• 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.
That is not the point being made. The point is, the ship's engineers were battling with some kind of problem on Deck 0 in the Engine Control Room, yet there is no mention of it in their official statements or in the JAIC Report, despite Sillaste telling the Dagens Nyheter they had been 'up to their knees' in water in the ECR.

Nothing was to get in the way of the 'bow visor fell off' story.

Did it occur to you that water up to their knees might be the problem? You seem bewildered. Water on deck 0 does not mean that water entered the ship at deck 0. Gravity exists.
 
Vixen, you're not actually getting any of this from Nucleonics Week itself, are you?

My guess is that you're using The Non-Proliferation Review (the spring/summer 1994 edition), although they don't make the 235 error, so I could be mistaken.

She could have checked what Helsingin Sanomat wrote about that incident. If she had enough research skills to do that, that is. They wrote three stories about it in 1993 (https://www.hs.fi/kotimaa/art-2000003259322.html 1993-08-17, https://www.hs.fi/kotimaa/art-2000003259590.html 1993.08-18, and https://www.hs.fi/kotimaa/art-2000003265115.html 1993-09-08)

There aren't that many details. Basically, the police got a hint that someone had brought radioactive material to Finland via Estonia, they did a raid in Espoo and caught five men and a few grams of Californium-252 (though the first article messes that up as Californium-525). Of of the guys was a Russian nuclear physicist who had lost his job and was acting as an advisor in the operation.

The articles speculate that the Californium was intended to go to Germany.

The last article states that four of the men had been charged in court but I couldn't find articles reporting about the result of the trial.

One of the articles includes a paragraph:

"According to the prosecutor the smuggled piece was worth 21000 FIM. According to the statement by Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority the piece is not dangerous and because its low radiation it is suitable mostly for scientific use".
 
Unless you are disputing laws formulated by the likes of Archimedes or Newton, there are some things that are given demonstrable facts.

You are the person who believed that a flat piece of paper hanging on the wall behaves the same as a bow visor of a roro ferry in water.

So, disputing facts presented by you does not mean that someone disputes Archimedes or Newton. Not that they have that much to do with modern shipbuilding.
 
Linde's own mouth uttered the words. That is how we know.

How many of Linde's utterings did you hear?

The point, which I regret the need to belabour, is that you are giving us your editorialised version of a story you gleaned from some already-editorialised third-hand source which has put its own spin on the tale, and now absurdly suggest we ought to accept it as accurate and truthful as if we had heard it first-hand.
 
She could have checked what Helsingin Sanomat wrote about that incident. If she had enough research skills to do that, that is. They wrote three stories about it in 1993 (https://www.hs.fi/kotimaa/art-2000003259322.html 1993-08-17, https://www.hs.fi/kotimaa/art-2000003259590.html 1993.08-18, and https://www.hs.fi/kotimaa/art-2000003265115.html 1993-09-08)

There aren't that many details. Basically, the police got a hint that someone had brought radioactive material to Finland via Estonia, they did a raid in Espoo and caught five men and a few grams of Californium-252 (though the first article messes that up as Californium-525). Of of the guys was a Russian nuclear physicist who had lost his job and was acting as an advisor in the operation.

The articles speculate that the Californium was intended to go to Germany.

The last article states that four of the men had been charged in court but I couldn't find articles reporting about the result of the trial.

One of the articles includes a paragraph:

"According to the prosecutor the smuggled piece was worth 21000 FIM. According to the statement by Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority the piece is not dangerous and because its low radiation it is suitable mostly for scientific use".

Very possible. I only suggested Non-Proliferation Review as they cite the same Nucleonics Week edition that Vixen does.
 
There is strong evidence that this was the case.

There are rumours upon rumours. Claims of TV footage which doesn't quite show a particular man stepping out of a Swedish hospital's ambulance at a hospital in Finland.

Calling this claptrap "strong evidence" is ludicrous.
 
Unless you are disputing laws formulated by the likes of Archimedes or Newton, there are some things that are given demonstrable facts.

And, yet other people look at those same laws as formulated by Archimedes or Newton and the words of Heiwa and come to other conclusions.
So it seems not to be as clear as you say it does.

So. How do you know that what Heiwa says is true?
 
Perhaps it’s so common that nobody bothers to report it.

You and Marras are the ones with newspaper libraries at your finger tips. If you can look up complex laws on human rights and he can find Härkätie mentions from TURUN SANOMAT 1918 (or rather, claims it doesn't exist), I should have thought looking up Estonians and others trying to smuggle dangerous metals past customs from the FSU in the 90's, in Sweden and Finland, a doddle.
 
That is nonsense. In a disaster with just a handful of survivors, and as logged by the helicopter pilots, hospitals and other officials, what is the problem in getting the correct number of survivors, or explaining how come survivors originally listed were now removed?

You are asking how there could be initial confusion in a disaster. Seriously, this is something you find hard to comprehend?
 
Nope, remember that this is your claim:
What was your source for the claim that the Swedish government disappeared the two Egyptians, and that this was confirmed to have happened by court decisions (you initially specified the ECHR)?

Sven Anér and Drew Wilson.
(My Hilight)


You claim Sven Anér as a source. Are you now saying that you actually can't quote what he actually say about the situation?

I'm not buying a book just because you claim it would contain something.
 
Your hands must have a grotesquely abnormal number of fingers.

And as you've now been told several times, there were survivors coming ashore via multiple routes, to multiple shore locations, and at differing times. And all against a backdrop of extreme fatigue, shock (clinical and sociological), panic, and a complex matrix of communications and information dissemination. Mistakes and misunderstandings were, frankly, almost inevitable in that context - it would actually have been very unusual if they'd arrived at the right number with the right identities right from the get-go. You don't know what you're talking about.

Absolute rubbish. The helicopters and ships were under the command of the OSC. The fixed-wing aircraft flew above all of these to help with the communications, which were of poor quality, so they helped guide where bodies and survivors could be seen and served as a centralised information base.

Since radio communications did not function properly OH-PRB served as a relay station between the vessels, MRCC and the helicopters.
JAIC 7.5.6

Of course they meticulously logged details. You are talking about societies that are meticulous record keepers.
 
Citation, please, of what you believe is 'misinterpreted'.

We could go back to yesterday for one trivial example of how you explained to us all about ordinary sonar being unable to see the Estonia as it should, but other superior equipment being able to zoom right in and spot it. That was great.
 
Before you moved the goalposts this concerned a rumour you introduced claiming he was taken to a German embassy. Now you appear to be addressing a different rumour entirely. The German embassies in Sweden and Finland are not US military zones.

They retain the nationality of the country they represent. Hence Assange was able to hide in the Ecuadorian embassy in London free from fear of UK cops.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom