• 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.
Reformed Offlian said:
Aner is actually writing about the Egyptians that were extradited from Sweden in 2002.
Click to expand...

Yes, but he wrote this:

The matter is apparently much more serious than that, and there is a possibility that headlight lighting on another and much larger CIA snatch, namely 9, possibly 10, Estonian crew members from the 1994 crashed ESTONIA which flew with two American aircraft in connection with the sinking to the west .

These sensational information are openly available at the Swedish Civil Aviation Administration Arlanda, information manager Jan Lindkvist, and they have never been denied, only silenced. The information is extensively referenced and commented on in

Lena and Sven Anér. MAYDAY - a novel about the fate of ESTONIA, Bokskogen 2004. Pages 44 ff. The book is attached.

The book is written in fictional form, but all the facts about the CIA affair are factual and correctly reproduced.

I have worked since 1994 and until today with intensive attempts to make the matter known (government, authorities, all major media, etc.) but the opposition has been total: in print, MAYDAY should be unique in this context.

My own conclusion in the case is that the nine, possibly ten Estonian crew members, who were first declared rescued, then missing (!) Were subjected to this "snatch" by the CIA because they had "dangerous" information. The matter is of constant concern in Estonia, where an association seeks to safeguard the interests of the survivors.
Click to expand...

He is telling a ghost story to prove his point about the Egyptians, even though no crew members vanished, and the CIA had no such abilities in 1994.
 
Vixen said:
I said I would come back to you and now I have:

Re Sven Anér

Sven Anér Palme Mordet
Click to expand...

Yes, this tells the story the way it appeared in the media and the way the testimony happened in the court case one of the men won against Sweden. Notice how it says nothing about "enforced disappearance" or the Rome Statute. It says the men were deported to Egypt where -- they alleged -- they faced torture in prison. Therefore this source does not support your claim.
 
JayUtah said:
Yes, this tells the story the way it appeared in the media and the way the testimony happened in the court case one of the men won against Sweden. Notice how it says nothing about "enforced disappearance" or the Rome Statute. It says the men were deported to Egypt where -- they alleged -- they faced torture in prison. Therefore this source does not support your claim.
Click to expand...

To quote one Gomer Pyle "Surprise, surprise, surprise!"
 
Vixen said:
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,
<snip>
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)
<snip>
The Herald of Free Enterprise was a VERY handy 'damage limitation' message
<snip>
Click to expand...

You know, there is a recording of Estonia's mayday call on YouTube, so the telecommunications worked.

The EPIRBS required manual activation. Due the storm and fast sinking, it would have been a miracle if they had been activated. After Estonia, SOLAS requirement was changed to require automatic activation.

It is an open secret in Finland that Finnish Navy has extensive hydrophone networks in Finnish coastal waters. Propably Sweden has them too. Any explosions would have been heard and investigated.

I have personally witnessed this system working. Many moons ago I attended a larper gathering which had a duel of wizards. It was a semi-illegal fireworks display by couple of university students stydying pyrotechnics. The epic finale was a series of small underwater explosions which raised a wall of water about 100 m long and 10 m high. Coast guard helo arrived within 30 mins to investigate. Luckily the show was over by then.

When submarine Kursk sank, the two torpedo explosions were registered on seismometers which helped the accident investigation.

The idea that underwater explosions would go unnoticed is propesterous.

That storm was a bad one. I live in Helsinki which is on southern coast of Finland. The previous evening I almost died when the storm blew a roofing tile from the roof of a nearby apartment building and almost hit me. It was the only storm I have seen tearing away any roofing tiles. Of course Helsinki =/= Utö but still it is the worst storm I have witnessed.

Originally the Estonia was designed and built for coastal use and was required to stay near a coast. That paperwork was missed during one of many changes of ownership.

Underspecced and badly maintained locking mechanism couldn't handle the strain of long open water leg in a bad storm and failed. The falling bow visor damaged the car ramp. This allowed water entry on car deck and the free surface effect and flooding capsized Estonia.

The Herald of Free Enterprise is a terrifying example of the power of free surface effect.

The Titanic and Costa Concordia had several compartments open to sea and their sinkings took almost 4 and 2 hours. A collision with a submarine would hole only one compartment and wouldn't be enough to sink a car ferry.

In World War II it was a common tactic for destroyers to sink surfaced submarines by ramming them. The hull of a submarine is built to withstand large water pressure on their whole hull. It doesn't handle localized damage nearly as well.

If the Estonia hit a submarine, where is that sunk submarine? Nobody noticed it during the search for Estonia's wreck? Finnish radar coverage missed stealthy recovery ships?
 
Jukkelus said:
Originally the Estonia was designed and built for coastal use and was required to stay near a coast. That paperwork was missed during one of many changes of ownership.
Click to expand...

Estonia was built for the work it was doing but Sweden and Finland gave themselves, through domestic legislation and a 'blind eye' exemption from compliance with SOLAS requirements at the time the Estonia was built. In addition, at the time it was built there were no standards for bow visors.
 
Last edited:
Captain_Swoop said:
Estonia was built for the work it was doing but Sweden and Finland gave themselves, through domestic legislation and a 'blind eye' exemption from compliance with SOALS requirements at the time the Estonia was built. In addition, at the time it was built there were no standards for bow visors.
Click to expand...

^This right here.

Of all the things in the report, this was the key moment of failure. Everything that happened came after the bow visor failed in rough seas the ship was never designed to sail.
 
Steve said:
Yeah, welcome. To enjoy the Estonia threads to their wacky fullest your really have to go back and start with Part 1 last summer. You have a lot of catching up to do, so get busy! :D
Click to expand...

To be fair, the sheer amount of repetition would make that a dreary task, despite the occasional nuggets of hilarity.
 
Jack by the hedge said:
To be fair, the sheer amount of repetition would make that a dreary task, despite the occasional nuggets of hilarity.
Click to expand...
There's all sorts of fun stuff about rogue KGB agents, assassinated captains, submarines deliberately ramming the Estonia, submarines accidentally ramming the Estonia, radioactive material dissolving the bow locks, planted explosives destroying the bow locks, crew members pushing trucks full of heroin out of the bow door, submarines attaching mines to the Estonia, submarines firing blank torpedoes at the ship, the bridge being hijacked, Bill Clinton, Israel/Palestine, wheeled submarines leaving tracks on the bottom of the Baltic Sea, WW2 mines, minisubs, the ship being raised from the bottom of the sea, etc.
 
Last edited:
JesseCuster said:
There's all sorts of fun stuff about rogue KGB agents, assassinated captains, submarines deliberately ramming the Estonia, submarines accidentally ramming the Estonia, radioactive material dissolving the bow locks, planted explosives destroying the bow locks, crew members pushing trucks full of heroin out of the bow door, submarines attaching mines to the Estonia, submarines firing blank torpedoes at the ship, the bridge being hijacked, Bill Clinton, Israel/Palestine, wheeled submarines leaving tracks on the bottom of the Baltic Sea, WW2 mines, minisubs, the ship being raised from the bottom of the sea, etc.
Click to expand...

And all that fun stuff is reported and believed by one single person here. One who insists that she is not a conspiracy theorist and is merely reporting properly referenced and cited facts.
 
JesseCuster said:
There's all sorts of fun stuff about rogue KGB agents, assassinated captains, submarines deliberately ramming the Estonia, submarines accidentally ramming the Estonia, radioactive material dissolving the bow locks, planted explosives destroying the bow locks, crew members pushing trucks full of heroin out of the bow door, submarines attaching mines to the Estonia, submarines firing blank torpedoes at the ship, the bridge being hijacked, Bill Clinton, Israel/Palestine, wheeled submarines leaving tracks on the bottom of the Baltic Sea, WW2 mines, minisubs, the ship being raised from the bottom of the sea, etc.
Click to expand...

I actually did go back and read the whole blessed thing. I can't say I recommend it to anyone with a job (I did it before the Spring semester started), family, hobbies, pets who need to be fed occasionally, or self respect, but it is strangely fascinating.

For a while, I imagined that perhaps the wheeled submarines were drawn by a team of horses in scuba gear, but now I'm convinced that malevolent merfolk were responsible for the sinking, quite possibly assisted by Soviet/CIA/MI6/Mossad-trained dolphins.
 
Lucian said:
I actually did go back and read the whole blessed thing. I can't say I recommend it to anyone with a job (I did it before the Spring semester started), family, hobbies, pets who need to be fed occasionally, or self respect, but it is strangely fascinating.

For a while, I imagined that perhaps the wheeled submarines were drawn by a team of horses in scuba gear, but now I'm convinced that malevolent merfolk were responsible for the sinking, quite possibly assisted by Soviet/CIA/MI6/Mossad-trained dolphins.
Click to expand...


I thought they had left tracks because they hadn’t taken off their muddy boots before stepping into the Baltic.
 
Vixen said:
Just coming back to you about this:

Johan Ridderstolpe, Engineer





So is this really not anything you have ever come across?
Click to expand...


No, because, as others have stated, composition b is not used as a demolition charge. And even in the types of explosives used, they wouldn’t be placed or configured as the picture showed to do steel cutting. That packaging is more akin to the standard blocks they come in when shipped in bulk.

What is seen us more like a satchel charge, primarily used for cratering and general destruction, rather than anything purpose built for breaking steel.

And there’s be no reason to use such for something like this, unless one was utterly incompetent or very short on resources (IOW, not a government actor).

ETA: I’ll also state, for the record, that the assertion that a half pound of Compound B would destroy the ramp is WILDLY inaccurate. That assertion bears more relation to movie physics than real physics. An unrestricted blast like that would have deformed the steel underneath it, possibly breaching the immediate area, at best. The placement is not optimal, the charge configuration is not optimal, and a half pound is a woefully small amount of explosive.

ETA2: the formula for a steel cutting charge is P=3/8A, where P is pounds in TNT equivalent and A is cross-sectional area. 1/2 pound of C B is about .7 pounds of TNT. That gives a charge of that type the capability of cutting about 1.867 square inches. So assuming quarter inch steel, that’s be a cut about 7 inches long. A far cry from destroying the ramp. Or in other terms, it’s be about enough to cut through a .84 inch diameter steel cable.

And my info is from FM 5-34, the “Engineers Bible” of the U.S. Army. If you find a copy, check page 9-9, tables 9-4 and 9-5.

Frankly, your “expert” is wrong.
 
Last edited:
JesseCuster said:
There's all sorts of fun stuff about rogue KGB agents, assassinated captains, submarines deliberately ramming the Estonia, submarines accidentally ramming the Estonia, radioactive material dissolving the bow locks, planted explosives destroying the bow locks, crew members pushing trucks full of heroin out of the bow door, submarines attaching mines to the Estonia, submarines firing blank torpedoes at the ship, the bridge being hijacked, Bill Clinton, Israel/Palestine, wheeled submarines leaving tracks on the bottom of the Baltic Sea, WW2 mines, minisubs, the ship being raised from the bottom of the sea, etc.
Click to expand...

I imagine that a poll on the "Best of the Estonia CT elements" would be against the m/a? You've compiled a pretty long list but there are probably more and it would take a community effort to compile the full list, at a guess.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom