And this is why we ask for actual cites instead of your usually inaccurate recollections.
Cite? Whose military was commissioned to dive on the Estonia and , please, a link to the supposed “military report” on this dive.
Again, do you have a source for this assertion?
No. You attempted to assert fourth-hand here say as fact.
So not an impartial source and one prone to (and proved to be) lying.
Bull
. In case you haven't noticed, most everyone else here believes you're a conspiracy theorist, too, and several have outright said so. And, as usual, you're just looking for some peripheral point to attempt to use as a distraction because you don't want to address the substance of my post, namely, the sheer absurdity of your claim to value honesty, integrity, and authenticity.Also as usual, you don't know what you're talking about. An appeal to the crowd, or argumentum ad populum, fallacy would occur if I said something like "We all think Vixen is a conspiracy theorist, and that many people can't be wrong."
Saying "we've seen . . ." isn't claiming to speak for others; it's an observation, as is my statement that your attempts to shame "us" in order to mute criticism won't work.
See above.
Evasion noted. None of this addresses any of the reasons why, as has been explained to you, an authorized member of the crew might have been wearing some sort of red outfit on the bridge rather than his regular uniform.
And, just like the first time you tried to weasel out of responsibility for what you'd said, you left out the part where you'd claimed that one of the purposes of the sign (which you'd conflated with the Grand Hailing Sign of Distress) was to allow a Freemason defendant to identify himself to a Freemason judge so that the judge would let him off. So explain to me again how you weren't impugning Freemasonry.
I copied some text from the Swedish translation, and then used Google translate to get it into English. So it an unknown translation from Estonian to Swedish, and then an unofficial translation to English. That is - I wouldn't really trust that what I quote below is matches the source.
As I pointed out a red outfit might well be his regular uniform for work hours or storm conditions.
Almost the exact opposite of claims we have seen in this thread.
You're lying again, both about being a scientist when you're not and about what happened.
The BPS requires a psychology degree for full, as opposed to student, membership. Do you have such?
She has stated she has a psych undergrad degree yes.
Of course.
Ainsalu and Tammes, who was found dead in the water in a life jacket, are known to have left the bridge. I suggest using search if you want to know about the bridge movements and protocols. AI overview tells you:
Initially the Swedish navy sent teams down to ascertain likelihood of recovery. A team went down to retrieve Capt Piht's attaché case. The Swedes carried out dives in secrecy not inviting Estonia or Finland (being the Swedish Navy). The wreck was nearest Finnish waters, so their Navy likely did some of its own inspections (cf; Lehtola, to investigate possible radioactivity). You should be able to search the discussions on this. Rockwater is an official dive and report.
No, you claimed you could only see it on 'conspiracy' sites so I pointed you to the ex-JAIC head.
If Meister was not an impartial source, one could say the same for Sweden, desperate to cover up its ex-Soviet materiel smuggling from Paldiski ex-USSR military base via an ordinary passenger ferry.
I said it was a popular myth.And, just like the first time you tried to weasel out of responsibility for what you'd said, you left out the part where you'd claimed that one of the purposes of the sign (which you'd conflated with the Grand Hailing Sign of Distress) was to allow a Freemason defendant to identify himself to a Freemason judge so that the judge would let him off. So explain to me again how you weren't impugning Freemasonry.
Rabe quotes p. 140, re the 'shot through the head' body of Andresson.