• 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.
Vixen said:
Ensign Kenneth Svensson did indeed get the Swedish Defence Forces Medal of Merit, Gold with Sword, did he not?

Or is that a 'conspiracy theory' that he got a medal but nobody else did in that category, not even silver or bronze. Is it a fact?

A simple yes or no will suffice.
Click to expand...

Must have been the Rescue Olympics with awards for first, second, and third place rescues! :eek:
 
Vixen said:
If a thing is classified, what would you accept as evidence?
Click to expand...

How would you propose to distinguish between an event that never happened and one whose evidence is alleged to be classified? In the total absence of evidence, is it more parsimonious to conclude that some particular, proposed event never occurred? Or that some particular event occurred and has been classified? Can someone who desires to believe that a certain particular thing happened simply assert its historicity and then claim that all evidence of it is classified? Cannot one simply conjure into existence any desired event under that pretext?
 
Reformed Offlian said:
So you now acknowledge that the JAIC report credits Svensson (i.e. "the Y 64 rescue man") with seven rescues on two different helicopters and not just one on Y 64. Good, that's progress.

And you've also acknowledged now that there must be inaccuracies in the Aftonblad report, since it reports that there were eight rescuees and a dead body in the helicopter that left Svensson in the water (Y64) to go to Huddinge. Even in your two-trip reconstruction, that's wrong.

And it makes a hash of most of the rest of your narrative.

Nobody is confused about the JAIC's report other than you.

And why would you assume that everybody's copying the same Aftonbladet report? Why would anybody else care about it? You've just fetishized it because you got it from Bjorkman and have made it central to your conspiracy theory. You've given no reason to think that anybody besides you considers it to be important or even remembers it.

And to date, you still haven't bothered to dig up the original article, as important as you claim it is. You continue to rely on Bjorkman's extract.
Click to expand...

No, they are not the same. Aftonbladet has the time of departure as just after two. The JAIC has it as an arrival of 0552, considerably later.

Fact is, Y64 is credited with one rescue and Y74 six.

That does not cancel out the eight he rescued according to Aftonbladet. It doesn't explain the Gold Medal with Sword. It doesn't explain why 149 were listed as survivors, including Estonia senior officers but then down-listed to 137, with all of the Estonia senior officers removed.
 
Vixen said:
That is the cargo that was regularly being transported from Estonia to the west, and as ordered by western intelligence agencies. That it is outwith your ken does not make it not so.
Click to expand...
Which items on that list of things do you claim were regularly being transported for Western intelligence agencies?

The Swedish admission was to smuggling electronics on two occasions, was it not? So what is your evidence for whatever more you are claiming?
 
Captain_Swoop said:
You have no evidence for this earlier claimed flight.

If the helicopter wasn't on a secret mission to capture the officers what is the claim you are making?

As for the bodies, they may have been in good condition but how would the diver identify them in the wreck? they don't know what the officers looked like and the certainly couldn't take pictures along with them.
Click to expand...

They had video cameras in their helmets.
 
JayUtah said:
How would you propose to distinguish between an event that never happened and one whose evidence is alleged to be classified? In the total absence of evidence, is it more parsimonious to conclude that some particular, proposed event never occurred? Or that some particular event occurred and has been classified? Can someone who desires to believe that a certain particular thing happened simply assert its historicity and then claim that all evidence of it is classified? Cannot one simply conjure into existence any desired event under that pretext?
Click to expand...

If you lived in China, you would be absolutely sure no massacre happened in Tiananmen Square because there is no official confirmation just conspiracy theories from people claiming it happened but as it was never confirmed by the government, it can't have happened.
 
Vixen said:
If you lived in China, you would be absolutely sure no massacre happened in Tiananmen Square because there is no official confirmation just conspiracy theories from people claiming it happened but as it was never confirmed by the government, it can't have happened.
Click to expand...
Straw man having nothing to do with what I asked. Which is the more parsimonious conclusion, Vixen, and why?
 
But there is evidence. It's just withheld from the Chinese people. You can easily find evidence of the Tiananmen square massacre outside of China.

So, for that to be an adequate comparison, there must be evidence for your claims. But there isn't, is there?
 
Jack by the hedge said:
Which items on that list of things do you claim were regularly being transported for Western intelligence agencies?

The Swedish admission was to smuggling electronics on two occasions, was it not? So what is your evidence for whatever more you are claiming?
Click to expand...

See the Felix Report. Apparently Vladimir Putin is or was a member of the Felix Group.

Russian intelligence claims there was illicit cargo on the Estonia.
 
Vixen said:
You can search for the discussion we had about the mayday communications and the responses of the various ships in the area and MRCC. It is all there.
Click to expand...
I've read the radio transcript where MRCC Turku underestimates how long it'll take the first Swedish helicopter to arrive (which was not Y64, of course) but you claimed the mystery flights were logged by MRCC Stockholm and MRCC Turku. If you have that log documented kindly present it. If you don't then why are you claiming it?
 
Vixen said:
No, they are not the same. Aftonbladet has the time of departure as just after two. The JAIC has it as an arrival of 0552, considerably later.

Fact is, Y64 is credited with one rescue and Y74 six.
Click to expand...

Fact is, the JAIC credits "the Y 64 rescue man" with all seven of these rescues, as you yourself, perhaps inadvertently, just documented.

That does not cancel out the eight he rescued according to Aftonbladet.
Click to expand...

Did Aftonbladet ever write any follow up articles? Did they issue any corrections in later editions? Do you know?

We know the Aftonblad account is wrong. There weren't eight survivors aboard Y 64 when it cut Svensson loose, not even in your two-trip timeline.

No, you don't know, because you've just borrowed an extract from Bjorkman's website and fetishized it as if it were the newspaper of record.

How many people does Dagens Nyheter say he rescued? That's generally regarded as the newspaper of record in Sweden, not Aftonbladet.
 
Vixen, I note to my disappointment but absolutely not my surprise that you are ignoring my request. Provide the citation from the book please.
 
MarkCorrigan said:
But there is evidence. It's just withheld from the Chinese people. You can easily find evidence of the Tiananmen square massacre outside of China.

So, for that to be an adequate comparison, there must be evidence for your claims. But there isn't, is there?
Click to expand...

So you do grasp the concept of classified information being information withheld from that country's nationals.
 
Vixen said:
You think illicit cargos from Estonia to the west are fantasies. That reflects on you, not me.
Click to expand...
I never said that. You're lying again.

I think that the bizarre stories you've spun about disappeared crew members, Israeli arms trading, Spetsnaz, rogue KGB agents, black sites, secret trials, blank torpedo firing minisubs, wheeled submarines, lock dissolving nuclear material, trucks full of heroin being pushed off the ship by crew members, escort submarines, rendition flights disguised as cargo flights, etc. I think they are imaginative fantasies.

Why do you insist on portraying what others say so blatantly dishonestly? That's twice in quick succession you've lied about what I've said.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom