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

[MarkCorrigan]

You obviously do not know the story and I am not going to enlighten you as it has little to do with this topic, other than as an example for Mark Corrigan, who claims to have never heard of 'disinformation' or how it works and who thus asked for one.

No, that's not what I asked for. I asked very specifically for examples of a person who publicly espoused a theory or idea while also espousing extremism in order to link the former with the latter. Which you have still not provided.


Secondly, I DO know the story, and you are simply lying. Hill never infiltrated Combat 18.

 

[MarkCorrigan]

My theory is that the West (Bildt, Clinton, et al) feared that a face-off with Russia would see Russian troops using it as an excuse to reinvade Estonia.

Would never happen, especially not in 1994.

Sensitive political situation. Sweden for the CIA smuiggling Russian state secrets, the Russians warning the intelligence agencies to stop doing it and then exacting ruthless revenge when ignored.

You have no evidence for this. None.

Why else would Sweden immediately cover it up, and th e UK sign a Baltic treaty, when it is nowhere near the Baltic.

Are you seriously asking why the UK would sign a treaty with newly allied nations?

Your understanding of global politics is like that of a child.

 

[LondonJohn]

By the way, this post is yet again a good example of Vixen's need to denigrate Sweden and the Swedish.

The name "Utö" is Swedish and it means simply "Outer Island". There are at least two Utös in Finland (and I strongly suspect there are more). I suspect that there are several in Sweden in addition to the most famous one next to Stockholm but haven't checked. They are all place names and there's absolutely no reason to consider any of them "the real one". They all are real places with that name. The Finnish island has a Swedish name because it is in an area that has been populated by Swedish-speaking people since before the start of recorded history. (Which starts quite late in Finland).

The documented history of the more famous Finnish Utö starts at 1540s. There are claims that a pile of rocks was built there as a sea sign already in the 9th century, but I personally find that claim a bit dubious. I didn't go digging through the sources to see who proposed that, when, why, and based on what evidence. Quite a few internet sites mention it as an established fact. It may be true, but I need some convincing before I accept that.

On the other hand, the Utö next to Stockholm has documented history going to several hundreds of years earlier. It is mentioned by that name in the Danish Itinerary that was written in the 13th century (probably sometime between 1240-90). The itinerary doesn't mention the Finnish Utö and we shouldn't really expect it to mention it because the sailing route that it describes goes well North of the island, from Kökar to Aspö.

The Stockholm Utö was mentioned earlier than the Finnish one, it got permanent population before the Finnish one, and it now has far more inhabitants than the Finnish Utö. I don't see any reason why it would be less "real" than the Finnish one.

Exactly. It was a preposterous claim from Vixen - and, as you say, it was merely the latest pathetic attempt by her to denigrate Sweden and big up Finland.

It's akin to claiming that the only "real" Boston is the small town in Lincolnshire, UK - since this town was the original source of the naming of the Boston in Massachusetts USA.

 

[Vixen]

No, that's not what I asked for. I asked very specifically for examples of a person who publicly espoused a theory or idea while also espousing extremism in order to link the former with the latter. Which you have still not provided.


Secondly, I DO know the story, and you are simply lying. Hill never infiltrated Combat 18.

Wikipedia is your friend:

Disinformation is primarily carried out by government intelligence agencies, but has also been used by non-governmental organizations and businesses.[20] Front groups are a form of disinformation, as they mislead the public about their true objectives and who their controllers are.[21] Most recently, disinformation has been deliberately spread through social media in the form of "fake news", disinformation masked as legitimate news articles and meant to mislead readers or viewers.[22] Disinformation may include distribution of forged documents, manuscripts, and photographs, or spreading dangerous rumours and fabricated intelligence. Use of these tactics can lead to blowback, however, causing such unintended consequences such as defamation lawsuits or damage to the dis-informer's reputation.

 

[LondonJohn]

Thanks for the information. However, I was being tongue-in-cheek. My fifth great grandmother was a listed Swedish noble. Thus, I have zero motivation to 'denigrate Sweden and the Swedish'. Your ad hominem claim is a preposterous one, based on zero justification.

Oh dear.
*shakes head slowly and backs away*

 

[MarkCorrigan]

Wikipedia is your friend:

Still not what I asked for.

Do you need me to repeat the question?

ETA: Not going to attempt to defend your lies about Combat 18 then?

 

[LondonJohn]

My theory is that the West (Bildt, Clinton, et al) feared that a face-off with Russia would see Russian troops using it as an excuse to reinvade Estonia. Sensitive political situation. Sweden for the CIA smuiggling Russian state secrets, the Russians warning the intelligence agencies to stop doing it and then exacting ruthless revenge when ignored. Why else would Sweden immediately cover it up, and th e UK sign a Baltic treaty, when it is nowhere near the Baltic.

Note how Russia exhumed every single one of the dead 97 Russian sailors in the Kursk disaster, at a much deeper and more difficult location than Estonia.

The Kursk and the Estonia are hugely incomparable. It was possible to raise the Kursk (though it was an extremely complex operation requiring several innovations and multinational input). It was, and remains, impossible to raise the Estonia.

The rest of your post is just more of the same ill-informed, sensationalist bollocks that we've long since come to expect from you. You don't know what you're talking about.

 

[LondonJohn]

Wikipedia is your friend:

Yes, Vixen. We know what disinformation is, and the many & various ways in which it can take place.

But that's not what's at issue here. Try reading for comprehension.

 

[Andy_Ross]

There are plenty of whistleblowers.

Germany never signed the treaty.

Intelligence agencies do cooperate with each other if a request is made.

There may be plenty of 'whistleblowers' but you have no evidence for any in this case. We showed you what is recorded in flight logs by aircrew. It does not include lists of survivors.

Germany may not have signed the treaty but why do you think they would have sent their secret police to raid a German news agency to seize materials relating to a story about something in Sweden?

Why do you think Germany would have agreed to seize materials and suppress a news story for Sweden?

Why didn't the news agency make a fuss about this?? They are a big organisation with a good, international reputation for their journalism, do you think they would have meekly handed anything over?

You don't even have any evidence that this seized material existed, if it was broadcast already what would be the point of seizing it after the event?

 

[Andy_Ross]

Thanks for the information. However, I was being tongue-in-cheek.

Please Noel Coward, I've only got so many ribs.

 

[Andy_Ross]

You obviously do not know the story and I am not going to enlighten you as it has little to do with this topic, other than as an example for Mark Corrigan, who claims to have never heard of 'disinformation' or how it works and who thus asked for one.

Your claim was that MI5 created Combat 18.

You haven't shown any evidence to support your claim.

 

[Andy_Ross]

My theory is that the West (Bildt, Clinton, et al) feared that a face-off with Russia would see Russian troops using it as an excuse to reinvade Estonia. Sensitive political situation. Sweden for the CIA smuiggling Russian state secrets, the Russians warning the intelligence agencies to stop doing it and then exacting ruthless revenge when ignored. Why else would Sweden immediately cover it up, and th e UK sign a Baltic treaty, when it is nowhere near the Baltic.

Note how Russia exhumed every single one of the dead 97 Russian sailors in the Kursk disaster, at a much deeper and more difficult location than Estonia.

So Russia sinks a civilian ship in international waters murdering many hundreds of people and the 'West' covered it up because the Russians might invade Estonia?
What reality was this in?

As for the Kursk, we went through this in detail. It was a completely different situation.

A Submarine has a very thick and strong hull, cables were passed through the hull and it was lifted on the cables. Estonia would have fallen to pieces if this was attempted, a ship hull and superstructure is not strong enough.
Bodies on the Kursk were inside the compartments of the hull, the layout of a sub is very simple, it is a long tube with one compartment opening off the other. Bodies were simple to retrieve from the hull or were brought up with it.

Divers could not get into the hull of the Estonia safely to retrieve bodies, if they had tried to lift the hull it would have broken up and bodies would have been scattered.

At least make an effort.

 

[Andy_Ross]

Wikipedia is your friend:

What does your quote have to do with your claim that MI5 founded Combat 18?

 

[junkshop]

You obviously do not know the story and I am not going to enlighten you as it has little to do with this topic, other than as an example for Mark Corrigan, who claims to have never heard of 'disinformation' or how it works and who thus asked for one.

Your condending tone is unearned, Vixen. You made two claims:

That

...MI5 [set] up Combat-18.

and that

They were infiltrated by Ray Hill.

You have failed to provided evidence for either of these claims, and will continue to fail, because they are not true. I asked if you would accept their untruth, and retract them.

Will you do so?

 

[Mojo]

My theory is that the West (Bildt, Clinton, et al) feared that a face-off with Russia would see Russian troops using it as an excuse to reinvade Estonia. Sensitive political situation. Sweden for the CIA smuiggling Russian state secrets, the Russians warning the intelligence agencies to stop doing it and then exacting ruthless revenge when ignored. Why else would Sweden immediately cover it up...

Blatantly begging the question.

 

[JesseCuster]

I also said:

"I certainly have not denigrated any recipient award for bravery."

But you have.

You've repeatedly done the following:

1. Asserted that Svensson only rescued 1 person when he actually rescued 7.

2. Made snarky remarks about Svensson getting a medal for falling in the water, or because his winch broke or because he had to tread water while waiting to be rescued.

3. Accused Svensson of accepting his medal under false pretenses, that it was compensation for keeping about what he really did, i.e. being involved in disappearing the officers of the Estonia.

You've repeatedly denigrated him and his medal and tried to get out of it by simply saying that you haven't denigrated him.

As I say, I am sure Svensson did something exceptional for his award.

You've said that Svensson got his medal as compensation for keeping quiet about being involved in disappearing the officers of the Estonia, how is that being "sure that Svensson did something exceptional" for his medal?

You're not fooling anyone.

 

[GlennB]

...

You've said that Svensson got his medal as compensation for keeping quiet about being involved in disappearing the officers of the Estonia, how is that being "sure that Svensson did something exceptional" for his medal?

You're not fooling anyone.

Ah, but Vixen's "As I say, I am sure Svensson did something exceptional for his award" are weasel words, allowing her to class 'being part of a cover-up' as 'something exceptional' at some future time (probably tomorrow at around the same time that she once again claims that Estonia's EPIRBS were of the automatic activation type).

 

[Andy_Ross]

Ah, but Vixen's "As I say, I am sure Svensson did something exceptional for his award" are weasel words, allowing her to class 'being part of a cover-up' as 'something exceptional' at some future time (probably tomorrow at around the same time that she once again claims that Estonia's EPIRBS were of the automatic activation type).

But we can see in the list for the recipients that it has been awarded a number of times to unnamed individuals for unnamed reasons.

There is no need to invent cover stories.

 

[Vixen]

But you have.

You've repeatedly done the following:

1. Asserted that Svensson only rescued 1 person when he actually rescued 7.

2. Made snarky remarks about Svensson getting a medal for falling in the water, or because his winch broke or because he had to tread water while waiting to be rescued.

3. Accused Svensson of accepting his medal under false pretenses, that it was compensation for keeping about what he really did, i.e. being involved in disappearing the officers of the Estonia.

You've repeatedly denigrated him and his medal and tried to get out of it by simply saying that you haven't denigrated him.

You've said that Svensson got his medal as compensation for keeping quiet about being involved in disappearing the officers of the Estonia, how is that being "sure that Svensson did something exceptional" for his medal?

You're not fooling anyone.

That is untrue. I must have quoted Aftonbladet and the JAIC Report a dozen times saying he rescued seven, eight or nine.

According to JAIC what he did is set out in 7.5.5.

In addition, I did not say he accepted a medal under false pretences.

All in your mind. Try not to twist my words.

 

[Vixen]

So Russia sinks a civilian ship in international waters murdering many hundreds of people and the 'West' covered it up because the Russians might invade Estonia?
What reality was this in?

As for the Kursk, we went through this in detail. It was a completely different situation.

A Submarine has a very thick and strong hull, cables were passed through the hull and it was lifted on the cables. Estonia would have fallen to pieces if this was attempted, a ship hull and superstructure is not strong enough.
Bodies on the Kursk were inside the compartments of the hull, the layout of a sub is very simple, it is a long tube with one compartment opening off the other. Bodies were simple to retrieve from the hull or were brought up with it.

Divers could not get into the hull of the Estonia safely to retrieve bodies, if they had tried to lift the hull it would have broken up and bodies would have been scattered.

At least make an effort.

Rockwater Report states clearly they could have recovered up to 200 bodies.


Raising the Estonia was also said to be manageable. A fraction of the cost of the SEK65,000,000 spent throwing rocks and stones over the wreck.