The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Discussions about the history of the ship, technical details, etc.
User avatar
wadinga
Senior Member
Posts: 1570
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 3:49 pm
Location: Tonbridge England

Re: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by wadinga » Wed Jul 18, 2018 12:50 am

Hello Alberto,
Only Rhys-Jones went a bit in this direction, speaking of "Tovey's version" but not studying the battle in detail and thus implicitly confirming the same version.
Please read this explanation of your incorrect conclusion due to Rhys-Jones' error carefully. I posted it once already, but you evidently ignored it or forgot it: :stubborn:
Rhys-Jones book has recently been quoted as in
Alberto said: However, the final proof, that allowed Antonio to understand everything bottom-up even before having entirely the above material available, is the intentional "embellishment" (or "sugar-coating", or "cover-up") of the facts in the reports presented after the battle to get to the final official version.
As Graham Rhys-Jones wisely said in his "The loss of the Bismarck": "it was Tovey's version which went to the printers".


The suggestion that Tovey's version differed from some other version is based on the mistaken reference in Rhys-Jones book regarding Rodney's movements.

He writes "Tovey had described her blocking position as extremely well chosen. Pound, who had gone through the records with extraordinary diligence, thought it very ill-judged (36)"

In the citation (36) he says this is from a letter from Pound to Tovey and then gives the ADM 199/1188 p25. However as you can see from the document I posted at the beginning of this thread [1941 Criticism thread], it is actually nothing of the sort, but an internal memo signed by Tom Phillips to Pound. We know from the other draft response to Tovey that Pound disagreed with and overrode Phillips' opinion, he agreed with Tovey's opinion and on this matter alone, it was correct that Tovey's version went to the printers. There was no contradictory version because Pound and Tovey agreed.

How Rhys-Jones got things muddled up who knows. There is nothing in Rhys-Jones book to suggest he thought there was any cover-up or conspiracy.


In clear for you: Tovey said Rodney's blocking position was well chosen. Phillips said it was ill chosen. Tovey's version went to the printers, because Pound realised he was correct and told Phillips he was wrong. Rhys-Jones incorrectly ascribed Phillips' opinion "ill-judged" to Pound.

Rhys-Jones never fabricated evidence as Antonio has done, and never suggested there was any kind of cover-up. He never suggested there was another "version" of the overall chase which varied from Tovey's. He studied the action in detail, but was not interested in making up a Conspiracy Theory with imaginary evidence.


Please confirm you understand Rhys-Jones' error and its significance. Please do not make this same error again and repeat these words again. :wink:

Only Rhys-Jones went a bit in this direction, speaking of "Tovey's version" but not studying the battle in detail and thus implicitly confirming the same version.

We know why you keep saying the same incorrect things over and over :negative:
Here the only fairy tale (that has been "imposed" by the "winners" for 75+ years) is Kennedy's novel, full of heroes, honorable decisions and consensus from British side.
The "cover up" conspiracy theory was always very illogical
Unless you deeply resent what you consider "triumphalist" accounts of the RN's defeat of Rheinübung and suspect you can make some money out of providing an alternative reality.

All the best

wadinga
"There seems to be something wrong with our bloody ships today!"

User avatar
Herr Nilsson
Senior Member
Posts: 1265
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 11:19 am
Location: Germany

Re: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by Herr Nilsson » Wed Jul 18, 2018 7:42 am

Antonio Bonomi wrote:
Tue Jul 17, 2018 3:53 pm
If somebody does have difficulties to realize the whole events scenario, ... it is his problem, ... not mine, ... I clearly realized what Stephen Roskill indicated us, ... so easy and elementary, ... and well explained it is.

Official documents, ... clear references, ... very reliable sources, ... I do not see any problem at all for the publication.
Possibly I'm not an
average intelligent person
, because I have a lot of difficulties. The whole scenario is absolutely illogical in my opinion. Why covering anything up when all knew about it?

An additional problem is what lead Tovey to falsify the despatch. Was it Tovey's own idea? Would Tovey really gamble with his own career? Would Pound ever trust him again? Illogical. Or did Pound incite Tovey to falsify the despatch? Illogical. Was there an agreement between Pound and Tovey? Illogical.
Regards

Marc

"Thank God we blow up and sink more easily." (unknown officer from HMS Norfolk)

User avatar
Antonio Bonomi
Senior Member
Posts: 3644
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Re: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by Antonio Bonomi » Wed Jul 18, 2018 7:53 am

Hello everybody,

if only those " hooligan/deniers " were going to stick to the facts and not jumping up and down on any interpretation they like to try to sell to this historical fact we were going to live more easily.

It is obvious that Stephen Roskill and Graham Rhys-Jones did not want to provide further analysis to this event, looking at the reactions we are seeing here in it is more than obvious now.

It is a fact that Adm Tovey changed the 06:02 ( after 2 minutes ) to 06:13 ( adding more than 10 minutes ), it is a fact that Adm Tovey " moved in " the PoW Y turret jamming ( compared to Capt Leach Official report ).

It is a fact that the Norfolk 20.000 yards became 30.000 yards already in June/July ( WW report and Tovey dispatches ) long before the Hood second board called in August and the shameful Pinchin " The Plot " incorrectly made on purpose to change it officially too.

Not to talk of what Capt Ellis revealed us thru his autobiography ( 9 sm ) being obviously done on his Official distance report ( wrote 15 sm ).

All is logic and the " Cover Up " well demonstrated by those facts.

The certification of it came from the Admiralty board and Sir Barnes letter wordings, clearly stating that the acceptable version of the facts was the one written on Adm Tovey dispatches.

Open your eyes and use your brain, ... because this is the historical truth no one can avoid to realize now, ... simply because it is written on Official documents and fully supported by available evidence on the archives.

Of course when you learn geometry, ... you can also be able to realize where really Norfolk was from 05:41 until 06:20 that morning ( if you read the Baron you will realize it too ).
Suffolk we know, ... from Capt Ellis now ( 9 sm ).
The PoW retreat, ... it is enough to look at the Rowell maps and gunnery plot, ... and here Pitcairn Jones already cutted it clear : 06:03 at the most, ... surely not 06:13, .. Adm Tovey was wrong.

@ Herr Nillson,

Of course he was wrong, ... he has been intentionally wrong ! With politicians and the Admiralty permission and approval ... :wink:

They were all in agreement ( Tovey, Pound, Alexander, Churchill ) immediately after Adm Tovey reaction surely Pound shared it with Alexander and Churchill. Once they decided that it was not positive for propaganda reason to go down that path of inquiry and Court martial involving also Adm Tovey, ... the only chance to resolve it was to manage them exactly like the other officers in the Bismarck operation, so a whole rewarding.

At that point, it only remained to " manage " the reports accordingly and the job was given to Adm Tovey as we can see at the beginning of June, .. and he started working with Wake-Walker and the others to change the facts and the reports accordingly, ... so to allow the Admiralty to approve their conduct and close all the open points and proceed with the rewarding for them too.

Bye Antonio
Last edited by Antonio Bonomi on Wed Jul 18, 2018 8:00 am, edited 1 time in total.
In order to honor a soldier, we have to tell the truth about what happened over there. The whole, hard, cold truth. And until we do that, we dishonor her and every soldier who died, who gave their life for their country. ( Courage Under Fire )

User avatar
Alberto Virtuani
Senior Member
Posts: 2712
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:22 am
Location: Milan (Italy)

Re: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by Alberto Virtuani » Wed Jul 18, 2018 7:57 am

Hello everybody,
I wrote: "Only Rhys-Jones went a bit in this direction, speaking of "Tovey's version" but not studying the battle in detail and thus implicitly confirming the same version."
Someone has not read carefully enough what I wrote above. :negative:

I have never said Toveyìs version was wrong or right in this specific case (as I'm not interested in this Rodney's movements). Rhys-Jones was the only one who understood that it was Tovey's version that went finally to printers (and this applies to Rodney, but then, after speaking of Rodney, Rhys-Jones goes on and speaks about the Court Martial story, also implying that Tovey's version was the one accepted as well, and in this case we know that Tovey's story was an intentional alteration of facts (see Antonio's crystal clear post above), while Rhys-Jones never investigated (apparently) this aspect).

I have clearly recognized to Antonio his great further step compared to Rhys-Jones:
I wrote: "you have done a great step forward: you have reconstructed precisely the battle and you have noticed the intentional alteration of facts done in the reports..... + your link between the CM story and the sugar-coating in the reports"
It's a pity Mr.Wadinga quibbles about my statements, refusing to read them and (possibly) to understand them before posting..... :negative:


Bye, Alberto
"It takes three years to build a ship; it takes three centuries to build a tradition" (Adm.A.B.Cunningham)

User avatar
Herr Nilsson
Senior Member
Posts: 1265
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 11:19 am
Location: Germany

Re: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by Herr Nilsson » Wed Jul 18, 2018 8:23 am

Antonio Bonomi wrote:All is logic and the " Cover Up " well demonstrated by those facts.
Logic and well demonstrated is slightly over-exaggerated in my opinion.
Antonio Bonomi wrote:@ Herr Nillson,

Of course he was wrong, ... he has been intentionally wrong ! With politicians and the Admiralty permission and approval ...

They were all in agreement ( Tovey, Pound, Alexander, Churchill ) immediately after Adm Tovey reaction surely Pound shared it with Alexander and Churchill. Once they decided that it was not positive for propaganda reason to go down that path of inquiry and Court martial involving also Adm Tovey, ... the only chance to resolve it was to manage them exactly like the other officers in the Bismarck operation, so a whole rewarding.

At that point, it only remained to " manage " the reports accordingly and the job was given to Adm Tovey as we can see at the beginning of June, .. and he started working with Wake-Walker and the others to change the facts and the reports accordingly, ... so to allow the Admiralty to approve their conduct and close all the open points and proceed with the rewarding for them too.
Wow! Such a great effort for a cover up. What for? All knew about it in your scenario....wouldn't it be easier to do nothing at all?

And don't forget Tovey "heard no more about it". That means in your scenario Tovey is either a liar or a fool to bring it up. Quite illogical.
Regards

Marc

"Thank God we blow up and sink more easily." (unknown officer from HMS Norfolk)

dunmunro
Senior Member
Posts: 3622
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 1:25 am
Location: Langley BC Canada

Re: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by dunmunro » Wed Jul 18, 2018 9:10 am

Antonio Bonomi wrote:
Wed Jul 18, 2018 7:53 am
Hello everybody,

if only those " hooligan/deniers " were going to stick to the facts and not jumping up and down on any interpretation they like to try to sell to this historical fact we were going to live more easily.

It is obvious that Stephen Roskill and Graham Rhys-Jones did not want to provide further analysis to this event, looking at the reactions we are seeing here in it is more than obvious now.
It's interesting that you feel you know Roskill's mind on this; are you in touch with him?
It is a fact that Adm Tovey changed the 06:02 ( after 2 minutes ) to 06:13 ( adding more than 10 minutes ), it is a fact that Adm Tovey " moved in " the PoW Y turret jamming ( compared to Capt Leach Official report ).
Maybe the fact that all 3 RN ships stated that the action ended at ~0613 had something to do with it as well.
It is a fact that the Norfolk 20.000 yards became 30.000 yards already in June/July ( WW report and Tovey dispatches ) long before the Hood second board called in August and the shameful Pinchin " The Plot " incorrectly made on purpose to change it officially too.
Your own reconstruction, extensively discussed here, shows that the range was substantially greater than 20K yds.

Not to talk of what Capt Ellis revealed us thru his autobiography ( 9 sm ) being obviously done on his Official distance report ( wrote 15 sm ).
Ellis also stated that Norfolk was miles out of sight and out of gunrange...but it's obvious that Ellis' memory was failing as he's forgotten ( I guess you have too - isn't memory loss insidious?) the 360d turn that he steered Suffolk through from 0542 -0550 which would have increased the range by ~15k yds (at a minimum) and for Suffolk to be at 18K yds at 0553 would have meant she was within a few thousand yards of Bismarck prior to the turn...:oops:
All is logic and the " Cover Up " well demonstrated by those facts.
Something has indeed been well demonstrated! :lol:

User avatar
wadinga
Senior Member
Posts: 1570
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 3:49 pm
Location: Tonbridge England

Re: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by wadinga » Wed Jul 18, 2018 9:44 am

Hello Alberto,

Your mischievous tendency to truncate quotes to deliberately change sense and distort meaning to serve your purposes has been demonstrated many times, but this case is unusual because you have done it to your own words. :D

You posted:
However you have done a great step forward: you have reconstructed precisely the battle and you have noticed the intentional alteration of facts done in the reports. Only Rhys-Jones went a bit in this direction, speaking of "Tovey's version" but not studying the battle in detail and thus implicitly confirming the same version.

In the two sentences you are talking about the insignificant and trivial differences in the reports, and about the whole battle and then stating Rhys-Jones went a bit in this direction, which he didn't, whereas clear analysis of what he actually wrote shows he was only talking about the assessment of Dalrymple-Hamilton's movements.

Why not accept your mistake, (actually Antonio made it first, you merely parroted it), and resolve never to use the phrase "Tovey's version went to the printers" again as a pretence that there was some other version of the whole battle?


Hello fellow hooligans/deniers, Well done for again pointing out the glaring shortcomings of the fabricated evidence, exposed at length elsewhere. Perhaps since the non-hooligan/deniers are clearly unwilling to show or even discuss the nature of the Silver Bullet here, for fear of damaging its commercial value, these other threads could be revived to further disparage the fabricated evidence?

All the best

wadinga
"There seems to be something wrong with our bloody ships today!"

User avatar
Alberto Virtuani
Senior Member
Posts: 2712
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:22 am
Location: Milan (Italy)

Re: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by Alberto Virtuani » Wed Jul 18, 2018 10:06 am

Hello everybody,

let's fix the major errors in a recent post from Mr.Dunmunro:
Dunmunro wrote: "Maybe the fact that all 3 RN ships stated that the action ended at ~0613"
Which action ? The anti-aircraft one of PG ? PoW reports nowhere mention 6:13. :lol:
Tovey had ALREADY issued his preliminary report on May 30 (that was correct in this regard), declaring PoW retreat a couple of minutes after Hood explosion = 6:02.
He had all PoW maps and salvo plot, clearly showing the time of her retreat, but he preferred to trust W-W ships (contradictory among themselves on the same ship :shock: ) observations (e.g. W-W: 6:13 (point 10 and 12) OR after 10 minutes engagement = 5:53 +10 = 6:03 (point 20 of his official report) ?).... :lol:

Dunmunro wrote: "Your own reconstruction, extensively discussed here, shows that the range was substantially greater than 20K yds"
22 to 23K yards, much substantially shorter than 30 K Yards.... :lol:

Dunmunro wrote: "the 360d turn that he steered Suffolk through from 0542 -0550 which would have increased the range by ~15k yds (at a minimum) and for Suffolk to be at 18K yds at 0553 would have meant she was within a few thousand yards of Bismarck prior to the turn"
As per the same reconstruction, SF was at 9-10 sm from Bismarck before her turn away (between 5:35 and 5:42) (as per Ellis autobiography + Busch observation) and at 15 sm after her turn to Nord due to the "mirage". :negative:



Fortunately, no objection at all to the most intentional "error", the "Y" turret jamming, astutely inserted by Tovey among the damages received BEFORE the decision to disengage and supported by NOTHING solid he had at hand (possibly, just very partially, only by Pound speech at the War Cabinet on May 26 afaik... :shock: ).



Bye, Alberto
Last edited by Alberto Virtuani on Wed Jul 18, 2018 11:01 am, edited 11 times in total.
"It takes three years to build a ship; it takes three centuries to build a tradition" (Adm.A.B.Cunningham)

User avatar
Alberto Virtuani
Senior Member
Posts: 2712
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:22 am
Location: Milan (Italy)

Re: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by Alberto Virtuani » Wed Jul 18, 2018 10:13 am

Hello everybody,

another intentionally wrong interpretation of what I wrote:
Wadinga wrote: "Why not accept your mistake, (actually Antonio made it first, you merely parroted it), and resolve never to use the phrase "Tovey's version went to the printers" "
I only admit my quotation of Rhys-Jones was incomplete, and I have completed it in my subsequent post already.
I have written: "I have never said Toveyìs version was wrong or right in this specific case (as I'm not interested in this Rodney's movements). Rhys-Jones was the only one who understood that it was Tovey's version that went finally to printers (and this applies to Rodney, but then, after speaking of Rodney, Rhys-Jones goes on and speaks about the Court Martial story, also implying that Tovey's version was the one accepted as well, and in this case we know that Tovey's story was an intentional alteration of facts (see Antonio's crystal clear post above), while Rhys-Jones never investigated (apparently) this aspect)."


Apart from this detail, the substance here is that Antonio did the great step forward linking the CM story to the intentional alteration of reports, thanks to his precise battle reconstruction..... and this annoys much more than Rhys-Jones statement. :lol: :lol: :lol:


Bye, Alberto
"It takes three years to build a ship; it takes three centuries to build a tradition" (Adm.A.B.Cunningham)

User avatar
Antonio Bonomi
Senior Member
Posts: 3644
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Re: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by Antonio Bonomi » Wed Jul 18, 2018 10:22 am

Hello everybody,

@ Herr Nillson,

any of us does have his own logic, ... for me it is logic both in the military terms as well as for the political needs.

Time ago while speaking about this with a very competent person I personally rate very wise and balanced, ... was telling me that everything was clear from the military report events, ... but I was missing the political relations/evidence and approval to this occurrence, ... this was before I have found the AM 205/10 pages ( thanks to Stepehen Roskill :wink: ) ... and now the gap is filled up and everything is well demonstrated and properly documented in my opinion.

You seem to forget that there were original radio messages and reports ( Tovey May 30th, 1941 ) telling clearly a different story being received also by the Admiralty.

That required a different set of reports to be submitted and formally accepted, and that is what Adm Tovey coordinated.

Adm Tovey definition looking at what he really did, he wrote, and revealed after to Stephen Roskill I leave to you, ... since I see that many do not like the utilization of certain terms here in.

The same goes for all the others as well, ... from Ellis to Churchill.

The evidence are almost all there now, ... available, ... still having the Suffolk and Norfolk tactical plots as well as Adm Pound May 28th, 1941 letter to Adm Tovey would be very interesting indeed.

Bye Antonio
In order to honor a soldier, we have to tell the truth about what happened over there. The whole, hard, cold truth. And until we do that, we dishonor her and every soldier who died, who gave their life for their country. ( Courage Under Fire )

User avatar
Herr Nilsson
Senior Member
Posts: 1265
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 11:19 am
Location: Germany

Re: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by Herr Nilsson » Wed Jul 18, 2018 11:36 am

Antonio Bonomi wrote:You seem to forget that there were original radio messages and reports ( Tovey May 30th, 1941 ) telling clearly a different story being received also by the Admiralty.
I don't forget it, it makes it even more illogical: Tovey's "falsified" despatch is from July 5th, but he forwarded PoW's account from June 4th to the Admiralty on July 15th. That would not be just silly that would be rather moronic.
Regards

Marc

"Thank God we blow up and sink more easily." (unknown officer from HMS Norfolk)

User avatar
Antonio Bonomi
Senior Member
Posts: 3644
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Re: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by Antonio Bonomi » Wed Jul 18, 2018 12:11 pm

Hello everybody,

@ Herr Nillson,

the evident difference anybody can easily realize between Capt Leach Official report ( plus his previous radio messages ) and Adm Tovey dispatches content describing the PoW retreat, ... with time at 06.13 and the Y turret jamming listed been occurred before the retreat of PoW ( moved in ), ... are the most easy to see evident proof of the wrong doing regarding the PoW disengagement description.

It is easy to realize that If Adm Tovey would have used by a simple " cut and paste " transcription what Capt Leach wrote on his Official report, ... most likely the Admiralty board/Sir Barnes would have not accepted it.

In this irrefutable fact easy to check and verify we can realize the Admiralty Board been in agreement about receiving this altered version of the facts, ... because the Admiralty had on his hands all previously released radio messages and reports.

Simple, logic and irrefutable.

Bye Antonio
In order to honor a soldier, we have to tell the truth about what happened over there. The whole, hard, cold truth. And until we do that, we dishonor her and every soldier who died, who gave their life for their country. ( Courage Under Fire )

User avatar
Herr Nilsson
Senior Member
Posts: 1265
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 11:19 am
Location: Germany

Re: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by Herr Nilsson » Wed Jul 18, 2018 12:33 pm

Please tell me who incited Tovey to falsify the despatch and who guaranteed that this falsification would not end his career? Who arrangened the agreement of all insiders?
Regards

Marc

"Thank God we blow up and sink more easily." (unknown officer from HMS Norfolk)

User avatar
Antonio Bonomi
Senior Member
Posts: 3644
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Re: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by Antonio Bonomi » Wed Jul 18, 2018 12:49 pm

Hello everybody,

@ Herr Nillson,

I will avoid to repeat myself, ... as I wrote above the ADM 205/10 thanking to Stephen Roskill is more than enough to explain who knew and approved all this event management up to WSC.

When I realized what they did, ... starting bottom up as I wrote many times, ... I would have never imagined that they would have left so many evidences into the Official documents and in the archives.

We are lucky to have found what we have found, ...to have found Stephen Roskill 2 books footnotes and the Adm 205/10 pages, ... to have found Capt Ellis autobiography, ... to have found Wake-Walker BBC interview, ... to have found the May 31st, 1941 letter from Adm Tovey to Adm Pound, ... and much more to come.

The scenario is very clear, ... at least it is very clear to me.

Bye Antonio
In order to honor a soldier, we have to tell the truth about what happened over there. The whole, hard, cold truth. And until we do that, we dishonor her and every soldier who died, who gave their life for their country. ( Courage Under Fire )

User avatar
Herr Nilsson
Senior Member
Posts: 1265
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 11:19 am
Location: Germany

Re: The Court Martial for the Denmark Strait

Post by Herr Nilsson » Wed Jul 18, 2018 1:54 pm

...and it is totally illogical to me. Obviously I'm really not an "average intelligent person".

Edit: ..you didn't answer my questions by the way.
Regards

Marc

"Thank God we blow up and sink more easily." (unknown officer from HMS Norfolk)

Post Reply