Cont: The Sinking of MS Estonia: Case Re-opened Part III

[Reformed Offlian]

1) Why do you persist in your ridiculous - and entirely unsubstantiated - conspiracy theory that the JAIC "had to" base its report on what Bildt had said - even if (in your world) it (the JAIC) knew that the true cause of the disaster was something else?

Vixen's obsession with keeping Carl Bildt personally front and center of this thing is bizarre, when you remember that he left office mere days after the event. There is no reason that anybody on that committee was beholden to him in any way.

Vixen will then try to shift this into some sort of deep state thing, but will later try to bring Bildt right back into center stage somehow.

She'd be better off saying it was the King.

 

[Mojo]

She'd be better off saying it was the King.

Elvis?

 

[GlennB]

Elvis?

Nah, he's living on the moon in an English double-decker bus. Or something.

 

[LondonJohn]

Elvis?

Of COURSE!! *slaps forehead hard* How could we all have been so stupid?!

Elvis didn't die on the toilet in 1977. Instead, he was spirited away to the Soviet Union by Brezhnev, who was a big fan of The King's later movies. Elvis was installed in a dacha on the Black Sea, and was provided with a constant supply of benzodiazepines, fried food and underage women, in return for re-recording his back catalogue in Russian. He eventually died (for real) in 1986 while filming for an episode of hit Russian TV show "я слишком толстый, чтобы пройти через мою входную дверь" ("I'm too fat to fit through my front door").

When the Soviet Union disintegrated in the early 1990s after the fall of the Berlin Wall, this "Elvis Secret" immediately took on a higher significance. And by 1994, even though then-Russian-President Yeltsin wasn't a fan of Presley (to the extent that he refused to have any Elvis songs on his own in-palace karaoke setup), he was determined that the secret itself should be preserved.

But in the late Summer of 1994, a disaffected former KGB Colonel who'd remained in Estonia decided to sell the secret to the highest bidder. He contacted a dissident officer in the Swedish Army, and a deal was made. It was arranged that the Swedish military would send two large trucks over to Tallinn, to collect the KGB Colonel together with several hundred copies of Elvis' Russian re-recordings - including such hits as "люби меня нежно", "отель разбитых сердец", and "(я не могу помочь) влюблен в тебя". The Swede and the Russian would then sell the story jointly to the highest bidder.

However... the Swedish intelligence services got wind of the plan, and decided not only that that it was imperative that the plan was foiled, but also that it should be foiled in such a way as to destroy all evidence that it had ever existed. The Russians were equally keen to make all of this go away permanently. A crack Swedish special forces team was formed to put together a suitable operation, and Bildt and Yeltsin met in Moscow in early September 1994* to sign off on it.

The rest, as they say, is history. They so nearly got away with it as well......


* An interesting side-note is that this meeting very nearly ended in failure and recriminations, owing to a misunderstanding involving pierogi and bisongrass vodka.

 

[Axxman300]

This was some sixteen hours after the sinking and about three weeks before the bow visor was found, even though by 8 Oct 1994, sonar images picked up the outline of...a bow visor...immediately below the bulbous bow visor...yet, the JAIC announced 9 October 1994, the bow visor 'has not yet been found'. Let that sink in.

Rockwater did the dive early December 1994.

We covered this after you posted the CT. The image in no way shows the bow visor in place.

 

[Andy_Ross]

We covered this after you posted the CT. The image in no way shows the bow visor in place.

Part of the CT is that the Swedish Navy separated it and removed it from the wreck.

 

[Axxman300]

The ship was ruptured on its starboard side. That is why it listed violently to the starboard side. The bow faces almost directly south, face down. The aft part of the vessel lies on the slope, with the starboard side to the east of it, on the upper side, and the aft port side on the lower slope. The forward part of the ship is on soft mud, as is most of the port side.

The fact the vessel landed on a slope is pure coincidence. The ship sank stern first, with a 40° list to aft starboard. Then it capsized onto starboard so that the port side was horizontal and passengers were able scramble along it for a short period. It then turned face forward with the bow rising virtually 90° upright out of the water, as the stern hit the bottom - the 155 metres length of the vessel in about 64 - 80 metres of water - thus, when it fell face forward, due to gravity, the stress would have been amidships - exactly or near the centre, hence the sensation surivivors have in such a sinking ship of it snapping in half, even if it does not actually do so. It fell on its stern, not on its starboard side, which, although nearer to the higher part of the slope, did not actually land on it, except to come to rest.


If there was a stress fracture, it will be seen roughly 75 -80 metres along, across the hull. But the hull looks perfectly smooth and intact, so the vessel appears to have landed relatively gently onto the seabed, after the initial bump on the stern.

LondonJohn's belief the Estonia was, 'just like The Herald of Free Enterprise and fated to land in the sea bed on its side', is unwarranted, unfounded and demonstrates an ignorance of how the Estonia actually sank.

LondonJohn isn't the one posting sidescan sonar image of a wreck that CLEARLY SHOWS IT HAS MOVED/ROLLED AT LEAST FIFTEEN MEETERS WHILE ON THE BOTTOM.

The damage is on the UNDERSIDE of the wreck, out of view from surface sonar. And Estonia lies in relatively shallow water, how it rests on the bottom is no indication of how it sank other than she took on excessive water at the open bow.

You need a new hobby because you are not good at this.

 

[Axxman300]

Part of the CT is that the Swedish Navy separated it and removed it from the wreck.

I know you that you know how much work such a job would entail, the kind of ships (plural) and men needed to get that thing dethatched from Estonia, and moved. All done in rough Baltic Seas.

Someone would have noticed.

Does the Swedish Navy even have that kind of salvage capability or do they have to contract with civilian companies? Either way, those ships are not usually on call at a moment's notice.

I guess what I'm saying is this idea is daft.

 

[Mojo]

I know you that you know how much work such a job would entail, the kind of ships (plural) and men needed to get that thing dethatched from Estonia, and moved. All done in rough Baltic Seas.

Someone would have noticed.

<fx Brummie accent, ‘See? It MUST have been covered up!’>

 

[Steve]

LondonJohn isn't the one posting sidescan sonar image of a wreck that CLEARLY SHOWS IT HAS MOVED/ROLLED AT LEAST FIFTEEN MEETERS WHILE ON THE BOTTOM.

The damage is on the UNDERSIDE of the wreck, out of view from surface sonar. And Estonia lies in relatively shallow water, how it rests on the bottom is no indication of how it sank other than she took on excessive water at the open bow.

You need a new hobby because you are not good at this.

And yet we are 600+ posts into the third volume of this thread. That must indicate a particular talent for............ I dunno, I got nuthin'.

 

[Andy_Ross]

I know you that you know how much work such a job would entail, the kind of ships (plural) and men needed to get that thing dethatched from Estonia, and moved. All done in rough Baltic Seas.

Someone would have noticed.

Does the Swedish Navy even have that kind of salvage capability or do they have to contract with civilian companies? Either way, those ships are not usually on call at a moment's notice.

I guess what I'm saying is this idea is daft.

They just needed some det cord, a few charges and a couple of divers it seems.

 

[Axxman300]

Carl Bildt knew about the accident before anybody else and he remains strangely coy about how he heard of it and when, given the contemporaneous Estonian and Finnish Prime Ministers at the time remember when they heard the news vividly and at what time and where they were. How can Carl Bildt claim not to remember, when in front of many witnesses, he was called aside at his leaving party (having lost the election) in a hotel.

Carl Bildt is not on trial. That he doesn't meet your standard of being candid is not relevant. Nothing in his LONG history of public service suggests anything indicating he would be comfortable with and or cover up mass murder.

This is a classic strawman argument.

Bildt is on Twitter, and anyone can follow him.

The Swedish intelligence knew about the accident immediately, as it was likely tracking the vessel due to the highly sensitive materiel on board.

Weird, almost as if Swedish intelligence does its job by monitoring radio traffic since anyone with a radio in that area would have heard THE MAYDAY call.

Plus there were about 70 policemen from Stockholm on board with a rumoured further contingent of American agents (the security services in Sweden are under the police umbrella) returning from a conference in Tallinn

Considering how much Sweden pays its police officers I think the ferry would be cheaper than an airplane.

And the CIA is oddly prompt about adding stars to its wall of fallen agents, but none were added in this time frame, certainly nothing to suggest a "contingent".

Truth is, Bildt and Clinton, together with their MI6 conterparts through PM John Major, believed the public were too dimwitted to question the heavily sanitised report and that it would just accept it was another "The Herald of Free Enterprise" unfortunate accident, due to miscommunication between the crew and the bridge and a weak design that was vulnerable to a 'few strong waves'. In fact, Sweden even had to set up a Ministry of Information to encourage the public to accept the JAIC report, because it knew it was unbelievable.

This is nothing more than anti-EU propaganda. In most of the CT links you post you will find many of those promoting conspiracy are Green Party members. Bildt's main achievement was getting Sweden into the EU, and this made enemies. Hence this claptrap of lies.

The Estonia sank after her bow visor was knocked off by heavy seas and her crew doing nothing until it was too late. That's what happened, it's ugly, but the truth often is ugly.

 

[lobosrul5]

<fx Brummie accent, ‘See? It MUST have been covered up!’>

I need to know this... we talking Ozzy Osbourne accent, or like Tommy Shelby from Peaky Blinders*?

*a show in which an Irishman does a bad Brummie accent, while a Kiwi** does a bad Irish accent

**who was indeed born in Ireland but moved to New Zealand at an early age

 

[Andy_Ross]

I need to know this... we talking Ozzy Osbourne accent, or like Tommy Shelby from Peaky Blinders*?

*a show in which an Irishman does a bad Brummie accent, while a Kiwi** does a bad Irish accent

**who was indeed born in Ireland but moved to New Zealand at an early age

It's a fantasy show anyway so 8in that worlds they are the real accents.

 

[LondonJohn]

Carl Bildt knew about the accident before anybody else and he remains strangely coy about how he heard of it and when, given the contemporaneous Estonian and Finnish Prime Ministers at the time remember when they heard the news vividly and at what time and where they were. How can Carl Bildt claim not to remember, when in front of many witnesses, he was called aside at his leaving party (having lost the election) in a hotel.

Are you sure about that? Or are you, just perhaps, regurgitating something that another conspiracy theorist has said?

Could it be, for example, that he might once have stated that he couldn't remember when he was told what about the disaster (eg he might have been told firstly that the Estonia was in trouble and that a rescue operation was underway, but only at a slightly later point in time was he told the full details of the disaster as they were known at that time)?

And as others have already said: how would/could Bildt possibly benefit from "pretending" not to remember something like this? Even if he was privy to some sort of grand conspiracy (he wasn't, but just supposing...), why on Earth would he have needed to lie about when he first heard the Estonia was in trouble? The Swedish Navy/Coastguard and/or listening stations would without doubt have learned about the unfolding disaster as soon as the Estonia put out its Mayday call (ie some time before it sank), so even a CT-involved Bildt would have had a plausible reason to have learned about things even before the ship went down.

The Swedish intelligence knew about the accident immediately, as it was likely tracking the vessel due to the highly sensitive materiel on board. Plus there were about 70 policemen from Stockholm on board with a rumoured further contingent of American agents (the security services in Sweden are under the police umbrella) returning from a conference in Tallinn.

No. It's just as likely - probably more likely, in fact - that if the Swedish intelligence services knew about the disaster immediately, it was because it had heard the Estonia's mayday calls, and subsequent related radio traffic.

Truth is, Bildt and Clinton, together with their MI6 conterparts through PM John Major, believed the public were too dimwitted to question the heavily sanitised report and that it would just accept it was another "The Herald of Free Enterprise" unfortunate accident, due to miscommunication between the crew and the bridge and a weak design that was vulnerable to a 'few strong waves'. In fact, Sweden even had to set up a Ministry of Information to encourage the public to accept the JAIC report, because it knew it was unbelievable.

Where to start on this stuff? Well firstly, the very moment you wrote "Truth is..." you invalidated everything following that opener. Because there's no way whatsoever that you can categorise what you've written as "truth". The best you can claim about it is that it's your opinion. Your wholly-unsubstantiated opinion.

As for your opinion itself, it resists any form of rebuttal, on account of its core stupidity and entire lack of substantiation.

 

[Axxman300]

In what world is the official accident report not plausible?

How was the report "rushed" in comparison accident reports from Europe around this time frame?

Some family member demand answers, but answers to what?

This whole thing is silly.

 

[Kid Eager]

In what world is the official accident report not plausible?

How was the report "rushed" in comparison accident reports from Europe around this time frame?

Some family member demand answers, but answers to what?

This whole thing is silly.

Agreed. The willingness to insert any old tosh into the gaps between facts and evidence, as if it were of equal weight, is well beyond inane.

The mistake is thinking that the OP actually believes any of it.

 

[Vixen]

So.... are you saying here that (from your perspective, of course):

1) The Wikipedia entry on the Estonia disaster has been "falsified" to make it look like the JAIC report "stands up to scrutiny"?

2) In reality (again, your reality....), the JAIC report doesn't stand up to scrutiny?

Not at all. I am referring to your own post in which you were bragging about how an entry was deliberately falsified and you seemed to believe this turned it into the truth, 'as it [the falsification] is on Wikipedia'.


The hypocrisy is astonishing. Wikipedia is wrong when it suits you.

 

[Mojo]

Not at all. I am referring to your own post in which you were bragging about how an entry was deliberately falsified and you seemed to believe this turned it into the truth, 'as it [the falsification] is on Wikipedia'.


The hypocrisy is astonishing. Wikipedia is wrong when it suits you.

You shouldn’t have linked to LondonJohn’s post. It makes it far too easy for people to see that your description of it doesn’t correspond to what was actually posted.

 

[Vixen]

Vixen's obsession with keeping Carl Bildt personally front and center of this thing is bizarre, when you remember that he left office mere days after the event. There is no reason that anybody on that committee was beholden to him in any way.

Vixen will then try to shift this into some sort of deep state thing, but will later try to bring Bildt right back into center stage somehow.

She'd be better off saying it was the King.

You've been told several times now that it was Bildt who appointed the Swedish head of the JAIC. Although supposedly a three-nation accident investigation committee, the Swedes withheld much of the important information. The JAIC thus had to largely work on assumptions and guess work. In effect, it shoe-horned the accident into Carl Bildt's edict on Day One. This will have been on orders of the national intelligence guys, thus he could hide under 'classified information'.