The sinking of MS Estonia: Case Reopened Part VII

[zooterkin]

I just watched this video again, but this time I didn't 'go straight to about 06:00' as suggested. In fact, the first segment of the video is text describing its purpose to refute the claim that the diver was looking for a certain case that was found in cabin 6230.

So, your own claim is specifically debunked by your own evidence. Remarkable.

Welcome to Vixen world, where such things are so commonplace they cease to be remarkable.

ETA: Ninjaed!

 

[Jack by the hedge]

The sad thing is that even though multiple posters have explained to Vixen exactly why the video proves the divers were not seeking the briefcase they found, that information will not have gone in. It'll barely leave a mark.

Next time the topic is recycled, if we're all still around to see it, they will be back on a desperate, secret mission to retrieve the brief case.

 

[Andy_Ross]

I thought I might add some actual information to this thread, albeit quite trivial.
UHF radio is used for onboard comms as it can penetrate steel plate, concrete etc, so exactly what might be used to communicate from an engine room if you are working in a place where internal intercom isn’t handy to you. Also as a backup in case you lose other internal comms.

So the “walkie-talkies” being discussed are nearly assuredly UHF radio.
We certainly used such handholds on offshore oil rigs, and in some cases land rigs, camps or logistics centres.

For recreational boating I hold an LROP (long range operators proficiency) licence to operate VHF as well as MF/HF radios. In Australia no license is required to operate UHF, so of course used by Grey Nomads and other short range CB radio users.

Well you learn something new.
I've never come across or used UHF handheld radio, my experience with radio is all VHF and HF SSB. I will investigate further.
HF SSB has largely been replaced with sat phones now.

 

[Mojo]

The sad thing is that even though multiple posters have explained to Vixen exactly why the video proves the divers were not seeking the briefcase they found, that information will not have gone in. It'll barely leave a mark.

Next time the topic is recycled, if we're all still around to see it, they will be back on a desperate, secret mission to retrieve the brief case.

Well, it was a secret mission, wasn't it? So obviously the divers and their supervisor will have gone to great lengths to make it sound as if they weren't looking for the briefcase. And that is exactly how it sounds! The tape is proof of a plot to cover up the secret mission!!!

 

[P.J. Denyer]

Well, it was a secret mission, wasn't it? So obviously the divers and their supervisor will have gone to great lengths to make it sound as if they weren't looking for the briefcase. And that is exactly how it sounds!

If it's super double blinded top secret you don't tell the divers or the supervisor what their mission is otherwise they might effect the outcome. That's basic science spy craft.

 

[Vixen]

I have as long as it takes for a couple of paragraphs of executive summary (which is what I am suggesting).

1. MV Estonia sank 28.9 1994
2. JAIC Report published 1997
3. TV series called 'This Changes Everything' by Henrik Evertsson, Lars Borgnäs and Jutta Rabe, 2020, appears
4. Demand for a reinvestigation grows due to the hole found on the hull, not mentioned in the JAIC Report
5. Thread opened in Current Affairs re the findings of Evertsson
6. Rene Arikas conducts preliminary survey of the wreck 2021. Margus Kurm conducts a rival one.
7. Feb 2024 Sweden says it will not reopen the investigation.
8. Final report awaited by year end 2025.
9. In the meantime, Lars Borgnäs claims to have a secret document, as reported here recently.
10. Margus Kurm has gone quiet, possibly under a gagging order due to the Swedish prosecutor's intervention..

Now you are up to date. Do read the JAIC Report if you haven't yet.

 

[Vixen]

I just watched this video again, but this time I didn't 'go straight to about 06:00' as suggested. In fact, the first segment of the video is text describing its purpose to refute the claim that the diver was looking for a certain case that was found in cabin 6230.

So, your own claim is specifically debunked by your own evidence. Remarkable.

Er, the video was posted in response to a request by a poster. If you want to dispute newspaper reports, do get in contact with Ilta-Sanomat and the Estonian newspaper it quotes. As quoted by them. Do ascribe things correctly.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Do read the JAIC Report if you haven't yet.

Have you read it yet? Or have you still only read whichever version of it your preferred secondary source posted?

 

[Vixen]

Not at all remarkable- this is a regular occurrence on this thread with a certain specific poster.....

Please explain.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Er, the video was posted in response to a request by a poster. If you want to dispute newspaper reports, do get in contact with Ilta-Sanomat and the Estonian newspaper it quotes. As quoted by them. Do ascribe things correctly.

Your reaction to being told your version of the story is clearly false is to deflect, and say it's not originally your false version, it's some newspaper's false version.

Is there any chance of your reflecting on the falsehood bit rather than just the attribution bit?

 

[dorricc0]

I have worked with Rockwater (they became part of what is now Subsea7) and other commercial diving companies on saturation diving jobs, mainly in the North Sea but their company processes are standard and global. My involvement has been on the client side, defining the overall work scope and outcomes.

For reasons of safety and efficiency, every saturation diving job is thoroughly planned and executed via a series of procedures / task plans which often run to 100+ pages of detailed instructions, drawings, and risk assessments. Especially so when entry to confined spaces is required. A typical diving support vessel has a crew numbering over one hundred (the Rockwater SEMI I involved in the Estonia survey had a capacity of 110 persons) as well as the same again in onshore support staff.

The point being, the idea that the work is being performed at the whim of the diver or dive supervisor, and that there was some sort of cover-up in which all these people were complicit, is frankly bonkers.

Just my 2p-worth.

 

[Vixen]

The sad thing is that even though multiple posters have explained to Vixen exactly why the video proves the divers were not seeking the briefcase they found, that information will not have gone in. It'll barely leave a mark.

Next time the topic is recycled, if we're all still around to see it, they will be back on a desperate, secret mission to retrieve the brief case.

The original post is as follows (#1377):

Yes, it is a hazardous and dangerous venture requiring great skill. However, divers did make their way through the interior of the vessel to search for the briefcase belonging to Capt Piht, which was in the room of Voronin, IIRC. So when prosecutors or investigators require evidence, if they have the skilled manpower and specialised equipment, they will employ them.

So you are being less than frank. They did indeed go to what they believed was Piht's cabin.

 

[Vixen]

Your reaction to being told your version of the story is clearly false is to deflect, and say it's not originally your false version, it's some newspaper's false version.

Is there any chance of your reflecting on the falsehood bit rather than just the attribution bit?

I was reporting current affairs, hence the quotes on what the papers say. Any objection?

 

[Mojo]

The original post is as follows (#1377):

Yes, it is a hazardous and dangerous venture requiring great skill. However, divers did make their way through the interior of the vessel to search for the briefcase belonging to Capt Piht, which was in the room of Voronin, IIRC. So when prosecutors or investigators require evidence, if they have the skilled manpower and specialised equipment, they will employ them.

So you are being less than frank. They did indeed go to what they believed was Piht's cabin.

Here's the post that Vixen was unable to link to. As you can see, she's now trying to use her own posts as evidence.

 

[dorricc0]

I just watched this video again, but this time I didn't 'go straight to about 06:00' as suggested. In fact, the first segment of the video is text describing its purpose to refute the claim that the diver was looking for a certain case that was found in cabin 6230.

So, your own claim is specifically debunked by your own evidence. Remarkable.

To which you replied:

Er, the video was posted in response to a request by a poster. If you want to dispute newspaper reports, do get in contact with Ilta-Sanomat and the Estonian newspaper it quotes. As quoted by them. Do ascribe things correctly.

Yes, the video was posted (by you) in response to a request by a poster to provide evidence that the divers were searching for a specific briefcase and the dive was then halted when the briefcase was found. The video you posted specifically refutes this.

I have not been involved in any discussions about newspaper reports, please do ascribe your replies correctly.

 

[Vixen]

Indeed, my link goes back to where it was identified in the thread.

So what? 'Bollyn' uses as supporting evidence it was a military psyop false flag operation by pointing to the fact Swedish naval commander, Börje Stenström, head of the technical group for the JAIC investigation committee, managed to retrieve a key piece of evidence: the so-called Atlantic lock of the bow visor...yet simply chucked it back into the water. This is a good point. Why on earth would he do that?

This doesn't make it 'Bollyn's claim' any more than the rendition one. A fact is not owned by anyone but exists independently of whether or not you believe it. Nobody can claim ownership of it. Stenström himself said the bolt was 'one of the most important pieces of evidence'. Yet he wantonly threw it away. Go figure.

 

[Vixen]

Welcome to Vixen world, where such things are so commonplace they cease to be remarkable.

ETA: Ninjaed!

Sorry, are you being personal?

 

[Vixen]

I thought I might add some actual information to this thread, albeit quite trivial.
UHF radio is used for onboard comms as it can penetrate steel plate, concrete etc, so exactly what might be used to communicate from an engine room if you are working in a place where internal intercom isn’t handy to you. Also as a backup in case you lose other internal comms.

So the “walkie-talkies” being discussed are nearly assuredly UHF radio.
We certainly used such handholds on offshore oil rigs, and in some cases land rigs, camps or logistics centres.

For recreational boating I hold an LROP (long range operators proficiency) licence to operate VHF as well as MF/HF radios. In Australia no license is required to operate UHF, so of course used by Grey Nomads and other short range CB radio users.

As I recall engineer Sillaste said communication from the engine room to the bridge was via monitors but whilst walking around deck they communicated by old style walkie-talkies.

 

[Vixen]

No, but your claim wasn't that they were renditioned was it? It was very specifically that they had been disappeared, and the only source that could be found for this incorrect claim was Bollyn.

Oh and are we back to trying to pretend you think he's using a pseudonym again? That really is the most pathetic of your farces and that's saying something. Either you pretend to believe it because you believe it makes you look smart, you pretend to believe it because you're a troll or you do believe it and you're an idiot.

Of course it's a pseudonym.

 

[Mojo]

Yes, the video was posted (by you) in response to a request by a poster to provide evidence that the divers were searching for a specific briefcase and the dive was then halted when the briefcase was found. The video you posted specifically refutes this.

In case anyone wants to see the context, here's the chain of posts that led to Vixen posting the video:

Evidence that divers "made a beeline" for a particular case? I'm betting you won't even pretend to provide evidence for this claim, just lazily telling others to go search for and find the evidence themselves.

Er, the guy on the video tape can be heard spelling out Voronin's name, albeit incorrectly.

Have you heard the tape?

I'd have to look into my history. In the meantime you can see a transcript here:



<snip>

The diver is reading and pointing at a sign over cabins in the corridor
DC2 - OK John, just in front of you there is possibly cabin 6229, very large cabin
D - 6229, that would be forward
DC2 - That's forward yes, very large cabin four bunks and all that crap
D - OK
DC2 - If you can get in to it?
D - Handle went all way round
DC2 - Handle went all way round
DC2 - Slack the diver as he goes
DC2 - Next one coming down on that side would be 6230
D - 6230
DC2 - Again, facing forward very large cabin
Diver complain of headache, want to change
DC2 - Slack the diver
D - Big cabins
DC2 - Yes very big cabins
D - not readable...cabin 6230
DC2 - Very big cabins this, might take a while searching
DC2 tell the diver what the cabin look like, where the toilet is and everything
D - Enters
Diver look around, find refrigerator, make joke of cold beer if any, look around
D - I'll found an attache case here
DC2 - Attache case, any markings on it?
D - Eeee...yes, hold on here, jepp, we got a name....Alexander Vorin
DC2 - Alexander...
D - Alexander Vorin
DC2 - Can you spell it?
D - Victor, Oscar, Romeo, Alfa, November, November
They try to read the name tag several times and come to VORANI
D - OK
DC2 - And that's it?
D - I cant read it out
DC2 - OK, I'll just see if that name rings a bell up here...
D - Can I leave...not readable...sudently
DC2 - OK, it's a Russian name, Alexander Voran
D - Voranoly
DC2 - Yes
D - It possibly could belong to the man outside
Time 47 minutes on the tape

The police controlled the diving survey

---

Index

@ReformedOfflian Here is a copy of the enhanced audio tape of the divers finding Voronin's attaché case. Go straight to about 06:00.

Estonia - cabin 6230 (enhanced audio)​

See, too, the top comment below it:

As a native English speaker I can tell from the tone of voice of the dive supervisor that they have found exactly what they want, the case. The diver wants to go on but the supervisor knows they have what they need but cannot say that. Around 8:40 he says" that looks like a good search", the code is he means we have what we need let's wrap it up, not risk more time in here, but cannot say that. He does not mean you are doing a good job searching . The diver does not know they have what they need because he wants to carry on and search the loo (toilet). This is all so British not saying what you mean but meaning something else. It totally throws foreign people. He checks 6229 to see how the handle responds in a locked situation compared to open that is all, hence it spins because someone died locked in there. When the supervisor states "I will see if that rings a bell up here" that is an English term of saying I will ask if that is what we are looking for, i.e. does it cause a elicit a response ". There is no physical bell ringing. The dive supervisor is talking him to the location. Less workload not navigating as well as diving. Neither of them would have a need to know the status of the owner. We have not seen the full footage we do not know the status of the case.They sound like Ex Forces from their tone and discussion.

@crankingsounds5856​

1 year ago