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

[JesseCuster]

I get between 0.7 and 1.4 cents.

Is that enough to hire a track-laying submarine with blank torpedoes and a crew of Spetsnaz explosives experts? Sometimes you can find surprisingly good Groupon deals.

They might chuck in some limpet mines and an extra Spetsnaz guy to hijack the bridge and shoot the captain. Just for ***** and giggles.

 

[Andy_Ross]

Just coming back to you about this:

Johan Ridderstolpe, Engineer





So is this really not anything you have ever come across?

Composition B (Not composite B), is a mix of RDX and TNT, it is used to fill artillery shells and grenades etc. It is not used as a cutting charge or demolition charge.

Who are these experts that identified it as a bomb and suggested it was Comp B?

 

[LondonJohn]

I said I would come back to you and now I have:

Re Sven Anér

Sven Anér Palme Mordet

This is pitiful.

Are you really trying to claim that the term "snatch" - which is in fact nothing more than a slightly loaded synonym for "arrest and detention" - somehow equates to "(enforced) disappearance"?

Do you even yet understand what is meant when it is said that the the state "disappeared" someone.... and how that differs from the state arresting someone, taking them off the streets, and placing them under detention?

Because it appears to me that either a) you genuinely (somehow) still do not understand the difference, despite it having been explained carefully to you probably dozens of times now; or b) you do understand the difference, yet you're trying your hand at casual deception in instances such as the above. I don't see a third possibility. Which of those two is correct, Vixen?

 

[Steve]

I thought this part of the quote that Vixen attributes, without citation, to, (well I am not really sure who the following is attributed to because it is quite unclear from Vixen's post) interesting.:

"According to maritime experts, the packages were attached to magnetic disks, so this package may have moved from one part of the ship to another due to the accident".

So although these unidentified persons are claiming there were explosives they are also confirming that the cause of the Estonia sinking was an accident, and not due to an explosion.

 

[LondonJohn]

I thought this part of the quote that Vixen attributes, without citation, to, (well I am not really sure who the following is attributed to because it is quite unclear from Vixen's post) interesting.:

"According to maritime experts, the packages were attached to magnetic disks, so this package may have moved from one part of the ship to another due to the accident".

So although these unidentified persons are claiming there were explosives they are also confirming that the cause of the Estonia sinking was an accident, and not due to an explosion.

Oh it's better even than that.

These "experts" opine that had those "explosives" actually detonated (as, presumably, was the intention), they would have "destroyed the ramp" and blown the visor clean off.

They then offer up the possibility that another similar charge may have been placed, and detonated, on the opposite side of the ramp/visor; they say this on the basis that there was "some damage" to the ramp on that other side - yet they'd only just said that had the "unexploded explosives pack" on the first side exploded, it would have "destroyed the ramp" (not mere cause "some damage" to the ramp). So are they asking us to believe here that the heinous explosives-planting operatives might, for reasons best known to themselves, have placed different-sized charges on either side of the (symmetrical) bow ramp/bow visor assembly? And if so..... why?

Hmmmm.... I wonder if EFD might be the "source" for this bilge?

 

[Steve]

Oh it's better even than that.

These "experts" opine that had those "explosives" actually detonated (as, presumably, was the intention), they would have "destroyed the ramp" and blown the visor clean off.

They then offer up the possibility that another similar charge may have been placed, and detonated, on the opposite side of the ramp/visor; they say this on the basis that there was "some damage" to the ramp on that other side - yet they'd only just said that had the "unexploded explosives pack" on the first side exploded, it would have "destroyed the ramp" (not mere cause "some damage" to the ramp). So are they asking us to believe here that the heinous explosives-planting operatives might, for reasons best known to themselves, have placed different-sized charges on either side of the (symmetrical) bow ramp/bow visor assembly? And if so..... why?

Hmmmm.... I wonder if EFD might be the "source" for this bilge?

Rather confused 'experts'. Seems somehow appropriate.

 

[JesseCuster]

Ole Dammegård

I'm Ole Dammegård, an award winning author, investigator and have spent over 30 years investigating the links between so called terror acts, false flag ops and top-assassinations, AMA
For more than 30 years I have worked very hard on solving the mystery behind the assassination of the Swedish Prime Minister Olof Palme, something that has turned out to be a very dangerous task and has cost the lives of some dear friends.

Not only do I humbly believe that I've now managed to solve one of the centuries' biggest murder mysteries, my extensive research has also revealed incredible links to other big political 'events' like the killing of JFK, John Lennon, Robert Kennedy, Che Guevara, Salvador Allende, Pablo Neruda and many others as well as the cold-blooded sinking of m/s Estonia, taking almost 1000 innocent lives.

I have made hundreds of international radio interviews on stations like Red Ice Creations, The People's Voice, Project Camelot, No Lies Radio, and The Real Deal, etc, which has caused a tidal wave of international interest.

I am totally dedicated to revealing the New World Order's agenda including False Flag-operations all over the world. It is important for me to point out that I am not here to spread fear by exposing the truth in whatever form it takes. My goal is to prevent the so called Global Elite from turning this beautiful world into a scary, controlled and fearful place. We all deserve so much better - it's time to stop the madness.

https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/2vscbv/im_ole_dammegård_an_award_winning_author/

Seems legit.

 

[Reformed Offlian]

I said I would come back to you and now I have:

Re Sven Anér

Sven Anér Palme Mordet

Still not a source saying the Egyptians were forcibly disappeared as defined by the Rome Statute. Why are you wasting your readers' time with irrelevant stuff?

 

[Reformed Offlian]

This is pitiful.

Are you really trying to claim that the term "snatch" - which is in fact nothing more than a slightly loaded synonym for "arrest and detention" - somehow equates to "(enforced) disappearance"?

Quite apart from this, there is the fact that Aner attributes said snatching to the CIA. But Bollyn's claim (and Vixen's) was that *Sweden* had a track record of enforced disappearances themselves, not simply that they sometimes winked at CIA shenanigans, which is what Aner is actually talking about here.

 

[Andy_Ross]

Oh it's better even than that.

These "experts" opine that had those "explosives" actually detonated (as, presumably, was the intention), they would have "destroyed the ramp" and blown the visor clean off.

They then offer up the possibility that another similar charge may have been placed, and detonated, on the opposite side of the ramp/visor; they say this on the basis that there was "some damage" to the ramp on that other side - yet they'd only just said that had the "unexploded explosives pack" on the first side exploded, it would have "destroyed the ramp" (not mere cause "some damage" to the ramp). So are they asking us to believe here that the heinous explosives-planting operatives might, for reasons best known to themselves, have placed different-sized charges on either side of the (symmetrical) bow ramp/bow visor assembly? And if so..... why?

Hmmmm.... I wonder if EFD might be the "source" for this bilge?

But they say the charges are about half a pound of Composition B which is filling for artillery shells and grenades. They would hardly blow the door off a garage.

 

[Mojo]

But they say the charges are about half a pound of Composition B which is filling for artillery shells and grenades. They would hardly blow the door off a garage.

“You were only supposed to blow the bloody doors off!”

 

[abaddon]

Herewith again.

That is in no way a proper citation, or reference, or source.

 

[Mojo]

Mojo's unraveling and laying bare your lengthy pattern of evasion...

All I did was use the quote function. It wasn’t exactly rocket science.

 

[MarkCorrigan]

Come on Vixen stop running away and answer my question.

 

[Andy_Ross]

“You were only supposed to blow the bloody doors off!”

Half a pound is about the same size charge as a grenade.

 

[Axxman300]

I said I would come back to you and now I have:

Re Sven Anér

Sven Anér Palme Mordet

So some guy with no direct knowledge of the facts, says the CIA grabbed the crew.

The CIA.

This is stupid, to believe it is true is a sign of brain damage.

In 1994, the CIA had no such capability on any level to "snatch" anyone. They would have to work with USSOCOM to do it, and even then they would have had problems. We tried to grab Manuel Noriega in 1989, in Panama, a country where we had free reign to pull all kinds of black-ops (and did), he escaped SEAL Team Six. To abduct ONE person took months of planning in 1994, complete with psychological profiles, names and photos of known associates, floor-plans of known habitations, Sat photos, and weeks of on-the-ground surveillance...and Noriega just slipped out a side door nobody knew about.

On the night of the sinking the CIA and this fantasy strike-team had no such preparation. In fact, IF there was smuggling taking place, the assumption would have been that the MS Estonia would have reached port. There would not have been a contingency for sinking. The next problem is integrating the strike-team into the rescue mission either in the air, or on the ground. The problem is not knowing who would survive or where they would be transported.

The whole idea is pathetically dumb on every real-world level.

The CIA continued to be hit and miss later in the 1990s in Somalia, and the Balkans, and would not become proficient until after 2005, thanks to the evolution in tactics of our Tier-1 units who had a lot of practice in Iraq.

Just when I think this thread can't get any more embarrassing, you post something from some delusional Swede.

 

[Reformed Offlian]

How many times have I told you I am not interested in personal politics and the cult of the personality? Did you not quite understand?

What I am interested in is whether you can provide a quote from somebody other than Bollyn, or somebody citing Bollyn, to the effect that Sweden committed enforced disappearance, as defined by the Rome Statute, against the two Egyptians. How is your search for that coming along?

 

[Reformed Offlian]

So some guy with no direct knowledge of the facts, says the CIA grabbed the crew.

The CIA.

This is stupid, to believe it is true is a sign of brain damage.

In 1994, the CIA had no such capability on any level to "snatch" anyone. They would have to work with USSOCOM to do it, and even then they would have had problems. We tried to grab Manuel Noriega in 1989, in Panama, a country where we had free reign to pull all kinds of black-ops (and did), he escaped SEAL Team Six. To abduct ONE person took months of planning in 1994, complete with psychological profiles, names and photos of known associates, floor-plans of known habitations, Sat photos, and weeks of on-the-ground surveillance...and Noriega just slipped out a side door nobody knew about.

On the night of the sinking the CIA and this fantasy strike-team had no such preparation. In fact, IF there was smuggling taking place, the assumption would have been that the MS Estonia would have reached port. There would not have been a contingency for sinking. The next problem is integrating the strike-team into the rescue mission either in the air, or on the ground. The problem is not knowing who would survive or where they would be transported.

The whole idea is pathetically dumb on every real-world level.

The CIA continued to be hit and miss later in the 1990s in Somalia, and the Balkans, and would not become proficient until after 2005, thanks to the evolution in tactics of our Tier-1 units who had a lot of practice in Iraq.

Just when I think this thread can't get any more embarrassing, you post something from some delusional Swede.

Aner is actually writing about the Egyptians that were extradited from Sweden in 2002.

 

[Mojo]

Aner is actually writing about the Egyptians that were extradited from Sweden in 2002.

Does he say that they were subjected to forced disappearance by the Swedish government, and give citations for the ECHR decision and the other court judgment confirming this?

 

[Reformed Offlian]

Does he say that they were subjected to forced disappearance by the Swedish government, and give citations for the ECHR decision and the other court judgment confirming this?

Of course. But it's coded as references to smuggling Californium 252.