The Sinking of MS Estonia: Case Re-opened Part II

[Vixen]

Sorry, are you accusing those who deny it was a mine of racism? That's cute.

Anyway, I don't recall anyone using the comments of the Swedish co-owners as evidence. Once again, just a stupid argument.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

Er, Carl Bildt immediately said it was the bow visor's fault, yet that is not considered 'covering his own back' (the ferryline was part state-funded) as it is claimed here of the Estonian part-owners who opined it 'might have been a mine' (as the Baltic has literally tens of thousands of them) or the German shipbuilders and architects who designed it are defamed likewise?

 

[JayUtah]

Er, Carl Bildt immediately said it was the bow visor's fault, yet that is not considered 'covering his own back' (the ferryline was part state-funded) as it is claimed here of the Estonian part-owners who opined it 'might have been a mine' (as the Baltic has literally tens of thousands of them) or the German shipbuilders and architects who designed it are defamed likewise?

Explain again how you're "just the messenger."

 

[phiwum]

Er, Carl Bildt immediately said it was the bow visor's fault, yet that is not considered 'covering his own back' (the ferryline was part state-funded) as it is claimed here of the Estonian part-owners who opined it 'might have been a mine' (as the Baltic has literally tens of thousands of them) or the German shipbuilders and architects who designed it are defamed likewise?

Has anyone here said that Bildt's opinion is evidence that it was the visor? Far as I can tell, his opinion has been ignored by everyone except you.

If I don't rely on someone's opinion, then I don't need to address their reliably when they agree with me.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

 

[MarkCorrigan]

It isn't defamation if it's true.

So are you claiming to be an expert on the KGB or not?

Did people in these threads make callous jokes or not? If so can you link to some examples?

You don't get to gish gallop past this Vixen.

 

[GlennB]

It isn't defamation if it's true.

So are you claiming to be an expert on the KGB or not?

Did people in these threads make callous jokes or not? If so can you link to some examples?

You don't get to gish gallop past this Vixen.

We've had many pages of precisely that.

 

[MarkCorrigan]

Which is why I'm asking my questions until I get an answer.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

So how did Sillaste manage to draw a diagram clearly showing the car ramp shut but with water seeping in at the sides (but not the top)?

Simple enough: Sillaste drew a representation of what he saw on a video monitor. He did not go to see how much water was on the car deck. And the fact that he drew a cascade of water pouring from both sides of the ramp and you choose to describe that with the word "seeping" tells us a lot about how determined you are to twist the evidence to fit your version(s) of the story.

Likewise, two passengers claimed to have climbed down the car ramp from the outside when the vessel was at a ninety-degree list.

Sillaste's drawing of the ramp still more-or-less closed does not mean that it wasn't torn open after that. And two survivors saying they climbed off the ship by clambering down the ramp while the ship was lying on its side does not tell us whether the ramp was then open, closed or partly open.

 

[JayUtah]

Has anyone here said that Bildt's opinion is evidence that it was the visor? Far as I can tell, his opinion has been ignored by everyone except you.

Indeed, I pay little if any attention to what Bildt may have said. And Vixen is the only one asking me to, apparently out of some demand that we treat all commentators with equal attention and credulity. But this started because Vixen demanded we accept the opinion of someone who, at the time, was completely unknown to her, but who she attested must be "reputable and reliable" on the subject of whether Estonia could reasonably have been sunk by an old sea mine. She made an affirmative claim, and the affirmative claim was rebutted. No one is on the hook for arguments they didn't affirm about people whose testimony is not being proffered as evidence.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

...Carl Bildt immediately said it was the bow visor's fault...

You do love to keep banging on about this nothing burger. Is there anything less suspicious than a Prime Minister appearing to have been briefed about whatever had been gleaned from survivor witnesses before a press conference?

 

[Vixen]

If you put as much effort into meaningfully participating in this thread as you do into manufacturing these elaborate straw men, the thread would be so much shorter. You really need a new act. This one's worn thin.

Johanson's claim is absurd on its face, and he even qualifies it as his personal opinion. It's fairly clear he didn't have any evidence at the time for it, and that he's just grasping at straws. And from the other coverage of his claim in other media, it seems that no one was really taking him seriously. It has zilch to do with anoyone's nationality, so quit trying to paint me as some kind of racist.

Further, you seem to argue a strange notion that a journalist must endorse whatever he prints as a quotation. No, Meek never endorsed the sea-mine theory. He's merely quoting a newsworthy statement from an important person associated with the incident. You're going to comical lengths to create the illusion that the sea-mine theory was credible at the time and had the support of "reputable" people. It wasn't, it isn't, and it didn't.

And Swedish PM Carl Bildt was not 'grasping at straws' when he immediately said no-one was to blame? Nobody called you a racist, don't start that shenanigans here.

IIRC you or someone claimed that the newspaper headline that the ship could have been sunk by a mine was by an unsubstantiated source by a gutter press hack (or words to that effect) and it turned out to be James Meek of the GUARDIAN and a high up official at the Estonian ferry company who did indeed give Meek his considered opinion 'the rapid sinking might have been caused by a mine'.

Turns out Carl Bildt is my ninth cousin, sharing the same seventh-great-grandparents as myself, who were born in Finland of Baltic German descent via Livonia (current day Estonia and Latvia) which was then in the Swedish Empire. My sixth-great-grandmother was a listed Swedish noblewoman; her forebears include Baltic German nobility who had vast estates in Livonia (they originated from Pomerania); my tenth-great-grandfather, a listed Swedish noble, from old Finnish stock, was actually Governor of Livonia and high commander of the Swedish Infantry in the Sixteenth Century. Yet that doesn't stop me from suspecting Sweden is covering its own back by (a) claiming on Day One, 'The Estonia accident is nobody's fault' and (b) claiming on Day One 'the bodies should not be recovered'. At least you can't claim I am not impartial.


NB: If your being related to one of the Titanic engineers gives you special dispensation, I'll raise you a relationship to a former Swedish Prime Minister.

 

[Vixen]

You do love to keep banging on about this nothing burger. Is there anything less suspicious than a Prime Minister appearing to have been briefed about whatever had been gleaned from survivor witnesses before a press conference?

PM Carl Bildt interviewed Sillaste on 28 Sept 1994, the morning of the accident, together with PM Aho (Finland) and PM Laar (Estonia) in the presence of the national security police (SuPo). Sillaste was the only survivor interviewed on 28 Sept 1994. PM Laar confirmed Sillaste did not mention in this interview that the bow visor was missing. Laar gave the opinion that he suspected terrorism but was ridden over roughshod by Bildt, who insisted it was the bow visor. Bildt did this just sixteen hours after the accident. So Bildt did not get this 'from a survivor witness', as you claim.

 

[JayUtah]

And Swedish PM Carl Bildt was not 'grasping at straws' when he immediately said no-one was to blame?

I claimed absolutely nothing about Bildt. Stop trying to shove an argument into my mouth.

Nobody called you a racist, don't start that shenanigans here.

Here are your literal words

So when a Swede says a thing, it is gospel truth but when Estonian, 'He's just trying to save his own skin', is your message. Nice.

My argument had absolutely nothing to do with the nationality of either person, and nothing to do with Bildt. You brought Bildt and nationality up out of nowhere and tried to claim that was the reason I allegedly believed one person but not the other. But even that was a distinction I did not make. If you would care to retract your accusation of racism (or at least nationalism), I will entertain your apology. But for you to claim you never made such an accusation is pure delusion.

IIRC you or someone claimed that the newspaper headline that the ship could have been sunk by a mine was by an unsubstantiated source by a gutter press hack (or words to that effect)

I made no such claim.

...and it turned out to be James Meek of the GUARDIAN...

You tried to make Meek the authority on the subject, because that was the only name in the citation you pilfered from Drew Wilson. Meek would not necessarily be an authority on sea mines. Then when we looked more carefully at the citation, it was apparent Meek was reporting someone else's claim. Without knowing who, you continued to assure us that the source must be "reputable and reliable," on no more promising grounds than the notion that Meek was a professional journalist who wouldn't do any other thing. Then when someone else finally provided the article, it was clear who was making the claim and probably why. Even then, you still deployed the absurd argument claiming Meek agreed with Johanson.

You seem to have no recollection of what you actually argued, and you certainly have no correct recollection of anything I've said. For once, rebut the argument I make instead of the ones you invent and try to put in my mouth.

...who did indeed give Meek his considered opinion 'the rapid sinking might have been caused by a mine'.

Explain what evidence makes that a "considered" opinion. Johanson said it was his "personal opinion," based on nothing more than his disbelief that his vessel could have sunk so quickly otherwise.

Turns out Carl Bildt is my ninth cousin...

I literally don't care.

 

[Axxman300]

You know as well as I do that impact of detonation depends on how much explosives are used. There are big mines - on the sea bed - and there are small ones that could theoretically, be attached to the side of a vessel.

Think about the sheer expertise involved in sinking this ship so rapidly and efficiently. Unlike the Al-Quaeda suicide bombers loaded with 400lbs - 700lbs of explosives on their small ship and likely suicide vests, when they decided to ram the USS Cole in 2000, a clear couple of amateurs who failed completely to sink the vessel despite blasting a massive hole in Cole's side, many times bigger than that seen on Estonia. If the Estonia was sabotaged then whoever did it was highly skilled in marine matters to a military expert level: not only ensuring that the bow visor and car ramp would be compromised - they didn't stop at just 'blowing off the doors' - they made darn sure the thing would sink by smashing into the starboard either by weapon or by vessel, whilst at the same time blocking all communications to prevent rescue of same and ensuring the ship was in international waters ATT, and even timing it to the stroke of Swedish midnight. If it was sabotage, the perpetrators were not only highly skilled to a professional military level but they also made damn sure the ship would go no further on its route.

Compare and contrast with USS Cole, which managed to limp home.

Stop comparing warships to the Estonia.

You are arguing with guys who can discuss in detail the sinking of multiple battle ships, aircraft carriers, and other warships going all the way back to the Vikings.

The USS Cole IS DESIGNED TO TAKE DAMAGE THAT WOULD DOOM COMMERCIAL VESSELS. The crews on ALL warships drill regularly on a long list of disasters.

And no, the USS Cole did not "limp home", it was ferried home aboard the Dutch ship, Blue Marlin. This was an easy fact to look up, and speaks to your research abilities.

 

[Andy_Ross]

Stop comparing warships to the Estonia.

You are arguing with guys who can discuss in detail the sinking of multiple battle ships, aircraft carriers, and other warships going all the way back to the Vikings.
.

In some cases guys actually trained to stop damaged warships from sinking.

 

[Vixen]

I claimed absolutely nothing about Bildt. Stop trying to shove an argument into my mouth.



Here are your literal words

​

My argument had absolutely nothing to do with the nationality of either person, and nothing to do with Bildt. You brought Bildt and nationality up out of nowhere and tried to claim that was the reason I allegedly believed one person but not the other. But even that was a distinction I did not make. If you would care to retract your accusation of racism (or at least nationalism), I will entertain your apology. But for you to claim you never made such an accusation is pure delusion.



I made no such claim.



You tried to make Meek the authority on the subject, because that was the only name in the citation you pilfered from Drew Wilson. Meek would not necessarily be an authority on sea mines. Then when we looked more carefully at the citation, it was apparent Meek was reporting someone else's claim. Without knowing who, you continued to assure us that the source must be "reputable and reliable," on no more promising grounds than the notion that Meek was a professional journalist who wouldn't do any other thing. Then when someone else finally provided the article, it was clear who was making the claim and probably why. Even then, you still deployed the absurd argument claiming Meek agreed with Johanson.

You seem to have no recollection of what you actually argued, and you certainly have no correct recollection of anything I've said. For once, rebut the argument I make instead of the ones you invent and try to put in my mouth.



Explain what evidence makes that a "considered" opinion. Johanson said it was his "personal opinion," based on nothing more than his disbelief that his vessel could have sunk so quickly otherwise.



I literally don't care.

Nonsense, I did not claim Meek was the person saying that it could have been a mine. Newspaper reporters do not quote themselves. The headline was obviously a claim by someone he had interviewed in Tallin.

As for your saying the chap who gave his opinion 'it could have been a mine' was 'grasping at straws' you never made the same charge at Bildt who made his claim sixteen hours after the event and could have been no more conjecture than Johanson.

So you were biased. You've assumed the forgone conclusion is the correct one without it ever crossing your mind it cannot have been the complete explanation if the hole in the starboard was disregarded completely by the JAIC.

Don't play the wounded innocent.

 

[Andy_Ross]

As for your saying the chap who gave his opinion 'it could have been a mine' was 'grasping at straws' you never made the same charge at Bildt who made his claim sixteen hours after the event and could have been no more conjecture than Johanson.

Why do you think it was 'conjecture'?

Do you think that he wasn't briefed by those involved with the rescue before making the statement?

 

[Vixen]

Why do you think it was 'conjecture'?

Do you think that he wasn't briefed by those involved with the rescue before making the statement?

As you have been told, only one crew survivor had been interviewed as of the time Bildt made his claim.

 

[junkshop]

The CEO of Estline ... and a reputable prize-winning journalist James Meek thought a mine was a genuine possibility as of the time of the incident.

Nonsense, I did not claim Meek was the person saying that it could have been a mine.

Scrolling back through the conversation is a thing one can do...

 

[Andy_Ross]

As you have been told, only one crew survivor had been interviewed as of the time Bildt made his claim.

Not one person rescued said anything to any of the rescuers in all that time?

 

[MarkCorrigan]

Scrolling back through the conversation is a thing one can do...

I'm starting to genuinely worry for Vixen here. This level of inability to recall basic details of what she herself said is alarming. If I found myself directly contradicting my own words this often I would consider speaking to a doctor.

Either that or she's inexcusably intellectually dishonest and doesn't care.

Either one.

So Vixen, again I ask. Are. You. Claiming. To. Be. An. Expert. In. The. KGB?

Are. You. Still. Accusing. People. In. These. Threads. Of. Making. Callous. Jokes?