The paternity of Harry will remain a closely guarded secret unless the royal family decide it is to their advantage to let commoners know the truth.
I see the royal propaganda machine has scored another success - an answer repeats the fallacy that Diana didn't meet James Hewitt until after Harry's birth. The power of Phil the Greek and company is quite frightening!
2007-08-20 05:20:14
·
answer #1
·
answered by Namlevram 5
·
2⤊
4⤋
There is no proof.Many people thought that since Harry was red-headed,a Spencer trait,that he must be the former paramour's child. And I find it highly informative that all of this talk of Harry's paternity came up AFTER Diana died and could not defend her son.
James Hewitt has been named "The Love Rat" or "The Cad" because he has acted so disgracefully;he first said that he had nothing to do with the book "Princess in Love" but was shown to have profited from it;and since Diana's death,he has tried to sell love letters from the princess to the highest bidder,made paid appearances to talk about her. If Diana had lived,there would be no tongue-wagging about Harry's paternity.The Queen and palace courtiers have no interest in asking Harry to even take a DNA test;they all think that Harry's being Hewitt's son in such a long-shot that it's not necessary. And the Queen herself had to live with the tongue-wagging about her son,Andrew,possibly not being Philip's(all because Philip took a Goodwill Tour around the world and some though the marriage was in trouble).
2007-08-19 07:14:02
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
6⤊
0⤋
Prince Harry was born in 1984, Diana met Major James Hewitt for the first time in 1986.
2007-08-19 05:14:58
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
0⤋
There is nothing but a lot of innuendo and gossip, which became widespread after Diana's death, spread by the tabloids. She would have been horrified to hear her son's name and her own slandered as they have been. I'm not a Diana supporter, but I'm sure that Harry is Prince Charles' son. Just look at him and a picture of Prince Philip in his younger days. Red hair runs in Diana's family anyway.
2007-08-19 00:56:43
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
8⤊
0⤋
I don't think there is any proof that Prince Harry isn't Prince Charles son. I think if there had been any question as to Prince Harry's paternity, the Queen herself would have insisted on a DNA Test for proof.
2007-08-19 00:43:37
·
answer #5
·
answered by Patricia P 2
·
3⤊
1⤋
it variety of feels Devils advo has double standards. If it have been a guy with many fans he might in simple terms be between the "LADS" despite the fact that a woman/lady is a Slapper!! MCP springs to thoughts Harry`s parentage isn't disputed by skill of his father or any senior royal so why speculate on it? all of us make disparaging comments and whether it have been a feeble attempt ay witticism does it deserve tabloid headlines..i think of not
2016-11-12 21:40:48
·
answer #6
·
answered by gracely 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Look at Prince Harry, then look at Prince Philip, his grandfather, then tell me they're not related.
The only resemblance between Harry and James Hewitt is nowadays the hair colour, and there's red hair in both the Spencer family and the Royal Family.
2007-08-19 03:22:36
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
8⤊
0⤋
there is no real question as to Prince Harry's identity if there was the queen would have has a DNA test done. the only reason that people question this it to run poor Diana'a name through the dirt.
2007-08-19 12:04:21
·
answer #8
·
answered by kel m 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
i think the real question that EVERYONE wants to know is what proof is there that Prince William IS the son of Prince charles. That man is gorgeous! He got all his looks from his momma!
2007-08-19 08:39:37
·
answer #9
·
answered by Bore sum 1 else w/ ur question! 6
·
1⤊
1⤋
what other rubbish will the media dig up about the Royal family, just so they can sell their news! The media killed Diana
2007-08-22 15:36:05
·
answer #10
·
answered by Pam m 1
·
0⤊
0⤋