Titanic

Interview with John Hamer

If you are new to this story, like I was, we are going to take it slow.

This is a very important story, because it is about Empire and Oligarchy, both subjects I am interested in, as both subjects drive our lives today.

I had bumped into some threads over the last couple of years suggesting that there was more to the Titanic story than what we were told, but I just didn’t have the bandwidth for it. I was trying to make sure family and friends didn’t kill themselves and their loved ones with the genetics. The Titanic had to take a back seat.

But here we are in 2024, and I’ve got the bandwidth now.

It all started late one night, when I was looking for something to watch, and seeing I couldn’t find anything, clean of woke propaganda, on the main streaming services, I went to Tubi, where you can find plenty of old, bad movies, some so bad that they rise to the level of “good bad” movies. Anyway, it was there I stumbled on this 50-minute documentary. Here it is also on Rumble. It is short and excellent!

Documentary: Titanic 'The Shocking Truth' (rumble.com)

I’m not going to spoil the story for you. Yes, a ship sinks, but I’ll leave the rest for you to discover by yourself.

Now that I knew the basic shape of the original story, I dug deeper and came across this great lecture by John Hamer on the subject from 11 years ago.

I decided that this is an important story and seeing that John Hamer is a subject matter expert, as he researched this story for several years and wrote two books on it, I approached John requesting an interview and I’m so grateful that he agreed.

What John has done in this interview is simply magnificent. Through a series of questions and answers he will take you from knowing nothing about the story to a deep understanding of this important history, including a dive into both the American and British “inquiries” into the sinking.

My recommendation for the best sequence of consuming this subject would be to first read this interview, then take that knowledge into the 50-minute documentary, and then finally take all of that into John Hamer’s lecture above.

At the end of all that you will have a solid foundation of a history we were never meant to know.

This was all done at a time before the internet before television and before radio. We were never meant to find out. But here we are.

With deep thanks and gratitude to John Hamer for putting in such a great effort into this interview that I thoroughly enjoyed, and I know you will too.

I have both John Hamer’s “Falsification” books (see at the end) that I can definitely recommend and would encourage you to support John by buying one or more of his books.

---

Introduction to John Hamer: "To begin, could you share a bit about your background and what sparked your interest in the Titanic's story?"

I was born and raised in a small village in the Pennine hills in ‘Last of the Summer Wine Country’ in rural West Yorkshire in the north of England, but I now live in Scarborough with my fiancée Karen on the beautiful North Yorkshire coast, overlooking the North Sea.

I spent most of my working life as a corporate slave to the IT industry, before ‘seeing the light’ and finally escaping from the dreary, soul-destroying confines of the corporatocracy around twenty three years ago.

Since then I have been a full-time geopolitical researcher, analyst, public speaker, and author, having written and published eight books to date.

My interest in the Titanic story began when I was a child.  I always had a fascination for the ‘official’ story as it contains almost every element of what constitutes a classic drama… the contrast between rich and poor, poignant love stories, unspeakable disaster and suffering, heroism and self-sacrifice etc. etc.

However, as an adult I soon discovered that things are not always as they seem and so began my three years of almost full-time research into the real truth about the Titanic disaster.  And it is safe to say that what I discovered and subsequently wrote extensively about is totally, completely at odds with the ‘official’ story of Titanic!

The apocryphal, official story was actually derived from a book written by Walter Lord, a known CIA agent in the early 1950s – ‘A Night to Remember’ which begs the question what was a CIA agent doing writing a story about a shipwreck 40 years earlier – and distorting all the facts too?  It was all rather strange – to me anyway – and my research bears this out.

The Titanic-Olympic Switch: "What is the theory about a switch between the Titanic and Olympic?"

JP Morgan, who was head of the huge financial conglomerate corporation of the same name and also ultimate owner of White Star shipping line decided to build three luxury liners with a mandate of becoming the most luxurious in the world, the Olympic, Titanic and Britannic.

Three ships almost (but not quite) identical were proposed by Morgan, so he commissioned Harland & Wolff shipyard in Belfast, Northern Ireland to commence construction in 1908.  A massive investment of money was required, and this was to be financed by JP personally.  So it was a huge gamble on his part and the entire plan depended on absolutely everything going right.  But unfortunately for Morgan – and his bank balance, the whole enterprise was beset with problems from the very beginning, ultimately ending in tragedy of course.

RMS Olympic was the first of the sisters to be built and she was launched in 1911.  Unfortunately for Morgan though, she had several serious accidents – four in fact, all before the launch of Titanic in early 1912, so in other words all in the first few months of Olympic’s life.

1. She totally destroyed a tug in New York harbour on her maiden voyage.  White Star Line were sued but fortunately, no deaths occurred.

2. She ran over a sunken wreck at Sandy Hook whilst leaving New York causing severe damage to her propellers and so had to return back across the Atlantic at around half speed but suffered further vibrational damage due to the imbalance caused by the propeller damage.  Two propellers had to be replaced.

3. Shortly afterwards she hit a sandbank, ran aground and ‘threw a propeller.’  This also had to be replaced but having already used both spares, they had to ‘borrow’ one from the Titanic which was still under construction.

4. Then in September 1911, Olympic was involved in a massive, high-speed collision with the British Navy Cruiser HMS Hawke (‘The Hawke Incident’) after leaving Southampton Water and preparing to turn westwards travelling clockwise around the Isle of Wight off the southern coast of England.

So she limped back to Southampton to be ‘patched-up’ and this alone took two weeks and from there back the 600 sea-miles to Harland & Wolff, Belfast for full repairs.  Back in dry dock in Belfast though, it was realised that she was in far worse shape than originally thought.  Worse still…

The Royal Navy enquiry into the accident found Olympic’s crew and therefore White Star Line culpable.  White Star was thus liable for many millions of pounds of expenses for repairs to both ships plus the significant loss of revenues whilst Olympic was out of action.

Amongst many, many other relatively minor issues, the major problem was that Olympic’s keel was bent and distorted out of shape.  The repairs were estimated to cost more than to build a new ship from scratch.  In the course of my research I spoke to several experienced mariners and they all said that a twisted or bent keel means a total wreck.

So, White Star now realised that Olympic was damaged beyond economic repair, significantly that she was now uninsurable, therefore an insurance ‘write off’ and White Star Line had no option but to declare her officially a ‘wreck.’   This actually did happen and is not speculation on my part.  Olympic was officially declared a wreck – a write off, at one point and documentation proves this to be true.

Also, due to the serious damage she was unable to ply her trade back and forth across the Atlantic any longer in order to begin to pay her way.  The bankruptcy of White Star and Harland & Wolff was now definitely looking likely and the impact upon Morgan’s personal fortune were this to happen, cannot be over-estimated!

So, it was at this point that Morgan and his co-conspirators then hatched a cunning plan to solve the White Star financial problems in one simple move. 

…That one simple move being to switch the identities of the wrecked Olympic and the almost completed Titanic and deliberately sink Olympic as Titanic, thus ensuring a substantial insurance payout for the worthless Olympic!

Differences Between Titanic and Olympic: "What were the primary differences between the Titanic and its sister ship, Olympic?"

The major visual difference between the two sisters originally was that Titanic’s A deck promenade was partially enclosed (the deck immediately below the lifeboats in the above picture) in order, it was determined, to create a more comfortable promenading experience for first class passengers in the advent of bad weather conditions.  Also the promenades on Titanic's B Deck were reduced in size from those of Olympic and the extra space was utilised for additional cabins and public rooms, including two luxury suites with their own private deck areas.

There were other initial differences too, such as the porthole configuration in the port bows (front) of the ships; Titanic had 14 when completed and these were evenly spaced, whilst Olympic had 16, unevenly spaced.  In addition, the bridge areas of the two ships were shaped slightly differently. Olympic’s bridge according to the designs was originally meant to be ‘bow-fronted’ and the wings overhung the hull slightly, whereas on Titanic the bridge was flat-fronted and did not overhang.  However, there are no pictures to be seen of Olympic with this bow-fronted bridge, so I am unsure as to what conclusion to draw from that other than it seems that the Bridge was never built as bow-fronted despite the plans.

The tonnage of the two ships was another, albeit non-visual difference.  Upon launch, Olympic was 45,324 gross tons whilst Titanic, mainly because of the modifications made, over and above the original blueprints, was 46,328 gross tons.

HMS Hawke Collision: "How did the collision between HMS Hawke and the Olympic set in motion the events leading to the Titanic disaster?"

The collision was actually the driving force of the disaster.  As related above, it was this accident that ultimately led to the plan to switch the identities of the two ships and to the planned, deliberate sinking of RMS Olympic whose identity had been switched with that of RMS Titanic.

Indeed, according to my extensive research, the switching of ships’ identities was and apparently still is a relatively common occurrence in maritime insurance fraud.

Inquiry and Insurance Implications: "Following the inquiry into the Olympic-Hawke collision, how did the decision impact the White Star Line's insurance claims and financial situation?"

It was the outcome of the Royal Navy enquiry following the ‘Hawke Incident’ that ultimately sealed the fate of the Titanic (Olympic).

In the event of any incidents or accidents to ships owned by the British Royal Navy, then an official enquiry is mandatory.  And in this particular instance the enquiry into the Olympic–Hawke collision found White Star Line and the crew of Olympic to be entirely culpable – even though an even cursory examination of the actual facts of the incident would clearly demonstrate that not to be the case.  In fact, it was the rudder of HMS Hawke that actually jammed, thus rendering the entire incident unavoidable and very clearly the fault of the military vessel and not RMS Olympic and its crew.

Nevertheless, the outcome of the RN enquiry effectively totally influenced the decision of Olympics insurers, Lloyds of London in denying any form of payout to White Star.  And of course, White Star thus became liable not only for the cost of repairs to RMS Olympic, but also for those of HMS Hawke which had been equally devastated by the accident.  These repairs in total would ultimately cost in excess of £5m which is almost half a billion in 2024 pounds sterling. 

And when added to the loss of revenues for several months due to Olympic’s enforced inactivity, then it makes total sense that JP Morgan would do everything in his considerable power to avoid the financial devastation that would inevitably follow.

Alterations to Titanic and Olympic: "How were the Titanic and Olympic altered during this period, and what evidence supports the theory that their identities were switched?"

Following Olympic’s arrival back in Belfast after the collision and the realisation that Olympic was in effect now 45,000 tons of scrap metal, the decision was taken to switch the identities of Titanic and Olympic and so work began to eradicate as many of their differences as possible and make Olympic as ready as possible for one last, dramatic final voyage.

The changes were made gradually and systematically over a period of several weeks.  The main differences in the two ships being removed and thereby making them as identical as possible.  Although this was not 100% practical and viable and thus this is how the plot was discovered – through meticulous research.

For example there are many photos showing both vessels in their various stages of transition.  And then, on one final weekend, the last changes were made by a specially selected, highly secret and trustworthy crew who were paid £100 (almost a years’ wages) for two day’s work.  These men were also threatened with loss of livelihood in the event of their speaking out about it in any way.

Lifeboats, menus, and complimentary letterheads and of course the nameplates were changed but all other ship’s accoutrements such as crockery and bed linen etc, were all White Star standard issue and did not require switching.

So many conflicting photographs of the two in various stages of both ‘official’ and ‘unofficial’ change that even so-called ‘experts’ struggle to separate the two.  Of course most photos have no dates and if surreptitious changes were being made alongside ‘official’ ones, then the conclusion has to be that photos prove nothing at all.  However in my book RMS Olympic there are a series of photographs that I believe do prove the switch.

It is perhaps significant that when the wreck of the Titanic was first investigated by Robert Ballard and his crew after its ‘discovery’ in 1985 that the first explorations of the wreckage revealed (completely undocumented in the ships original blueprints) a steel support structure in place which appeared to be supporting and bracing the keel.  This was never satisfactorily explained either at the time or subsequently but would certainly be significant if correct and there is absolutely no reason to believe that it is not correct, as it was reported by Ballard himself who of course at that time allegedly knew nothing about the switching of the two ships’ identities.

Also, significantly, there is in existence a Harland and Wolff official photograph of RMS Olympic, in the Thompson Graving Dock in 1911 distinctly showing a vertical joint in her hull plating immediately adjacent to the port-side anchor.  Photographs of Titanic while she was still being fitted- out in 1911 show clearly that there was no similar feature in her hull.  However, this joint is again clearly not present in a picture of Olympic, during her 1912/13 refit following the Titanic disaster, proving beyond question that this is a photograph of the original Titanic, although the name Olympic is clearly visible on both sides of the bow.  This I submit is totally conclusive proof of a switch.

So, Titanic was launched in December 1911, re-named the Olympic and work continued on the original Olympic, rebranded as Titanic, to make her seaworthy enough for that one dramatic, final voyage.

Preparation and Trials of the 'New' Titanic: "How was the 'new' Titanic prepared for its maiden voyage, and what were the shortcomings of its trials?"

In addition to all the alterations mentioned previously, the wrecked Olympic had to be patched up as best they could and by bracing the twisted keel with metal struts as related above.  When Robert Ballard discovered the Titanic wreck site (he actually didn’t but that’s another story) he was puzzled to find these struts which of course did not appear on the construction blueprints.

And furthermore it is possible to see the repairs to Olympic’s superstructure and steel plates in some pictures of Titanic prior to the ‘maiden’ voyage -as previously alluded to. 

In those days, all passenger ships had to have a Board of Trade certificate of seaworthiness which involved a full one day sea trial on open seas.  This Involved such tests as for example, stopping, starting, turning circles, manoeuvrability, adequate no. of lifeboats etc. etc. 

Olympic upon its ‘original’ sea trial did indeed undergo this extensive testing, however, strangely (or maybe not) Titanic’s sea trial was just a cursory two hour jaunt along Belfast Lough (effectively a lake) which involved no strenuous examinations of its performance or fitness to withstand the stresses and strains involved in negotiating the North Atlantic, totally contrary to British maritime law.

JP Morgan's Involvement: "How significant was JP Morgan's role in the Titanic's history?"

As already mentioned, JP (John Pierpont) Morgan was the owner of the White Star Line but significantly he was also the owner of the ‘umbrella’ company IMM (International Mercantile Marine) of which White Star along with several other lines, was an integral part.

It was he who of course personally financed the entire enterprise.

The very fact that Morgan was allowed to purchase the White Star Line was an (allegedly) inexplicable anomaly.  Foreign (i.e. non-British nationals) were prohibited by law from owning British shipping lines at that time – and yet Morgan was allowed by the British government to purchase the White Star Line from J. Bruce Ismay, its previous owner.  This of course begs the question ‘why?’

I believe that all available evidence points to the fact that JP Morgan had struck a deal with the British government of the day as part of the negotiations allowing him to take-over White Star, a British company and this consisted of Morgan allowing the government to requisition all White Star ships in the event of an upcoming war.  There is no doubt that it was common knowledge at that time that a war was inevitable. 

The government readily agreed to this deal because at that time the incumbent Liberal administration was under pressure with a very slim majority and they knew only too well that if Harland and Wolff and the White Star Line went under then this would put upwards of 50,000 people out of work and that they would have no chance of winning the next general election.  And furthermore, equally if not more importantly, Morgan agreed that, upon taking-over that any White Star line ship could be requisitioned as troop carriers in the event of war, which as stated above was becoming increasingly inevitable. 

Should the worst have happened and the WSL had been bankrupted, there is no doubt that Morgan would have exercised his rights as the major creditor and seized the company’s major assets, the ships themselves.  The government of course, knew this only too well and so acquiesced to his demands.

Iceberg Collision Hypothesis: "Can you elaborate on the iceberg collision hypothesis and its credibility?"

The apocryphal story of Titanic’s untimely ending, accepted for more than one hundred years, is that she hit an iceberg and foundered in the deepest part of the North Atlantic Ocean.  However, there are too many anomalies and downright misleading statements, not to mention blatant untruths and sheer impossibilities, surrounding the story to take this all at face value.

The generally accepted version of events states that the ship collided with and bumped along a protruding ice shelf on an iceberg which caused an intermittent ‘rip’ in the superstructure almost 300 feet in length, causing six of the watertight compartments to flood and thus guaranteeing her a one-way ticket to the ocean floor.  But I would suggest that had the perforations in the ship’s hull been caused by a piece of ice protruding from an iceberg, the impact would have broken off huge pieces of this ‘shelf’ and these would have found their way into the interior of the ship. 

However, there were no reports of any ice whatsoever inside the ship, only ice that found its way onto the forward well deck.  But this could easily have been the result of the engines being abruptly thrust into reverse while the liner was travelling forward at a speed of around 22 knots.  The air temperature at this point was well below zero and large deposits of ice would undoubtedly have formed on masts, rigging and deck structures, only to be shaken off as the ship shuddered to a halt. 

Then when we examine the huge rent in the side of the ship itself, it turns out that it was 1.6 metres deep (more than 5 feet) through the outer steel plates and into the inner skin!  Compacted ice is known to be very strong, indeed stronger than steel under certain conditions, but there is no evidence that I am aware of that it is capable of doing such catastrophic damage to steel.  In addition the relatively narrow, 15cm (6 inch) puncture line in the ship’s hull in conjunction with a penetration of around 1.6m would indicate an almost impossibly shaped ice outcrop colliding with the ship at exactly the most critical point.  Surely an icy protuberance of these dimensions (5 feet x 6 inches) would have been easily snapped-off before causing such alleged devastating damage to one inch-thick steel plating?

There is no doubt that there was an iceberg that drifted past, extremely close to the liner at the time of the ‘incident’ but in my humble view it is highly unlikely that an iceberg could cause the generally accepted damage to the ship.  There are credible eye-witness reports of a ’yellow funnelled steamer’ in very close proximity to the liner that could have been responsible for the possibly deliberate, devastating damage.

But I would suggest that the iceberg theory may also be discounted for another credible reason.  In those days it was common practice for shipping lines to decree that the forwardmost two lifeboats be swung out over the deck rails and immediately above the ocean in readiness for possible ‘man overboard’ situations. In this the White Star Line was no exception.  This means that had an iceberg scraped along the starboard bow and for 300 feet down the side of Titanic, then this lifeboat would have been severely damaged if not dislodged or destroyed altogether.  And we know for a fact that this lifeboat was definitely launched and used in the rescue of passengers, as well as it being completely damage-free.

The Californian's Unique Voyage: "The Californian set out five days before the Titanic, reportedly without passengers and carrying only sweaters. What significance do you attribute to this unusual voyage?"

Californian was a medium-sized liner of the Leyland Line (significantly, part of JP Morgan’s IMM conglomerate), captained by Stanley Lord.  She was 6223 tons gross registered weight (about one eighth that of Titanic) and was 447 feet long (about half that of Titanic).

It is indeed a strange fact that on Friday 5^th April 1912, she left London, England ostensibly bound for Boston, USA, with no passengers and a very unusual cargo to say the least.  Despite the coal strike in Britain that had been ongoing for around five weeks at this time and also despite the fact that there was a massive backlog of potential fare-paying passengers desperately waiting for passages across the Atlantic, she carried no passengers at all and appeared to leave in an inordinate hurry.  So abruptly in fact that the sole wireless operator on board, Cyril Evans, had no time to collect his wireless chart, an important piece of equipment as it denoted the relative, expected positions of ships in the North Atlantic for the duration of the voyage.

So, to reiterate; she carried no passengers, was somehow fully coaled in the midst of a lengthy coal strike and then we have the cargo itself… She was in fact carrying 3000 woollen sweaters and 3000 woollen blankets, yet nothing else at all! 

In addition to all the above, an interesting fact regarding Captain Stanley Lord is that almost eight years earlier on 5^th September 1904, he was commander of the British troop transport ship, the Antillian and earned a commendation for transferring 1000 men and their equipment from lifeboats to the ship in the middle of the night in under one hour, during a seaborne invasion exercise.  How useful would this experience and his undoubted skills have been in light of JP Morgan’s ostensible plans for him and the Titanic?!

Californian was a much slower ship than Titanic having a top speed of only 12 knots, this being around half that of Titanic.  In effect this meant that after 10 days at sea, she would be in the approximate same position as Titanic would be after 5 days at sea… and so it proved.  Californian left England 5 days before Titanic and so after 10 days elapsed time, sure enough, they were in the same ice field just off the Grand Banks in the North Atlantic Ocean at the same time on the fateful night of 14^th / 15^th April 1912.  Coincidence?  Maybe, but I think not.  One coincidence is always a possibility, but this coupled with all the other conveniently synchronistic facts, tends to point towards some kind of planning being involved, in my humble view.  I am no mathematician, but the odds against all those synchronous, serendipitous events occurring must be astronomical I would have thought. 

So, Californian had left London five days prior to Titanic in what can only be described as a race against time to take up her allotted position in the ice field in order to facilitate the hoax of the century taking place. 

Crew Recruitment Struggles: "Is it accurate that for the Titanic's maiden voyage, there was difficulty in recruiting enough crew despite a severe workforce shortage at the time? How do you explain this phenomenon?"

As related above, at the time of Titanic’s maiden voyage, indeed her only voyage, there had been a coal strike ongoing for the previous six weeks or so.  This meant that in contrast to the text of this question, that there was an absolute army of seafaring men and women out of work and desperate to gain employment.  And yet, despite this fact, WSL still had severe difficulties in recruiting a crew for the maiden voyage as word had no doubt got around through the grapevine, that not all was as it seemed with the great liner!

This would make perfect sense.  There must have been ‘leaks’ of information regarding the switch, despite WSL’s best efforts to contain them within the dockyard. 

And significantly, of the transit crew responsible for the safe passage of Titanic from Belfast to Southampton in preparation for the maiden voyage, only TWO of the stokers and engineer contingent signed on for the maiden voyage!  And both of these men actually ‘jumped ship’ at Queenstown before Titanic set sail across the Atlantic.  What conclusions are we to draw from this fact alone?

Rudder Number on the Sunken Ship: "In your research, what have you found about the number on the rudder of the sunken ship identified as the Titanic? What does this number indicate?"

Does this question refer to Titanic’s build number which is ‘401’, stamped on the propeller still visible on the seabed?  If so then this is highly significant.  Debunkers of this version of events state that this proves that it is the original Titanic down there and not Olympic.  Olympic’s build number was actually ‘400’, so at first glance this may seem to be conclusive.  However, we also know that due to Olympic’s earlier accidents that propellers were borrowed from the still under construction Titanic, so sadly for the doubters this argument does not stand up to logic.

M and P Letters on the Wreckage: "In your research, you've mentioned the discovery of the letters 'M' and 'P' on the Titanic's wreckage. Can you elaborate on the importance of this finding and what it might suggest?"

There is some photographic evidence to suggest that the letters ‘M’ and ‘P’ are visible on the bow nameplate of the underwater wreck.

The names ‘Olympic’ and ‘Titanic’ which had been engraved on the bows of the two vessels were of course surreptitiously replaced too, by a Mr. Williams.  Apparently, Williams’ compensation for this secretive work was extra holidays with pay and promotion to a better job with higher rates of pay and a guaranteed ‘job for life’.  He was also allegedly provided with a better house, closer to the shipyard – all of course at the company’s expense.  Apparently also, when the White Star Line was taken over by Cunard in the early 1930s, Mr. Williams was still employed by Harland and Wolff at this time.

The ships’ names on their sterns required alterations too.  The stern nameplate required a slightly different approach as it was an actual ‘plate’ with raised lettering spelling out ‘OLYMPIC’ and ‘TITANIC’, and ‘LIVERPOOL’ beneath each name.  Williams simply ground off the original nameplates and replaced it with the new one.  Of course the ‘new’ Titanic was not expected to have a very long life and so less care was taken than it otherwise may have been, as a result.  Indeed, while the ship was undergoing its plunge to the floor of the North Atlantic Ocean, the stresses involved must have dislodged it and the stern nameplate is now actually missing.

Inconsistencies with the Ship’s Structure: "Robert Ballard found an unexpected longitudinal bulkhead in the wreck, which wasn’t a part of the original Olympic class design. What implications does this have for our understanding of the ship's identity and construction?"

As related in the answer to a previous question, Ballard was puzzled by the discovery of the steel struts used to temporarily brace the keel of the ship on the seabed.  These struts did not appear in the original blueprints for obvious reasons as they were obviously an addition due to the ‘Hawke’ incident.  This constitutes further evidence of the identity switch.

The Starboard Hole: "There's a hole on the starboard side of the hull, identified by a French explosives expert as resulting from an internal explosion. How does this finding challenge the traditional iceberg collision theory?"

The hole is believed by researchers including myself to be the result of a ongoing, unextinguished fire which was raging in coal bunker 10 throughout the voyage.

There is a record of an outbreak of fire in Titanic’s coal bunker number ten, before she set sail on Wednesday 10^th April.  It surely could have been extinguished in port at Southampton before she set sail and indeed there is no reasonable excuse for it not to have been.  With all that great port’s state of the art fire-fighting facilities this would only have marginally delayed her planned departure time.  Instead of this however, an additional twelve firemen were signed-on to extinguish the blaze at sea.  In addition, efforts were made to conceal the fire from Maurice Harvey Clarke, the Board of Trade inspector who was responsible for the final inspection of the vessel before her departure.  This leaves us with an absolute plethora of unanswered and indeed unanswerable questions…

Why did Captain Smith not have the fire extinguished before setting sail and why would a captain of his standing, risk not only passengers and crew, but the greatest ocean liner ever built along with his own reputation and the opinion of history?  Why did he behave so irresponsibly and conceal the existence of the fire?  Could the fire or some internal structural damage account for the ship’s slight list to port in calm seas before the collision, as noted by several witnesses?  Was there some undeclared damage to account for this, such as a leak in the superstructure? Had the ship already been taking on water before she ‘hit the iceberg’? Why after the alleged collision with the iceberg did Smith run the engines slow ahead for several minutes, as attested by to by several witnesses, a move which would have certainly resulted in further flooding of the forward compartments?  Why was ‘counter-flooding’ or trimming not attempted as a means of keeping the ship on an even keel for longer?  Why did Robert Ballard find a bulkhead not on his plan of the Titanic when exploring the wreck and which could easily have been the one placed in Olympic to brace her keel after the Hawke incident?

It is also alleged that there was not only a fire but also an explosion in the boiler room before she set sail, which would certainly have resulted in damage to the ship’s hull at the bow below the waterline. The iceberg purportedly cracked the plates for 300 feet along the ship’s side, but the hole near the bow (see photo below) looks more like it was the result of an internal explosion which blew the hull from the inside out.  Coal bunker fires have been employed as a modus operandus for sabotaging ships since the American Civil War (1861-65).  The ploy consists of inserting gelignite inside a piece of coal, so that when it is shovelled into the furnace, it causes an explosion powerful enough to tear a hole in the hull.

White Paint on the Hull: "There appears to be white paint on the hull, suggesting it could be the Olympic, which had been painted white for clearer photographic shots. Could you elaborate on this?"

The undercoat of the original Titanic was black and Olympic’s was white (some say grey).

There is compelling photographic evidence to suggest that the ship on the seabed has traces of white/grey undercoat showing through the black topcoat…

Treatment of Surviving Crew: "Once the surviving crew of the Titanic were brought back to England, what actions were taken towards them, particularly in terms of legal or administrative procedures?"

Upon arriving back in England at Plymouth docks, from New York aboard the steamer Lapland, two weeks after the disaster, 173 of the surviving Titanic crew members both male and female were firstly, illegally denied their rights to speak with their trade union representatives.  Then in addition they were also illegally detained overnight against their wishes (I believe the common terminology for this act is unlawful imprisonment or even kidnapping) in a containing area within the dockyard itself where they were forced to sign a document that they believed was the British Government’s recently introduced legislation in the form of the ‘Official Secrets Act’, promising to keep secret forever, the actual events of the night of 14^th / 15^th April 1912.  Otherwise, they were told, they would be prosecuted and ‘never work again’, not just for White Star but for any other employer.  In those now long-gone days, the inability to procure gainful employment could be almost a death sentence to the crews and their families. 

So, make of that what you will, but I can personally think of no reason why this should happen if the official version of events was the truth.  It is also worth noting that also in those days it was far easier without mass and instantaneous communication devices, to invent or twist facts and bury individuals’ own stories.  Today of course, any of the survivors’ personal experiences would be viral on the Internet within hours of the event.

Over the course of the next twenty-four hours, 138 crew members provided written depositions of their own personal experiences of the disaster but again significantly, not a single one of these was ever made public and neither were any submitted as evidence at the British Inquiry.  Surely this has to be regarded as suspicious in the extreme?  How could it be at all possible that none of the statements were relevant to the enquiry?

In actual fact, they were quietly buried, lost, or destroyed, containing as they did what must have been crucial evidence.  No-one knows or at least has laid claim to knowing, what happened to them.  Are they still in existence, locked away in a secret file somewhere in the Harland and Wolff or Cunard (the eventual acquirer of White Star Line) archives – or do they reside within the offices of MI5 in some dusty, forgotten corner of their document storage facilities?  We will almost certainly never know the answer to that and in fact I would be willing to bet that they have actually been secretly destroyed in order to obviate the possibility of them ever seeing the light of day again and thus incriminating the perpetrators of this terrible incident, albeit posthumously.

The following day, the ‘prisoners’ were at last allowed to leave the secure compound and were finally reunited with their much-relieved family and friends, many of whom had travelled to Plymouth by train from Southampton, to greet their relatives upon their arrival back on home soil once more.

Intention to Save Lives: "Based on your analysis, is it fair to say that there was an initial intention to save the lives onboard the Titanic, but a series of errors and unexpected events ultimately led to the tragic loss of life?"

I believe that it was absolutely the intention to save the passengers.  The idea was that Californian would be standing by complete with her 3000 blankets and sweaters to pick up the survivors.

Several passengers said afterwards that they had been told by WSL staff that the Californian was on its way to pick them up.  Yet Californian was totally incommunicado 19 miles away with its wireless switched off and beyond visible contact.  And there had been no communications between the two ships at all at that point, other than Californian reporting her position several hours earlier, which could be regarded as extremely significant!

Sadly though, for some inexplicable reason, Californian’s wireless was switched off for the night sometime after 11pm and it was therefore unable to receive any communications at all from Titanic.

Insurance Payout Details: "Can you provide details on the insurance payout following the Titanic disaster? What implications did this have for the ship's owners and investors?"

WSL normally insured ships for 75% of their value.  Titanic’s build costs were around £2.5m so therefore the payout for Titanic should have been around £1.8m but in fact the insurance on Titanic was upped the week before the maiden voyage to £3.2m!!  Nothing at all suspicious there then!

Lloyds of London paid out in full within a week of the disaster!  Its (very strange) logic being that ‘of course the disaster happened, there is no disputing that.’  However this ignores the possibility of an identity switch and therefore insurance fraud.

Of course, the badly damaged Olympic (soon to become Titanic) was completely uninsurable, having previously been declared a wreck.

The insurance payment in effect saved WSL AND Harland and Wolff shipyard from bankruptcy.

Inquiries and Their Outcomes: "What were the key findings of the inquiries into the Titanic disaster?"

Even at the time, both enquiries, the American and British were widely thought to be ‘whitewashes’.  No witnesses were called from the passenger contingent except for the Gordon family of the famous gin company.  No witnesses were allowed to give personal evidence and were strictly forbidden from speaking other than to give simple answers to direct questions with no elaboration.

The American Inquiry

Within 2 days of Carpathia’s arrival in New York with the Titanic passengers and crew onboard, an Inquiry into the incident was convened, although ‘Inquiry’ is perhaps stretching it a little.  Perhaps a more accurate description would be a ‘whitewash’ or ‘cover-up’ carried out by the United States Government in collusion with the British Government, JP Morgan and White Star Line. 

The Inquiry was headed-up by Senator William Alden Smith and it was he who undertook the responsibility for most of the questioning of witnesses.  I use the word ‘questioning’ in the loosest sense of the word, however.  He barely posed a pertinent question at all throughout the eighteen days of the proceedings and as was to be the case with his counterpart, Lord Mersey at the British Inquiry the following month, he obviously had a pre-determined agenda and outcome he wished to see achieved.  It was also widely believed that he used the publicity generated by this Inquiry as a vehicle to further his own personal, political ambitions and as a form of self-promotion.

It was Senator Smith also who first exposed to the wider world the pre-determined scapegoat, Captain Stanley Lord of the Californian and of course this was instrumental in diverting away attention from the real facts of the matter.  Titanic could not possibly have been seen from Californian due to their great distance from each other (about twenty miles) and so the one solitary person who stated that he definitely saw the stricken ship, seaman Ernest Gill, must have been either coerced into lying or have had his own agenda of personal aggrandisement in much the same vein as the good Senator himself. 

Unfortunately for Captain Lord and his reputation, Smith either believed Gill, or used his conveniently false testimony to further his own agenda.  Smith proclaimed, as was Lord Mersey to do the following month, that the much vaunted ‘mystery ship’ visible from Titanic as she foundered could only have been Californian and therefore Lord and his officers and crew were culpable of failing to respond to another vessel’s distress signals.

Smith also purported to believe that had Californian intervened as he asserted she should, all those who died that night, may have lived.

The final report of the Inquiry, regarding the Californian issue…

“The committee is forced to the inevitable conclusion that the Californian, controlled by the same company, was nearer the Titanic than the 19 miles reported by her Captain, and that her officers and crew saw the distress signals of the Titanic and failed to respond to them in accordance with the dictates of humanity, international usage, and the requirements of law. The only reply to the distress signals was a counter signal from a large white light which was flashed for nearly two hours from the mast of the Californian. In our opinion such conduct, whether arising from indifference or gross carelessness, is most reprehensible, and places upon the commander the Californian a grave responsibility. The wireless operator of the Californian was not aroused until 3.30 a.m., New York time, on the morning of the 15th, after considerable conversation between officers and members of the crew had taken place aboard that ship regarding these distress signals or rockets and was directed by the Chief Officer to see there was anything the matter, as a ship had been firing rockets during the night. The inquiry thus set on foot immediately disclosed the fact that the Titanic had sunk. Had assistance been promptly proffered or had wireless operator of the Californian remained a few minutes longer at his post on Sunday evening, that ship might have had the proud distinction of rescuing the lives of the passengers and crew of the Titanic.”

In defence of Stanley Lord, had Californian been where Smith erroneously determined her to be and had the crew seen Titanic’s rockets, he was most definitely the right man for the job of rescuing the 2000 plus souls on board, given his previous credentials in that particular skill set.  However, as we know, it was in fact Samson, the illegal seal hunting ship that the crew of Californian had seen in the distance firing rockets.

Lord’s estimate of 19 miles away was probably almost right and at that distance it would not have been possible to see Titanic’s distress flares due to the limitations of the human eye (even with binoculars or a telescope).  As he quite rightly commented; he had absolutely nothing to lose and everything to gain by affecting a rescue, so surely, had he been aware of a ship in trouble in close proximity, this is exactly what he would have done.

As a result of Smith’s (and Lord Mersey’s later) proclamations, Stanley Lord was labelled as the guilty party and this subtly deflected away the blame from White Star and its employees, as no doubt was the intention all along.  It is significant I believe that Lord was never charged with a misdemeanour of any sort under which circumstances he would have had the opportunity to defend himself – and his subsequent, multiple requests for a hearing and to have charges brought against him (to allow him to put his case) were all denied.

It probably goes without saying that Smith’s Senatorial election campaign had been largely financed by our old friend JP Morgan, as had that of President William Taft, so it is totally unsurprising that the American Inquiry did not wish to reveal the true events.  And of course, unsurprisingly, the ‘mystery’ ships known to have been in the area at the time, were never alluded to despite the fact that there were several witnesses who officially reported them.  Indeed, any witness statements at all that contradicted the official line were ignored or blatantly side-stepped. 

The testimony given by Titanic’s officers, especially Lightoller’s was extremely telling.  Second Officer Charles Herbert Lightoller, defender-in-chief of the White Star ‘party line’ spent more time giving evidence than any other witness.  To say that he was evasive, bordering on aggressive, yet sometimes contradictory would be a fair and accurate summation of his performance on the witness stand.  On more than one occasion he deftly deflected Senator Smith’s questions whilst not even attempting to hide his belief that he was dealing with an ignoramus in nautical matters (which of course Smith was).  Obviously his extensive maritime experience gave him the upper hand and he steadfastly defended his employers, the White Star Line, as he had no doubt been cajoled and coached to do, by his boss, Bruce Ismay, Managing Director of WSL.  His description of the so-called sea-trials in Belfast Lough earlier that month and the subsequent safety inspections that had taken place in Southampton completely glossed-over the real facts and emphasised the myth that Titanic was indeed a safe ship on which to sail.  He then went on, under questioning, to describe his own role in the events of 14^th / 15^th April.

He told of how he had commenced duty at 6 pm on the Sunday evening, the 14^th April.  At around 9 pm, Captain Smith had returned to the Bridge to resume his duties after his party in the First Class restaurant (a fact which of course was not mentioned in evidence) and that they had remarked upon the unusually clear air and calm sea conditions that evening.  According to Lightoller, he had then related to Smith that he estimated that they would be entering an icefield at around 11 pm and they subsequently discussed how they might easily recognise ice and icebergs, when initially seen.  They spoke for about twenty minutes and just before departing for (what turned out to be) his short stint on the sofa, Smith asked Lightoller to ensure that should there be any cause for concern regarding the conditions, that the vessels speed should be significantly reduced.  However we know that this did not happen for whatever reason.  Lightoller also related how he had instructed Moody, the Sixth Officer to make the lookouts aware that they were in an icefield and that they should be extremely vigilant. 

Also, significantly, Lightoller told the Inquiry that he had seen no ice warnings that evening and regarded the speed at which they were travelling was safe in the prevailing conditions.  First Officer Murdoch arrived to relieve Lightoller at 10pm and they had a short discussion about the unusual weather conditions and the clear visibility.  According to Lightoller, he also apprised Murdoch regarding the Captain’s instructions before retiring.  This of course was all rather convenient for Lightoller.  As neither Murdoch nor the Captain survived the incident, there was no-one to corroborate Lightoller’s version of events and we could be forgiven perhaps for feeling that in the diversion of blame from himself, he was in fact shifting it onto others who were unable to defend themselves any longer – specifically First Officer William McMaster Murdoch (deceased).

According to Lightoller he had been dozing in his bunk when the incident happened.  What first attracted his attention was that the engines had stopped altogether and that the ship was, as a result, slowing down.  (Note that he did not mention feeling an impact of any kind.)  At this point he went on to the deck to investigate as his curiosity had got the better of him and ran into Third Officer Pitman, who had also been stirred into action by the stopping of the engines.  However they decided between them it was nothing to worry about and headed back to their respective cabins to sleep after a brief chat about how they thought they had hit something.  Lightoller then explained how about ten minutes later, Fourth Officer Boxhall had knocked on his cabin door and relayed the news that they had collided with an iceberg and were shipping water. 

Lightoller claimed during his interrogation by Smith that there had been no panic, that everyone had remained calm and that there had been no prevention of Third Class passengers accessing the boat deck.  According to his testimony, he instructed the crew members in the lifeboats to row towards the ship whose lights were visible on the horizon and then he described, playing to the crowd now (and accompanied by laughter), that it was the ship that had ‘left him’ by sinking from under him, when asked how he left the ship. 

He then went on to relate how he rescued himself by climbing aboard an upturned lifeboat, upon which thirty others eventually joined him and they remained there for most of the night leaning first this way then that way, under Lightoller’s instructions, as the unstable boat rocked in the water with its swaying cargo of people, many of them up to their knees in the ice-cold water.  After several hours, another lifeboat at last came alongside and took them on board until they were later picked-up by Carpathia.  Of course Smith never asked the obvious question (either of Lightoller or an expert witness) and that was how on earth Lightoller managed to survive the extreme cold, soaked to the skin as he must have been, after prolonged immersion in those frigid waters.  The life expectancy in water so cold is approximately 4 minutes.

At this point he was released from further questioning but instructed to remain available should he be required.

Next to ‘face the music’ was Joseph Boxhall, Fourth Officer, who explained that he had just left the officers’ quarters on the starboard side (the side the alleged iceberg struck, when he heard three bells sound, immediately followed by a ‘grinding sound’.  According to him, he gave it no further thought and did not even pause for a moment to wonder what it was.  Note please that at this point he should have been clearly in a position to see any iceberg passing by, in fact according to others’ description of it, it absolutely towered above the ship, but Boxhall did not even mention this and of course nor did Smith even ask him why not.  In actual fact had Boxhall really been where he said he was then he would have been literally only a few paltry feet from this monstrous mountain of ice that supposedly sank Titanic.  To blithely state that he gave it no further thought and did not even wonder what it was, when he must have been within touching distance of it is too absurd to even contemplate.

Anyway, moving swiftly on… apparently, according to Boxhall, he was then approaching the Bridge and heard Murdoch order ‘hard-a-starboard’ and Murdoch subsequently told him that he had also ordered the engines ‘full astern’ (reverse) but that they were already too close and they could not avoid the iceberg.   If indeed Titanic had been taken from ‘full speed ahead’ to ‘full astern’ almost in an instant as Murdoch claimed, then this would have created a shock wave through the ship that would have thrown people to the floor and absolutely everyone on board would have noticed it.  Of course, Boxhall never mentioned anything of that nature, but simply went on to say that Murdoch had ‘intended to port-around it’ and that Murdoch then closed the watertight doors.  Then apparently, according to him, they all went outside on to the open bridge-wing where he ‘thought’ he could see a low-lying growler, but of course he could not be certain.  Oh what a tangled web we weave…  The fact that he was not subject to further questions from the Inquiry committee regarding this blatant concoction, speaks volumes about their overall intent.

Next it was the turn of Fifth Officer, Harold Lowe.  Senator Smith asked Lowe an interesting question, and the following conversation ensued:

Smith: “Are you a temperate man?”

Lowe: “I am sir. I never touched it in my life.  I am an abstainer.”

Smith: “I am very glad to have you say that.”

Lowe: “I say it sir, without fear of contradiction.”

Smith: “I am not contradicting you and I congratulate you upon it but so many stories have been circulated; one has just been passed up to me now from a very reputable man who says it was reported that you were drinking that night.”

Lowe: “Me, sir?”

Smith: “That is why I am asking the question.”

Lowe: “No sir. This (indicating a glass of water) is the strongest drink I ever take.”

Smith had prior to this line of questioning asked Lowe in the most minute of details, about the sea-trials and the voyage from Belfast to Southampton and lifeboat drills in general and his part in the voyage up to the moment the iceberg struck.  Lowe insisted that he had been asleep and not noticed an impact of any kind.

As time passed, it became increasingly more difficult to obtain statements from witnesses as they all made their way home or simply to their onward destinations.  Many were taken as affidavits.  Catherine Crosby, an American First Class passenger, in hers wrote that…

“…it was reported on the Carpathia by passengers, whose names I do not recollect, that the lookout who was on duty at the time the Titanic struck the iceberg had said: ‘I know they will blame me for it, because I was on duty, but it was not my fault; I had warned the officers three or four times before striking the iceberg that we were in the vicinity of icebergs, but the officer on the bridge paid no attention to my signals.’  I cannot give the name of any passenger who made that statement, but it was common talk on the Carpathia that that is what the lookout said…

…Mr. Elmer Taylor informed me after we got on the Carpathia that a dinner was in progress at the time the boat struck, this banquet was given for the Captain and the wine flowed freely.”

Eventually Quartermaster Robert Hichens, the helmsman at the time of the incident, was examined by Smith…

Smith:  “I wish you would tell me now, in your own way, what happened that night from the time you went on watch until the collision occurred?”

Hichens:  “Standing by, waiting for another message – it is the duty of the quartermaster to strike the bell every half hour – as the standby quartermaster sir, I heard the second officer repeat to Mr Moody, the Sixth Officer, to speak through the telephone, warning the lookout men in the crow’s nest to keep a sharp look out for small ice until daylight and pass the word along to the other lookout men.  The next order I received from the second officer was to go and find the deck engineer and bring up the key to open the heaters up in the corridor of the officers’ quarters, also in the wheelhouse and the chartroom on account of the intense cold.  At a quarter to ten I called the first officer, Mr Murdoch, to let him know it was one bell, which is part of our duty and also took the thermometer and barometer, the temperature of the water and the log. 

At 10 o’clock I went to the wheel sir. Mr. Murdoch came up to relieve Mr. Lightoller.  I had the course given me from the other quartermaster; north 71 west which I repeated to him and he went and reported it to the first officer or second officer in charge which he repeated back – the course sir.  All went along very well until twenty minutes to twelve when three gongs come from the lookout and immediately afterwards a report on the telephone ‘iceberg right ahead’.  The Chief Officer rushed from the wings to the bridge, or I imagine so sir.  Certainly I am enclosed in the wheelhouse and I cannot see, only my compass.  He rushed to the engines.  I heard the telegraph bell ring and also give the order, ‘Hard-a-starboard,’ with the sixth officer standing by me to see the duty carried out and the quartermaster standing by my left side.  Repeated the order, ‘Hard-a-starboard, the helm is hard over.’”

Of course this is all at variance with the real sequence of events but Hichens had obviously been well-drilled by Ismay and Lightoller on Carpathia, during the short trip to New York.

The outcome of the Inquiry, as one would expect was that there was no real blame to be attached to the White Star Line, IMM or the officers and crew of Titanic.  In fact the sole major conclusion seemed to be that Captain Stanley Lord and Californian was the villain of the piece.  Also Joseph Bruce Ismay, as well as Captain Lord, was singled out for particular criticism and chastised for living while so many others drowned.  The real truth about Ismay’s escape will never be known of course.  Did he make his escape as a coward or was he just ordered into the lifeboat as he claimed?

The whitewash that was the American Inquiry may be summed-up succinctly in Senator Smith’s proclamation in his closing speech…

“…I am well aware from the testimony of the captain of the Californian that he deluded himself with the idea that there was a ship between the Titanic and the Californian, but there was no ship seen there at daybreak and no intervening rockets were seen by anyone on the Titanic, although they were looking longingly for such a sign and only saw the white light of the Californian, which was flashed the moment the ship struck and taken down when the vessel sank. A ship would not have been held there if it had been eastbound, and she could not have gone west without passing the Californian on the north or the Titanic on the south. That ice floe held but two ships - the Titanic and the Californian. The conduct of the captain of the Californian calls for drastic action by the Government of England and by the owners of that vessel, who were the same owners as those of the ill-fated ship.”

But, as a pointer to what really happened, the American Inquiry can be totally discounted on the basis that a pre-determined outcome was both sought and more importantly, achieved.

But would the British Inquiry, bring us a more accurate picture of events…?

The British Inquiry

The venue chosen for the Inquiry was the Scottish Drill Hall in London and it was announced that the proceedings would be presided over by Lord Mersey, who had been involved in several other controversial hearings of a similar nature.  Obviously Mersey, a pillar of the British establishment of the day, could be relied-upon to bring the required conclusion to bear – as indeed he had on all the other occasions he had been called-upon to do the same.  Sir Rufus Isaacs was to represent the British Board of Trade… the self-same organisation that had set the inadequate lifeboat levels for ships of the size of Olympic and Titanic, as well as several other, by this time, out-dated maritime regulations.

As per the recommendations of the Board of Trade, White Star decided to carry only twenty lifeboats with a maximum capacity of 1,178.  Although the Olympic class had been designed for thirty-two lifeboats, Ismay insisted on only twenty mainly for purely aesthetic reasons but also in order that First Class passengers could enjoy the benefits of a ‘promenade’ deck.  It was only subsequent to the disaster that the Board of Trade revisited its regulations and made it mandatory for all ships to carry sufficient lifeboats for all on board and most importantly of all, to have regular lifeboat drills.

The Scottish Drill Hall was a strange choice for an event of this nature (or maybe not?).  Its acoustics were known to be extremely poor and as this was well before the days of electrical sound amplification, speakers and microphones et al, many of the press and spectators from the general public found it difficult, if not downright impossible, to follow the proceedings at all.

Mersey had indeed served the British establishment very well on many previous occasions and he was the Government’s man of choice whenever they needed a certain result to be ‘fixed’ in any inquiry.  He was, among other similar appointments, chair of the British Inquiry into the loss of the Cunard liner Lusitania in 1915, where he once again exonerated the Government of any culpability in the affair although the very facts of the matter, when closely scrutinised, say very different.  Just the simple fact that Mersey was the man chosen to oversee the British Inquiry into the Titanic incident is in itself a good enough reason to conclude that the outcome was a travesty.

“At the inquiry in London, it was very necessary to keep one’s hand on the whitewash brush.  Sharp questions that needed clever answers, if one was to avoid a pitfall, carefully, subtly dug, leading to a pinning-down of blame onto someone’s luckless shoulders.  I think in the end the White Star Line won.”  Excerpt from Charles H. Lightoller’s autobiography, ‘Titanic and Other Ships’.

And so it was that the Inquiry eventually commenced on the 2^nd May 1912.  The assessors had a list of 26 questions to which they ostensibly needed answers, but only of course should those answers lie within the parameters of acceptability by Mersey.  The first eight referred to events before Titanic had received any ice warnings, followed by six that related to the ice warnings themselves that were received from other vessels and what the process had been in order to deal with them.  The next one (note, one only!) actually related to the alleged impact itself and questions 16 to 24 were concerned with the aftermath and actions taken to save both the ship and its passengers and crew.  Finally there was a question regarding the design and construction of the ship, and one about the rules relating to ‘immigrant’ ships and whether or not they needed an overhaul.  Very broadly speaking, it was virtually the same crew and passenger witnesses called to the stand, as were questioned in the American Inquiry with the exception that unlike the American Inquiry, where no passengers gave evidence at all, one passenger only, the distinguished Sir Cosmo Duff Gordon, he of ‘Gordon’s Gin’ fame, was arraigned for questioning.

Harold Sanderson a White Star Line director, repeatedly referred to the name of the ship that sank as ‘Olympic’ and not ‘Titanic’.  This happened on at least 12 separate occasions in his testimony to the British Inquiry.

As was its previously held counterpart on the other side of the ocean, the British Inquiry was a complete sham.  Mersey prevented anything that did not fit his preconceived outcome from being aired, shouting-down or even simply ignoring any statements that contradicted the desired conclusions.  Indeed, the outcome was never in any doubt and the findings were unsurprisingly very much the same as before.  Of course the British Government in general, White Star Line and the Board of Trade in particular were absolved of any blame or involvement in the disaster whatsoever and Captain Lord of the Californian was again deemed to be guilty of failing to aid Titanic, despite the fact that he was never formally accused of any misdemeanour and at which time therefore, he would of course have had a reasonable opportunity to defend himself.  The only significant difference between the two inquiries was that Ismay was exonerated of any culpability by the British Inquiry.

Of course Stanley Lord was absolutely incensed by the findings and did not let it rest there.  For the remainder of his long life (he died in 1962), he tried periodically to petition the Government to formally charge him with failing to go to the aid of another vessel after ignoring distress signals.  Of course, this avenue was denied him.  The last thing that the government wanted was Captain Lord being placed in a position where he would be given the opportunity to formally submit his side of the sorry affair, complete naturally, with skilled legal representation who would have been able to tear the official story apart.

Of course, because of the British Government’s refusal to formally charge him with any offence, Captain Lord also never had the opportunity or the platform to explain why he had constantly asked that night if there were coloured rockets being launched from the ship plainly visible from Californian and which was definitely not Titanic as she was far too small.  Neither was he ever asked why he retired for the night on a small sofa and not in his cabin or how enough coal had been sourced to fuel his ship when so many other vessels could not sail at that time due to the coal strike.  He was also never asked why a cargo of woollens and blankets were deemed so important and why he had departed London in such seemingly indecent haste and then stopped for the night in an icefield when it was not normal maritime practice so to do.  He also never got to explain his answer to a newspaper reporter shortly after Californian reached Boston after this eventful episode, when a reporter asked Lord what the position of his vessel was at the fateful moment.  Lord flatly refused to give an answer on the basis that he was being asked ‘state secrets’.  This remark alone strongly points to the fact there was indeed some kind of conspiracy taking place, at the very least between Lord and the British Government, but probably much more far-reaching than that.

(When questioned by the press at the time, Captain Lord of the Californian had said, and I quote… “I am not allowed to give out state secrets.  You will have to ask those ‘in the office!’”)

Current and Future Work: "Finally, could you tell us about your current projects and how people can stay updated with your work?"

My eight books to date are:

• ‘The Falsification of History’ (2012)

• ‘RMS Olympic’ (the REAL Titanic story) (2013)

• ‘Titanic’s Last Secret’ (a novel based on the above) (2014)

• ‘Behind the Curtain’ volume 1 (2016)

• ‘Behind the Curtain’ volume 2 (2016)

• ‘JFK – A Very British Coup’ (2019)

• ‘The Falsification of Science’ (2021)

• ‘Welcome to the Masquerade’ (2022)

Work in progress:

‘2034’ (publication expected late 2024)

My UK Amazon author page: Amazon.co.uk: John Hamer: books, biography, latest update

For Amazon in other countries simply type in John Hamer into the Amazon search bar.

My website: falsificationofhistory.co.uk

My channel is ‘John Hamer Official’: John Hamer Official (bitchute.com)

Thank You for Being Part of Our Community

Your presence here is greatly valued. If you've found the content interesting and useful, please consider supporting it through a paid subscription. While all our resources are freely available, your subscription plays a vital role. It helps in covering some of the operational costs and supports the continuation of this independent research and journalism work. Please make full use of our Free Libraries.

Discover Our Free Libraries:

Unbekoming Interview Library: Dive into a world of thought-provoking interviews across a spectrum of fascinating topics.

Unbekoming Book Summary Library: Explore concise summaries of groundbreaking books, distilled for efficient understanding.

Hear From Our Subscribers: Check out the [Subscriber Testimonials] to see the impact of this Substack on our readers.

Share Your Story or Nominate Someone to Interview:

I'm always in search of compelling narratives and insightful individuals to feature. Whether it's personal experiences with the vaccination or other medical interventions, or if you know someone whose story and expertise could enlighten our community, I'd love to hear from you. If you have a story to share, insights to offer, or wish to suggest an interviewee who can add significant value to our discussions, please don't hesitate to get in touch at unbekoming@outlook.com. Your contributions and suggestions are invaluable in enriching our understanding and conversation.

Resources for the Community:

For those affected by COVID vaccine injury, consider the FLCCC Post-Vaccine Treatment as a resource.

Discover 'Baseline Human Health': Watch and share this insightful 21-minute video to understand and appreciate the foundations of health without vaccination.

Books as Tools: Consider recommending 'Official Stories' by Liam Scheff to someone seeking understanding. Start with a “safe” chapter such as Electricity and Shakespeare and they might find their way to vaccination.

Your support, whether through subscriptions, sharing stories, or spreading knowledge, is what keeps this community thriving. Thank you for being an integral part of this journey.