Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
Er, there is actually a copy of the newspaper report.
Cont: The sinking of MS Estonia: Case Reopened Part VI
- Thread starter JesseCuster
- Start date
-
- Tags
- ms estonia
- Status
Er, there is actually a copy of the newspaper report.
Mojo
Mostly harmless
MarkCorrigan
Героям слава!
Because eyewitness testimony is notoriously unreliable, the sounds could easily have been the banging of the bow visor, and there's no evidence from the reports of the disaster that show anything other than what was explained already.
You know that people on 9/11 reported hearing "explosions" too right? That they thought that they had heard bombs going off in the towers? Those people were simply mistaken about the reason for the sound they heard. They heard loud bangs from the damage inflicted to the towers and the destruction of support structures inside the towers before and during the collapses. They were absolutely correct in saying that they had heard noises, but they were wrong in attributing the noises to bombs.
You know that we would require actual physical evidence for any of the wild speculation that you've suggested in the thread? It's all well and good to point to people hearing something they claimed sounded like an explosion and seeing a military truck, but if examination of the wreckage shows no explosive damage, residue or other evidence of explosives, we know those people were mistaken.
1. Because it was a paranoid high control group with people jockying for positions of power within the organisation. It's no coincidence that the person who accused him was also trying to establlsh himself in a leadership role at the time and was pushing for his own vision of what C18 should be.
2. Even if someone WAS passing information to the security services, that is not evidence that C18 was founded by MI5.
C18 was founded by the BNP, particularly it's more violence-oriented members as a security group to stop BNP marches getting the crap kicked out of them by anti-fascists, as had been happening. They thought if they had a notorious paramilitary wing of their "political party" that it would stop people turning up and putting the boot in, or even prevent people protesting their activities at all.
MarkCorrigan
Героям слава!
The two highlights are not the same thing at all, and they're also not the same thing as:
That you seem to think that "a few strong waves" and "the bow visor", which were only part of the explanation offered anyway are the same as claiming it was "a big wave" is extremely revealing.
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
Think about it. Your military guys are expecting a military delivery on that ferry. Your military guys realise the said vessel has suddenly sunk at the exact halfway point of the journey (in international waters), the third mate only just managed to get a mayday through to a nearby cruise ship that happened to be passing; a communications failure. Of course you are going to immediately slap on a Section D notice (news blackout other than primary facts). The Swedish newspapers reported nine were rescued in the early hours and taken to Stockholm. No-one said they were 'kidnapped' at that stage. IMV they were likely remanded for questioning and what happened after that no-one knows, but they were listed as survivors originally. But we have a clue in that CIA could demand Sweden hand over suspected terrorists. or activists.
Here_to_learn
Illuminator
It was only three days ago that I responded to this, linking back to where I provided the facts around this.
Obviousely my final wish did not come true.
MarkCorrigan
Героям слава!
That would be the Swedish Armed Forces Medal of Merit, yes?
1. That award is not actually reserved for combat or war only.
2. Svensson is not listed here under those who received the medal.
Now that is only Wikipedia (although that's what you linked to, of course) so if you have a more authoratative list where he is present please do share.
MarkCorrigan
Героям слава!
Why are all your speculations on the activities of intelligence services like something straight out of a pulp spy novel and not at all connected to the real world?
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
Again you are 'arguing on paper'. The correct place to determine 'witness reliability' is at a court hearing and under cross-examination. People aren't stupid; they know all about the various cognitive biases and philosophical issues about recounting personal experience.
It is laughable that someone on the internet thinks they know better than someone who was actually there.
Given that the 'accident' was only ever assessed by the JAIC panel who only met every two months and their meetings were barely minuted, do you seriously believe this takes the place of a proper investigation instead one by computer simulation?
Mojo
Mostly harmless
Jack by the hedge
Safely Ignored
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2009
- Messages
- 23,029
No.
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
That is because Ken Svensson was not posthumous!!!
Try again:
[ 2 ] wiki
Note the posthumous awards were guys who were downed in their planes by the USSR in the 1950-s cold war, and their deaths were for many decades classified secret, with not even their own close families knowing what had become of them (although the Swedish government did, all along). Hence the posthumous awards in 2004 when the scandal came to light and was declassified.
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
Er, you do know when something becomes classified, all later mentions are removed.
Mojo
Mostly harmless
MarkCorrigan
Героям слава!
Except that they often don't, and it's regularly shown that people wildly overestimate their ability to accurately recall things and how reliable eyewitness testimony is.
Also, why does it have to be a court of law? If there is eyewitness testimony that suggests one possibility, but the physical evidence shows that it did not happen that way, the eyewitness was clearly mistaken. It's not hard.
Why? People "on the internet" are operating with all the information available. There were people who were present on 9/11 who claimed they heard bombs. I, someone on the internet, knows that they did not hear bombs, because no bombs were used.
Why am I less correct than someone who just happened to be present?
Sure, being present gives a person the potential for additional information and the experience itself, but that doesn't make them objective, it doesn't mean they're correct, and it certainly doesn't make their pronouncements beyond reproach.
It's basic psychology, people will layer their experiences with their own personal bias. Happens all the time. People mistake car backfires for gunshots. Did they hear a bang? Sure, but that doesn't mean a gun was fired.
Did they hear banging on the Estonia? Sure, but that doesn't mean it was explosions. It provides a possibility to be investigated certainly, but if the investigation is done and finds no evidence for explosions, then the eyewitness was mistaken about their explanation for the noise.
You do know these people are actually experts, right? That experts are way more well informed than someone who is not an expert who happened to be on the ferry at the time?
Also, dropping Combat 18 now? Going to admit you were wrong?
MarkCorrigan
Героям слава!
Good to see you still think you can teach people about how classification works.
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
The JAIC do say in their report conclusion the accident was caused by a strong wave. How do you get around that?
Nor are most of the others listed on the page. Did you misunderstand the part that said " This with the † indicates that the Swedish Armed Forces Medal of Merit was awarded posthumously"?
MarkCorrigan
Героям слава!
Nor are all the recipients on the list provided. It even highlights those that were.
Thank you for providing a list though. You didn't actually address my point though, that being that it is not an award given only for actions in combat.
- Status