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

[LondonJohn]

Excellent point.

Read my response.

 

[Vixen]

This isn't even funny, it's either utterly delusional or part of a troll-fest.

I still have the news clippings, actually.

 

[MarkCorrigan]

I still have the news clippings, actually.

I'm sure you do. I'm equally sure that the British secret service did not have agents in the German front line at Stalingrad, and I'm absolutely sure that the Times reporters were not secret agents.

 

[LondonJohn]

I still have the news clippings, actually.

These are news clippings which accurately report - with supporting evidence - the fact that the British had secret agents who'd infiltrated the German 6th Army during its assault on Stalingrad?

And that these British secret agents, and their handlers/superiors in Britain, allowed their reports on the battle to be published in a national newspaper (rather than..... I dunno.... the British intelligence community keeping those reports to itself for intelligence purposes)?

 

[LondonJohn]

The Estonian government officially believes that those nine Estonians listed as survivors have been disappeared by Sweden.

Oooh you know you're going to be required to supply reliable documentary evidence for this zinger, don't you?

 

[Vixen]

To answer your two questions 1. Yes, he was. 2. Sort of but not really.

Again, the CIA is not the arm of the President. They have to (sort of) answer to the President in some respects, but the President doesn't tell them what to do.

No, they advise him. The POTUS generally does what he is 'advised' by his generals. Fact is, Clinton was building up his image as Middle East Peacemaker.

No way would he have wanted to spoilt his image of chumminess with Yasser Arafat (See Camp David) 2000) by being revealed as helping Israel through the back door.

So 'classify' anything that might tarnish that image.

 

[Vixen]

Why on Earth would the JAIC have reported on his death? Why would the papers for that matter?

If the Swedish government HAD abducted him, why wouldn't the papers report on his death? Or write that he was "missing, presumed dead"? Are you claiming that the Swedish government ordered the papers to not report that he had died or something?

You seem to have the understanding of the world and realpolitik of a 5 year old.

How can they write that he died if he never did?

 

[MarkCorrigan]

No, they advise him. The POTUS generally does what he is 'advised' by his generals. Fact is, Clinton was building up his image as Middle East Peacemaker.

No way would he have wanted to spoilt his image of chumminess with Yasser Arafat (See Camp David) 2000) by being revealed as helping Israel through the back door.

So 'classify' anything that might tarnish that image.

But he wasn't helping Israel "through the back door". The US has been openly helping Israel for decades. Why on Earth do you think that the US would cover up help to Israel when it publicly gives them huge amounts of money and military equipment every year?

 

[MarkCorrigan]

How can they write that he died if he never did?

I...what? How would they know he isn't dead? He was involved in a maritime disaster that killed a lot of people. I'm pretty sure if they never heard from him again the logical thing to do would be assume he died in the disaster.

Also people get incorrectly reported as dead quite often, and people who disappear are routinely identified as being likely dead after time has passed.

Are you saying that a newspaper won't print a notice of death unless they have absolute confirmatin that they died? Because no one seems to have told the people who reported that the passengers of Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 are dead.

 

[Steve]

I still have the news clippings, actually.

Stole them from the British Newspaper Library?

 

[Vixen]

These are news clippings which accurately report - with supporting evidence - the fact that the British had secret agents who'd infiltrated the German 6th Army during its assault on Stalingrad?

And that these British secret agents, and their handlers/superiors in Britain, allowed their reports on the battle to be published in a national newspaper (rather than..... I dunno.... the British intelligence community keeping those reports to itself for intelligence purposes)?

I don't want to go off topic, but I certainly do have one piece where the TIMES reporter reports back on what the ordinary German soldiers are saying about the British, as per eavesdropping. I can recommend researching the newspaper libraries on any historical project. Looking up the Estonia tragedy, it becomes readily apparent that the 'bow visor fell off and it was a design fault' is something that was promulgated virtually on the same day as the accident by Bildt or his officially sanctioned officials. Stenmark who mentioned Piht being interviewed and challenged the bow visor claim was summarily sacked pronto.

The Estonian radio station KuKu who claims to have interviewed Pilot Y64 whilst he was taking Piht to Huddinge says to this day it is true the Estonian intelligence forces seized the tape.

Whilst it is unclear all nine survivors did actually survive, there seems to be a huge amount of evidence Piht certainly did.

The government, the newspapers and the JAIC never explained how these nine 'survivors' supposedly all in the same life boat (and being in the luxury cabins on the upper decks, near the life saving equipment, it does seem reasonably likely) were listed as survivors and then mysteriously not. Those in a life boat had a much greater chance of survival.

 

[Vixen]

Stole them from the British Newspaper Library?

Er, you pay for photocopying them. DUH!

 

[GlennB]

Stole them from the British Newspaper Library?

So it would seem. How many hundreds of times has Vixen self-debunked with these fanciful, over-elaborate claims?

eta: I stand (possibly) corrected.

 

[LondonJohn]

I don't want to go off topic, but I certainly do have one piece where the TIMES reporter reports back on what the ordinary German soldiers are saying about the British, as per eavesdropping. I can recommend researching the newspaper libraries on any historical project. Looking up the Estonia tragedy, it becomes readily apparent that the 'bow visor fell off and it was a design fault' is something that was promulgated virtually on the same day as the accident by Bildt or his officially sanctioned officials. Stenmark who mentioned Piht being interviewed and challenged the bow visor claim was summarily sacked pronto.

The Estonian radio station KuKu who claims to have interviewed Pilot Y64 whilst he was taking Piht to Huddinge says to this day it is true the Estonian intelligence forces seized the tape.

Whilst it is unclear all nine survivors did actually survive, there seems to be a huge amount of evidence Piht certainly did.

The government, the newspapers and the JAIC never explained how these nine 'survivors' supposedly all in the same life boat (and being in the luxury cabins on the upper decks, near the life saving equipment, it does seem reasonably likely) were listed as survivors and then mysteriously not. Those in a life boat had a much greater chance of survival.

Well, nothing you've written here (ie your first sentence) supports in any way whatsoever your contention that British secret agents had infiltrated the German army during its assault on Stalingrad.

And everything past your first sentence is wholly irrelevant as a response to my post. I guess you find whack-a-mole to be an amusing diversion...?

 

[Jack by the hedge]

He was de facto head of state, was he not? The CIA was answerable to him? (When he wasn't with that woman.)

Unlike Boris Yeltsin, his counterpart head of state who had absolutely no idea what his security services were up to, as you told us before. Right?

This very curious approach to history seems to be based on deciding "he's a wrong 'un" and proceeding on that basis. Clinton was shagging his intern therefore he's a wrong 'un and anything nefarious you like to imagine he might have got up to may be assumed true because that's just the kind of thing his kind do.

Bildt was also a wrong 'un therefore even though we have a report from his press conference saying he declined to speculate, the fact that a news report came out later that day blaming the bow visor means it must have come from Bildt somehow, maybe by transferring the thought to journalists telepathically, because he's a wrong 'un and that's just the kind of thing you can expect from his kind.

 

[Mojo]

OK, let’s remind ourselves, again, how we got here, and what claims Vixen is supposed to be supporting:

Bearing in mind the strict rules that all vehicles had to have a registered owner, and a group of young Estonians were turned away because they didn't realise the car they wanted to board was a company car and they needed to show the car owner's written permission and the EU edict together with previous rules, it illustrates how far Sweden was prepared to break the law to satisfy Clinton's demands.

What demands?

To smuggle former Soviet Union military and space electronics and equipment to the west.

The President at the time, Bill Clinton, was eager to appear as 'Middle East Peacemaker' extraordinaire. Plus, the CIA, together with MI6 and KSI/MUST were helping Estonia cut ties from the KGB/GRU in helping it to build up its own intelligence forces.

He thought that smuggling military equipment would make him look like a “'Middle East Peacemaker' extraordinaire”?

Leaving aside the bizarre reasoning, do you have any evidence that these demands were ever made?

Stop deliberately twisting my words.

Please do be so kind as to look at the Swedish version of Hansards, at the Rikstag's minutes in which Johan Hirschfeld, High Court Judge, confirms smuggling took place in September 1994, as reported by Henriksson the whislteblowing Customs Officer, thanks so awfully.

Can you give citations for the specific passages of the minutes that say that Clinton made these demands?

He was de facto head of state, was he not? The CIA was answerable to him? (When he wasn't with that woman.)

That looks like a “no”.

Do you have any evidence that Clinton, or anyone else, made these demands?

 

[Reformed Offlian]

Technically, at least in the UK, and workplace jargon notwithstanding, the police are civilians too.

And it's a useful distinction in situations where both military and civil authorities are involved (as in some peacekeeping missions - Joint Endeavor had MPs and the IPTF running round Bosnia)

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Despite Piht being described as waiting for questioning in Turku and described as having been interviewed (Stenmark), not one newspaper or official ever retracted this claim or stated it was an error.

The Estonian government officially believes that those nine Estonians listed as survivors have been disappeared by Sweden.

I appreciate it's hard to prove a negative but how on earth can you claim to know for certain that no newspaper which printed an early report suggesting Piht was rescued ever printed a correction?

If you really had such perfect insight into everything they published, perhaps you would like to indicate whether any ever reported anyone claiming to have seen, met or spoken with Piht personally. Any helicopter crew, rescue ship crew, hospital staff, police or anything like that. I expect the answer will be nobody ever did.

 

[Mojo]

I don't want to go off topic, but I certainly do have one piece where the TIMES reporter reports back on what the ordinary German soldiers are saying about the British, as per eavesdropping.

Do you have the date for that, or can you remember what the headline said? Or perhaps the name of the reporter?

 

[Reformed Offlian]

Can you find any more than secondhand reports about people assuming he was going to be interviewed? Are there no reports at all from anyone who actually saw him? Why would that be?

What did Helsingen Sanomat say, if anything, about the revelation that a man they had previously reported saved was actually presumed drowned?

And notice that this article acknowledges that there is conflicting information about Piht. It doesn't say: "Piht is for sure totes alive iron-clad."