Tonka97's Five Scenarios for John Chatterton

[Chatterton]

No, not really.

Question #2 for Chatterton.

Were you surprised when you entered the E-room (the climax of Shadow Divers, AND Hitler's lost sub), only to see a flashing strobe in the room, left by Will McBeth, following the aft access plan devised by John Yurga?

Why was that left out? It would have been good for comic relief in the story. (Yurga's solution to the penetration of the e-motor room became the only one used by subsequent divers).

I have consistently recommended that divers would be well advised to obtain and read
both Shadow Divers by Kurson, Chatterton, and Kohler and Shadow Divers Exposed, by Gary Gentile, Gary Gentile Productions - Shadow Divers Exposed

I will end my challenge to readers and John Chatterton with the follow assertions by Gentile, well documented in his book:

1. Bill Nagle discovered the wreck of the U-869
2. Mark McKellar furnished the identity
3. Barbara Lander and John Yurga conducted the bulk of the research
4. Harold Moyers ascertained how the U-869 was sunk
5. Chatterton and Kohler took the credit, then made a career out of reputations that were based upon a foundation that was either faked, filched, or fictitious.

T,

Will McBeth deserves full credit for finding a second way into the EMotor Room, and he did leave a strobe to prove he made it. He did this while I was on my 5th of 6 dives into the EMR. He and John Yurga thought they saw a second way in after looking at my video of the interior, which I shared with all the other divers. I made one more dive the same way I had been doing it, and recovered the box that identified the sub. I assume Rob felt this was sort of an interesting footnote, but like so much other minutia was irrelivant.

1) Bill Nagle did discover the wreck?? He got the numbers from Skeets, not Bogen, and we (I worked for the boat) put a trip together. I thought this was pretty clear in SD? Where have I ever taken cdredit away from Bill?

2) Mark McKellar did not identify the wreck, the spare parts box did that? Bob Coppock sent me a copy of a letter to Mark McKellar in which Bob mentioned that it was interesting that the U-869 was originally supposed to operate off the Jersey coast?? I immediately went to the National Archives with Barb Lander and we hit the Ultras. We consulted with lots of experts and historians. This documentary evidence showed that it was possible for the U-869 to be the U-Who. However, we had nothing from the wreck or from the documents to positivley prove it was the U-869, as opposed to the U857, or even the U-879???

3) Barb Lander was an important contributor, as was John Yurga, and a bunch of other divers, historians, experts, and veterans. However, no one made more trips to the National Archives, the USN Historical Center, or any other archive, more than I did.

4) Harold Moyers was contacted by WWII veteran Harolod Muth who served on the USCGC Crow. They hypothesised that an incident on February 11, 1945, involving the USS Koiner and the USCGC Crow, sank the U-869. The vessels each made 3 runs of depth charges. The Koiner came to a complete stop and put launch in the water specifically to look for debris, according to the protocol of the day. They found nothing more than a "sheen" of oil, like they would expect from a wreck. They returned to the convoy without even filling out an Action Report? If they sank the U-boat, where s the oil (there was lots of it)? And the wood debris, from the deck? And what about the crew from this sub that is virtually blown in two?? Quite simply, I am not convinced there is any evidence in either the documents, or the site itself that can prove what happened to the U-869. The Crow/Koiner is still a hypothesis, but far from conclusive proof of anything?

5) This is an inflamatory personal attack without any sort of support or credibility.


Your twisted personal agenda appears to be one of trying to embarass, humiliate, and/or otherwise discredit me using half truths, inuendo, and outright lies while you are protected by your anonymity. I suspect there is more here than meets the eye with regards to your identity? Judging strictly from the feedback on this thread, I think you have failed?

You should be ashamed of yourself.

Regards

 

[Chatterton]

Well finally there is a substantive post! Thank you!

John Chatterton and Richie Kohler were not authors. Gentile had written many books.

According to Gentile, Chatterton shopped for an author after the discovery.

Three years after the discovery, ICM (Rob's agent, who would soon be my agent) came to Richie and me. The only thing we shopped for is groceries.

CHeers

 

[Chatterton]

Killing the messenger?

I again paraphrase Gary Gentile from Shadow Divers Exposed, with the purpose of creating a query:

John,

Your book Shadow Divers gives you credit for discovering the Ultra decrypts which identified the U-869, and which determined that it was proceeding to the precise location of its ultimate demise. Yet Mark McKellar actually unearthed this valuable information, and passed it along to you in a spirit of cooperation.

Why did you not even acknowledge Mark McKellar's existence in Shadow Divers?

Mark McKellar never gave me anything, and we never cooperated on anything. Period. He was an author working this project on his own.

JC

 

[TwoBitTxn]

This is a morbid curiosity question. If you don't want to answer it, feel free not to.

Chowdhury's account and Kurson's account of what happend with the CG evac of the Rouses are fairly different.

Will you set the story straight?

 

[rookers]

Its really too bad that J Chatterton has to waste valuable time responding to poorly formed attacks.
His argumentum ad verecundiam probably will not make the troll disappear, but it should satisfy most.

Pretty much lays waste to my claim to have envisioned the whole thing in 1415 whilst part of Henry Vths 1st French foray.

 

[rawls]

One little snippet that Mr. Gentile uses to discredit the circular run hypothesis is the damage to the top of the sub...I think near the bow...not sure...If the sub was sunk by its own torpedo then there is a good possibility that in depth charging a dead target the damage could have been done by a depth charge subsequent to the 869's demise....

 

[The Chairman]

John,

thanks so much for putting up with the innuendo and insults. You answered straight and fairly. Again, thanks!

 

[rawls]

Does this mean John has left the building...Tell me it's not so....

Even if it's so...Thanks from me too...Hope to see ya in Morehead again...

 

[The Chairman]

I am sure that we have not seen the last of this Shadow Diver.

 

[amascuba]

Your twisted personal agenda appears to be one of trying to embarass, humiliate, and/or otherwise discredit me using half truths, inuendo, and outright lies while you are protected by your anonymity. I suspect there is more here than meets the eye with regards to your identity? Judging strictly from the feedback on this thread, I think you have failed?

There have been a few other threads on this very subject where Tonka97 has ranted and raved about SD telling lies and praising SDE for revealing the truth to everybody. Most everybody here are pretty tired of reading the propaganda.

That said, thank you for answering his questions. Maybe he will move on now.