."  With rules like this,  why wouldn't a few people be told to lie about something as important as fixing a mess, if all didn't go as planned and because of this continued need to hid the truth, most people will probably never know  what really happen on the night of July 16/17 July 1918 in the Ipatiev House

When Lenin died, there was Stalin and ....then came Khrushchev.
Please, do not waste your time telling me that they weren't capable of sending such an order "for the sake of the Soviet Union"?

AGRBear

[Dashkova]

AGRBEar, my post was not particularly directed to you, and sure, plenty of people on all sides of the political fences were eliminated, none for good reasons (to our modern minds).

This sort of thing was also rampant under Tsarist rule, from Ivan Grozni to Nicholas II.  It goes on today, in different guises, such as the journalist recently murdered.

Not a whole lot has changed over a milenium, which is why it is very annoying to repeatedly read about non-existent "good old days."

As for Khrushev, for pity's sake, considering it was the Soviet Union we're talking about, the man had a lot of good ideas for reform.  They don't call it "The Thaw" for nothing! But the powers that be behind the powers that be (namely Suslov) sent Nikita packing.

[rskkiya]

AGRBear...

I am so confused...first you were American-- then you were German,  then you're a German from Russia... now your Russian?
Y ne'panimiayu!  Y ne'panimiayu!

Just stop worrying about whatever heritage you want to claim for yourself and give us the facts... After all I'm English, but that doesn't mean that I have a genetically  better knowlege of the House of York or Plantagenant than a scholar who has devoted her life to the study!

R.

[olga]

As to "not believing the Russians," this is just juvenille thinking, and painting the people involved (directly and on the periphery) as nothing but a pack of liars.  For political expediency, sure, plenty of lies must have been told.  Fake "searches" for Romanovs also took place.  

But underlying all of this, the people who left their memories recorded WERE THERE.  We were not.  Embedded within their reports are truths and untruths.  What we have as individuals living today, are only our own speculation.

Historically speaking, those living at the time and participating in one form or another, are the most reliable.  To discriminate against anyone's documented memoirs simply because they are of a particular nationality (Oh, they're Russian...I don't believe *their* stories) is blatantly irresponsible. Not too bright, either.

I agree Dashkova.  Should we make up stories about what happened on 16/17 July 1918 or refer to documented memoirs of people who were actually there? Just they are communists doesn't mean they are incapable of teeling the truth.

[rskkiya]

Olga and Dashkova!

Dubroye utro! (good morning)

You both have delightful precise and witty posts and its  always a delight to discover them.

ALAS  (sigh) We seem to have forgotten that AGRBear possesses  [glb]secret knowledge [/glb]all about the Real Fate of The Romanovs...
She really ought to tell us all this shocking story now...
don't you think?

R.

[AGRBear]

It is true, I was told a story about 1946.  So, I have been asking various questions on various threads to see if I can prove or disprove what I was told.  I see no reason to say more at this time since I don't believe in repeating what might be just another "red herring" or "white rumor".

Some of my  questions  seem to spark remarks like Rskkiya's.  

As for being American and German and Russian,   these people already know from the various theads,  my ancestors were Germans who migrated to Russia in the late 1700s and early 1800s then left Russia for the good old USA in the late 1800s and early 1900s.  Not confusing at all.  

Now, can we get back to the subject, please.

If two bodies are missing, can we assume the two escaped?  If they escaped we should ask:  "When?"  "How?"  "Who helped them?"  "Is there evidence this might be possible?"

Most agree that Alexei may not have lived very long  if he did escape.  However,  Anatasia/ Marie could have.  Most of us have ruled out Anna Anderson.  There were 29 other women who claimed they were Anatasia/ Marie, Olga or Tatiana.  Could one of them been the real missing daughter?  Anything is possible, not highly probable, but possible.  And,  I think that is the direction this thread is supose to be moving.

AGRBear

[rskkiya]

AGRbear

Will you tell us what you know?

About the bodies ...do you agree that alexie is not there?  I am convinced that we do not yet have his remains.
Most forensic experts (and I am not a forensic expert) agree that most likely Anastasia is not in the grave.  I accept this possibility too.

I do not believe that they escaped. I think that the bodies were damaged & burned and have not yet been found.

R.