22 Responses to “Anastasia: The Mystery of Anna Part 10”

1. 1toscany says:

   January 28, 2012 at 5:18 am

   @CarCriticAssessor No name dropping, I have 4 letters signed by him, regarding the Icon. He is living. No one with my knowledge would be so foolish as to expose the truth on this comical venue. They all survived, it is the truth and you shall learn it soon. I know all about the genetics in this case (ie Dr. Maples at our rival University). At least we both are Scots. Lol!
2. CarCriticAssessor says:

   January 28, 2012 at 6:01 am

   @1toscany: “Persuasive”; lol. You have not bothered to delve into any possible genetic foul-up, re analysis methodology and/or data flubs — those would appear to be your sole realms and venues (empirical mastery thereof) that might bolster your underlying claim(ant). Name dropping and “title” brandishing married to “age ‘ism” does not cut it.
3. 1toscany says:

   January 28, 2012 at 6:35 am

   @CarCriticAssessor We have investigated this case longer than you are old, son. When you become old, I hope you are not noted as being “homely”. Just remember that you heard the truth from me. I have been to your, Isle of Man, very cool place. I am old enough to be your grand father. The “impostor” as you call her was a Godmother of Prince MIchael Saxe-Weimar-Eisenach, His other was Queen Juliana of The Netherlands. Quite an honor to bestow upon a Polish peasant.
4. CarCriticAssessor says:

   January 28, 2012 at 7:33 am

   @1toscany: Dear Supercilious, Again, barring any possible Chimera instance {rare: two types of mt|RNA DNA presence}, it appears, adduced from my own exhaustive research into the cross-discipline and cross-functional subject matter that, indeed, the rather homely “Anna Anderson” was an imposter. That said, it does not imply that yours truly holds any particular pro-leadership aka monarchist views; but, instead, it, the HOAX, gulls me, itself, as much as the hidden Jacob Schiff Tzar-Gone ruse does
5. CarCriticAssessor says:

   January 28, 2012 at 7:39 am

   @1toscany: Well … not to be construed in any way that yours truly vests any credence in the remote possibility that “Anna Anderson” was in any way shape or form offspring of Tzarina Alexandra: her iconography & other physical attributes do not match theirs; her having had been disavowed by eg, Olga and others who knew very well the Tzar’s children speaks volumes. Anna Anderson seemed to me akin to a STD … a nasty canker-sore that needed to be banished from existence: a scank … L-Lysine!
6. 1toscany says:

   January 28, 2012 at 8:07 am

   @CarCriticAssessor Nonsense! Olga cried over being forced to sign a deposition. She was indeed the Grand Duchess! Everyone knew it! The dark cloud that covered the scandal over the family will come to light very soon. Have you read any books or researched and investigated this topic in 5 countries like I have?
7. cynthiacher says:

   January 28, 2012 at 8:37 am

   A block of Anna Anderson’s intestine (it was saved after an operation she had) and a clump of her hair (she dyed her hair orange; the orange hair was taken from an envelope found in her filthy house with “Anastasia’s hair” written on it, no doubt by her husband) were used to obtain her DNA. Her body was cremated; perhaps to prevent a DNA analysis? Anyway, her DNA was tested against relatives of the Romanovs and there was no match. She was finally proven a fraud.
8. 1toscany says:

   January 28, 2012 at 8:54 am

   @cynthiacher “Doubt has also been cast on the accuracy of the early testing by a more recent team of Japanese researchers. Clearly primarily I mean in the case of a potential deliberate contamination”. (See your AP post from September 12, 2011, replying to The guru Bob Atchison, Re: Stories of Survivors of Ipatiev House Murder)
9. 1toscany says:

   January 28, 2012 at 9:31 am

   @CarCriticAssessor Well said.
10. 1toscany says:

    January 28, 2012 at 9:46 am

    @counterhon Scientists are rebuffed for their opinions. Anastasia lived at Unterlegenhardt until 1968. Elizabeth visited her there many times. So Wilhelm’s second wife, Princess Hermine Reuss of Greiz. Also Catherine de Graaf. I believe you are far to young to have studied intensely the genealogy of Europe’s families. It is extremely complex. I can not possibly imagine you have gone beyond the opinions of those at AP to know much more. You have not walked in a royal’s shoes.
11. counterhon says:

    January 28, 2012 at 10:10 am

    @1toscany Why then would Grand Duchess Elizabeth be considered to be a reliable witness when she was born in 1912 and was only a toddler when Anastasia was imprisoned? Her opinion counts for absolutely nothing, not even a positive identification, which is far from proof.
12. mcmlxvi says:

    January 28, 2012 at 10:56 am

    @1toscany Dude, you really need to work on your attitude, I don’t know if it is because of your choice of words or what but you come across as a real obnoxious asshole in your comments. That period and case closed bullshit doesn’t help you either. And just to be clear as I said before, go fuck yourself. moron!
13. mcmlxvi says:

    January 28, 2012 at 11:24 am

    @cynthiacher Ok… let me see what went wrong here. 1) The comment about coming across as an asshole was not meant to you, that one was for 1toscany, so…sorry about that. 2) The comment “point taken” was most definitively for you, I found the combinations of the terms you use hilarious. 3) No I don’t believe Anna was Anastasia, although I have to say that the DNA test was not 100 per cent conclusive.
14. 1toscany says:

    January 28, 2012 at 11:56 am

    @cynthiacher I have several letters of his as documentation, poor child. You are just another brainwashed, ill informed child, my dear, cynthiacher. The truth will be out, and you will feel like a fool. This is for your lifetime, for the youth of the World.
15. 1toscany says:

    January 28, 2012 at 12:41 pm

    @cynthiacher yawn….
16. cynthiacher says:

    January 28, 2012 at 1:26 pm

    @mcmlxvi Well, I certainly hope so! You don’t actually believe that Anna Anderson WAS Anastasia, do you? It’s been well-documented that she was a crazy woman who fooled a lot of gullible people.
17. cynthiacher says:

    January 28, 2012 at 2:15 pm

    @1toscany You are a loony tune.
18. cynthiacher says:

    January 28, 2012 at 2:31 pm

    @mcmlxvi Just stating the facts, hon. But some people are so dense you have to hit them over the head with it to get through to them.
19. cynthiacher says:

    January 28, 2012 at 2:58 pm

    @1toscany It was proven by DNA testing, you idiot. DNA doesn’t lie.
20. mcmlxvi says:

    January 28, 2012 at 3:08 pm

    @cynthiacher Hahahaha..psychotically mentally ill? point taken!
21. mcmlxvi says:

    January 28, 2012 at 4:01 pm

    @cynthiacher Dude, you really need to work on your attitude, I don’t know if it is because of your choice of words or what but you come across as a real obnoxious asshole in your comments. That period and case closed bullshit doesn’t help you either.
22. mcmlxvi says:

    January 28, 2012 at 4:18 pm

    @TRUEStoryFILMS Accuracy? Seriously, Fantasia was more accurate in its depiction of wild animals than this mini series.