The Sinking of MS Estonia: Case Re-Opened

[Reformed Offlian]

You misunderstand. It was (as far as I can make out) supposedly a Swedish sub that did the damage by mistake while it was shadowing the ferry.

A Swedish sub commanded by a rouge ex-KGB agent, who apparently warned some Estonian crewmembers about the mistake he was about to make for reasons. Somebody seeing military trucks at a seaport is a key observation that makes sense of all this.

 

[Steve]

A Swedish sub commanded by a rouge ex-KGB agent, who apparently warned some Estonian crewmembers about the mistake he was about to make for reasons. Somebody seeing military trucks at a seaport is a key observation that makes sense of all this.

Should I be worried that this is starting to make sense?

 

[RolandRat]

Has this witness's testimony about military trucks on the night even been corroborated? Do we even know what made them think they were military trucks?

 

[Steve]

Has this witness's testimony about military trucks on the night even been corroborated? Do we even know what made them think they were military trucks?

It is widely known that when the military is involved in covert operations they always use readily identifiable military vehicles with white lettering on the sides that reads “SECRET OPS - LOOK AWAY”.

 

[Andy_Ross]

A Swedish sub commanded by a rouge ex-KGB agent, who apparently warned some Estonian crewmembers about the mistake he was about to make for reasons. Somebody seeing military trucks at a seaport is a key observation that makes sense of all this.

Don't forget the NATO exercise going on 500 miles away!

 

[JayUtah]

You misunderstand. It was (as far as I can make out) supposedly a Swedish sub that did the damage by mistake while it was shadowing the ferry.

And evidently running on the surface, for some reason, in order to allegedly poke a hole that high up on the hull.

 

[Steve]

Man, people here sure know how to ruin a good interesting scatterbrained conspiracy theory.

 

[Axxman300]

You misunderstand. It was (as far as I can make out) supposedly a Swedish sub that did the damage by mistake while it was shadowing the ferry.

The Swedes would have copped to it, apologized, and sent huge checks to the families.

Then why risk a submarine running shallow in that kind of sea when the ferry presumably had GPS, which can be tracked? I can't think of a submarine commander in any navy putting his boat, crew, and own butt into that kind of danger.

I know, you're just the messenger. We see this CT all the time with big disasters where there is limited access to the wreckage/evidence. *cough* TWA 800* cough*

 

[Vixen]

I will point out that experts in eyewitness testimony identify reordered chronology as one of the most profound effects of memory amplification. But according to you, those kinds of findings are not worth discussing.

By some psychologist who hires herself out as a defense 'expert witness' to try to undermine prosecution witnesses in exchange for lots of money. (Chauvin didn't hire her so she can't be much good.)

Can we get back to the topic of M/S Estonia and why the survivors are complaining their experience of the tragedy doesn't match the imaginary timeline of the JAIC report?

 

[Vixen]

Did you notice the highlighted word?

I understand there is a new investigation. Perhaps that investigation will change this particular JAIC theory. You seem to be of the opinion that the current existing investigation and report is incorrect and/or incomplete in at least some respects, yet you are quite willing to quote it as fact when it agrees with your own thoughts. Have you been able to discern exactly which parts may be accurate, which parts may be mistaken, which parts may be able to examined in more detail due to advances in investigative techniques, and which parts have, and may continue to be, been covered up due to government conspiracies?

The fact it didn't mention the massive 22metre by 4m in the hull does seem to render the report absolutely useless if it failed to note what was going on in the hull. No point talking about 2,000 tonnes of water in the superstructure if the hull is flooded out first. Crewmen Sillaste and Treu when interviewed straight after the accident 29 Sept 1994 claimed to have 'been up to their knees in water in the Engine Room (which is in the hull!) turning on the bilge pumps, yet this version is superceded in the JAIC Report with a cock and bull story about how the pair heroically worked to save the ship until as late as nearly 1:30, when all the facts point to the the pair actually being amongst the first off the ship, safe on a life raft and according to survivor Rolf Sorman (_Sp?), who was in the same raft, Sillaste was fully kitted out in a survival suit. Truth is the crew knew the ship was sinking long before the passengers and that's why so many survived and the passengers didn't.

Yet the JAIC just takes the crew's tales of heroism at face value without even questioning how either Sillaste or Treu could get from the engine room in the hull to the top of the chimney or the 8th deck - depending on which of their three versions your read - and how the pair managed, as they later claim, to have climbed up a near 90° solid wall - which was formerly the horizontal deck - 12 m high to get to the port side (now horizontal, with the starboard side submerged). It is just rubbish. Far from being 'last off the ship' they were ******* first off!

 

[Vixen]

Well, the bow ramp is not watertight, it is just a ramp that allows vehicles to be discharged on to docks of varying heights.
If the bow was 'working' and started to come free water would be entering the ship. It would make lots of loud noises.

If it was just the car deck being flooded, the vessel would have simply capsized within minutes and floated upside down. The fact it didn't but sank like a stone in 35 minutes indicates otherwise.

 

[Vixen]

Just as a layman, I would expect that the bow visor might not fall off completely before some water got behind it, equalizing the pressure with the surrounding sea.

Oh my giddy aunt. The waves were splashing from north to south up and over. There is no way a wave could sneak under the bow visor to suddenly change direction to from aft and forward! pushing the visor out (whilst all the time waves in a counter direction are pounding the other side). There is no end to what bovine excrement people are willing to believe if they read it in 'a report'.

 

[Vixen]

Here's an idea, why not wait until a second investigation is completed and see what the findings are instead of speculating about a rouge Russian sabotage plot?

I will go out on a limb to suggest the results of the second investigation will mostly reinforce the findings of the original.

I can say that the Russians are smart, and sinking a civilian ferry on purpose is an act of war (the jetliners they've shot down were the result of misidentification because while the Russians are smart, they are prone to huge mistakes). More importantly, sinking at ferry because there was seekreht Swedish military tech onboard is not the Russian's style. Tracking said technology to its destination and later stealing it is the Russian M.O.

As far as submarines go, NATO watches Russian sub bases 24/7. A damaged sub would have stood out.

This is a tragedy. The Ocean is a cruel place to those who don't respect it. Nothing should have been out on the sea in that storm.

Don't be too sure. The Estonians vehemently disagreed with the Swedes in 1997 when the report came out, and this time, they are in charge of reviewing the case. Public prosecutor, Margus Kurm in 2006 made it clear he believes a submarine, probably Swedish, collided with the vessel. As prosecutor who will be privy to all sorts of background information and understands the legal requirement of evidence to back up claims.

 

[Vixen]

LOL! Did this "rogue ex-KGB type" navigate the submarine himself? Is he the one who forewarned the vanishing Estonian crew members for some reason? Was he exchanging signals with them while in the sub? Did he have a white Persian cat, too?

"Rogue ex-KGB types" were more likely to be the ones *selling* the weapons to the Swedes in the first place. If Boris and Natasha were mad about anything, it would be that a competitor beat them to it.

We were actually discussing your claim that 'there must be proof that there was ex-USSR military equipment on board as of the time of the accident or it cannot have been any kind of sabotage or accident such as a collision with another vessel'.

I was simply pointing out that the fact that ex-Soviet military secrets had been shipped out on M/S Estonia at least twice in the fortnight leading up to the accident, and the Swedish government admitted this ten years later, in 2005, and it was the Swedish Customs who were ordered to not inspect these vehicles (but the guy did, anyway, out of curiosity) so there does not need to be such a vehicle or vehicles present for a potential saboteur - if it was sabotage - to 'take revenge', if that is what it was.

I was pointing out the flaws in your logic.

 

[Vixen]

A Swedish sub commanded by a rouge ex-KGB agent, who apparently warned some Estonian crewmembers about the mistake he was about to make for reasons. Somebody seeing military trucks at a seaport is a key observation that makes sense of all this.

Nice try at the logical fallacy of ridicule.

Fact is, Sara Hedrenius did see what looked to her like military trucks enter the Estonia at the last minute after delaying departure. Fact is, and this is acknowledged by the Swedish government in the Rikstag (Hirschfelt _sp?, an Appeal Court Judge) that the Swedish Customs Guy had been telling the truth when he came forward to say he had been ordered by an intelligence higher than the minister of the interior government (= that is, the Swedish intelligence agency, KSI, most likely) not to inspect certain vehicles coming off the Estonia. His curiosity got the better of him and he had a look anyway and saw what looked like some kind of electronic equipment.

This is not a dullards conspiracy theory but a record of fact.

 

[Vixen]

Has this witness's testimony about military trucks on the night even been corroborated? Do we even know what made them think they were military trucks?

Yes, someone else also saw them.

 

[Vixen]

It is widely known that when the military is involved in covert operations they always use readily identifiable military vehicles with white lettering on the sides that reads “SECRET OPS - LOOK AWAY”.

That underlines the authenticity of Sara Hedrenius' eye witness account at the time that she saw military trucks and military guys board the car deck. She didn't need to dress it up as anything other than a straight forward observation.

 

[Vixen]

Don't forget the NATO exercise going on 500 miles away!

Be that as it may but if you know the area, Skagerrak is the gateway into the Baltic Sea (it is rather like the English Channel) why would a ship even be there unless traversing through.

So how do you know during NATO's ten-days of manoeuvres they restricted themselves to the Norwegian Sea, bearing in mind it is international waters and there is no-one to stop them adventuring into surrounding areas?

 

[Vixen]

Man, people here sure know how to ruin a good interesting scatterbrained conspiracy theory.

Have you considered your utterings might be a reflection on yourself rather than on the survivors and victims' families requesting a review of the investigation.

852 drowned or died of hypothermia and it is a big joke for some.

 

[Vixen]

The Swedes would have copped to it, apologized, and sent huge checks to the families.

Then why risk a submarine running shallow in that kind of sea when the ferry presumably had GPS, which can be tracked? I can't think of a submarine commander in any navy putting his boat, crew, and own butt into that kind of danger.

I know, you're just the messenger. We see this CT all the time with big disasters where there is limited access to the wreckage/evidence. *cough* TWA 800* cough*

Far from it! The Swedish government, under US/CIA-ally, Carl Bildt, actually covered it up. It was only under Goran Persson some ten years later that it came clean that it was running a smuggling operation of ex-Soviet military defence secrets via a passenger liner, namely M/S Estonia. Despite pointing people to the actual minutes of the Rikstag that records this admission, some people still think it is a made up story despite Sweden itself admitting it. One despairs at people's powers of discernment between truth and fiction, or lack thereof.

Now along comes Axxman and repeats the myth that is is a conspiracy theory that Sweden covered up the arms smuggling from a hostile foreign power.