Shadow Divers – Exposed U 869

[H2Andy]

Perhaps you would prefer to read the "garbage" directly from
Gary's newsletter which was posted this morning.

sadly, you don't seem to understand why this is the worst case scenario.

crap coming from nobodies like me and you is just crap. crap coming
from the likes of gary is a tarnishment to his character and to the sport in
general.

i'm sure he'll make a ton of money and get the appropriate attentions

 

[Chaseh]

Wow is this offbase. The point of the story was identifying the wreck, and doing so while respecting those that rest inside it.

Now someone else, aided by you, is trying to capitalize by "exposing" the truth? Well, you're either part of the plan or a pawn, but either way, this exposes nothing.

In the tradition of "the truth behind the DaVinci Code" he's gonna try to ride the momentum of the book and the subsequent film, but is there any dispute over the identification of the wreck? Is there any real point to this at all? Your tone seems to equate this to the Pentagon Papers.

 

[wreckedinri]

crap coming from nobodies like me and you is just crap. crap coming
from the likes of gary is a tarnishment to his character and to the sport in
general.

Judgements even before hearing/reading what the guy has to say:huh:.

It's not about torpedos, how a wreck was identified, or who did what dives; it's about a writing style that is slowly becoming acceptable, where "journalism" is melding into the realm of novels. Glamorization and heroism are allowed to be created through artistic license. Gary uses the term “at variance with the truth”; before we became a politically correct world that was known as bull-$hit. It is what that is being passed along as an historically accurate tome that is the issue, not the questioning of some dude’s accomplishment of crawling through a sunken u-boat over 200 feet deep. No one is saying that those guys didn’t do incredible dives – there is simply more to the story.

Over the recent years we have had some great works of adventure to enjoy. From Krakauer’s, Into Thin Air; Brashears’, High Exposure; McMurray’s, Deep Descent & Dark Descent; and Chowdhury’s the Last Dive, not one person has come forward to even imply that what was recounted in those works was inaccurate. Not in internet chat rooms or in the respective communities (mountaineering and diving) have the slightest rumblings been heard. Yet, with Shadow Divers, not just one person, but several are stepping forward and putting their reputations on the line to speak out. And these people are not nobodies.

Does anyone think that perhaps we should hear what they have to say before we decide what is crap?

And BTW H2Andy, perhaps you consider yourself a nobody but I am not and do not presume to know me.

Capt. Dennis St Germain

 

[fire_diver]

Perhaps you would prefer to read the "garbage" directly from Gary's newsletter which was posted this morning.

I hope his "tone" does not offend anyone.


The following is copied from Gary Gentile's Newsletter
06/13/2006 11:17 AM

Thanks to the dedicated research efforts of Harold Moyers, the world can now learn the real and tragic saga of the U-869: the German U-boat previously known as the U-Who? or Hitler’s Lost Sub.

Moyers located archival documents that described an incident that occurred on February 11, 1945, in which two destroyer escorts trounced a U-boat as it crept along the bottom some sixty miles off the New Jersey coast. The U-boat was subsequently destroyed in a series of hedgehog and depth-charge attacks. This incident occurred at the site of the U- 869.

Moyers pursued his findings by contacting surviving members of the two destroyer escorts. Supplementing his archival research with the recollections of crewmen of that historic day, he assembled the full story of that tragic and exciting event so that it can now be brought to light.


Shadow Divers Exposed is where the truth hits the fan.
The result is a volume that works on a multitude of levels: it presents the real saga of the loss of the U-869; it puts the discovery of the U-869 into perspective with other U-boats that have been found in American waters; it provides an overview of the U-boat war through the stories of other U-boat losses; and it corrects many - but not all - of the errors and distortions in Shadow Divers.

The ersatz Shadow Divers claim that the U- 869 was sunk by a circular run of its own torpedo. Even without the evidence of the destroyer escort attack, this theory is untenable for any number of reasons: all of which are thoroughly discussed in the chapter on U-boat forensics - an in-depth study of torpedo engineering, shipwreck deterioration, and damage assessment.<p. The exposé disputes events in Shadow Divers that are fictitious or grossly overstated. Reliable witnesses have contradicted a number of major events in which they participated. Their participation was deleted in order to glamorize two chosen heroes.

Some witnesses were ignored altogether so dissenting views of events did not contradict the self- glorifying plot. The testimony of others was altered, resulting in accounts that are at variance with the truth.

Shadow Divers paints all divers as bickerers and subservient to its heroes. The exposé shows the teamwork and camaraderie that are essential facets of the technical diving community.

Shadow Divers is rife with boastful exaggerations, theatrical embellishments, and unnecessary historical inaccuracies, many of which are addressed in this exposé so that the actual facts will be available to present and future generations.

You may recall the public furor over A Million Little Pieces, the so-called nonfiction book by James Frey about his experiences with drug abuse. To Frey’s chagrin, investigative reporters learned that he exaggerated some of the book. After he was exposed (on the Internet, on the Oprah Winfrey Show, and numerous other places), he issued a statement in which he admitted to adding gross embellishments that were contradicted by the facts. Additionally, there has been a great deal of controversy over the tactic of publishing houses to promote works of fiction as actual events.

In this reporter’s opinion, Frey’s exaggerations and embellishments do not come anywhere near to the amount of fictionalizing that occurred in Shadow Divers. The book was a hoax: a blatant attempt to hoodwink the public with self-serving fabrications. Only a sincere public apology can help to atone for its sins.

Read all about it in: Shadow Divers Exposed: the Real Saga of the U-869.



Sincerely,


Gary Gentile
Gary Gentile Productions

Everything in bold is hereby defined as GARBAGE.

 

[scubabum2]

Over the recent years we have had some great works of adventure to enjoy. From Krakauer’s, Into Thin Air; Brashears’, High Exposure; McMurray’s, Deep Descent & Dark Descent; and Chowdhury’s the Last Dive, not one person has come forward to even imply that what was recounted in those works was inaccurate. Not in internet chat rooms or in the respective communities (mountaineering and diving) have the slightest rumblings been heard. Yet, with Shadow Divers, not just one person, but several are stepping forward and putting their reputations on the line to speak out. And these people are not nobodies.

Actually, a couple of people took issue to Krakauer's account of the Everest tragedy. Two of the members of the same expedition, Dr. Beck Weathers and the late Anatoli Boukreev, wrote their own books disputing Krakauer's account.

 

[Chaseh]

Judgements even before hearing/reading what the guy has to say:huh:.

It's not about torpedos, how a wreck was identified, or who did what dives; it's about a writing style that is slowly becoming acceptable, where "journalism" is melding into the realm of novels. Glamorization and heroism are allowed to be created through artistic license. Gary uses the term “at variance with the truth”; before we became a politically correct world that was known as bull-$hit. It is what that is being passed along as an historically accurate tome that is the issue, not the questioning of some dude’s accomplishment of crawling through a sunken u-boat over 200 feet deep. No one is saying that those guys didn’t do incredible dives – there is simply more to the story.

Over the recent years we have had some great works of adventure to enjoy. From Krakauer’s, Into Thin Air; Brashears’, High Exposure; McMurray’s, Deep Descent & Dark Descent; and Chowdhury’s the Last Dive, not one person has come forward to even imply that what was recounted in those works was inaccurate. Not in internet chat rooms or in the respective communities (mountaineering and diving) have the slightest rumblings been heard. Yet, with Shadow Divers, not just one person, but several are stepping forward and putting their reputations on the line to speak out. And these people are not nobodies.

Does anyone think that perhaps we should hear what they have to say before we decide what is crap?

And BTW H2Andy, perhaps you consider yourself a nobody but I am not and do not presume to know me.

Capt. Dennis St Germain

Your logic is ridiculous. You cannot assume that those books were beyond reproach simply because your buddy hasn't written about them. Have you researched the actual instances in those cases and interviewed the witnesses?

My point is, and I believe I'm not alone, is you're making inflamitory comments about a non-event. Of course some people have different stories to tell. Sure there was dramatic license to make it the great read that it is. The facts that are significant are who was involved and was the ID correct.

Instead, you're hyping small details to sell someone's book. Good for you.

Like I said, "The Truth Behind the DaVinci Code" Buy it now. Or Don't.

 

[dbush]

Shadow Divers Exposed works on a multitude of levels. It presents the actual circumstances that surrounded the loss of the U-869. It puts the discovery of the U-869 into perspective with other U-boats that have been found in American waters. It provides an overview of the U-boat war through accounts of other U-boat losses. And it corrects some of the gross errors, wild exaggerations, and deliberate distortions that filled the pages of Shadow Divers.

The author interviewed a number of witnesses whose testimony contradicted the theatrical plot and boastful embellishments that formed the essential ingredients of Shadow Divers. Some of these witnesses actually performed the deeds for which the chosen protagonists of Shadow Divers were given credit. These witnesses disputed many of the fictitious elements that ran rampant through the pages of Shadow Divers.

The quote is from: http://www.ggentile.com/sdexposed.html
Highlights are mine.

Well, I now see the issue and I suppose I am a bit saddened to see it as all three of these guys are sort of heros to me. It does seem that Gary is using "fighting" words. However if true, they are serious accusations, and I think the rational thing to do would be to listen to his case and decide for yourself. It certainly appears to be a smelly stink bomb that will cause strife, and bitterness among many in the dive world. If there has been a gross missrepresentation (not just an arguement about theories) as charged by Gary, then I do think that he has an obligation to set the record straight. While I am very sad to see this come out, one should not hide in idealistic fantasies from the ugly realities of life. I for one will see what Gary has to say and make up my own mind in as close to an unbiased fashion as I can.

 

[lamont]

If he wanted to write a book to correct the historical errors surrounding the diving, add the new information that contradicts the circle-running theory and present a much better historical backdrop of the U-boat war it could have been done without the confrontation and it would have been welcomed. All that he had to do was tell the story well and shut up about comparing it with the Shadow Divers book.

Instead we've got this wonderfully hypocritical statement:

Shadow Divers paints all divers as bickerers and subservient to its heroes. The expos&#233; shows the teamwork and camaraderie that are essential facets of the technical diving community.

Gary has a really odd way of trying to paint divers as not bickering.

 

[H2Andy]

Judgements even before hearing/reading what the guy has to say:huh:.

i've read his site. i've read the press releases. i know what the guy is saying.

he thinks he should have gotten more of the credit than he did. he thinks he
should have been the star of Shadow Divers. big whoop. grow up.

his "new evidence" isn't new at all and he's not the guy who came up with it.

it's just sore grapes.

btw, i would have been a perfect reader for this book had Gary gone about it the
wrong way. there's more than one side to a story. i would have LOVED to read
gary's side.

instead, he's come out of the gate slinging mud and calling people names, and that's
just a turn off to me.

you speak of what today's jounalism has become. i say, look no further than what
gary is trying to do for a terrible example.

ugh... not what i want to spend my money or time on

And BTW H2Andy, perhaps you consider yourself a nobody but I am not and do not presume to know me.

know thyself

 

[dbush]

If he wanted to write a book to correct the historical errors surrounding the diving

My original concept of his book was that he was correcting errors and therefore, I did not understand the need for his tone. However, based on his quotes, it appears to me that he intends the book to go beyond simply correcting historical errors. It seems that he is making charges of intentional deception. Certainly more serious than outdated theories, or a few incorrect facts.