• 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 Reopened Part V

Status
Not open for further replies.
An update re the planned March revisit by the Swedish team. Johan Bäckstrand wants to cut a few samples from the hole in the starboard side to test it further and also to survey the cargo.

According to Bäckstrand, they are also examining the holes found on the right side of the wreck of the Estonian wreck in the Dplay documentary series, especially the last large hole discovered. According to the expert, they arose when Estonia collided with the seabed.

"We are thoroughly examining all three holes. We cut parts of the holes to make them a detailed laboratory test, "explained Bäckstrand.

According to him, a new investigation into the car deck may prove or disprove speculation that Estonia was transporting military material from Russia on the day of the death.

According to Bäckstrand, the information available so far does not suggest that the cargo on board played a role in Estonia's death.

"We hope that the new study will shed light on some unanswered questions and bring clarity," said the expert.
Click to expand...
Postimees 11.1.2022

ETA: Bäckstrand reports that 'no bodies will be recovered'. Well, that would have been a bit late in the day, although one Polish guy did attempt to recover the body of his wife at the time.

no corpses will be brought to the surface
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Captain_Swoop said:
So you do think the only medal awarded by Sweden is dodgy but the ones handed out like sweets to the Finns are all ok?*

*See I can play that game too.
Click to expand...

Actually, until quite recently, Swedish citizens* were allowed to be awarded certain types of Finnish medals (probably the Red Lion). They were considered very prestigious by Swedes, as Sweden had stopped giving out medals of their own for non-war situations. (*Not to be confused with medals available for foreigners.) So it could well be that some of those Swedish rescuers received a Finnish medal, if they were still available for Swedes, then.
 
Reformed Offlian said:
Why would the accident be Sweden's fault? It wasn't their ship, nor their crew, nor their line. The overwhelming majority of the time a ship sinks, it's either something wrong with the ship or a mistake the crew made. Only in crazy conspiracy theories is anything Sweden's fault.

What are Germany's or Finland's governments being blamed for?
Click to expand...

It would be their fault (vicarious liability) if they were smuggling Russian/Soviet state secrets on a passenger ferry, which had a normal capacity of 70% Swedish citizens on any given trip.

No way did the ship sink in half an hour 'because a wave knocked off the bow visor'.
 
JesseCuster said:
When I Google "Christopher Bollyn", the 2nd result is to an article on the ADL website about him being an anti-semitic conspiracy theorist.

You suck at researching.

Why did you mention his book has 250 positive reviews? Trying to rehabilitate him as a source?

Here's some choice quotes from the first page of those "positive reviews":

"Cheney said there was never any evidence of Osama bin Laden's involvement and no arrest warrent was issued in relation to "9-11". "

"Yitzhak Rabin was in Dallas TX on the day of President Kennedy's assassination (1963). In 1967 he was the Israeli Defence Forces's (IDF) Chief of Staff."

"Anyone who has seen the `Loose Change' documentary, especially the 2nd edition, will know that 9-11 was an inside job. "

"Bollyn is almost alone among 9/11 researchers in that he squarely identifies an international cabal of Zionist politicians, spooks, and businessmen as the planners and managers of the world's most dramatic act of state-sponsored terrorism. "

Positive reviews from truther idiots and anti-semites.
Click to expand...

I am not 100% sure that being sceptical of the 9/11 'official reason' makes a person an 'anti-Semite'. Just because Bollyn believes it was a Zionist-backed plot doesn't make it 'anti-Semitic' in itself. The red flag is that he believes there is a Zionist plot to flood Christian democratic countries with pornography to undermine them, according to a post SpitfireX posted. That is assuming the excerpt is authentic and in context.
 
JayUtah said:
But then you were given reason to doubt that by criticism being posted here by others who did not assume who he was, and assessed his reliability on their own. Your response was to fail at Googling, fail to infer anything from reviews of the one book you saw he wrote, and then speculate that "Christopher Bollyn" was a pseudonym for a disinformationist. None of that a responsible approach to validating your sources.
Click to expand...

You will agree there is a big difference between someone setting out to spread disinformation and someone genuinely researching the situation?

Fact is, there exists both.
 
Vixen said:
You will agree there is a big difference between someone setting out to spread disinformation and someone genuinely researching the situation?

Fact is, there exists both.
Click to expand...

You may or may not agree that there is not much difference between "someone setting out to spread disinformation and someone" for, who cares, whatever reason ends up simply spreading such disinformation.

Heck, at least the intentional one knew what they were doing.

While no one denies that someone can unintentionally spread disinformation, such unintentional person will generally stop once they become aware that is what they are doing.

Also your assertion of "genuinely researching the situation" would imply a positive intent to not spread or even consider disinformation. So an assertion of an active effort at verification and filtering out the BS. Failing that, just makes it doubly worse than either the one with no intent or the one with malicious intent.
 
The Man said:
You may or may not agree that there is not much difference between "someone setting out to spread disinformation and someone" for, who cares, whatever reason ends up simply spreading such disinformation.

Heck, at least the intentional one knew what they were doing.

While no one denies that someone can unintentionally spread disinformation, such unintentional person will generally stop once they become aware that is what they are doing.

Also your assertion of "genuinely researching the situation" would imply a positive intent to not spread or even consider disinformation. So an assertion of an active effort at verification and filtering out the BS. Failing that, just makes it doubly worse than either the one with no intent or the one with malicious intent.
Click to expand...

Has it been established that Bollyn is a disinformation merchant? Apparently, although 'Christopher Bollyn' claims to be a US citizen with a PhD in Middle East history from UCLA(iirc), he is married to someone who supposedly lost her husband in the Estonia accident, and thus, his interest in the case becomes clearer.
 
Vixen said:
Has it been established that Bollyn is a disinformation merchant? Apparently, although 'Christopher Bollyn' claims to be a US citizen with a PhD in Middle East history from UCLA(iirc), he is married to someone who supposedly lost her husband in the Estonia accident, and thus, his interest in the case becomes clearer.
Click to expand...


Cui bono?
 
Vixen said:
Has it been established that Bollyn is a disinformation merchant? Apparently, although 'Christopher Bollyn' claims to be a US citizen with a PhD in Middle East history from UCLA(iirc), he is married to someone who supposedly lost her husband in the Estonia accident, and thus, his interest in the case becomes clearer.
Click to expand...

Has it been established that Bollyn even just knows what he's talking about? You seem to have just forgotten your own assertion above that one need not be "a disinformation merchant" to end up spreading disinformation.

His interest in the case has no bearing in his veracity on the case.
 
The Man said:
Has it been established that Bollyn even just knows what he's talking about? You seem to have just forgotten your own assertion above that one need not be "a disinformation merchant" to end up spreading disinformation.

His interest in the case has no bearing in his veracity on the case.
Click to expand...

In any case, whatever, Bollyn's political slant, his reference to 'disappeared Egyptians' was sourced from a Swedish investigative journalist called Sven Anér, so can hardly claim to have copyright to it.
 
Vixen said:
It would be their fault (vicarious liability) if they were smuggling Russian/Soviet state secrets on a passenger ferry ...
Click to expand...

No it wouldn't. Not even if you could show that they were doing that. Not unless you can show that the ship somehow sank as a result of those actions.

No way did the ship sink in half an hour 'because a wave knocked off the bow visor'.
Click to expand...
You're a few hundred pages too late to start recycling that garbage. If you want to convince anyone that you know what you're talking about, show your working.
 
Vixen said:
In any case, whatever, Bollyn's political slant, his reference to 'disappeared Egyptians' was sourced from a Swedish investigative journalist called Sven Anér, so can hardly claim to have copyright to it.
Click to expand...

Again, nobody has referenced "copyright." However, you cited Bollyn as your source for the legal theory that the deportation of the Egyptians constituted enforced disappearance. You've been reading and believing Bollyn, which doesn't look good for you.
 
Vixen said:
... his reference to 'disappeared Egyptians' was sourced from a Swedish investigative journalist called Sven Anér ...
Click to expand...

Does discovering this Anér person get you any closer to proving your original claim that the two Egyptians were disappeared by Sweden?

No, it doesn't. Because they weren't.
 
Vixen said:
In any case, whatever, Bollyn's political slant, his reference to 'disappeared Egyptians' was sourced from a Swedish investigative journalist called Sven Anér, so can hardly claim to have copyright to it.
Click to expand...

Who's talking about his "political slant"? It's his accuracy slant that was being discussed and simply trying to pawn it off on someone else doesn't cut it. Particularly if one wants to claim he's "genuinely researching the situation".
 
Vixen said:
I am not 100% sure that being sceptical of the 9/11 'official reason' makes a person an 'anti-Semite'.
Click to expand...

Oh my God, are you actually trying to rehabilitate Bollyn as a reputable source? This should be good.

No, "being skeptical" doesn't make one an anti-Semite. Making a long-standing career out of spewing anti-Jewish rhetoric, of which his views on 9/11 is just one element, makes one an anti-Semite.

Just because Bollyn believes it was a Zionist-backed plot doesn't make it 'anti-Semitic' in itself.
Click to expand...

If there's no credible evidence that it happened that way, and if it's another brick in a wall of well-established anti-Semitic rhetoric, then it doesn't matter whether it's "anti-Semitic" in itself.

Bollyn is a disreputable source. He's your source for the "enforced disappearance" claim. You can't find another one. And you're so fixated on saving face that now you have to rehabilitate a monster.

That is assuming the excerpt is authentic and in context.
Click to expand...

Oh, now you start worrying about the authenticity and context of your sources' statements?
 
Vixen said:
You will agree there is a big difference between someone setting out to spread disinformation and someone genuinely researching the situation?
Click to expand...

Irrelevant. You didn't even attempt to find out which one Bollyn was. You just speculated your way out of a pickle and left it at that. When you tell us you have exceptional research skills, and then you do something like this, we all just laugh at you.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom