2006-09-23 00:28:16 · 22 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Royalty
he definately is the father! its a shame di'was murdered bc charlies cronies,she was so happy with dodi,a bit of arab blood in the monarchy!
2006-09-23 00:47:22 · update #1
he definately is the father! its a shame di'was murdered bc charlies cronies,she was so happy with dodi,a bit of arab blood in the monarchy!
2006-09-23 00:48:47 · update #2
Ooooh look at this , i might have to agree with u !
2006-09-23 05:55:07 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Obviously Harry's likeness to Hewitt does give a bit, no a lot, of doubt about who the father is and i am sure that he would have been given a blood test at birth. Naturally the royal Family wouldn't make this public, but Diana was known for putting it about a bit.
When you mention 'Arab blood' in royalty you have to remember that the only persons actually classed as 'royal' are those born into the family, not those married into it so Diana was never, technically, 'Royal'. Not only that but any child she has not of 'Royal' blood would' itself, not be truly 'Royal'. I think the jury's out on that one as far as Harry is concerned.
As far as being 'murdered' by Charlie's cronies I think there;s enough evidence to prove that her death was an accident. It's just that the media and Fayed's lot keep prolonging the 'conspiracy' theory for their own purposes, one to sell newspapers and TV programmes, the other to try to discredit the Royal Family because he has not been allowed British citizenship or a UK passport and his family were snubbed by them when Diana became involved with Dodi . (By the way Fayed is not entitled to the 'al' prefix he insists on using in his name to make himself seem more important than he is).
2006-09-23 05:10:52 · answer #2 · answered by quatt47 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
The UK (United Kingdom - it should be neither of these) has preserved the tradidtion of primageniture (first born male heir succeeds their father) for centuries. WHY???!!!
Given that head of state is of such significance and we the British citizens (we're not, we're subjects, but if politicians keep calling us citizens they're hoping we might evenutally believe we're citizens) have no other means of appointing a head of state, we might reasonably be expected to have the succession proved to us all with DNA testing.
The technology has been around for years. Surely the succession to head of state might require a few confirmatory checks? William and Harry and the next 10 in line to the throne should prove their parentage with DNA tests, just so we the citizens (no subjects - see above) don't get a king or queen from the "wrong" blood line.
Hewiitt genes would be obviously and recognisably different from Saxe-Coburg De Goethe (sorry forgot the pre-WWI name change - Windsor) genes - don't you think? (duh!)
I want to vote for my head state. The bedroom frolics of the inbred aristocracy is no way to determine our head of state. We can hardly demand a recount.
Thomas Paine was right, in 1774. But we're silently accepting that this ginger haired boy is 2nd in line? Prove your credentials, you chav lout!
Proverb: "It's a wise man that knows his father."
2006-09-24 07:59:10 · answer #3 · answered by Blunt Bloke 1 · 1⤊ 1⤋
You are a sad person if you think that the 3rd in line to the British Throne had not been declared authentic! Have you heard of DNA sampling?
As for Diana Princess of Wales Conspiracy Theory, you can shove it!
2006-09-24 00:04:57 · answer #4 · answered by Raymo 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Chavs are scary. I don't like them.
Anyway I never thought of Prince Harry as a chav. Chavs were these really ugly hats andn checkered shirts and jumpsits... but OK. Harry may not dress like one, I am started to see that he acts like one in a way. I am disappointed in him because chavs are low class and ew.
2006-09-23 04:08:21 · answer #5 · answered by Sarah* 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Can't see much of Diana... lucky boy seems to have nothing from Charlie..... probably the best thing to happen to the kid!!! A little normality surely is a good thing! (Before any Brits jump down my throat...Lizzie and Phil happen to be close personal friends!)
2006-09-23 00:49:42 · answer #6 · answered by renclrk 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
let the poor girl R I P she's not here to defend herself I;m not too fond of the monarchy but they are humans the same as us although some of them think they are superior however they all have feelings that can be hurt and they cannot defend themselves
2006-09-23 06:29:51 · answer #7 · answered by srracvuee 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Initially, I did think so but as he has grown older, I am afraid he looks more like that goof Charles. What a shame, still at least he has some of Diana's character.
2006-09-23 03:51:45 · answer #8 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 2⤋
The fact that Harry's looks are common in the Spencer line mean nothing, hmmm?
Leave the guy alone. Leave the family alone. Would you suddenly want everybody questioning your genetics, and have it discussed on talk shows, in tabloids, and here on Y! answers?
2006-09-24 11:24:38 · answer #9 · answered by Alex D. 2 · 0⤊ 2⤋
It is so good we are getting to hear about this stuff that would have been kept quiet and the pr about them being divine beings all we got fed
2006-09-23 00:46:50 · answer #10 · answered by william john l 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
We all heard of DNA sampling RAYMO51.
But if you listen real carefully you may hear dear old HRH saying to CHARLIE BOY..... "holy sh*t........best keep this quiet! see what you get for riding SOMEONE who looks like a horse instead of your wife?"
2006-09-24 02:42:51 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋