barney-I am starting to get the feeling you may not believe my story. Yes, I stated that some of the diamonds were hidden in New Jersey and Florida. Did I say they were put there by the Germans? You do know that the U-853 was sunk not far from Montauk Point, correct? Why was it there? Just to sink a fairly unimportant ship?
Yes, I do not believe your story.
The way your post read implied the diamond-filled shells were hidden by the Germans.
Yes, I know my geography and know where the wreck site of the U-853 is located. The reason it was there was due to its orders upon leaving Norway -- the U-853 was directed to operate in the Gulf of Maine off Boston, with alternative sites off Halifax or New York. This was due to the concentration of shipping in those areas - that's how u-boats operated. They could not afford to expend precious fuel running down targets all over the East Coast but positioned themselves in strategic areas where geography funneled shipping traffic. Every Allied ship potentially carrying supplies, oil, munitions, or troops to Europe - or even petroleum products or other supplies intended for domestic use - was most definitely not "unimportant." All of these could disrupt the Allied war effort. This assignment would most definitely be viewed as more important -- and more believable -- than a supposed mission to bury diamond-filled shells on a beach tightly patrolled and controlled by the U.S. military.
I think your comparison with the story of hiding the shells at the Washington monument just shows that you are a smart-alec.
Thanks. I think the analogy also shows how unlikely your story is.
As far as deck gun size. yes it is irelevant. If the officers wanted to smuggle these shells on board without them being seen it would not be that hard to do. For instance putting a couple in a duffle bag. Give me a break!
You did not say a couple, you said 12-14 shells. Where would one hide 12-14 useless (and "huge" in your description) 88 mm rounds - in their spacious and luxurious state rooms onboard the U-853? (<-- that was sarcasm)
These issues are not irrelevant.
As far as whether it was a conventional war patrol, this thread is about Nazi treasure submarines. Do you think their "official" war records say "U-boat # whatever was offically filled with treasure to be buried at (blank) location? Do you believe all records? You are starting to sound a lot like ECS. Are you two tag-teaming me?
Do you think that if something can't be found in the "official" records then it could not have happened? If so you are very naive.
So, because something is not included in the official records means that is must be true? Convenient. Just don't believe any facts that go against your story and all is good.
I am not saying that if something is not in the records that it could not have happened, but I am pretty sure if something as amazing as what your story claims actually went down, there would be more info from various sources that could be presented as facts, as there had to be others in the know to pull off something like this.
So you think my story is fantasy or fiction? Why don't you just call me a liar?
Yes, I think your story is fantasy. I would not call you a liar as that is rude. You seem to believe what you are offering, but I just fail to see any credibility in the offered information. Of course, you could apparently go out and recover these shells and diamonds and present your finds, and I would be the first to eat crow and applaud your success.
Questions for you. Why does this story bother you so much? Since we are talking facts here can you state that it is impossible for my story to be true? Were you there when all of this may have happened? Maybe I am biased but I don't see where any of it is that hard to accept as possibly happening more or less just as I have said.
I have trouble with the story as it runs contrary to all available historical information and common sense. And as one who researches maritime history, writes articles, and does presentations to the public, I have grown tired of all these tall tales (my opinion). I have been asked about the ghost u-boats floating around the Gulf of Mexico with mercury, about the sunken u-boat off every single inlet along the U.S. East Coast (must be hundreds of them out there off the U.S.), and all the other nonsense like the Bermuda Triangle.
These ultra-fantastic u-boat stories takes away from what I already consider an amazing tale - that these tiny, unbearably humid, uncomfortable, hot submarines stuffed with men would cross the Atlantic using a tiny compass (used on an all metal tube!), which took weeks to do, and try to wreak havoc on their enemy against horrendous odds...by this time in the war these guys knew they were likely going to their death and most of these guys were volunteers!
The bottom line is unadulterated history is fascinating just as it is.
The bottom line is this. Almost all the stories in all the books talk about a possible treasure on the U-853. A guy even testified that he sealed up shells to be put on this sub.
That is not true -
some books mention a possible treasure. Basically, it is one tale that has spread like a virus. The story of the supposed Nuremberg testimony was presented in a Rhode Island newspaper in 1969. The actual Nuremberg testimony is a matter of public record, and one should be able to find the actual information in the transcripts. Has it? FWIW, the newspaper actually reported it was travelers cheques (not diamonds) that were welded inside the shells.
Actual salvage efforts on the U-853 began in 1953 by Mr. Bonifay. He revealed
his information indicated the u-boat carried $1 million in mercury contained in stainless steel flasks that was destined for Japan in trade for tin. He could not explain why the U-853 was off New England if it was supposed to be headed to Japan (Northwest Passage perhaps?).
So you see, there are definitely stories about potential treasure on the U-853, many of them different, but all (IMHO based on available evidence) without merit.
To anyone that is tired of all this your solution is simple-Stay off this thread and/or don't read my posts.
I think you were the one who stated you did not care what others thought, so I am surprised you are spending all this effort to refute my critique.
Cheers,
Mike
