Friday, May 27, 2011

More Real History Revealed: The Truth About The Sinking Of The Bismarck, 70 Years Ago Today!

As a true student of history and always trying to decipher the real truth from the fiction that has been published as "Historical Record", I sometimes come across information that is indeed disturbing.  For this article, I want to again expose a lie of history that is a must read...

Today, May 27th, 2011, marks the 70th anniversary of the sinking of one of Germany's most powerful weapons of war, the naval battleship, the SS Bismarck by the British Navy in the Atlantic Ocean.   There have been many books written about that sinking, and even a war movie "Sink The Bismarck" which tells the story of the attack and sinking of this mighty battleship from the British perspective.  We have always been led to believe that the Bismarck was sunk by gunfire and torpedoes from British battleships and cruisers, and that the ship went down with few survivors....

But again, it appears that true history is quite different from the so called "Historical Records" that we have been subjugated and brainwashed with for decades.  I want to present the following article, from the British online news service: Mail Online, at, entitled: "Should We Have Sunk The Bismarck? Tormented Sailor Reveals  How Germans Tried To Surrender Before Ship Was Destroyed Costing 2000 Lives", and the findings revealed here are both startling and disturbing.  Here is that article:

Should we have sunk the Bismarck? Tormented sailor reveals how Germans tried to surrender before ship was destroyed costing 2,000 lives

Last updated at 12:58 PM on 27th May 2011

With her steering jammed and her speed slashed by torpedo attacks, the Bismarck and her crew of 2,200 were a sitting duck for the Royal Navy.

And in two hours the German battleship was a helpless wreck of twisted metal,  raging fires and dead and dying crew.

But the ship’s agony was not over. After the bombardment by British battleships, she was finished off by torpedoes, slipping under the Atlantic with all but 200 of those aboard.

Tommy Byers aged 78, who told his son before he died the deaths of 2,000 men on board the Bismarck had tormented him
Tommy Byers, a young sailor who witnessed the attempted surrender of the Bismarck 70 years ago

Tommy Byers, pictured left aged 78 and, right, as a young sailor during WWII. He witnessed the attempted surrender of the Bismarck 70 years ago

Ablaze and with vast plumes of smoke rising from it, the Bismarck takes a pounding shortly before it sank with the loss of 2,206 men

This scene from the film Sink The Bismarck shows the destroyer ablaze and shortly before she sank with the loss of 2,206 men

HMS Hood at full speed. She was sunk in 1941

Sinking the Bismarck was revenge for the destruction of HMS Hood, seen here at full speed, days earlier
For the Royal Navy it was a triumph –  revenge for the Bismarck’s destruction of the pride of the fleet, HMS Hood, days earlier.

But the son of one of the British sailors who saw Bismarck’s end 70 years ago today has come forward to claim that the battle might have ended very differently – because the German crew tried to surrender at the height of the bombardment.

Tommy Byers, a sailor on the British battleship Rodney, maintained until he died that the ship, which was sunk hundreds of miles off the coast of Brittany, France, hoisted a black flag – the naval sign calling for parley.

The launching of the battleship Bismarck at Hamburg in 1939

The launching of the battleship Bismarck at Hamburg in 1939. Had the Bismarck been captured the ship would also have been a prized catch, giving Navy engineers an insight into the design of Bismarck¿s mighty sistership, Tirpitz

Bismarck view from astern, before her May 1941 breakout to attack Allied shipping. The stern fell off when she turned over on being sunk, due to poor welding
Bismarck view from astern, before her May 1941 breakout to attack Allied shipping. The stern fell off when she turned over on being sunk, due to poor welding.

He and a second seaman also saw a Morse code flash, which they interpreted as surrender, along with a man waving semaphore flags conveying the same message.

Royal Navy officers were made aware of the signs but were determined to follow Winston Churchill’s order to ‘sink the Bismarck’. The Prime Minister wanted to avenge the Hood, on which all but three of its 1,418 crew had died.
Had the Bismarck been captured, the lives of hundreds of Germans could have been saved. The ship would also have been a prized catch, giving Navy engineers an insight into the design of Bismarck’s mighty sistership, Tirpitz.

The Bismarck at sea during her doomed May 1941 deployment into the Atlantic
The Bismarck at sea during her doomed May 1941 deployment into the Atlantic


There are strong arguments to support the Royal Navy's decision to ignore the attempt by some on Bismarck to surrender.

According to Navy accounts, the Bismarck never stopped returning fire, so they were faced with little choice but to destroy it.

Terry Charman, senior historian at the Imperial War Museum, said: 'The Bismarck's admiral was a fairly fanatical believer in Hitler and the telegrams he sent were along the lines of "we will fight to the end".
'It would have been very dangerous to take the surrender.

'HMS Devonshire picked up 200 survivors but had to leave a lot of men behind because there was U-boat activity in the area.'
The revelation has been unearthed by author Iain Ballantyne for a book about the Bismarck which has been published 70 years after the sinking on May 27, 1941.

One account he came across  was an interview Mr Byers gave  to his son Kevin before he died  in 2004 aged 86.

Mr Byers, a gunnery officer on Rodney, saw the battle unfold through binoculars at a distance of two miles. The Rodney had closed to what was point-blank range in gunnery terms because the Bismarck was no longer firing back.

Mr Byers said: ‘Very early on men started jumping over board. They couldn’t stand the heat. One particular fella on top of B turret was waving his arms in semaphore.

‘I saw this and I told the gunnery officer, Lieutenant Commander Crawford. He said, “I don’t want to know about any signal now”. She then flew a black flag…but he (Crawford) wasn’t having any of it.

‘Then she started blinking with her Morse lamps on the yard arm and he (Crawford) said “Don’t report anything more like that”.’

Kevin Byers, 52, from Portaferry, County Down, said: ‘Dad knew what he saw. He felt guilty he didn’t do more at the time but he wasn’t of high enough rank to be heard.

‘Something like 2,000 men died and this nagged away at him for the rest of his life.’

Tommy Byers in 1948 towards the end of his Naval career
Tommy Byers in 1948 towards the end of his Naval career

The second witness was Lieutenant Donald Campbell, the air defence officer on HMS Rodney. In his account of the sinking he said he saw the morse signal. This was also reported by a sailor on the cruiser HMS Dorsetshire.

The Bismarck had been hunted down relentlessly. 

Crippled by torpedo attacks from the carrier Ark Royal, she tried to limp towards France but was  cornered by Rodney and another battleship, King George V.

Terry Charman, of the Imperial War Museum, said the admiral on Bismarck had sent telegrams to Hitler that the ship would fight to the end. But he added: ‘It may be some of the crew wanted to surrender, they were in a hopeless position.’

Ian Ballantyne's book Killing The Bismarck is published by Pen and Sword Books.

NTS Notes:  I wish to thank commentator "Little Bo Peep" for bringing this startling and very disturbing article to my attention, so that I can share it with all of my readers.

This article brings forward a very disturbing aspect to the sinking of the Bismarck indeed.   Even in a time of war, there are rules of war that are followed, and one rule is that surrendering soldiers, sailors, and airmen, are allowed to surrender to their attackers, and are allowed to be taken as prisoners of war.   These rules are part of the original Geneva Convention on Rules of War, and have always had to be upheld.... To violate these rules is considered as a war crime!

I will state the obvious that is missing here... If what is stated here is true, then what the British did by not allowing the German sailors on the battleship Bismarck to surrender is a serious war crime, and outright murder!   Even after 70 years these allegations are very serious and should be investigated further.   But again, history, especially in a time of war, is written by the victors, and there probably will be no justice for the victims of this atrocity.

Again, readers, it does appear that our so called "written" history, especially when it comes to war,  is not as it seems....

More to come



Northerntruthseeker said...

Anonymous... True, because even in 1925 Billy Mitchell showed conclusively that battleships could be sunk by aircraft... Which showed the increasing dominance of the aircraft carrier...

The Japanese made use of the knowledge that battleships were a thing of the past by destroying 5 of them at Pearl Harbor... But again, that was a setup according to the McCollum report of October, 1940... Sacrifice old battleships and over 2400 soldiers and sailors just to get the United States into World War II....

This article focuses in on the atrocity of not allowing sailors that were willing to surrender the ability to surrender... Which IS a war crime!

Anonymous said...

Northerntruthseeker...I made the comment about battleships being outdated..I apologize for going off point...Tostoy made the statement that there is no such thing as a military genius...I would like to add that their certainly are such things as military idiots.

Pearl Harbor was an obvious false flag.

The allies were also the first to bomb civilian targets in Europe, or so I have been told.

The germans and the japanese never had a chance. Those poor people were sold out by their leaders. I have also noted that after the war Hirohito was allowed to keep his job. The hypocracy is disgusting!

Mandy Rose said...

Personally, I believe that the Bismarck trying to surrender is completely ridiculous. First of all, if there were any plans to surrender, I think that signalling would have been done on the night before the battle. Why wait until the battle is on to start signalling. Secondly, the Bismarck was on fire which happened quite quickly. For anyone to see a person standing on a turrent waving a flag just seems odd to me.

veritas6464 said...

Hey NTS,...Excellent Post, "To violate these rules is considered as a war crime!" The fire-bombing of Dresden comes to mind as do water-boarding, white-phoss in Gaza and extraordinary rendition!

Cheers, excellent read and further reasons to be cheerful, not.


Anonymous said...

Considering the fact the Churchill was a damned jew (his mother was a jew-whore) is it really surprising that he would seize the opportunity to murder Whites?

jews have always been murderers from the beginning; starting with Abel.


kerdasi amaq said...

It wouldn't surprise me if Churchill had the same daddy as his mammy!

I'd say that the Bismarck was set up to be sunk by elements within the German navy.

Northerntruthseeker said...

The whole point in all of this is to alert people of some real truths about history, and again to expose the fact that what we have been spoon fed by the criminals is pure BS!

Yes, the Bismarck was a weapon of war.. But to not accept surrender is a serious war crime and outright murder... Plain and simple..

Again, as we expose some truths about history, the facts behind WWII are coming out loud and clear, and it definitely will not sit well with many people.. But if we are not to learn from history, and especially about the lies, then we are definitely doomed to repeat it!

Noor al Haqiqa said...

More historical whitewashing. I remember that song from my "youth" where the refrain was "We gotta sink the Bismark cos the world depends on us", over and over again.

How many ways they hit us with their revisionism.



Yesterday I posted an article called Israel Must Perish!, a parody of a real book put out pre WW2 by a Jew. The original was, Germany Must Perish!

When you read the original you realize the complete and absolute horror that the Allies and esp the Jews had for Germany and its people. It explains Dresden, the camps, Katlyn Forest, etc etc.

When you read the parodied version, you will be startled at how bang on it is to our current international situation ~ and how easy changing a few words can be that could change the course of history.

BTW, as with Churchill, Eisenhower was also half Jewish. His West Point yearbook (The Howitzer) named him "The Terrible Swedish Jew".

"God, I hate the Germans..." (Dwight David Eisenhower in a letter to his wife in September, 1944)

Dy deception we shall wage war is not just the motto of Mossad any more. It seems the Allies were using it too!