• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jack by the hedge said:
So what? If he knew in advance that stolen military hardware was going to be loaded onto a ferry he could have intercepted it before it left Estonia. In what way is that less plausible than sinking the ferry at sea in a storm by some unidentified means?
Click to expand...

Russia had no jurisdiction, military power or authority in Estonia in 1994.
 
Vixen said:
The JAIC never looked at anything else other than the bow visor. They devoted hundreds of pages as to its specifications.
Click to expand...
That has nothing to do with what I said and the post of yours I responded. I think you're pathologically incapable of following the discussion.

You said that the Swedish government rushed to say that no-one was to blame for the Estonia disaster, and when asked for evidence, you said that the JAIC report said no-one is to blame.

So I asked you, given that there was 3 years between the disaster and the publication of the JAIC report, how is that evidence if a rush to a claim that no-one was to blame.

Are you even aware of how often and how flagrantly you quote people's questions, only to talk about something else?
 
Vixen said:
Ensuring the vessel would not reach its destination.


There have been plenty of Herald of Free Enterprise scenarios in which ar ferries limped home or sank hours later.

This one sank fast.

It almost certainly was carrying smuggled Russian state secrets.
Click to expand...



Ships sink every day, on average around 200 ships a year.
Some sink slow, some sink fast, it depends on the ship and the conditions.

Some sink so quickly they don't get a mayday off at all and the entire crew is lost.

Estonia is not special.
 
Jack by the hedge said:
The hole is very obviously across the divide in the blue and white paint scheme. Photos of the ship show that is well above the waterline. Do you disagree?
Click to expand...

The vertical part is four metres high. That is over twelve feet. In the photos, this looks small but in fact the gap is 1.2m which is just over three feet, which is a sizeable gap!
 
Vixen said:
Putin was KGB Head in 1991 when the Soviet Union fell and the Head of the newly formed Russian spy agency as from that date.
Click to expand...
And he was so incompetent that when he learned that ex-Soviet military equipment was being sold on the black market he devised an inept plan where, instead of trying to intercept the gang and round them up, he would instead sink a ferry carrying one consignment. Because that would stop the trade, right? Without that particular ferry there would be absolutely no way to transport black market goods from Estonia and the trade would just stop.

This dunderheaded plot isn't quite the cunning Putin's reputation was built on, is it?
 
Last edited:
Vixen said:
The vertical part is four metres high. That is over twelve feet. In the photos, this looks small but in fact the gap is 1.2m which is just over three feet, which is a sizeable gap!
Click to expand...

But above the waterline and too small to sink the Estonia so quickly and certainly too small to be caused by a torpedo or mine, and in the wrong place to have been caused by a submarine ramming it.
 
Vixen said:
The vertical part is four metres high. That is over twelve feet. In the photos, this looks small but in fact the gap is 1.2m which is just over three feet, which is a sizeable gap!
Click to expand...
Still above the water line. Is it your claim that towels were not permitted in cabins and had to be stowed down on whatever deck the pool was on?
 
Vixen said:
Formality? I wouldn't know. However, fact is, Bildt seems to have known about the accident straight away.
Click to expand...
You imagine car ferries might be escorted by navy submarines as a formality. That may be a new level of weirdness.

If a country's Prime Minister is told straight away when a ship that's due to arrive there has in fact sunk in a storm, what part of that surprises you?
 
JesseCuster said:
That has nothing to do with what I said and the post of yours I responded. I think you're pathologically incapable of following the discussion.

You said that the Swedish government rushed to say that no-one was to blame for the Estonia disaster, and when asked for evidence, you said that the JAIC report said no-one is to blame.

So I asked you, given that there was 3 years between the disaster and the publication of the JAIC report, how is that evidence if a rush to a claim that no-one was to blame.

Are you even aware of how often and how flagrantly you quote people's questions, only to talk about something else?
Click to expand...


I'll stop attempting to answer your questions, then, given you have zero respect for these attempts. 'No good deed goes unpunished'.
 
Vixen said:
How do you know those nine 'missing' Estonian crew, including the second captain Piht, Chief Engineer Lembit and Chief Medical Officer Bogdanov, were not 'disappeared' by the Swedes/USA to face top secret charges of crimes against humanity?
Click to expand...
Whose hypothesis is it that members of the Estonia's crew might have been disappeared by the Swedes or the US in order to face top secret charges of crimes against humanity?

You've been quite adamant in this thread that the fantastical scenarios that you're spinning yarns about aren't yours but that you're merely the messenger, reporting on what others have said and what is reported in the news.

So why haven't you included a source, cite or proper reference for the origin of this scenario, given that you have told us that your posts are sourced, cited and properly referenced?
 
Jack by the hedge said:
And he was so incompetent that when he learned that ex-Soviet military equipment was being sold on the black market he devised an inept plan where, instead of trying to intercept the gang and round them up, he would instead sink a ferry carrying one consignment. Because that would stop the trade, right. Without that particular ferry there would be absolutely no way to transport black market goods from Estonia and the trade would just stop.

This dunderheaded plot isn't quite the cunning Putin his reputation was built on, is it?
Click to expand...

This was not some 'gang', this was the Swedish government on behalf of the CIA, allegedly. Sweden has a very sizeable navy and military. Russia was broke in 1991 and even in 1994 all that was left was an elite core of ex-speznats, still fiercely loyal to the Old Fatherland and dreams of Soviet military might. However, despite the Soviet Union having fallen, these guys were still extremely highly skilled. That ship was not brought down by a couple of amateur terrorists, as with the USS Cole.
 
Captain_Swoop said:
But above the waterline and too small to sink the Estonia so quickly and certainly too small to be caused by a torpedo or mine, and in the wrong place to have been caused by a submarine ramming it.
Click to expand...

That is not what the experts say.

Indeed, three sovereign nations have amended the Estonia Treaty to allow for this very hole in the starboard to be investigated. This would not happen unless they thought it of significance.

So your claim 'it is too small and above the waterline' is misconceived and ill-informed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom