The Sinking of MS Estonia: Case Re-Opened

Status
Not open for further replies.
Vixen said:
It was clearly a Swedish or UK submarine given who is keen to cover it up. It was probably an accident.

The expert who had to sweep the area for mines, was probably looking for what Sweden/Finland knew to be a mined area.
Click to expand...

Now it was an RN submarine?

That would be one of the big nuclear powered boats as the RN don't have small diesel electrics
 
JesseCuster said:
Then why did go at length to portray the supposed disappearance of nine crew members as being suspicious, instead of being a "cock up"? You've suddenly done an about face and are now merely dismissing it as a clerical error when it was all skulduggery and potential acts of sabotage by the crew very recently according to you (you clearly insinuated that the crew knew about what was going on early in the disaster when they somehow shouldn't have and that this was definitely suspicious, as was nine of them disappearing).

This "clerical error" idea isn't your default about the supposed disappearing crew, it's a new idea you've latched onto because your new ad hoc theory about a British submarine (or whatever) escorting the ship (for some reason) accidentally hitting it (above water somehow) and sinking the Estonia doesn't require any cloak and dagger involvement of the crew, you've just just ********** that idea.
Click to expand...

I am not dismissing it as a clerical error. I am saying it probably is. However, it is quite possible the nine have been 'disappeared' contrary to the Treaty or Rome (criminal law). It is possible they voluntarily vanished, although it seems unlikely, that they would never want to contact their families again, especially the twins, who were only entertainers after all. However, their names appeared on a survivors list and this is where the confusion starts, as survivors not only had to give their names but also their date of birth to avoid future doubt. The name of one of the twins was written down as her nickname, and the parents wondered how any official would have known that to accidentally list her as a survivor, if that was the case.
 
Vixen said:
Same reason anyone gets an escort. Probably in the bodyguard sense. Possibly in a policing sense (detective). I don't know.

Police escort football coaches. They escort government ministers. They might escort a prison van taking someone to court.

It might be a submarine monitoring movement. It might be a rogue submarine for sale by the Russians to an inexperienced third world buyers.

It is only my opinion that it was likely a Swedish or British submarine due to who is covering it up, if there was indeed a submarine collision.

That doesn't rule out another scenario,
Click to expand...

I like the other scenario where there was no submarine and no collision leaving no telltale submarine-shaped damage on the ship whose bow door came off.
 
Vixen said:
I said quite clearly that Lehtola was high-handed and arrogant, which you can be without being dishonest, in the usual meaning of the word. I expect Lehtola justified it to himself as it all being in the cause of 'National Security'. If Bildt told him this was the case then it would be reckless of him not to play along.
Click to expand...

You can't say Lehtola was a willing party to a lie without impugning his integrity and calling him dishonest. So either the JAIC report doesn't knowingly contain any falsehoods, or Lehtola is a lying liar with no integrity. There isn't a third option.

Also, what national security was at risk? Wasn't Lehtola Finnish? What patriotic motives could he have to lie for Carl Bildt?
 
Last edited:
Jack by the hedge said:
I like the other scenario where there was no submarine and no collision leaving no telltale submarine-shaped damage on the ship whose bow door came off.
Click to expand...

The irony is that whilst nobody in naval circles or the survivors groups, including marine claims investigators, engineers, architects and investigative journalists believes the JAIC report and a new investigation has opened, a bunch of people claiming to be sceptics prefer to believe the original bunkum.

Ask yourself how come Germany isn't buying it? Is it just because they feel nationalist towards Meyer Werft just because they are German? They declined to sign the Estonia Gravesite Treaty. Why? Because they are international waters. Why did the UK sign, when it is nowhere near the Baltic to even patrol it.
 
Vixen said:
I am not an investigator so I am not in a position to give a definitive answer. I can only give you my opinion, based on the facts as I know them. It is a fact that people are claiming nine of the Estonian crew are missing. So I looked into it. Any objections?

The captain would have been wearing his uniform.

Picture below in b/w is Captain Andresson, the other a typical uniform of a cruise captain on these liners.
Click to expand...

No he would not have been wearing that uniform. He wasn't attending a cocktail party
 
Vixen said:
Politicians are puppets of the intelligence agencies and the army generals.

You don't really believe the likes of Biden or Clinton (who was USA president as of the time of the accident) have the vaguest of idea where to begin raining down bombs? They will have been advised by the defence forces bods.
Click to expand...

I was wondering when we would get into "deep state" nonsense.

Carl Bildt is either the villain of the story or he isn't. You seem to be trying to have it both ways. Is Lehtola a mere puppet of the Swedish deep state, too? What about Uno Kaur?
 
Vixen said:
It might be a rogue submarine for sale by the Russians to an inexperienced third world buyers.
Click to expand...
So the MS Estonia was being escorted by a submarine which was on sale by the Russians, and that submarine accidentally sank the MS Estonia by somehow hitting it as evidence by damage above the waterline, after which the Swedish premier, who is possibly a CIA agent, soon after told the press the accident was caused by the bow visor falling off, and then the CIA and/or Swedish intelligence concocted a story and investigation consistent with the bow visor theory in order to cover up that the ferry was sank because it was accidentally sank by a Russian submarine which was escorting it on its way to be sold?

Have I got that right? :confused:
 
Last edited:
Reformed Offlian said:
You can't say Lehtola was a willing party to a lie without impugning his integrity and calling him dishonest. So either the JAIC report doesn't knowingly contain any falsehoods, or Lehtola is a lying liar with no integrity. There isn't a third option.

Also, what national security was at risk? Wasn't Lehtola Finnish? What patriotic motives could he have to lie for Carl Bildt?
Click to expand...

Lehtola certainly acted in a legerdemain way. Giving the Estonians the wrong coordinates for the wreck. Getting a sonar picture drawn up which he confirmed in a memo included an object that fitted the specifications of the bow visor perfectly. Then days later he sent another memo saying 'we are stil searching for it'. When asked about the original 'find' Lehtola claimed it was just a piece of plate metal. Yet this supposed piece of metal has never been mentioned ever again by anyone.

Lehtola was a lawyer. So maybe gilding the lily was something that came naturally to him.
 
Jack by the hedge said:
So your imaginary movie now has this "high-handed and arrogant" former chief of police meekly accepting the outgoing Swedish PM's order to cover up any embarrassing evidence in the accident he's responsible for investigating because something something national security wink wink. Cool story.
Click to expand...

Not just national security wink wink. Somebody *else's* national security wink wink. Vixen just called Lehtola a secret foreign agent. Which is probably against the law in Finland.

But she's not questioning his intergity.
 
Vixen said:
Lehtola certainly acted in a legerdemain way. Giving the Estonians the wrong coordinates for the wreck. Getting a sonar picture drawn up which he confirmed in a memo included an object that fitted the specifications of the bow visor perfectly. Then days later he sent another memo saying 'we are stil searching for it'. When asked about the original 'find' Lehtola claimed it was just a piece of plate metal. Yet this supposed piece of metal has never been mentioned ever again by anyone.

Lehtola was a lawyer. So maybe gilding the lily was something that came naturally to him.
Click to expand...

But you aren't questioning his intergrity.
 
Vixen said:
I am sure he believed his intentions were sound.
Click to expand...

There is no way he could have reasonably believed that. He would have been knowingly (and possibly illegally) acting as a foreign agent to perpetuate a lie that did not, AFAICT, serve country he was supposed to be representing.

I'll ask again, what moral, patriotic reason could Lehtola possibly have had to lie at the behest of *Swedish* intelligence services?
 
I think someone a few pages back asked the question why didn't "they" just chuck the stuff on this secretive sub that was allegedly shadowing the ferry. Did this get an answer?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom