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

[Jack by the hedge]

... So Bildt did not get this 'from a survivor witness', as you claim.

But of course I did not make that claim. I said it would be utterly unsurprising if your cousin had been briefed before his press conference.

Do you disagree? Do you think that would be surprising?

Do you suppose the survivors were told to shut up and say nothing until the Swedish Prime Minister could get there to interview them personally?

 

[JayUtah]

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

Not until others pointed out that it was not Meek making the claim. Prior to that you wrote such things as

You can say that but reputable reporter James Meek in Tallinn and Greg Mcivor in Stockholm reported in the GUARDIAN , 3 October 1994: 'Mine Could Have Sunk Ferry Claim'.

And even after the full nature of Meek's reportage was made evident, you still wrote

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.

...you never made the same charge at Bildt...

You're absolutely right. It's almost as if Bildt has nothing to do with my evaluation of another person's credibility on a particular point.

So you were biased.

Nonsense. You're going to increasingly disturbing lengths to fabricate an argument you think I've tacitly made, or should have made, and cram it into my mouth. And if it weren't bad enough that you're trying to put me on the hook for an argument I never made, you've added a whiff of racism or nationalism to it that is absolutely, in no way, part of any argument I have ever made in this thread. It's not enough for you to straw-man other people's arguments. Now you have to make those straw-man arguments as distasteful as you possibly can.

The obsession over Bildt is yours. You have absolutely no idea what opinion, if any, I have of him or of any statements he may have made. This notion that I'm biased against one because he's a Swede and not an Estonian is completely contrived by you. My argument doesn't compare the two. It never compared the two. It doesn't need to compare the two. No matter how badly you want to shoehorn your obsession into my argument, it's not the argument I'm making.

Don't play the wounded innocent.

I'll stop pressing you as soon as you explain how this

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.

should not have been construed as an accusation of racism/nationalism.

 

[LondonJohn]

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.

Oh my gosh. We sink to new lows.

Remind us all exactly why this genealogical nonsense (which, incidentally, appears to have been described in such toe-curling detail mainly/purely in a sad attempt at self-aggrandisement) is in any way relevant to the (increasingly pitiful) debate about the sinking of the Estonia?

 

[MarkCorrigan]

If she thinks that's impressive, I'm related to Charlemange.

 

[GlennB]

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.

That's truly pathetic.

 

[LondonJohn]

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

Exactly. I'd suggest it's actually highly likely that quite a few of the crew who managed to successfully abandon the ship (together perhaps with some passengers who realised what they were looking at) were able to view the bow of the ship before it sank. And they'd have seen that the bow visor was entirely missing, and that the vehicle ramp had also been torn away from its stowed position.

And if they did see all this from the life boats, it would have been immediately entirely apparent to them exactly why the ship was sinking: the catastrophic failure/loss of the bow visor, coupled with the huge damage to the ramp, had allowed seawater to flood into the vehicle deck. And they'd have known enough about the dangers of serious water ingress to know that a flooding of the vehicle deck would easily be enough to destabilise the ship in terms of list and loss of buoyancy to the point where the ship would inevitably sink.

So yes, I'd say it's eminently possible - probable even - that within even a few hours of the sinking there were plenty of reasonably-credible reports of the primary cause being the loss of the bow visor and the consequent damage to the bow ramp. There need be no requirement whatsoever for any skulduggery or conspiracy-theorising when considering how the "bow visor" causal theory found its way to Bildt's ear so quickly.

 

[RolandRat]

If she thinks that's impressive, I'm related to Charlemange.

I'm related to a bunch of thieving toe-rags from Kent. I'm heading down to the Baltic to pick up the bow shield so I can sell it for scrap.

 

[GlennB]

I'm related to a bunch of thieving toe-rags from Kent. I'm heading down to the Baltic to pick up the bow shield so I can sell it for scrap.

I'm related to a bunch of carriage makers up Liverpool way.

That makes me qualified to be Minister of Transport. Boris??? You listening?

 

[LondonJohn]

I'm related to a bunch of thieving toe-rags from Kent. I'm heading down to the Baltic to pick up the bow shield so I can sell it for scrap.

You'll be delighted to know that you too are related to Charlemagne.

Remember also that the UK is a signatory to the no-dive treaty, so I advise that when you go to plunder the wreck, you perhaps go by the name of RolandRatte aus Gelsenkirchen.

 

[ferd burfle]

Oh my gosh. We sink to new lows.

I see what you did there

 

[SteveAitch]

If she thinks that's impressive, I'm related to Charlemange.

No, I'm descended from Charlemagne!

But closer to home, I'm descended from a family of Irish silk weavers who legged it England in the early 19th century.

 

[Mojo]

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'.

This seems highly unlikely given that when you introduced the headline into the discussion you attributed it to “reputable reporter James Meek in Tallinn and Greg Mcivor in Stockholm reported in the GUARDIAN”.

I suspect that you don’t recall correctly.

 

[Vixen]

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

Meek is the journalist, the Head Honch at Estline is his source. So Meek did find a reliable source and duly reported it. He is a hack, not an expert in mines.

 

[Vixen]

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

Er, they were half dead with hypothermia. It is not the rescuers' role to interrogate half-drowned people fresh from the sea. They are far more likely to be worried about their loved ones left behind than some poxy bow visor.

 

[Vixen]

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.

Manners.

Are you some kind of arbiter that you go around asking people if they are experts in the KGB?

You have been told where to find the bulk of the callous jokes.

Oh, and please quit with the clichés and clichéd style.

 

[Vixen]

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.



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.

Sillaste and Kadak never saw the bow visor. All they saw was the car ramp door and it was shut. They could have had no idea the bow visor had fallen off or was hanging off from their vantage point looking at the monitor. According to Hummel, the water on the monitor lens was likely the fire alarm spray, as someone did trigger the fire alarm with a coded 'Mr Skylight' message on the tannoy.

 

[Vixen]

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?

Manners. That style of fake 'Mr Angry' went out with the ark. Give it a rest .

 

[Vixen]

But of course I did not make that claim. I said it would be utterly unsurprising if your cousin had been briefed before his press conference.

Do you disagree? Do you think that would be surprising?

Do you suppose the survivors were told to shut up and say nothing until the Swedish Prime Minister could get there to interview them personally?

The survivors had gone virtually 24 hours without sleep, for fear of dozing off forever, as hypothermia brings about extreme sleepiness and indeed, most people on the rafts had to watch their fellow passengers die. All of the rescued had dangerously low core body temperatures. Some were on the verge of death and hallucinating.

Jack the Hedge thinks they were in a fit position to discuss the pros and cons o the bow visor and the car ramp.

Fact is, Paul Barney reports he definitely saw the pointy bit against the moonlight as the vessel went down.

This was later; when he was rescued he was far too delirious with happiness to care a darn about the flipping car ramp.

 

[Mojo]

Meek is the journalist, the Head Honch at Estline is his source. So Meek did find a reliable source and duly reported it. He is a hack, not an expert in mines.

You calling him a hack now does not substantiate your previous complaint that someone in the thread had called him a hack.

 

[Vixen]

Not until others pointed out that it was not Meek making the claim. Prior to that you wrote such things as

​

And even after the full nature of Meek's reportage was made evident, you still wrote

​

You're absolutely right. It's almost as if Bildt has nothing to do with my evaluation of another person's credibility on a particular point.



Nonsense. You're going to increasingly disturbing lengths to fabricate an argument you think I've tacitly made, or should have made, and cram it into my mouth. And if it weren't bad enough that you're trying to put me on the hook for an argument I never made, you've added a whiff of racism or nationalism to it that is absolutely, in no way, part of any argument I have ever made in this thread. It's not enough for you to straw-man other people's arguments. Now you have to make those straw-man arguments as distasteful as you possibly can.

The obsession over Bildt is yours. You have absolutely no idea what opinion, if any, I have of him or of any statements he may have made. This notion that I'm biased against one because he's a Swede and not an Estonian is completely contrived by you. My argument doesn't compare the two. It never compared the two. It doesn't need to compare the two. No matter how badly you want to shoehorn your obsession into my argument, it's not the argument I'm making.



I'll stop pressing you as soon as you explain how this

​

should not have been construed as an accusation of racism/nationalism.

Do you think Meek a reputable journalist for a respected British broadsheet, the GRAUNIAD would have published the story if he did not think it credible? He is not writing for the SUN or NATIONAL ENQUIRER where any old gossip will do. GRAUNIAD readers are sandal-wearing middle-class lefties who are conscious of climate change, social inequality and the need for reform. They could not give a toss about sensationalist stories. Enter James Meek with his reasonable story that Estonia 'might have been sunk by a mine claim'. Note the word 'claim'.