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

[abaddon]

It was a political issue. Hence the need to classify it as being a national security protection.

Same reason the DC-3 thing was classified all those years.

Note the person who likely ordered the Russian FSU esponiage stuff was the military chief Uwe Wictorin...the same guy who gave Svensson the highest medal of the land.

It is in plain sight.

But I guess you are waiting for the newspapers to confirm it before you dare believe it.

Dunno. Perhaps you meant the Russian FSB? Or the Russian FSO, or FAPSI even. Former Soviet Union would fit the acronym, but not the context. This is just another example of your sloppy thinking.

And it is "espionage" (note correct spelling) which would mean the Russian FSB.

And what is your problem with waiting for actual evidence before drawing any actual conclusions? And what makes you think I read ANY newspapers? Let alone consume any of Murdoch's media nonsense?

 

[LondonJohn]

That would be explosives at the bow and a submarine, or similar, hitting the starboard.

Ahh, so that would be "explosives at the bow", where no (necessarily present, had there indeed been explosion) evidence of explosive deformation or residue has ever been discovered....

and

"a submarine or similar, hitting the starboard", where a) the supposed impact point was above the waterline (somewhat ineffective, if the aim is to sink the ship - not to mention difficult in itself for a submarine to inflict), and b) there's ample evidence to suggest that the damage to the starboard hull was actually caused by the ship landing on a rock outcrop on the sea bed on the night it sank.


Apart from that, your bizarre, ludicrous and utterly unsubstantiated conspiracy theory about the cause of the Estonia disaster is really good!

 

[abaddon]

Ahh, so that would be "explosives at the bow", where no (necessarily present, had there indeed been explosion) evidence of explosive deformation or residue has ever been discovered....

and

"a submarine or similar, hitting the starboard", where a) the supposed impact point was above the waterline (somewhat ineffective, if the aim is to sink the ship - not to mention difficult in itself for a submarine to inflict), and b) there's ample evidence to suggest that the damage to the starboard hull was actually caused by the ship landing on a rock outcrop on the sea bed on the night it sank.


Apart from that, your bizarre, ludicrous and utterly unsubstantiated conspiracy theory about the cause of the Estonia disaster is really good!

Oh, but Vixen assures us that it is not a conspiracy theory in any way. Spetznaz, and submarines, and explosives, and "nucular" waste being used. The command crew being disappeared. And then all being covered up by the brits, the finns, the swedes, the germans, the russians, the estonians? To conceal the smuggling of russian technology on board? Or nuclear waste? Ignoring the fact that one can openly sell that anyway?

And it is definitely not a conspiracy theory?

 

[Mojo]

So what happened?

She has no idea, but she knows it happened with “military precision”.

 

[abaddon]

She has no idea, but she knows it happened with “military precision”.

Difficult to know what to do with this. In effect, we have

I don't know what happened but I know it happened with military precision because I have a TV version of how military operations work. Therefore I must be right.

I wonder if Vixen has ever happened upon the military terms SNAFU and FUBAR?

 

[Mojo]

the bow and the starboard,

Whut?

135 degrees.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Given the sheer military precision of the sinking...

A repeat of your paranoid fantasy that's been dealt with over and over. But a distinct lack of any answer to the question of what you actually believe caused the ship to sink.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

That would be explosives at the bow and a submarine, or similar, hitting the starboard.

Neither of which happened.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

telecommunications, radio, sonar, all down

You know, because you have referred to it yourself, that we have a transcript of the ships' radio telecommunications on the night.

Now what's this stuff about sonar?

 

[abaddon]

You know, because you have referred to it yourself, that we have a transcript of the ships' radio telecommunications on the night.

Now what's this stuff about sonar?

All ships must carry sonar, both active and passive, so they can detect the russian/swedish/finnish/estonian/british submarines as any fule no.

Seriously, I am betting Vixen doesn't even know what sonar is or what it is for or how it operates. Were I to be cynical, I would bet on a claim of a typo in our near future.

 

[Andy_Ross]

All ships must carry sonar, both active and passive, so they can detect the russian/swedish/finnish/estonian/british submarines as any fule no.

Seriously, I am betting Vixen doesn't even know what sonar is or what it is for or how it operates. Were I to be cynical, I would bet on a claim of a typo in our near future.

Maybe the Estonia did a bit of trawling on the side?
Got to find those fish.

 

[abaddon]

Maybe the Estonia did a bit of trawling on the side?
Got to find those fish.

Dunno. Sea floor mapping perhaps? In any event, according to Vixen, there are so many subs in the Baltic one could walk from Estonia to Finland without getting ones feet wet.

 

[Here_to_learn]

You know, because you have referred to it yourself, that we have a transcript of the ships' radio telecommunications on the night.

Now what's this stuff about sonar?

Vixen has confused Sonar with Radar before in this thread. It's just a matter of lack of knowledge and lack of attention to detail. And her bringing it up again is additional proof that she is not willing or able to learn anything from the discussions.

 

[lobosrul5]

Given the sheer military precision of the sinking: telecommunications, radio, sonar, all down, EPIRB's deactivated/removed, the timing at Swedish midnight of the series of explosions heard and collision felt by survivors, the removal of the senior crew who - unlike the engine room guys - would know exactly what happened, an attack on at least two fronts - the bow and the starboard, the lack of time for a proper Mayday, zero opportunity for passenger evacuation, zero opportunity to launch lifeboats, the immediate sinking instead of floating upside down or semi-submerged, the exaggeration of the the stormy weather, the apparent apathy by the authorities in bringing anyone to justice, the immediate cover up from day one blaming the bow visor (which could have broken off for a hundred and one different reasons, and could be an effect not a cause): all of this adds up to a military exercise and a 'classified' label as a result thereof.

The Herald of Free Enterprise was a VERY handy 'damage limitation' message sent out on Day One by Bildt/Lehtola* newly appointed JAIC spokesman, so that the press could go into a frenzy about 'the safety of ro-ros': perfect reputation management and crisis management.

* Lehtola was by no means stupid or deceitful he will have seen it as diplomacy, an honourable deceit, it being highly classified stuff.

Are you now claiming no passengers made it off the ship and no lifeboats were launched?

ETA: please list these 101 reasons the visor may have broken off.

 

[Steve]

Given the sheer military precision of the sinking: telecommunications, radio, sonar, all down, EPIRB's deactivated/removed, the timing at Swedish midnight of the series of explosions heard and collision felt by survivors, the removal of the senior crew who - unlike the engine room guys - would know exactly what happened, an attack on at least two fronts - the bow and the starboard, the lack of time for a proper Mayday, zero opportunity for passenger evacuation, zero opportunity to launch lifeboats, the immediate sinking instead of floating upside down or semi-submerged, the exaggeration of the the stormy weather, the apparent apathy by the authorities in bringing anyone to justice, the immediate cover up from day one blaming the bow visor (which could have broken off for a hundred and one different reasons, and could be an effect not a cause): all of this adds up to a military exercise and a 'classified' label as a result thereof.

The Herald of Free Enterprise was a VERY handy 'damage limitation' message sent out on Day One by Bildt/Lehtola* newly appointed JAIC spokesman, so that the press could go into a frenzy about 'the safety of ro-ros': perfect reputation management and crisis management.

* Lehtola was by no means stupid or deceitful he will have seen it as diplomacy, an honourable deceit, it being highly classified stuff.

That would be explosives at the bow and a submarine, or similar, hitting the starboard.

Are you now claiming no passengers made it off the ship and no lifeboats were launched?

ETA: please list these 101 reasons the visor may have broken off.

We seem to have a certain inconsistency of thought by our intrepid reporter.

 

[LondonJohn]

We seem to have a certain inconsistency of thought by our intrepid reporter.

Well.... who'd'a thunk it?

 

[Jack by the hedge]

But it's nice to see some of the old tropes getting an airing again, like some kind of nonsense greatest hits tour. We haven't seen "military precision" since way back in about Part II.

 

[malbui]

But it's nice to see some of the old tropes getting an airing again, like some kind of nonsense greatest hits tour. We haven't seen "military precision" since way back in about Part II.

I was rather hoping for remixes by some trendy young producer in a desperate attempt to stay relevant.

 

[JesseCuster]

That would be explosives at the bow and a submarine, or similar, hitting the starboard.

Six months ago:

Ramming by a submarine whether Russian or Swedish is a tall story which I haven't seen perpetuated here, except as a troll.

That's quite the turnabout you've done since the beginning of this thread Vixen!

At first it was only trolls who suggested submarines causing the sinking, now you're fully onboard with the idea of a submarine ramming the Estonia.

 

[Axxman300]

I just want a plausible CT, like one where the captain and or key members of the bridge crew, or owners of the ship had deep gambling debts forcing them to drive the ship fast into the large waves of the storm, knowing it would sink the ship, and then paying off the debt with insurance money.

You know, something that kind of works with the facts of the actual event, but is both kind of dumb, but harder to prove either way without looking at the books. Then when the company denies it, CTists can use that as proof that it happened. A quality exercise in failed circular logic.

But no, we get "Military Precision"...