A confirmation of the seriousness of the matter is that it is the first topic of the letter, NO more important matters are
Where does Tovey mention the CM to Bellairs saying it was due to political interference, please
I suggest that the report to the War Cabinet should be on the following lines
Stretto di Danimarca 24 Maggio 1941 : Nuove evidenze.
Wadinga wrote: "....the apocryphal threat ......Is it mentioned at all in any of the other letters? "
you wrote: "You are certainly ingenious to imagine Tovey's need to delay talking to W-W and Leach is to allow them to change their reports. "
you wrote: "We'll tell them it's all been checked and everything's just fine, yada yada yada"
McMullen IWM crystal clear interview, where Tovey referred of the Court Martial to Blake and McMullen ?
(albeit implicitly in one single line)
Why should Tovey underline that he answered Pound BEFORE seeing the 2 officers if not to be prepared to tell them what to do ?
If he wants a sham investigation, he will have to insist, which he doesn't. Because even he knows the potential victims have done nothing wrong which is why he leaves them in their responsible positions. There is no evidence W-W or Leach knew anything of the apocryphal threat in the rest of their short lives.
Per pura combinazione ho riletto in questi giorni i due articoli di Cernuschi su Punta Stilo apparsi sulla rivista qualche anno fa (mi pare 2008 e 2012).
you wrote: "nobody denies Tovey believed his misrememberings. Why should he tell McMullen anything different to Roskill? So he's consistent"
you wrote: "There is no evidence W-W or Leach knew anything of the apocryphal threat in the rest of their short lives."
You have not answered my question: why did Tovey feel the need to underline to Pound that he was answering his private letter BEFORE seeing Leach and Wake-Walker ? A matter of tact
I thought I spelled it out for you. To allow Pound time to abandon his stupid idea of a sham Inquiry to appease Churchill without the potential victims having to worry or even know about the thought. Which he did.
Alberto Virtuani wrote:@Wadinga:
I see that at least you don't insist in your masochistic denial of the "thorough investigation" (that would have confirmed an explicit cover-up at the highest levels in the Royal Navy). Therefore you admit that there was an investigation, as per posted evidences. I hope you will not come back again in some days with the same incorrect statements.....you wrote: "nobody denies Tovey believed his misrememberings. Why should he tell McMullen anything different to Roskill? So he's consistent"
the "misrememberings" have to be proven..... this is your problem because they are just your speculations.
Tovey letters are consistent, regarding the threat to Leach and W-W from 1941 till 1962, he was very lucid and reliable and the insinuations about his misremembering were clearly contradicted in writing by S.Roskill.
Are you really unable to see that the threat was actually there ? What do you need more than:
Tovey 1941 and 1961 letters (available in full text, both confirming the threat in milder or more tough words) ?You should not really need also the "silver bullet" (that, once published, will close the debate forever, being a completely independent source for the "regrettable aftermath").
Pound May 28 1941 letter (not yet available in its full text..... , but very clearly referenced by Tovey May 31 answer) ?
Roskill, Correlli-Barnett and Rhys-Jones historical judgement (all well convinced that the threat was actually there) ?
Barnes answer to Tovey despatches, ADM 205/10 papers and War Cabinet minutes ?
McMullen testimony in the interview (with Adm Blake present when Tovey accounted the threat) and
Sir Henry Leach interpretation of the threat in a book about his father ?
The intentional alteration of the facts in Tovey's report (but also in W-W, Leach, Ellis and subordinates' reports) ?
Not being willing to see the reality at any cost, is of course a totally different matter......you wrote: "There is no evidence W-W or Leach knew anything of the apocryphal threat in the rest of their short lives."
Not really. Leach and Wake-Walker official reports, contradicting their previous reports, declarations and interviews, prove beyond any doubt that they were well aware of the threat.
You have not answered my question: why did Tovey feel the need to underline to Pound that he was answering his private letter BEFORE seeing Leach and Wake-Walker ? A matter of tact ?
Dunmunro wrote: "All we have established so far is that the Admiralty (DP) requested that Tovey conduct/request a BofI"
All we have established so far is that the Admiralty (DP) requested that Tovey conduct/request a BofI. The only mention of a CM comes from Tovey himself.
Wadinga wrote: "The great step forward has been to to see how weak Pound's promulgation of the threat really was."
you wrote: "the threat.....was in fact born out of ill informed premature reaction and was completely dead and buried by the 30th or 31st May at the latest. "
you wrote: "some minor irrelevant and inconsequential revisions made to initial reports"
Antonio Bonomi wrote:Do you believe that the Pound/Tovey phone call about the Board of Inquiry/Court Martial for Wake-Walker and Leach never happened ?
Antonio Bonomi wrote:Do you believe that no " Cover Up " has been done in order to save and after reward them in October 1941 ?
Antonio Bonomi wrote:Do you believe that this " Denmark Strait Saga ", as Sir Henry Leach called it, from May 24th, 1941 until October 14th, 1941 never occurred ?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests