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

[Vixen]

1) Why would you find it hard to believe that Bildt first heard about it at around 2.30am?

2) Why could it not have been the case that Bildt might have heard the news in a fractured series of instalments? For instance, he might firstly have been told that reports were coming through of a ferry on its way to Stockholm having run into serious trouble; then some time later he might have been told the name of the ship and that it was feared sunk; then some time later still he might have been given a fuller briefing about the circumstances and the rescue operation.

3) Why on earth does it matter to you that those two other PMs (say that they) remember when they were first informed, while Bildt appears equivocal on when he first knew? Why would/should that even be indicative of "funny business" on Bildt's part? How would he - assuming for a moment that he was wearing your "conspiracy ringmaster" hat - have benefited by claiming a level of confusion over when/how he first found out?






Nope. No dice.

1) It's a hospital list. Totally different from any lists which might have been compiled aboard the rescue helicopters. Indeed, that hospital list might easily have been drawn up entirely independently from any information that might have been gathered during the rescue operation itself.

2) It clearly doesn't contain anyone's date of birth.


Other than that (as they say).......................

Privacy laws prohibit people putting up personal birthdates. Strangely, in Sweden and Finland, you can look up how much people earn (tax) and what car belongs to whom but anything else such as being named in court is a big no-no.

It should be obvious Bildt was informed of the accident by his intelligence officers and the fact they knew before Stockholm MRCC tell you they had their ear to the ground or should that be sonar to the sea.

He flew to Turku the same day with Laar from Tallinn and PM Aho of Finland and by the afternoon had put out a press release it was the bow visor, even though Sillaste was the only one interviewed as of that time. He never claimed the bow visor was missing nor that the car deck ramp was open. He said water was coming in through the sides from looking at his monitor. Hardly the basis of a final conclusion. Bildt's chief defence officer, Svensson, said a day later that the bodies should not be brought up.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Please grow up. When I said I didn't answer hypothetical questions, it was in the context of a poster asking a what-if imaginary scenario...

The idea that the Estonia was sabotaged is a what-if imaginary scenario.

 

[Axxman300]

I imagine Bildt swanning around in a red tailcoat, silver-tipped cane and huge top hat, laughing and gesticulating theatrically while he builds and safeguards the conspiracy as its ringmaster....

I started following Bildt on Twitter.

He continues to work for human rights in Europe. A few weeks ago he was in Iceland, and posted a photo of his favorite bookstore.

What a monster.

 

[Agatha]

A boat is only a half circle in shape, thus if port is at 45° and starboard at 135°

I admit I only did five years of physics and seven years of maths at school as my A-levels, degree and post-grad qualifications weren't in physics, though I do have a maths A-level. This puts me at a huge disadvantage to some of the regulars in this thread, so I regularly defer to their knowledge.

However, I possess a protractor and have sailed boats, and am aware that port and starboard are directly opposite each other; in terms of angles they are 180 degrees apart, not 90. So if port is at 45 degrees (relative to what?) then starboard is at 225 degrees.

Or to put it another way, if port is at 45 degrees (again, relative to what?) then 135 degrees is either the keel or the mast depending on which way the boat is facing/where one sets 0 degrees.

 

[GlennB]

deleted - probably a mistake

 

[Axxman300]

Likewise, if the senior Estonian crew manning the Estonia that night were carted off elsewhere because the accident itself had to be classified* as top secret because of the involvement of governments and spy agencies, then that, too, would be a breach of the Treaty as technically everybody is entitled to go through due process and not be vanished.

Except that didn't happen.

Worse, you just ignored the context on which you base your ridiculous statement. First, the two Egyptians were suspect. Second, Sweden could have said no. Third, after 9-11-2001 nobody cared. Fourth, both men are still alive and findable today.

This has no bearing on the events on 1994 in any way.

Officials learned quickly that the bow visor had come off, which had nothing to do with smuggling, espionage, or international intrigue so there was no reason to "disappear" anyone. You have yet to show proof that any of the crew knew there was smuggling taking place on the Estonia, and or that they were in on it.

*When I was on jury service waiting to be called, an usher told us that there was a top secret hearing going on at the time at the court and because it involved national security, no public were allowed and all reporting banned.

Neat. I can regale you with details of at least four classified operations. But I won't because it has nothing to do with the Estonia sinking after her bow-visor got knocked off in rough seas.

 

[Reformed Offlian]

I said, 'I don't tend to answer hypothetical questions'.

In future, kindly quote me properly and in context.

What a silly quibble. And also inaccurate. While it is true that you rarely give straight answers to *any* question that put you on the spot, you do not *consistently* fail to answer hypothetical questions in preference to others. For example:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=13600512&postcount=50

If the entire phone network went down, how was the call via mobile phone completed??

I am guessing one of those hand-held jobs that are really landline phones recharged to be carried around. This was 1994, remember!!!

 

[Reformed Offlian]

What a lot of codswallop. A poster asked in which way could a crew be charged with the Estonia accident and I gave my opinion and I said it was hypothetical as it would not be fair or ethical to state the Estonia crew would be liable for criminal charges. It was a disclaimer, if you like.

IOW, you answered a hypothetical question.

 

[Reformed Offlian]

How would the pilots know the names of the people they were rescuing?

They keep a log book!!!

This is also you answering a hypothetical question.

 

[Mojo]

I gave you the link. Stop pretending you cannot comprehend it.

You cited the “Treaty 1988 (Criminal Law)” as supporting your claim that Sweden was disappearing people, and linked to the 1998 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. You claimed that “Articles 58 through to 67” of the treaty supported your claim, but those articles of the statute you linked to are about the court’s procedure, not about people disappearing.

Can you provide a link to the 1988 treaty?

 

[abaddon]

This is so absurd it is annoying my breakfarcicile at this point.

So vixen has claimed that...well my actual response is is way outside the MA. Suffice it to say that our resident physicist, scientist, forensic analyst, psychologist. teacher, accountant, aviation expert, marine engineer, linguist possibly has an opinion.

Consider that.

 

[Here_to_learn]

Privacy laws prohibit people putting up personal birthdates. Strangely, in Sweden and Finland, you can look up how much people earn (tax) and what car belongs to whom but anything else such as being named in court is a big no-no.

That is of course not what privacy laws restrict. Please show where the law say you may not put a birthdate on a piece of paper.

It should be obvious Bildt was informed of the accident by his intelligence officers and the fact they knew before Stockholm MRCC tell you they had their ear to the ground or should that be sonar to the sea.

Your fantasies are not worth anything. In the press conference in the morning (that you can listen to at https://sok.riksarkivet.se/estonia?infosida=1994-09-28 (in Swedish)) Carl Bildt say that he was notified by an unnamed person, that got the information from a TT News flash. After that he contacted MRCC.

He flew to Turku the same day with Laar from Tallinn and PM Aho of Finland and by the afternoon had put out a press release it was the bow visor, [...]

Citation please. In the reports I have been able to find in newspaper archives this is not supported. https://www.dn.se/arkiv/inrikes/carl-bildt-kande-folk-ombord/
https://www.svd.se/arkiv/1994-09-29/7¨
(Subscription required)

In the second article, there is some information about the press conference.

På presskonferensen fick Carl Bildt också frågan om han kände till uppgiften att en frontlucka på fartyget inte var stängd och att den orsakade att stora vattenmassor forsade in i fartyget.
Carl Bildt avfärdade frågan och sade att det inte var statsministrarnas sak att hantera uppgifter som tillhör haverikommissionen.

My translation:
"At the press conference, Carl Bildt was also asked if he was aware of the information that a front hatch on the ship was not closed and that it caused large bodies of water to rush into the ship.
Carl Bildt rejected the question and said that it was not the prime ministers' job to handle tasks belonging to the Accident Investigation Board."

So Vixen, show your sources that your oft repeated statement is true.

 

[Vixen]

I admit I only did five years of physics and seven years of maths at school as my A-levels, degree and post-grad qualifications weren't in physics, though I do have a maths A-level. This puts me at a huge disadvantage to some of the regulars in this thread, so I regularly defer to their knowledge.

However, I possess a protractor and have sailed boats, and am aware that port and starboard are directly opposite each other; in terms of angles they are 180 degrees apart, not 90. So if port is at 45 degrees (relative to what?) then starboard is at 225 degrees.

Or to put it another way, if port is at 45 degrees (again, relative to what?) then 135 degrees is either the keel or the mast depending on which way the boat is facing/where one sets 0 degrees.

Relative to midship transverse.

 

[Vixen]

Except that didn't happen.

Worse, you just ignored the context on which you base your ridiculous statement. First, the two Egyptians were suspect. Second, Sweden could have said no. Third, after 9-11-2001 nobody cared. Fourth, both men are still alive and findable today.

This has no bearing on the events on 1994 in any way.

Officials learned quickly that the bow visor had come off, which had nothing to do with smuggling, espionage, or international intrigue so there was no reason to "disappear" anyone. You have yet to show proof that any of the crew knew there was smuggling taking place on the Estonia, and or that they were in on it.



[qimg]http://https://media.giphy.com/media/xT77Y36ijyuwn58bja/giphy.gif[/qimg]

Neat. I can regale you with details of at least four classified operations. But I won't because it has nothing to do with the Estonia sinking after her bow-visor got knocked off in rough seas.

You have spectacularly missed the point. It isn't that the two men were 'suspects' it is to do with the principle of 'disappearing' a person, for whatever reason. For example, as happened in Argentina.

How could officials have 'learned it quickly' that the cause of the accident was the bow visor, when it was not even recovered for about three weeks, nor located until 4 Oct (Hesari) or 18 October, depending which of Lehtola's memos you read.

It is ridiculous.

 

[Vixen]

IOW, you answered a hypothetical question.

You have been told I was referring to the 'what-if' variety, of the type, 'If my uncle had tits would he be my aunt?'

Clear now?

 

[Vixen]

I started following Bildt on Twitter.

He continues to work for human rights in Europe. A few weeks ago he was in Iceland, and posted a photo of his favorite bookstore.

What a monster.

He is my ninth cousin. We share the same 8th great grandparents. That being so, doesn't make him immune to criticism. Enabling the CIA to smuggle sensitive and dangerous stuff out of Russia on the passenger ferry Estonia might have seemed like a 'noble cause' but it put thousands of ordinary people at foreseeable risk of retaliation by disaffected speznats, stalinists, gangsters and mafia racketeers.

In classifying the accident a secret, probably at order from the CIA, MUST and MI6, the victims' families have been deprived of:

• Burying their loved ones in their chosen home plot
• Having any form of redress for negligence and manslaughter/murder
• the right to know what happened in full (closure).

Transparency and ethics are all.

 

[Here_to_learn]

Enabling the CIA to smuggle sensitive and dangerous stuff out of Russia on the passenger ferry Estonia might have seemed like a 'noble cause' but it put thousands of ordinary people at foreseeable risk of retaliation by disaffected speznats, stalinists, gangsters and mafia racketeers.

Citation needed. I have previously posted links to the investigation that concluded that the transport of military material was for the Swedish defense. You claim CIA - show your sources.

In classifying the accident a secret, probably at order from the CIA, MUST and MI6,

Citation needed. In what way is the accident classified a secret?

Transparency and ethics are all.

Then apply that, by properly sourcing your statements.

 

[Vixen]

You cited the “Treaty 1988 (Criminal Law)” as supporting your claim that Sweden was disappearing people, and linked to the 1998 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. You claimed that “Articles 58 through to 67” of the treaty supported your claim, but those articles of the statute you linked to are about the court’s procedure, not about people disappearing.

Can you provide a link to the 1988 treaty?

Asked and answered.

If you want to know more you can read about it on wiki.

After World War I and even more after the heinous crimes committed during World War II, it became a priority to prosecute individuals responsible for egregious crimes so serious that they needed to be exemplified by being referred to as "crimes against humanity". In order to re-affirm basic principles of democratic civilisation, the alleged criminals were not executed in public squares or sent to torture camps, but instead treated as criminals: with a regular trial, the right to defense and the presumption of innocence. The Nuremberg trials marked a crucial moment in legal history, and after that, some treaties that led to the drafting of the Rome Statute were signed.

 

[Mojo]

Asked and answered.

If you want to know more you can read about it on wiki.

Nope, that’s the 1998 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court again, which we have already established does not say that Sweden was disappearing people. You cited the “Treaty 1988 (Criminal Law)”, also referring to it as the “Rome Treaty 1988”.

ETA: I suppose I’d better remind you what your claim was:

That's what happened two to Egyptian suspected terrorists in Sweden in 2002 IIRC. They were 'disappeared'.

The fact there is a Treaty 1988 (Criminal Law) that forbids the disappearance of suspects, must mean that it had been happening.

 

[GlennB]

Relative to midship transverse.

'Midship transverse' appears to refer to a plane section drawn amidships and at right angles to the hull, i.e. the dark 'slice' in the diagram below. In that case 'at 45° to midship transverse' is completely meaningless, as far as I can see.

Perhaps, Vixen, you could explain in more detail?