• 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.

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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Vixen said:
The Atlantic lock is the bolt. It was a bolt lock. The bolt is indeed key to the whole thing, as the JAIC has the bow visor hanging from this bolt. Thus we need to see it. It was available. It was not 'too big for the helicopter' . Even if it had weighed a ludicrous 150kg it is still only the weight of two people (or one heavyweight boxer).
Click to expand...

It was one component in the lock.

It was examined as part of the whole lock assembly and found to be intact with only slight wear as would be expected .

Read the report.
 
Last edited:
Jack by the hedge said:
How would anyone know anything? What is there to explain? You're the one quoting a timeline of events here, not me. If he said it appeared the visor had been located and the next day withdrew and said it probably hadn't been, then the obvious implication is he was passing on information he received and which was revised. There's nothing obviously sinister about it.



Well, if you put that kind of spin on it then you can make it look sinister, but that's your invention rather than the bare facts.
Click to expand...

Er, Lehtola sent out a memo next day saying he had misspoken, so clearly someone briefed him to do so.
 
phiwum said:
I don't see that as having anything to do with the bow visor. "The ship is in one piece" means simply that the ship didn't break in two, not that the bow visor was still intact. Similarly, "a bow pointing west" is about the general position of the ship and not about the location of any bow visor.
Click to expand...

Given the JAIC were reporting 30.9.1994 that the bow visor had broken off, then Lehtola saying the bow visor had been found shortly after, and citing sonar imaging then that is what is being discussed.
 
Vixen said:
Translated: "this guy whupped me in debate...?"
Click to expand...

Bjorkman/Heiwa never whupped anyone in debate. Check out some of his old posts in the 9/11 CT sub-forum. I could probably find a few gems in no time, but you'd probably ignore them and render it a waste of time.
 
Captain_Swoop said:
It was one component in the lock.

It was examined as part of the whole lock assembly and found to be intact with only slight wear as would be expected .

Read the report.
Click to expand...

..By diver Stenström, Swedish head engineer and head of Swedish JAIC. He looked at it on the sea bed and threw it back in (so he claims). We literally only have his word for it, examined whilst underwater.
 
GlennB said:
So that's explosives and radioactive waste that did for the bow visor? I see. Where do torpedoes and limpet mines fit in?
Click to expand...

Well, Harri Ruotsalainen believes this theory; he even persuaded the Estonian government via a working party to look into the spot where the Estonia crossed back on itself. He believes that whilst working as an intern in the earliest days of examining the wreck as a naval diver recruit, he saw a sonar imaging of small squares on the seabed which he believes represent lorries.

Even Werner Hummel, level-headed shipping claims expert believed this theory as far back as February 1996, although I am not sure if he still does.

It has been established that the Estonia sank after a bowdoor broke off, but how this happened exactly is unclear until today. Swedish experts stated that "a giant wave" was the culprit. German experts originally conformed with this theory. Until December last year. Hummel: "Then we set eyes upon the translation of the so-called Felix Report. This report was named after Felix Dzerdzinski - the founder of the KGB (and its forerunners NKVD and Cheka), the former secret service of the Soviet Union. Former members of this organization revealed their findings about organized crime in the Baltic states in an 85-page report commissioned by the Russian government. The report already dates from March last year and was passed on to the local authorities, and then translated. Two pages of it are on the Estonia disaster. This theory was so fantastic that we didn't believe it in the beginning."

According to the report, the Estonia was a crucial link in an enormous smuggling operation from the Baltic states to Western Europe. On the night of the disaster, the ferry had contraband cargo on board, including a huge amount of heroin and forty metric tonnes (40,000 kg) of radioactive cobalt and some osmium.

The captain of the Estonia, Arvo Andresson, reportedly was aware of the smuggling but did not know exactly what was on board. He was reportedly told during the journey by a certain "Yuri" - named in the report as the contact person of the smugglers in Tallinn - that the Swedish Customs had been tipped. (The Swedish deny this.) "Yuri" threatened the captain with death and ordered him to throw the contraband cargo overboard. The cargo was on two lorries; thus, there was only one way to get rid of it: through the opened bowdoor.

According to the report, there was a key witness - someone named Igor Kristapowich - who had recorded the incriminating telephone call of Yuri to the captain. After the disaster, Kristapowich was found murdered in Talinn. He was murdered, says the report, because of this knowledge and his involvement in the smuggling. Not a single trace of the sound recording has ever been found. "Therefore nobody believed in this theory," expert Hummel says. Until February.
Click to expand...
Wise international

IMV only a simpleton believes the bow visor fell off due to a wave, at face value, with no proof.
 
Last edited:
Vixen said:
..By diver Stenström, Swedish head engineer and head of Swedish JAIC. He looked at it on the sea bed and threw it back in (so he claims). We literally only have his word for it, examined whilst underwater.
Click to expand...

That makes no sense. If he's underwater then he couldn't throw it back in the sea, as it's still in the sea.
 
Vixen said:
Well, Harri Ruotsalainen believes this theory; he even persuaded the Estonian government via a working party to look into the spot where the Estonia crossed back on itself. He believes that whilst working as an intern in the earliest days of examining the wreck as a naval diver recruit, he saw a sonar imaging of small squares on the seabed which he believes represent lorries.

Even Werner Hummel, level-headed shipping claims expert believed this theory as far back as February 1996, although I am not sure if he still does.

Wise international

IMV only a simpleton believes the bow visor fell off due to a wave, at face value, with no proof.
Click to expand...

You're back to that old bollocks again?
 
Vixen said:
The Atlantic lock is the bolt. It was a bolt lock. The bolt is indeed key to the whole thing, as the JAIC has the bow visor hanging from this bolt. Thus we need to see it. It was available. It was not 'too big for the helicopter' . Even if it had weighed a ludicrous 150kg it is still only the weight of two people (or one heavyweight boxer).
Click to expand...

The bolt is one part of the lock. It was examined and described. It was not significantly damaged. The lugs which were fixed to the ship, and which the bolt was pushed through, had failed. Not the bolt. Nor the lug on the visor. The fact that the bolt was not damaged suggests that the failed lugs had indeed simply had the pin ripped out of them by the great forces acting on the visor, and they had not been cut by explosive charges which would inevitably have cut into the bolt too.
 
Vixen said:
I have no idea.
Click to expand...

You don't know whether you're claiming him as an authority? How is that supposed to work? Who else would know?

But I am not going to call someone a loon just because YOU say so.
Click to expand...

Straw man. No one is asking you to call him a loon. But you're citing him as if you expect his statements and opinions to have authority. You know full well he is discredited not only at this forum but in his former industry. So don't expect your citations of him to result in anything but continued laughter at your inability to find creditable sources.
 
Vixen said:
...many a true word said in jest.
Click to expand...

You really can't seriously imagine that radioactive waste could have destroyed steel parts several centimetres thick in a matter of hours without also killing every human being within tens of metres.

Did the first sailor sent to inspect the car deck notice the eerie blue glow? No.
 
Vixen said:
The Atlantic lock is the bolt.
Click to expand...

No, it isn't. The bolt was part of the lock. I have a lock on a side gate that incorporates a sliding bolt.

Perhaps your English has got a bit muddled here?
 
Vixen said:
Er, Lehtola sent out a memo next day saying he had misspoken, so clearly someone briefed him to do so.
Click to expand...

Far from it. "Briefed him to do so" is spin. It implies he was instructed to change his report without any good reason to do so. Briefed him on the latest information or interpretation of that evidence is more likely. You want to spin it as some sinister, menacing people ordering him to change what he said. That's entirely in your head.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom