INSIGHT 21st April 1949 ------------------------- The photograph of H.M.S. Consort, undergoing repairs in dry dock at Singapore, when coupled to the damage report, provides an insight that allows you to form an opinion to some extent of what it must have been like to have been involved in that conflict. It does not however paint the picture of the blood and guts, the dead and wounded the action and actions taken the valour and seamanship, the valour above and beyond the call of duty, matters to this day that have gone unrecognised, under the heading of deceit and deception. When H.M.S. Consort, on the 20th April 1949 tied up alongside of H.M.S. London, the London was fully operational and as such was able to transmit to the Admiralty reports on Consorts damage and condition. H.M.S. London's ships company with Consort along side were getting a gruesome insight into the damage and carnage flowing from a rescue attempt of Amethyst, what must have been the mixed emotions and thoughts of H.M.S. London's ships company on viewing that. There can be no doubt about the British Ambassador, on learning of Amethysts flash signal "UNDER HEAVY FIRE. AM AGROUND. LARGE MUMBER OF CASUALTIES." He the British Ambassador sent dispatches to the C.C.P. Headquarters requesting an immediate cease-fire, a fact recorded but we are still unaware as to what the response was to those dispatches, being dispatches, the dispatches were not being sent via electrical transmission utilities, so the dispatches would have taken some time, but during that interim period, H.M.S. Consort was ordered to Amethysts assistance, in going to her assistance, she was, fired upon by the P.L.A. now in view of dispatches having been sent was Consort, seen as a betrayal.? It was not the British Ambassador who ordered Consort to the rescue of Amethyst; it was the Admiralty on the Far East Station. On the 21st April 1949 H.M.S. London, a County Class Cruiser a ship with a seventeen feet draught, in the company of H.M.S. Black Swan was ordered up the Yangtze to attempt the rescue of Amethyst as stated previously they got to within twenty miles of Amethyst, before having to retire. Both of those ships were ordered into a war zone on a date known to be the invasion date of Chinas Civil War. To this date we are being asked to accept that Amethyst was going about her Lawful occasions on 20th April, as was the London and Black Swan on The 21st April 1949. Since the time of that incident and up until the present time in this year 2003 there has never been a Judicial or Public Enquiry into the overall Yangtze Incident in order to ascertain the legalities or illegalities of that incident. Fifty- four years on and into the present, the Government of today is attempting to avoid a Judicial or Public inquiry into the legalities of the right or wrongs of having gone to war in Iraq. In my opinion I believe that there should be Judicial Inquiries into both the Yangtze Incident of 1949 and the present day legalities of the war in Iraq, two incidents of conflict in peacetime that British Service Personnel have been committed to by perhaps wrongful acts or omissions of the Government. If there are no judicial inquiries then as I see it the Government is seen to be above the law and not accountable to the law. Prior to the Yangtze Incident of 1949 the Labour Party was responsible for bringing about what must be one of the most important Legal Statutes of Law Reform ever witnessed, I am of course referring to the Crown Proceedings Act of 31st July 1947. In bringing about that Act, the Government removed the maxim "Rex None Pecare Potest" (The King Can Do No Wrong) in removing that maxim the Government removed the Crowns traditional immunity from liability bringing the Crown, on to a par with that of a subject in libel actions. In removing the maxim this meant that the Crown its Offices, Ministers and Servants could no longer rely upon a defence of Crown immunity from or for their wrongful acts and omissions. There has been no test case so far as I am aware, ever having been presented within a Court of Law challenging the legality of the Yangtze Incident. I believe there is a case to be answered in respect to the Yangtze Incident. I also believe there is a case to be answered in respect to the legality of war in Iraq and my argument is that being a part of the U.N. that is where commitment should have been made by the agreement of the U.N. If the Government of 1949 had nothing to hide and the government of today has nothing to hide then what excuse can there be for not initiating a Judicial Inquiry, could it be because there might just be a mass entitlement of compensation that has something to do with it. |
|
Updated jwr-computers |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|