The Sinking of MS Estonia: Case Re-Opened

[Steve]

This topic started off as 'social and current affairs' as I was merely reporting that the M/S Estonia was being reinvestigated by experts and that the treaty signed by the Baltic countries - plus the UK - had been amended to allow for this official re-visiting of the site. The Act has been amended up to 2024. The reason the investigators are back, is because a couple of German 'investigative journalists' on behalf of Estonian and Swedish survivors and relatives of the dead, and as approved by the German shipbuilders who designed and constructed the M/S Estonia whose diver robot cameras showed a hole in the hull , together with a four metre long fracture.


As the case goes back to 1994, I presume it was then moved to 'History' as it has a lot of background. For people to understand why the site has been reopened for approved official investigators, of course, the controversial issues need to be explained. The null hypotheses is that the bow visor simply fell off in a storm and has nothing at all to do with other circumstances. As the hole at the side tends to call for a rejection of the null hypothesis - because, of course, a hole in the hull will cause any ship to sink rapidly then you can see why it is being reevaluated.

Yet posters here believe the whole thing should be shut down and forgotten about, which i don't think demonstrates scepticism. It might demonstrate lack of interest, which is anybody's prerogative. However, I for one am interested in it. I am not sure why I should be criticised for bringing the topic up, when it is being reported in the Estonian, Swedish and Finnish newspapers.

Yes, it is well understood that your speculations are based mainly on your ignorance of the mechanics and physics involved in the operation and sinking of a large vessel in deep water, this vessel in particular. Unfortunately your speculations (and incredulity) are yet to lead to any coherent alternate scenario to the known facts around the sinking. But feel free to carry on speculating. As usual in these types of threads some really interesting and fact based information comes to light in the responses to mere speculations. You know, putting the E in.......

 

[Andy_Ross]

I have never claimed it was the Russians. There are many people who believe it was a Swedish accident. I have no view, being determined, as always, to be as objective as possible. I have no eggs in the basket, as it were.


However, I enjoy problem solving so maybe that is what perplexes others, who prefer being told what to believe, as per the mass media. If it is not being reported by the BBC it can't be happening.

What problem is there? the bow fell off and the ship was swamped.
It happens all the time.


What kind of 'Swedish accident' do these 'many' people think it was?

 

[Andy_Ross]

If the Swedes are responsible and trying to cover it up why do you think their new investigation will find anything?

 

[Steve]

Then perhaps you should contact the Swedish and Estonian authorities who are funding the new investigation that they are a bunch of conspiracy theorists who are wasting their money because you from your keyboard prefer to not to have to read about this in the press because everything is clear and obvious to you.

Well I do not think they are conspiracy theorists so I would have no reason to do that. I do think there is more politics involved than any real belief that they will uncover some astounding new fact that will completely change the original conclusion. And politicians are notorious for wasting money on things they think will keep them in office.

Again with the hypocrisy. Me from my keyboard, you from your keyboard. The difference is?

 

[Vixen]

What problem is there? the bow fell off and the ship was swamped.
It happens all the time.


What kind of 'Swedish accident' do these 'many' people think it was?

As I explained up thread, there were many bitter disputes between members of the Joint Accident Investigation Committee (JAIC) . The Estonian foreign minister and the Estonian head of security resigned in protest at the findings.

According to Margus Kurm , who led the previous Estonian survey of Estonia in 2005-2009 , the car ramp was closed when the ship sank in 1994. Seamen Linde and Sillaste were eye witnesses to this on their life craft.
Kurm says it’s hard to believe the ramp would have fallen down by itself.
In an interview with Estonian Õhtuleht, Kurm also added that he believes the ramp has been removed afterwards. According to Kurmi's own theory, the cause of Estonia's sinking is a collision with a submarine.

The submarine in question being a Swedish one that was supposedly escorting the ferry to Stockholm.

In 2009, Estonia's leading Prosecutor General Margus Kurm expressed the hope that the Estonian wreck would be thoroughly investigated. According to Kurm, a proper investigation of the wreck is the only way to stop speculation about the causes of the shipwreck and ensure that no crime has occurred. Kurm wondered in Postimees why the first divers did not go to the wreck until two months after the accident. At that time, the wreck was only partially described. Kurm, who led the Estonian government's commission of inquiry into Estonia, considers it possible that the cause of the ship's sinking was an opening in the side of the ship. Andrus Ansip, who was the Prime Minister of Estonia at the time, rejected the proposal. [33] Some of the passengers had heard noises before sinking, which they interpreted to have come from the bottom of the ship - as if some metal had scratched the bottom of the ship.[7] Some passengers heard howling, squeaking, whining, and scratching.

wiki


Not my theory. I'm just the messenger.

I think, that when 852 passengers on public transport die suddenly with almost zero chance of survival if they were below deck seven, including children and families, there should be searching questions and an interest in the what caused such an accident.

Others say, well there are two ships sinking every week <shrug>.

 

[Vixen]

If the Swedes are responsible and trying to cover it up why do you think their new investigation will find anything?

Because it is joint Swedish and Estonian, with an expert US photographer taking 15,000- 25,000 photos to build up a 3-D image.

The Swedes and the Estonians have long been at loggerheads over the cause of the accident. The Finns go along with the Swedes.

The Estonians, together with the Swedes, now have a chance to put their differences to rest.

 

[Vixen]

Well I do not think they are conspiracy theorists so I would have no reason to do that. I do think there is more politics involved than any real belief that they will uncover some astounding new fact that will completely change the original conclusion. And politicians are notorious for wasting money on things they think will keep them in office.

Again with the hypocrisy. Me from my keyboard, you from your keyboard. The difference is?

The difference is, I am not telling people off.

 

[Steve]

Others say, well there are two ships sinking every week <shrug>.

Context m'dear, context.

 

[Vixen]

Context m'dear, context.

Yes, m'dear.

 

[Steve]

The difference is, I am not telling people off.

??? But you are. Remember this "I think you just like arguing, Steve."? Or this "It is pure speculation on his part,"?

I am telling you that criticizing other posters for doing the very thing that you do is hypocritical. And hence, totally ineffective.

I am asking you to put the dribs and drabs of "what about this", "what about that" in your posts into a coherent narrative that indicates what you personally think caused the sinking. Hopefully supported by some evidence beyond mere opinion. Can you do that?

 

[Andy_Ross]

Ramp removed later?
Ship was hit by a Swedish submarine secretly escorting it with enough force to cause the ship to sink but the sub sailed away happily?

Passengers herd noises as the ship was sinking? of course they did, the ship was sinking, subject to stresses it was not designed for.

Seems to me that Kurm is a conspiracy nut.

 

[Vixen]

Ramp removed later?
Ship was hit by a Swedish submarine secretly escorting it with enough force to cause the ship to sink but the sub sailed away happily?

Passengers herd noises as the ship was sinking? of course they did, the ship was sinking, subject to stresses it was not designed for.

Seems to me that Kurm is a conspiracy nut.

Er, he was and maybe still is, Estonia's leading public prosecutor...?

I think a prosecutor knows more about weighing up evidence than most people. They also have privy to classified and confidential stuff. After, all they are the guys who get to know everything about the circumstances of a case. State prosecutors are smart guys who choose their words carefully. Educated at leading law schools, possibly moved up the ranks in the police force.

Bear in mind, Estonia was very recently a Soviet-governed. Therefore, many of its officials - including naval captains and state prosecutors -will have been Russian trained, which is not to say t is good or bad, but they probably have a different perspective to the Finns and Swedes. Just sayin'.

I am just telling you what the Estonian prosecutor thinks. Not endorsing it.

Maybe he is stung by the fact the Swedes blame the Estonians, when - hey! you were the guys bringing Soviet military stuff on our public transport.

 

[Vixen]

??? But you are. Remember this "I think you just like arguing, Steve."? Or this "It is pure speculation on his part,"?

I am telling you that criticizing other posters for doing the very thing that you do is hypocritical. And hence, totally ineffective.

I am asking you to put the dribs and drabs of "what about this", "what about that" in your posts into a coherent narrative that indicates what you personally think caused the sinking. Hopefully supported by some evidence beyond mere opinion. Can you do that?

I should think it obvious that I am sceptical that 'a wave caused the bow visor to fall off'.

However, I retain an open mind as to what happened.

 

[Andy_Ross]

Er, he was and maybe still is, Estonia's leading public prosecutor...?

I think a prosecutor knows more about weighing up evidence than most people. They also have privy to classified and confidential stuff. After, all they are the guys who get to know everything about the circumstances of a case. State prosecutors are smart guys who choose their words carefully. Educated at leading law schools, possibly moved up the ranks in the police force.

Bear in mind, Estonia was very recently a Soviet-governed. Therefore, many of its officials - including naval captains and state prosecutors -will have been Russian trained, which is not to say t is good or bad, but they probably have a different perspective to the Finns and Swedes. Just sayin'.

I am just telling you what the Estonian prosecutor thinks. Not endorsing it.

Maybe he is stung by the fact the Swedes blame the Estonians, when - hey! you were the guys bringing Soviet military stuff on our public transport.

Again with this 'military stuff'

If they moved some stuff two weeks before, how was it involved in the sinking of the ship?

When one of the lead investigators is claiming submarines rammed it and skulduggery with the ramp after the sinking rather than the bows falling off it seems to me he is trying to shift blame.

 

[Andy_Ross]

I should think it obvious that I am sceptical that 'a wave caused the bow visor to fall off'.

However, I retain an open mind as to what happened.

Well, it was a storm with lots of waves and the bow fell off.

Why would you be sceptical of something we know happened?

You are looking exactly like a 9/11 Truther.

 

[Vixen]

Again with this 'military stuff'

If they moved some stuff two weeks before, how was it involved in the sinking of the ship?

When one of the lead investigators is claiming submarines rammed it and skulduggery with the ramp after the sinking rather than the bows falling off it seems to me he is trying to shift blame.

You might well be right. But then, the Swedes were smuggling Soviet military stuff out on the Estonia, and which is mentioned in the report. There is no principle or law or even logic that 'you must prove this also happened on the night of the accident'. In other words, almost a thousand ordinary passengers and crew, were 'human shields', in effect. If this is the case, the survivors and relatives of the dead and injured, and indeed the peoples of all the nations involved have a right to expect transparency and an apology if this was the case. Of course, the Swedes could have been doing all this, as they admit, yet has nothing at all to do with the bow visor falling off.

Just pure coinicidence.

 

[Vixen]

Well, it was a storm with lots of waves and the bow fell off.

Why would you be sceptical of something we know happened?

You are looking exactly like a 9/11 Truther.

I am obviously not a 9/11 truther as I don't recall ever posting on that thread. I think I did post on the Pittsburg plane that came down on its way to Washington as I was intrigued by the brave passenger who said, 'Let's roll'. Like many people around the world, I wanted to understand what happened. You might claim such people are 'nutcases' but it doesn't make it so. You might be one of the apathetic majority who couldn't care less about such matters. It doesn't make you superior, as you seem to think it does.

 

[llwyd]

This thread should not be here, it should be in the Conspiracies section.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Shouldn't one show the crack was actually from an explosion of some sort before going off on who did it or how it was done? Is there evidence it blew out or blew in?

Explosions have indicators in how the metal is bent.

A stress fracture from the forces involved in sinking should be distinguishable from other kinds of fractures.

 

[Steve]

Shouldn't one show the crack was actually from an explosion of some sort before going off on who did it or how it was done? Is there evidence it blew out or blew in?

Explosions have indicators in how the metal is bent.

A stress fracture from the forces involved in sinking should be distinguishable from other kinds of fractures.

That actually seems to be something interesting that might come out of the new investigation, if it has not already been determined. The investigation is unlikely to provide any info that will overturn current thinking, but it may fill in a few more gaps and details. The known cause of the sinking will remain as is, incredulous amateurs notwithstanding.