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

[Mojo]

We could at least have had a formal "Previously on 'Estonia'" kind of intro.

Actually, I think this one covers it even better:

Complete and utter bollocks.

 

[Vixen]

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.

Yes, let's give it a neutral sounding euphemism, such as 'Extraordinary Rendition' and quibble about the exact name of the various Acts and Treaty, instead.

When done by happy smiley Bill Clinton and the affable meek-mannered John Major, all well and good. It is only when done by evil fat hard-faced bastards in North Korea that we should show any concern as to the fate of the presumed enforceably missing.

 

[Vixen]

Exactly, and Sweden could have told the CIA to get lost, but they didn't, which suggests they weren't comfortable with their presence, and found an excuse to get rid of them.

Sweden, and just about every other country in western Europe tells the US "no" all the time.

So the guys were Egyptians. They must be the same as the people who flew into the 9/11 Towers. Bloody terrorists. Nice.

 

[junkshop]

Yes, let's give it a neutral sounding euphemism, such as 'Extraordinary Rendition' and quibble about the exact name of the various Acts and Treaty, instead.

When done by happy smiley Bill Clinton and the affable meek-mannered John Major, all well and good. It is only when done by evil fat hard-faced bastards in North Korea that we should show any concern as to the fate of the presumed enforceably missing.

I refer you to Captain Swoop's previous response.

 

[Mojo]

Yes, let's give it a neutral sounding euphemism, such as 'Extraordinary Rendition' and quibble about the exact name of the various Acts and Treaty, instead.

When done by happy smiley Bill Clinton and the affable meek-mannered John Major, all well and good. It is only when done by evil fat hard-faced bastards in North Korea that we should show any concern as to the fate of the presumed enforceably missing.

Where’s your evidence that the Egyptians were disappeared by the Swedish government, and that this was confirmed by a court of law and the ECHR?

 

[Jack by the hedge]

... a cut about 7 inches long.

... perhaps 'a cut of maybe seven inches square' was the aim.

Details just get in the way of telling a more exciting story.

 

[Mojo]

And by the way, Vixen, have you managed to find the newspaper cutting you claim to have, which shows that The Times published reports from journalists embedded in the German front line at the battle of Stalingrad?

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Yes, let's give it a neutral sounding euphemism, such as 'Extraordinary Rendition' and quibble about the exact name of the various Acts and Treaty, instead.

Oh yes, let's get bogged down in that and forget the only reason you brought it up in the first place was to show the Swedish government was in the habit of "disappearing" people in the manner you claim they did to MS Estonia officers. Which this case does not show. Fail.

 

[Vixen]

Channel 16 was not blocked. The Mayday calls were received by 14 ship- and shore-based radio stations.
The signal was weak because it was sent from a battery powered, hand held transmitter, the ship had lost power for the main radio systems.
The beacons were found to be in working order, they had full batteries and when they were activated they broadcast their distress signal for over 4 hours.

They didn't activate because the crew did not activate them. They were manual activation units.

Are we going to go through all that again?

Where is your evidence that dynamite can be bought in hardware stores?

Where is your evidence that explosions aboard the ship would not be detected?

I think what you and Jukkelas share in common is the BIUTC-philosophy of life, which is fine for everyday life but hardly apposite in a debate. Sure, we can't take all the weight of the world on our shoulders so we save our concerns for our own. For example, we can easily say, 'Mr Blenkinsop at number 27 has passed away peacefully in his sleep', or if you have a more gallows humour frame of mind, 'Mr. Blenkinz has kicked the bucket.' However, that is not satisfactory when entering a debate, accident inquiry or perhaps even an inquest.

If you don't want to unearth the heart of the matter or get to the hard truth as is the aim of such an undertaking (debating/concluding), don't be the coroner or medic that has to write, 'Alan Arthur Blenkinsop, deceased, cause of death: torn aorta as the result of a violent road accident'. Perhaps better not to go to the inquest if you prefer to believe, 'Alan has passed and is now an Angel in Heaven'.

Fact is, on any given journey, the passenger ferry Estonia carried on average 70% Swedish nationals and was joint owned by a Swedish shipping company, Nordstrom and Thulin and were headed to a Swedish destination.

If you and Jukkelas believe it is all sunshine and buttercups that the two-hour time delay between the Mayday being first received and Sweden's SAR and MRCC's sending out a rescue helicopter for its own >500 Swedish citizens, and that you san see no problem at all with the communications on that night, then maybe you prefer not to look at the reality in the face?

 

[Vixen]

Where can I buy 'FIXOR' in the UK?


What is your evidence for an explosive applied to steel having a 'metallic' sound?



What is your evidence for this?
I have direct experience of an anchor slamming home in to a hawse pipe sounding through the hull of a ship.

Stop making stuff up .

You can order it here.


Nobody said anchors do not make any noise.

I am not sure how a visor dropping off and falling immediately below the waves (owing to its weight of 55 tonnes) would sound the equivalent of a series of bangs. Especially if as claimed the Atlantic Lock fell off due to a strong wave and then somehow the 55-tonne bow visor could swing up and down and bang away like the Dire Straits song.


Maybe waves can move of their own accord in t he opposite direction, forcing the bow visor open against them and pushing it up at the same time. Why not?

 

[JesseCuster]

I think what you and Jukkelas share in common is the BIUTC-philosophy of life, which is fine for everyday life but hardly apposite in a debate. Sure, we can't take all the weight of the world on our shoulders so we save our concerns for our own. For example, we can easily say, 'Mr Blenkinsop at number 27 has passed away peacefully in his sleep', or if you have a more gallows humour frame of mind, 'Mr. Blenkinz has kicked the bucket.' However, that is not satisfactory when entering a debate, accident inquiry or perhaps even an inquest.

If you don't want to unearth the heart of the matter or get to the hard truth as is the aim of such an undertaking (debating/concluding), don't be the coroner or medic that has to write, 'Alan Arthur Blenkinsop, deceased, cause of death: torn aorta as the result of a violent road accident'. Perhaps better not to go to the inquest if you prefer to believe, 'Alan has passed and is now an Angel in Heaven'.

What in holy hell are you blathering about?

 

[Andy_Ross]

I think what you and Jukkelas share in common is the BIUTC-philosophy of life, which is fine for everyday life but hardly apposite in a debate. Sure, we can't take all the weight of the world on our shoulders so we save our concerns for our own. For example, we can easily say, 'Mr Blenkinsop at number 27 has passed away peacefully in his sleep', or if you have a more gallows humour frame of mind, 'Mr. Blenkinz has kicked the bucket.' However, that is not satisfactory when entering a debate, accident inquiry or perhaps even an inquest.

If you don't want to unearth the heart of the matter or get to the hard truth as is the aim of such an undertaking (debating/concluding), don't be the coroner or medic that has to write, 'Alan Arthur Blenkinsop, deceased, cause of death: torn aorta as the result of a violent road accident'. Perhaps better not to go to the inquest if you prefer to believe, 'Alan has passed and is now an Angel in Heaven'.

Fact is, on any given journey, the passenger ferry Estonia carried on average 70% Swedish nationals and was joint owned by a Swedish shipping company, Nordstrom and Thulin and were headed to a Swedish destination.

If you and Jukkelas believe it is all sunshine and buttercups that the two-hour time delay between the Mayday being first received and Sweden's SAR and MRCC's sending out a rescue helicopter for its own >500 Swedish citizens, and that you san see no problem at all with the communications on that night, then maybe you prefer not to look at the reality in the face?

Ships were on the way to the Estonia within minutes of receiving the mayday.
First Finnish rescue helicopter was alerted by 01.35, it was on 1 hour standby and was in the air within an hour.

First Swedish helicopter was alerted by 02.07, it was on one hour standby and was in the air within an hour.

As Finland was controlling the rescue Sweden could only send helicopters once they were cleared to do so.

I notice you don't criticise the Finnish helicopter response. |Their second helicopter wasn't alerted until 02.18 and wasn't in the air until after 3.

 

[Andy_Ross]

You can order it here.

That is in Canada.
Try ordering it in the UK and expect a visit from the police.

Nobody said anchors do not make any noise.

I am not sure how a visor dropping off and falling immediately below the waves (owing to its weight of 55 tonnes) would sound the equivalent of a series of bangs. Especially if as claimed the Atlantic Lock fell off due to a strong wave and then somehow the 55-tonne bow visor could swing up and down and bang away like the Dire Straits song.


Maybe waves can move of their own accord in t he opposite direction, forcing the bow visor open against them and pushing it up at the same time. Why not?

The ship was pitching up and down, it was a storm.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

<pop-psych padding snipped for brevity>
If you and Jukkelas believe it is all sunshine and buttercups that the two-hour time delay between the Mayday being first received and Sweden's SAR and MRCC's sending out a rescue helicopter for its own >500 Swedish citizens, and that you san see no problem at all with the communications on that night, then maybe you prefer not to look at the reality in the face?

Report section 17.3.2:

The accident took place within the rescue region of MRCC Turku.

The alerting plan in place did include alerting other countries' MRCC but if you look to the extreme lower left of the linked diagram you will see how far down the priority list it was.
https://onse.fi/estonia/kuvat/suuren/kuva17_2s.gif

At 0152 hrs MRCC Stockholm was informed of the accident by MRSC Mariehamn which, in accordance with normal practice, contacted MRCC Stockholm to check whether they knew about the accident. After first calling MRCC Helsinki, at 0157 hrs MRCC Stockholm called MRCC Turku and offered helicopter assistance.

Three Finnish helicopters were on stand-by at various bases. The crews were on one-hour alert, meaning that they should be assembled within that time. Three of the Swedish stand-by helicopters should be ready to depart within one hour, and one should be ready to depart within two hours. All stand-by helicopters fulfilled the requirements. The first helicopters took off earlier than their alert times required.

As the report does not believe this was "all sunshine and buttercups" it then goes on to recommend ways in which helicopter standby times might be reduced.

Which you might know, if only you had read it.

 

[Vixen]

The ship was listing to starboard, the windows were impacted by the waves, why would you think they were 'defying gravity'?

No, you do not get to put the cart before the horse. You cannot claim the capsize happened before the cause of it. Like a footballer rolling around in agony before he was even tackled. If the ingress of 8,000 tonnes of water caused the capsize, it cannot also be the result of the capsize.

Chronology is all. The JAIC on realising that an ingress of water onto the car deck could not cause the vessel to capsize, it had to come up with a ridiculous hypothetical scenario of the thing floating on its side until enough windows and dividers were broken.

Window on cruise ship being smashed by wave.

Not that old chestnut of an obviously defective window, which shows that the exception proves the rule. The chance of that happening is so exceptional it has become a viral youtube clip.

Thank you for underlining the truth of the rule.

 

[Mojo]

The ship was pitching up and down, it was a storm.

Good heavens! Do you mean to tell us that waves make ships go up and down? Who would have thought it?

 

[zooterkin]

As you would know, living in Helsinki, dynamite is a very common factor in building work and excavating wells, due to the ice-age-formed granite that is so characteristic of the Finnish landscape. When a neighbour built nearby our summer cottage, they had to come and ask permission and warn us that the builders would be applying dynamite (luckily it didn't dislodge anything of ours). You can even buy the stuff at hardware stores..

You can order it here.

You said 'dynamite'. That's not dynamite.

(Not that there's a shred of evidence of an explosion on the Estonia.)

 

[Vixen]

So Vixen, do you consider yourself capable to accurately assess Bjorkman's claims?

Easily.

AS Bob Dylan so nicely put it, "You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows".

 

[Mojo]

The ship was listing to starboard, the windows were impacted by the waves, why would you think they were 'defying gravity'?

No, you do not get to put the cart before the horse. You cannot claim the capsize happened before the cause of it.

Nobody is suggesting that the listing was caused by water coming in through the windows.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

No, you do not get to put the cart before the horse. You cannot claim the capsize happened before the cause of it. Like a footballer rolling around in agony before he was even tackled. If the ingress of 8,000 tonnes of water caused the capsize, it cannot also be the result of the capsize.

Chronology is all. The JAIC on realising that an ingress of water onto the car deck could not cause the vessel to capsize, it had to come up with a ridiculous hypothetical scenario of the thing floating on its side until enough windows and dividers were broken.

No. Your confusion, misunderstanding and and bewilderment do not make their analysis wrong. They only illustrate your incomprehension of what the report says, assuming you have read it.