HMS Consort - Suicide Missions to Order

LUNACY

The incident involving Amethyst and the subsequent involvement of Consort, took place on the 20th of April 1949.   This was the same date ending the C.C.P. ultimatum as was issued upon the Nationalists. Gathered along the North shore on the upper reaches of the Yangtze on that date there were more than one million troops of the Peoples Liberation Army, poised and ready for the crossing of the Yangtze. This was not a war game being played out in some club or establishment with Generals sitting around participating in a game. In monitoring Chinas internal affairs, the Generals so to speak of or coin a phrase, including the Admirals on the Far East Station, by their expertise would be providing their own individual Governments and war departments with up to date news on the volatile situation that existed on that station because of and in particular to Britain, because of its commerce and invested interests within China.   Or were they in conflict with the Government having some sort of ill informed idea that they should be left in control of matters on the Far East Station as one thing is certain whoever was responsible for ordering the Amethyst up river that person or authority ordered that ship on a suicide mission.

Now, as it happens, one of Britain's invested interests in China at that time was in protecting the Opium trade that existed between Britain under the auspicious of Nationalist Government within China a trade that the C.C.P. as an authority within China were determined to put a stop to and in 1946 created the Peoples Liberation Army to assist in stamping out that trade.

In 1949 rationing of food and clothing was still in existence in Great Britain the economy was at low ebb as the country was recovering from the costs of world war two. In 1945 with the defeat of Japan, China was liberated from the Japanese occupation of China and restored to the Chinese. In December of 1945 with China being liberated a treaty was drawn up and became known as the Moscow Declaration, which I have already referred to for its terms therein and the importance of the same, just as I have pointed to some Key Dates In Modern China, these I will now update, 1921 The Chinese Communist Party (C.C.P.) is established; Mao Zeroing (1893-1976) is one of the party Organizers. 1924 Soviet aid and advisors to G.M.D's Whampoa Military Academy train GMD/CCP leadership for national unification, headed by Chiang Kai-shek. 1934-1935 at the time known as the Long March, Mao becomes prim leader of the CCP. 1946-1949 CCP creates the Peoples Liberation Army (PLA). Civil War ensues. With CCP victory, Chiang and GMD forces flee to Taiwan. With this update you now have the established facts by date to the existence of an authority within China known as the CCP. The purpose of providing this date will become reasonably clear in reading the following.

Within the House of Commons on the 26th April 1949 Prime Minister, Mr Clement Attlee, two days after the five ships companies from H.M.S. Consort, Amethyst, London, Black Swan and H.M.A.S. Shoalhaven, among others were burying some of the dead from the Yangtze Incident, at Hung Joa Cemetery in Shanghai made a statement concerning the Yangtze Incident.

Attlee's Statement to the House of Commons 26th April 1949. I quote* "It has been repeatedly stated in this House that our policy has been governed by the Moscow Declaration of December 1945, in which the United Kingdom, the United States and the Soviet Union declared a policy of none-intervention in China's internal affairs.
In view of the considerable British interests in China and of the presence of large British Communities, His Majesty's Government decided some months ago that His Majesty's Consular Officers in China should remain at their posts and this was announced to the House by the Foreign Secretary on 9th December. We are not alone in our decision to remain at Nanking. Other powers represented there with the exception of the Soviet Union, reached the same decision, and there has since been full consultation between the members of the Diplomatic Corps at Nanking.

In the disturbed conditions, which have prevailed in recent months, warships of various Powers have been at Shanghai and Nanking so that in the event of a breakdown of law and order as a result of the hostilities they would be able to assist in the evacuation of their nationals. When the Chinese Government decided to move to Canton, it is true that a warning was issued about warships in the Yangtze.
Nevertheless, it is a fact that since that time the movement of our war ships in the Yangtze have taken place with the full knowledge and consent of the National Government of China. I want to make the point therefore that when the incident took place to which I am about to refer, HMS AMETHYST was proceeding on her lawful occasions and that there was no other properly constituted authority to whom His Majesty's Government were under an obligation to notify her movements even had they been in a position to do so." Unquote. The part played by H.M.S. Consort is also covered in the public statement.

I Quote * "Thus early on Tuesday, 19th April, the frigate HMS AMETHYST (Lieutenant -Commander Skinner) sailed from Shanghai for Nanking, wearing the White Ensign and the Union Jack painted on her hull. When AMETHYST had reached a point on the Yangtze River some 60 miles from Nanking, at about nine o'clock in the morning on the 20th, she came under heavy fire from batteries on the North bank, suffered considerable damage and casualties and eventually grounded on Rose Island. After this the captain decided to land sixty of her crew, including her wounded, who got ashore by swimming or in sampans, being shelled and machine-gunned as they did so; we know that a large proportion have, with Chinese help arrived at Shanghai.

Vice-Admiral Madden, the Flag Officer, second in command, Far East Station, ordered the destroyer HMS CONSORT (Commander Robertson) from Nanking to go to AMETHYST's assistance, and the frigate BLACK SWAN (Captain Jay) from Shanghai to Kiang Yin, 40 miles down river from the AMETHYST. CONSORT reached AMETHYST at about three in the afternoon and was immediately heavily engaged. She found the fire too hot to approach AMETHYST and therefore passed her at speed down river. She turned two miles below and again closed with AMETHYST to take her in tow. But again she came under such heavy fire that she was obliged to abandon the attempt, although she answered the shore batteries with her full armament and signalled that she had silenced most of the opposition. Half an hour later her signals ceased, though in fact she was making a second attempt to take AMETHYST in tow, having turned down stream again.   This attempt also failed and she sustained further damage and casualties during which her steering was effected. She therefore had to continue down stream out of the firing area." * Unquote.

Within that statement where Attlee relates "In view of the considerable British interest in china" he does not relate specifically to what those considerable British interests were. Well, the considerable British interests were in extracting reserves that could be found within China such as ivory among other things and paying for those commodities not in currency such as pounds shillings and pence but in the form of opium.

In his statement Attlee point's to a great folly, the foolish act of His Majesty's Government and he does this in pointing to a decision reached by the Government, which was announced by the Foreign Secretary 9th December 1948. He, Attlee then goes on to point out more or less emphasising "We are not alone in the decision to remain at Nanking". Then he follows up on that rhetoric with an endorsement, "Other powers represented there, with the exception of the Soviet Union, reached the same decision and there has since been full consultation between members of the Diplomatic Corps at Nanking".

There is no explanation as to why the Soviet Union exempted from the decision to remain at Nanking there is no mention of the fact there were consultations between the British and Australian Powers represented there in Nanking that brought about the decision to have the Australian war ship H.M.A.S. Shoalhaven stood down from the duty of relieving H.M.S. Consort. In having the Shoal haven stood down the Australian Powers were exempting them from the lunacy of sending a war ship into the internal and territorial waters of a nation involved in civil war and in particular into what amounted to be the war zone without having taken the necessary and required precautions for safe passage.

I believe it would be fair to state that Prime Minister, Clement Attlee's, statement to the House of Commons 26th April 1949 is a monumental and a historical document that has to be relied upon for its terms, there can be no way of altering its structure, as such with the passage of time should credible evidence become available which points to that statement showing it to have been formed and presented by deceit and deception in order to delude, then regardless of the passage of time reparation has to be found to the wrongful acts and omissions caused prior to the making of that statement and what has resulted and flowed from it.

From Clement Atlee's, Public statement to The House of Commons I Quote* I want to make the therefore that when the incident took place which I am about to refer, HMS AMETHYST was proceeding on her lawful occasions and that there was no other properly constituted authority to whom His Majesty's Government were under an obligation to notify her movements even had they been in a position to do so. *Unquote.

Can fact establish the wrongful acts and omission within that part of the statement just quoted? I say that it can and is by what so far has been pointed out but what I cannot understand to a degree is, why it was not challenged and set right by the political legislators who were within the House of Commons on the 26th April 1949 listening to that statement being made, (men of straw) perhaps. And there was also the fanatics and lunatics, one fanatic if not a lunatic was on the opposition benches of the House of Commons, the leader of the opposition Winston Churchill, warmonger, his approach to the situation was that aircraft carriers should be sent in and the P.L.A. bombed.

Now by that recorded fact and the fact that Churchill's demands were rejected that was the second escape we had from what could have amounted to a third world war, not an opinion, but certainty.

At this present time of writing and relating to matters concerning conflict namely the Yangtze Incident that happened in peace time Britain 1949. Fifty-four years on in peacetime Britain has again become involved in Conflict this time Iraq. Via the news media there are the reports and discussions as to the legalities of that conflict, and there is now a divide within the United Nations with the large question mark over the legalities of Britain siding with the U.S.A in sending troops to Iraq without full consent and upon agreement of the United Nations.

If in the event that the United Nations do decide that the British Government were wrong in committing a wrongful act by sending troops into Iraq without the full consent and by agreement of the United Nations then the realisation of that will be brought home to Prime Minister, Blair, and this present day Government.

Returning to the Yangtze Incident and in particular to Clement Attlee's, Statement for a moment. In that statement there is no mention of who gave the order that sent the Amethyst on its journey up the Yangtze.

Admiralty records to this day are capable of showing the ages of those on that ship and when the joined the ship and what those records establish is the fact that the ship had not been "Shaken Down" the term meaning lacking in experience not proficient unsettled, the shaking down of a ship comes about by becoming familiar with the ship what is required so that the ship is in a state of readiness at all times and in all events.

Earl in his book Yangtze Incident at page 16 "She had left Shanghai that morning, carrying a youngish crew, including sixteen boy-seamen fresh both to the ship and the Far East Station." Now concerning the matter of the Shoalhaven being stood down and no reference given, or provided, in Attlee's statement to the House of Commons.

The prerogative of standing down a ship belongs to the Admiralty; the Admiralty on the Far East Station at that time was in the form of Commander-in-Chief, Admiral Sir E.J. Patrick Brind. and, Flag Officer Second-in-Command, Vice-Admiral A.C.G. Madden. With them rested the decision with regard to the request to have the Shoal- haven stood down from its delegated duty that being, the relief of Consort, there had to be discussions and considerations in order to come to the decision of standing that ship down. Was it because of the danger that existed, was it from fear of a backlash from Australia that would come about should anything untoward happen to the ship and ships company on refusing to meet the request of standing down the Shoalhaven, or was it that the Australians, made it known that if the Shoalhaven was not stood down Australia would break of relations with Britain. (Or was it an advantageous fluke).

Earl's book Yangtze Incident at page fourteen. Quote* Even to-day it is not clear why Amethyst was fired upon. Was the first salvo a deliberate, sneering affront to Britain and the Royal Navy?
Or, as Amethysts First Lieutenant, Geoffrey Weston, believes, did the Communist gunners mistake the frigate's up river movement for the double betrayal and attempted escape of a Chinese Nationalist warship which had previously agreed, for a price, to remain at the near-by river-port of Kiang Yin and fight on the Communist side. *Unquote.

In Attlee's statement to the House of Commons it was stated, "HMS AMETHYST was proceeding on her lawful occasions and that there was no other constituted authority to whom His Majesty's Government were under an obligation to notify her movements even had they been in a position to do so"

There was an authority that could have and should have been contacted whether by right or in courtesy to ensure safe passage, because of those wrongful acts attempts by the means of deceit and deception have been the order of the day to cover up the true story of the Yangtze Incident.

BACK NEXT