• 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 IV

Status
Not open for further replies.
Mojo said:
Note also Vixen’s disinclination to provide any information that would aid identification of a Times report she cited.
Click to expand...

There was a regular column called 'through German eyes'. One example is as attached.

As you can glean, newspapers then were excellent sources of research.

Some, such as Helsingin Sanomat have retained standards. I can understand why people in the UK are highly sceptical of early new reports as they are often based on prurience, salaciousness or faux outrage.
 

Attachments

  • Web_Photo_Editor .jpg
    Web_Photo_Editor .jpg
    130.3 KB · Views: 13
Vixen said:
. We saw how Axxman300 said the Nazis were baddies so who cares, which is circumventing the issue of what is or is not a fair target.
Click to expand...

If I'm the captain of that sub, I'd sink it too.

My point is that instead of making your point from a British point of view, say the silence surrounding the Dieppe raid, Operation Tiger, or if you wanted to stretch it - Coventry, the fact is you went with the Nazi perspective.

This is where your lack of historical facts merges with your lack of all things nautical.

Pro-Tip: Never take the Nazi's side on anything.
 
Jack by the hedge said:
Permit me to remind you:

You claimed the Soviets breached the convention of not attacking hospital ships.

When challenged that the Wilhelm Gustloff was not a hospital ship you doubled down by claiming your reference was a textbook and superior to the unreliable Wikipedia. And that it told you the ship had been painted the traditional grey of a hospital ship.

When challenged again that grey isn't how hospital ships were designated, and by another poster who has the book and wanted the reference page, you did not supply the reference but rather defied them to prove they had the book.

That looks suspiciously like bluffing on your part. Either because the book does not support your claim at all or because you don't actually have the book.

So, having reminded you of how we got here, it would certainly set my mind at ease if you would provide the reference page for where your book says the Wilhelm Gustloff was painted as a hospital ship. Thanks in anticipation.
Click to expand...

Open a thread and we can chat about it.
 
JesseCuster said:
Yes, I know that your half-baked nonsense about rogue KGB agents, wheeled submarines, minisubs firing blank torpedos, detonation charges, lock dissolving nuclear material, trucks full of heroin being pushed off the Estonia in the middle of a storm, CIA rendition flights disguised as cargo flights, WW2 mines, Spetsnaz, secret helicopter flights, etc. because I watch Homes under the Hammer and Strictly Come Dancing. Would it surprise you if I said I didn't watch those shows? Or if I had no ******* idea what you're on about?

Seriously, what in god's name are you talking about? Do you feel ok? :confused:
Click to expand...

You said if something is not within your radar it cannot be true.
 
JesseCuster said:
So why weren't any of the other helicopter crew members given medals to keep them quiet for secretly disappearing crew members? Remember, according to you, Svensson was compensated with a medal for keeping quiet about the skulduggery he was involved in.
Click to expand...

What skulduggery? Rescuing people is not skullduggery.
 
Vixen said:
You said if something is not within your radar it cannot be true.
Click to expand...


Are you seriously suggesting that “rogue KGB agents, wheeled submarines, minisubs firing blank torpedos, detonation charges, lock dissolving nuclear material, trucks full of heroin being pushed off the Estonia in the middle of a storm, CIA rendition flights disguised as cargo flights, WW2 mines, Spetsnaz, secret helicopter flights, etc.” is not half-baked nonsense?
 
Vixen said:
Open a thread and we can chat about it.
Click to expand...

No, let's talk about it in the thread where you brought it up. You seemed to think it was relevant then. Trying now to claim it is irrelevant just further convinces people that you are bluffing. You have claimed all your arguments are properly sourced. Your source on this claim was challenged. You levied the bizarre condition that the challenger must prove he owned the reference you cited before you would give the details of the citation. He has done so. It now falls to you to withdraw the claim in the thread where you made it, or properly support with citation the claim in the thread where you made it.
 
That's just a link to information about a book. Even if one of us had the book you have not provided a correct citation to where in the book you could find the evidence for your claim.

Come on, you're a "scientist", you should know how to do a proper citation.
 
Vixen said:
You said if something is not within your radar it cannot be true.
Click to expand...
This is the post of mine you were responding to:

JesseCuster said:
The conspiracy theory isn't that there was arms smuggling on the Estonia.

The conspiracy theories are all the BS about rogue KGB agents, secret escort British submarines, Spetsnaz, detonation charges, disappeared crew members, hidden helicopter flights, Israeli arms dealing, blank torpedo firing minisubs, wheeled submarines on the bottom of the Baltic, bow visor lock dissolving nuclear material, trucks full of heroin being pushed off the ship in the middle of a storm, etc.

You know, all that stuff that is clearly nutty conspiracy theory half-baked nonsense.
Click to expand...
How in god's name did you interpret that post as saying that if something is not within my radar it cannot be true?
 
JayUtah said:
Yes, those are facts. What aren't facts are the notions that: the ship was sunk on purpose, that the officers were kidnapped, that secret rescue missions were conducted, that the aircrews were bribed, that footage was seized, and so forth. Those are conspiracy theories. You seem unable to separate a fact from a conspiracy theory.
Click to expand...

It is a fact the Estonian crew were listed as survivors and their names later removed from the list. No explanation given.


The captains of Oceanos and Concordia wasted no time in saving themselves and the lower Estonia orders, Treu, Linde, Kadak and Sillaste were all on the same life raft, suited and booted before Tammes even got his Mayday call through. So erm, the senior crew of the Estonia on the privileged upper deck and lifeboat accessibility quite possibly had the same idea.

In fact, a Man Overboard lifeboat was found floating some miles to the East of Estonia, which had been successfully launched from the ship. It was empty.

It is meet and right to expect to understand what happened to the senior crew.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom