• 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

The Estonia sank stern down first, bow in the air. The depth was 80m, the length of the vessel was 155m. Do the maths, So now the 22m gaping hole in the hull has been confirmed, although not mentioned at all in the original JAIC Report (how could they miss it?). So the trigger 'initial findings' is that this was caused by rocks where it landed and rolled against. This is classic Change Management, preparing the public for a conclusion it was the rocks that caused the hole. Let's see if it all adds up.
You need to end this clown show.

The "hole" is from impacting on the rock outcrop on the sea floor. It wasn't the cause of the sinking because it didn't exist until after sinking. Not only is the hole OBVIOUS impact damage, it follows the seam of the hull plate. Only a complete moron would interpret the gouge as damage from an explosion. And the reason it wasn't seen in the first investigation is due to the hull lying more on its side at the time. In the decades since the sinking the hull has rolled over enough to allow DSRV access (and DSRVs are much smaller today than in the 1990s). You can't report what you don't observe, at least in the adult world.

Of course it sank stern-first. That's where the water was. And the bow was considerably lighter.

Usually the preliminary report and the final report agree. There's more details in the final report.
 
You have said you have no respect for my citation skills, so you are welcome to research who was on the bridge for yourself, without my help.
This sort of response is why people have no respect for your citation skills. They would have to see evidence that you have some to have respect for them.
 
Whoosh! Once again my point seems to have escaped you, which was fit senior officers aged mid-twenties to forties, regular medicals, know the drill, fit and strong (+ all 'missing presumed dead') ~vs~ a youngish guy but with severe health problems, 245lbs*, and who had badly injured his back when the lists back and forth began, with a kid to look after and his grandfather, plus an ex-sea Captain aged 74 and his wife of similar age group (I presume) nonetheless, despite having some problem unravelling the life jackets, managed to spritely jump into a life boat and were saved.

* Donald Trump is 6'3" (=feet and inches) and weighs 245lbs. (= pounds)
Is that how it should work in these kinds of chaotic disastrous events? The young and fit survive, and the old or unfit perish? And anything other than that is suspicious (/ strange) and evidence of... something. Ok then.
 
Maybe I'm getting bogged down on this point about the unidentified yet unauthorised person on the bridge.

How about a different approach, @Vixen . What is the significance to this disaster that an unauthorised person may have been on the bridge at the time of the sinking. (I haven't waded back through the threads so forgive me if this has been covered).

I wouldn't know what the 'significance' is except that this was observed and reported in credible sources. It just is. [snip]

Ok, so you don't think there is a significance that an unauthorised person may have been on the bridge at the time of the sinking. I agree, so that's good, we can stop debating this point, thank you.
 
Last edited:
I wouldn't know what the 'significance' is except that this was observed and reported in credible sources. It just is. I suggest watching Baltic Storm if you want to find out what Jutta Rabe claims to have found out from her research as an investigative journalist.

Oh and I was curious enough to click the YouTube link, but this is a movie, not a factual documentary - are you sure you used the correct link?
 
Perhaps the ship was sunk as part of some secret experiment in eugenics.
Yes, that's it! Khan Noonien Singh was onboard and this is how he came to be cryogenically frozen, at the bottom of the Baltic sea.

And here's the evidence: {YouTube link to ST-II movie}.
 
Would it surprise you to learn that this has been discussed before, when Vixen wrote very clearly that Greta Saatchi starred as herself in it?
Wow. I confess my naivety in being surprised.

So what she is saying is:
{quote from post #1890 of part III} 'Corny scenes' from the film {Baltic Storm} that are actually based on fact or evidence:

And now we're asking for evidence:
{quote from post #2024 of part VII} I suggest watching Baltic Storm if you want to find out what Jutta Rabe claims to have found out from her research as an investigative journalist.

There's a term for this kind of reasoning that goes round in a circle, isn't there.
 


There are still several rule 12 violations despite a very recent modbox warning about this.

Stay on topic, which isn't the other posters

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: jimbob
 
TBH even if he was obese, chance plays a big role. If crew are checking that area, see him and help him to a life boat. If he's not in his cabin when the ship founders and happens to be near the life boats. If he has people near him, etc. In this kind of situation where you are and whether you're awake or asleep when events happen makes a huge difference to your chances of survival and it's totally random.
That is true but what is the probability of that out of fourteen persons in upper deck accommodation out of which five are relatively impeded (a minor, a clinically obese person with an injured back, his grandfather and two pensioners) and it is these five who are the only ones who supposedly made it.
 
Last edited:
Your point and argument about Voronin surviving are entirely moot if Voronin wasn't "grossly overweight" or "clinically obese". So again, I'll ask, what is the evidence that Voronin was grossly overweight and 245lbs? What does the book you cited say about Voronin's weight and what evidence does it offer?

edit: Also, did he have "severe health problems" apart from his weight, what were those problems? Also, who says he "spritely jumped into a life boat" (apart from you)?

Have you read the book? Can you cite what it actually says and what evidence it puts forth?
I gave you the source look it up for yourself. You were told he died of natural causes (health problems) aged circa 42.
 
We aren't asking you to argue for or against Bollyns beliefs. We're asking you why you persist in the insane conclusion he isn't real.
I don't believe he is who he says he is. Could be a CIA MKULTRA-style spycop, planted to keep an eye on and to sniff out 'conspiracy theories' amongst the masses by pretending to be one such advocate himself. Wouldn't surprise me. Why else would someone supposedly born in Chicago be into worldwide conspiracies and seems to be an expert in Middle East studies. Reminds me of right wing conservative MP Suella Bravermann pictured in her young adulthood as being a member of the far left Trotskyist Revolutionary Communist Party. How so, and why was the newspaper article promptly removed? She was working for MI5/6 as in infiltrator gathering information. That's how so. Bollyn is made up of similar stuff IMV, more interested in scandal stirring than anything.
 
They were lucky, other's weren't, the crew were helping passengers escape, you said so yourself. what's your point?

Are you implying the officers were murdered so they couldn't escape?
The point being made is that the Tallinn shipping company were sent a fax of the surviving crew and those senior officers plus a couple of show girls and bar staff member were listed as survivors. People saw the same information on German tv. But suddenly they were listed as missing. No bodies recovered or found. Plus the early newspaper reports in Swedish newspapers praised one if its rescuers as having saved a similar amount of persons, who were flown straight to Sweden instead of the designated survivor spot in Finland.
 
I don't believe he is who he says he is. Could be a CIA MKULTRA-style spycop, planted to keep an eye on and to sniff out 'conspiracy theories' amongst the masses by pretending to be one such advocate himself. Wouldn't surprise me. Why else would someone supposedly born in Chicago be into worldwide conspiracies and seems to be an expert in Middle East studies. Reminds me of right wing conservative MP Suella Bravermann pictured in her young adulthood as being a member of the far left Trotskyist Revolutionary Communist Party. How so, and why was the newspaper article promptly removed? She was working for MI5/6 as in infiltrator gathering information. That's how so. Bollyn is made up of similar stuff IMV, more interested in scandal stirring than anything.
Remarkable!
 

Back
Top Bottom