• 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.

The sinking of MS Estonia: Case Reopened Part VII

Vixen said:
What conspiracy would this be? It is a current affairs news item that the sinking of the Estonia is being reinvestigated. This is a factual statement. Let me know if you have any objections and what they are.
Click to expand...

Which conspiracy? I dunno, pick one of these that I'm listing off the top of my head you're proposed in this thread.

Russian Spetsnaz operatives boarded the Estonia (maybe on a minisub, maybe not) and shot and killed at least one of the senior crew.
Explosive charges that didn't explode were planted on the ship and photographed during investigation of the wreck.
A Royal Navy submarine escorting the Estonia crashed into it and caused the sinking.
At least one of the helicopter rescue crews was bribed with a medal he didn't deserve to lie about the details of the timing of the rescue, which helicopter he was on, how many people he rescued, etc. in order to coverup that he helping in the rendition of the crew.

All of these are scenarios that you've proposed and you've proposed that they're being covered by the authorities investigating the event.

Be honest Vixen, how many of those scenarios do you give plausibility to? This entire thread has been a continual carnival of you proposing something like the Estonia sinking being caused by a submarine collison, defending that with suposedexperts, witnesses, etc. and then coming back with some other new idea mutually exclusive to the previous one, such as that the sinking was actually caused by explosive charges, again accompanied by evidence from witnesses, experts, etc.

Vixen, if you're going to respond, than respond to this question: Do you still think that the Estonia being sunk by a British escort submarine is a plausible and valid explanation for the sinking? Does it gel with the idea the idea that explosive charges sank the Estonia? Every silly new idea you propose here you seem to want to examine in isolation, as if the new ideas are somehow compatible with the older ideas, or as if we're going to forget that you propsed minisubmarines. Baltic floor crawling submarines, etc.
 
To be fair, I dont' think the correction about Piht would warrant an erratum, because the news outlets were not the ones in error; they were correctly repeating a mistaken early report from officials. Any subsequent correction from said officials would simply be an update, not an erratum.
 
Last edited:
LondonJohn said:
Indeed. In fact, reporting is often inaccurate in the "fog of war" wrt disasters...
Click to expand...
Case in point: in the early hours after the crash of the Air India 787, a number of outlets reported opinions from "experts" saying the flaps weren't extended. (They were.) Someone who wanted to formulate a conspiracy theory that Boeing was covering up another mechanical failure could point to the later (correct) stories about engine shutdown, write them off as revisionism, and try to stick with the first reports. It shouldn't be a bridge too far to realize that early reports are often wrong and that if there's a conflict between early reports and later reports, the later reports should be considered likely more informed.
 
JesseCuster said:
Which conspiracy? I dunno, pick one of these that I'm listing off the top of my head you're proposed in this thread.

Russian Spetsnaz operatives boarded the Estonia (maybe on a minisub, maybe not) and shot and killed at least one of the senior crew.
Explosive charges that didn't explode were planted on the ship and photographed during investigation of the wreck.
A Royal Navy submarine escorting the Estonia crashed into it and caused the sinking.
At least one of the helicopter rescue crews was bribed with a medal he didn't deserve to lie about the details of the timing of the rescue, which helicopter he was on, how many people he rescued, etc. in order to coverup that he helping in the rendition of the crew.

All of these are scenarios that you've proposed and you've proposed that they're being covered by the authorities investigating the event.

Be honest Vixen, how many of those scenarios do you give plausibility to? This entire thread has been a continual carnival of you proposing something like the Estonia sinking being caused by a submarine collison, defending that with suposedexperts, witnesses, etc. and then coming back with some other new idea mutually exclusive to the previous one, such as that the sinking was actually caused by explosive charges, again accompanied by evidence from witnesses, experts, etc.

Vixen, if you're going to respond, than respond to this question: Do you still think that the Estonia being sunk by a British escort submarine is a plausible and valid explanation for the sinking? Does it gel with the idea the idea that explosive charges sank the Estonia? Every silly new idea you propose here you seem to want to examine in isolation, as if the new ideas are somehow compatible with the older ideas, or as if we're going to forget that you propsed minisubmarines. Baltic floor crawling submarines, etc.
Click to expand...
I think it's plausible because Braidwood, an explosives expert and at arm's length from the ship's crew and interested nations, being from the British Royal Navy and a respected trainer/lecturer, recognised what he identified as an explosive attached to one side of the bow, that had failed to ignite. You recall teams of British and Irish divers went in to survey the vessel. Jutta Rabe, too, is a serious journalist and isn't going to get involved in fake news.
 
Reformed Offlian said:
To be fair, I dont' think the correction about Piht would warrant an erratum, because the news outlets were not the ones in error; they were correctly repeating a mistaken early report from officials. Any subsequent correction from said officials would simply be an update, not an erratum.
Click to expand...
There is a big difference between being believed to be a survivor to actually being seen in Helsinki.
 
Jack by the hedge said:
As I recall, you insisted Sweden had "disappeared" the two guys because that's just the kind of thing Sweden does, and you said so to bolster one of your crazy fairytale conspiracy theories: that Sweden had magically rescued but then "disappeared" the officers of the Estonia.
Click to expand...
Sweden did disappear two guys. One of them received citizenship and damages in compensation for his ordeal. At the time, although the Cold War was over, Sweden and the USA were great allies (it is a pity there is now a traitor in the White House) but Clinton wanted those two guys renditioned so the Swedes acquiesed to the foreign power.
 
Last edited:
Vixen said:
I think it's plausible because Braidwood, an explosives expert and at arm's length from the ship's crew and interested nations, being from the British Royal Navy and a respected trainer/lecturer, recognised what he identified as an explosive attached to one side of the bow, that had failed to ignite. You recall teams of British and Irish divers went in to survey the vessel. Jutta Rabe, too, is a serious journalist and isn't going to get involved in fake news.
Click to expand...
ha ha

So how does that fit with a Royal Navy submarine escorting the ferry hitting and sinking it?
 
Vixen said:
There is a big difference between being believed to be a survivor to actually being seen in Helsinki.
Click to expand...
There's an even bigger difference between some guy watching TV news in Germany and thinking he saw a fleeting glimpse of Piht in Helsinki (although the clip is still online and it's not him) and a Swedish rescue helicopter making an undocumented super secret flight before anyone else even managed to find the site of the sinking and, in the dark, magically rescuing only the ships' officers, without any other survivors noticing, and then somehow delivering Piht to a hospital in Finland but then later somehow kidnapping him again and disappearing him forever, for no reason anyone can articulate.
 
Last edited:
Vixen said:
Sweden did disappear two guys.
Click to expand...

No. Words have meanings. Sweden did not "disappear" two guys and Sweden did not "disappear" Piht.

Unless maybe you want to tell us Sweden later gave Piht citizenship and damages in compensation. Is that something you would like to claim?
 
Jack by the hedge said:
There's an even bigger difference between some guy watching TV news in Germany and thinking he saw a fleeting glimpse of Piht in Helsinki (although the clip is still online and it's not him) and a Swedish rescue helicopter making an undocumented super secret flight before anyone else even managed to find the site of the sinking, and magically rescuing only the ships' officers, without any other survivors noticing, and then somehow delivering Piht to a hospital in Finland but then later somehow kidnapping him again and disappearing him forever, for no reason anyone can articulate.
Click to expand...
This isn't based on tv clips. It was commonly held that the PM's of Sweden, Finland and Estonia were flying over to Turku TYKS hospital to chat to the survivors, of which Piht was supposedly a key one, together with security police from SAPO and SUPO given the possible sabotage by a foreign power. They then flew to Helsinki and Piht was said to have flown with them. Piht was reported as having been seen in Helsinki and no more was heard from him again. In the interim Interpol put out an international arrest warrant. If a hostile foreign power sabotaged the removal by Sweden allied with the USA of former Soviet equipment and materiel from Estonia, then one can see this would quickly become classified information, especially as Sweden had to admit having done this on a passenger ferry before.
 
Vixen said:
This isn't based on tv clips.
Click to expand...
Yes it is.

Vixen said:
It was commonly held that the PM's of Sweden, Finland and Estonia were flying over to Turku TYKS hospital to chat to the survivors, of which Piht was supposedly a key one, together with security police from SAPO and SUPO given the possible sabotage by a foreign power. They then flew to Helsinki and Piht was said to have flown with them. Piht was reported as having been seen in Helsinki and no more was heard from him again. In the interim Interpol put out an international arrest warrant. If a hostile foreign power sabotaged the removal by Sweden allied with the USA of former Soviet equipment and materiel from Estonia, then one can see this would quickly become classified information, especially as Sweden had to admit having done this on a passenger ferry before.
Click to expand...

You argued for page after page after page that Sweden magically plucked the ships' officers out of the sea, in the dark, in total secrecy and disappeared them. Have you forgotten you did that?
 
Jack by the hedge said:
That is too low a bar to be a useful test. (Unless it's about welding, in which case it turns out to be much too high a bar.)
Click to expand...
The welding thing refers to the Norwegian lady, Ida [Name?] who said in her demonstration that in order to recreate the same deformation forms for steel exposed to explosive impact on to steel, it could only be done artificially in a lab. So people tried to make out they could reach those temperatures in their living room with their welding arcs, completely deliberately twisting mine and her words.
 
How do explosives blowing the bow door off and sinking the ship fit in with the bow door being opened to push out lorries full of contraband Russian equipment and/or nuclear waste?
 
You were astounded that anyone would suggest welding might involve melting steel. It went downhill from there. You insisted that even if it did involve melting, this could only be achieved in a laboratory because you misunderstood what the professor said.

Have you forgotten you did all of that?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom