Cont: The Sinking of MS Estonia: Case Reopened Part V

[Vixen]

Excerpt from his book on the September 11 attacks:

This chapter examines an extensive Zionist criminal network, which the evidence indicates is behind the false-flag terrorism of 9/11. The information in this chapter strongly supports the thesis that senior officers from Israeli military intelligence agencies were the chief architects of 9/11. . . <snip>​

Blimey.​

 

[Vixen]

Are you saying that MV Lehti was the source for your claim that Sweden disappeared the Egyptians?

No I did not. The point being made was that it was in the general public domain and the MV Lehti article (which I actually mistook for MTV) was one I found at random as an example.

 

[MarkCorrigan]

Vixen, would you please enlighten me as to what you think a cult of personality is?

 

[Mojo]

No I did not. The point being made was that it was in the general public domain and the MV Lehti article (which I actually mistook for MTV)

…was one I found at random as an example.

Do you have a reputable source that said it?

ETA: Perhaps one of the four newspapers that you actually read?

 

[JayUtah]

Heh, has anyone ever seen Bollyn and Bjorkman in the same room together...?

I've had lengthy interactions with Björkman, but none whatsoever with Bollyn. From what they've written I conclude they are separate people. Besides, you don't seem to be a very reliable authority on who is real and who isn't.

...is an important figure in your eyes?

You cited him as your source. You seem to believe he is important.

As I said, I do not agree with either Bollyn or Bjorkman.

You have cited both men as your sources, and now are trying to pretend you didn't and don't. In Björkman's case, you vacillate between denouncing him and rehabilitating him as an expert. You continue to use both men as authorities in your argument, even if you do not directly cite to them. You have learned not to mention them, but you have not stopped repeating their ideas.

What is more egregious in my mind is your habitual lying, especially since so much of your argument appears to rest on facts you present on your own authority. Tell us why a rational person should pay attention to someone whose first impulse seems to be to lie.

For example, Bjorkman says he agrees with AB Silve Linde. I do not.

Straw man. I may disagree with Sir Patrick Moore on political topics, but I still cite him as an authority on astronomy. You are still relying on Björkman to feed you snippets from Aftonbladet, and upon his version of ship stability. Although you tried very hard to conceal that Bollyn was your source for the enforced disappearance claim, you were unsuccessful.

 

[JayUtah]

A generally read newspaper.

No.

In any case, the new citation is irrelevant. You already cited Bollyn as your source, and it's the same source your newspaper cites.

 

[JayUtah]

What I actually said was...

No. What you actually said was what other posters have quoted you as saying.

To twist that into 'speaking ill of Svensson' shows a certain kind of dishonesty...

No twisting was required. You seem to have a very selective memory for what you and others have posted.

 

[JayUtah]

I didn't register the author nor did I know who he was.

You cited him as a source. The article you cited spells out exactly the legal theory you're now trying to say has been so commonly reported that it must have come from someplace else. You have yet to cite any other source that makes these same pseudo-legal claims. Just how dumb do you think other people are?

 

[JayUtah]

Who knows what the truth is about this person. Fact is I am not interested in the cult of personality. Full stop.

This is the same lame excuse you offer every time one of your authorities revealed not to be one. With neither Björkman nor Bollyn is the question of one of a "personality cult." The question is whether they are reliable authorities for the claims they have made, which you have happily borrowed. The amount of effort you expend dodging an examination of your sources leads me to conclude you know full well who they are and what their reputation is, but you plan to see how far you can lie about what your sources are.

Bollyn is clearly your source for the claim that Sweden committed the crime of enforced disappearance against two Egyptian deportees, and that this should be considered a continuation of their behavior in the MS Estonia case. An honest person would have realized after some discussion that the claim is factually wrong and legally absurd. You have not; you have pressed onward hoping enough of that claim seems superficially credible and that no one would find out where you got it from.

 

[Steve]

You cited him as a source. The article you cited spells out exactly the legal theory you're now trying to say has been so commonly reported that it must have come from someplace else. You have yet to cite any other source that makes these same pseudo-legal claims. Just how dumb do you think other people are?

No doubt Vixen thinks all other people are just a little dumber than she is.

 

[Andy_Ross]

No, the JIAC gives the reason as being 'low on fuel'.

This underlines my belief there was a helicopter on the scene, having left just after 0200 (EET) within the standard 15-minute time frame, and as there was no OSC as of that time, it simply took the persons it rescued to Huddinge. As these turned out to include some members of the senior crew - who unsurprisingly would be travelling together - just like, Sillaste, Treu, Linde and Kadak, who were also all in one raft - as they were accommodated in the upper decks in nearby cabins.

As they had to be removed from the list of survivors later, JAIC found it easier to simply ignore the early flight all together and pretend Svensson's team did not arrive until near six o'clock and only picked up one survivor.

The fact one team member might have swapped with another team member does not obscure the fact that Y64's tally was one, when earlier Svensson had been giving it large to Aftonbladet that he (his team) had rescued eight human beings plus one who died.

Why does taking the most direct route for repair and dropping survivors on the way mean they weren't also low on fuel?
By the time they returned they had been in the air for hours.

There was no 'standard 15 minute timefraim'

We went through this in great detail just a week or so ago. At the time of the Estonia sinking the standby time was one hour.

Also Y 64 was not a SAR helicopter. It was not on standby to do anything. It was an Anti Submarine helicopter. It' along with a number of others was brought in to supplement the SAR helicopters.

 

[junkshop]

... the MV Lehti article (which I actually mistook for MTV) was one I found at random as an example.

Maybe you should read things more carefully before you cite them.

 

[JayUtah]

Can someone tell me what Bollyn's crimes are, other than writing a book about 9/11 claiming Mossad was behind it?

There are all kinds of theories about 9/11. Who cares if some guy has yet another theory?

Because examining people's theories informs us how devoted they are to the otherwise discoverable truth.

I see that in a short space of time you've gone from denying that Christopher Bollyn is a real person -- claiming it to be a pen name of "disiniformationists" -- to saying he's an okay chap and we should listen to him even if he has strange beliefs. As others have noted, this change of heart coincides with your inability to hide him any further as your source for the claim regarding Sweden, the Egyptians, and international law. You'll find him just as difficult to whitewash as Björkman.

You're asking us to trust Bollyn's judgment and legal analysis. You're asking us to trust that he has represented the facts correctly. We're showing you the reasons why such trust should not be granted.

 

[JayUtah]

Obviously, I am talking about regularly read newspapers.

You tried to cite MV Lehti as an independent source for the legal theory that Sweden's deportation of two Egyptians constituted enforced disappearance as defined in the 1998 Rome Statute, and that a court found as much. It is not an independent source, as it cites to Bollyn.

You have insinuated that this theory is well enough known that other sources have reported on it. But you have yet to cite any such sources, "regularly read" or otherwise. And it really does not matter at this point, because you seem to have forgotten that you identified Bollyn as your source. Bollyn is your problem because you made it so.

 

[Marras]

Maybe you should read things more carefully before you cite them.

That's also on the level of "I confused OANN with CNN" or "I confused Epoch Times with New York Times".

 

[JayUtah]

No I did not. The point being made was that it was in the general public domain and the MV Lehti article (which I actually mistook for MTV) was one I found at random as an example.

Since it's not an independent source, please cite to another one. While I'm sure MV Lehti will not be the only publication that refers to Bollyn, the point is that you referred to Bollyn and identified him as the source, citing to the very article in which the theory was explained. Whatever other reporting there may be, your source is Bollyn.

 

[JayUtah]

Blimey.

Is that a concession that the excerpt shows that the label "anti-Semitic" is properly applied to Christopher Bollyn?

 

[Jack by the hedge]

The point I was making was the idea that 'the Swedish helicopters had to fly directly to Huddinge because there were no other hospitals nearby' is utter nonsense.

That may be nonsense but it's your nonsense because as usual it wasn't the claim. Y74 had to return to base for a change of crew before rejoining the search. Diverting to Utö would have delayed that and would not have got the survivors to a proper hospital as soon as flying them to Huddinge.

What part did you not understand?

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Berga is 35km from Huddinge Hospital.

And Huddinge hospital is a hospital, which Utö is not. And Utö did not have an inexhaustible supply of beds or fuel for helicopters. There was no good reason to go there instead and indeed sensible reasons not to.

 

[Vixen]

Vixen, would you please enlighten me as to what you think a cult of personality is?

In this context, the idea that one idealised person is the possessor of some kind of esoteric knowledge; his or her followers lap up every word like pearls of wisdom which they can quote like shining drops of molten gold off by heart, whenever the occasion demands it.

The idea that I am a follower of some not-even-particularly bright or literate person is just so funny.