The sinking of MS Estonia: Case Reopened Part VII

[Jack by the hedge]

Never lose sight of the fact that the deported Egyptians are only in this thread to stand as an example proving Sweden secretly disappears people. Which their case does not show.

 

[Mojo]

So when power qwas lost so was the communication with the bridge, someone would have to go up there and report.

No, they could just send a lizard.

 

[Andy_Ross]

No, I haven't said it was 'a given the ship sank because it was attacked by Russia'. You just made that up.

You made the claim several times previously, you even said it was their sub that sank it.

 

[P.J. Denyer]

No, they could just send a lizard.

The sad thing is that in the context of these threads this is far from the most rediculous suggestion about events that night.

 

[dorricc0]

Many a true word spoken in jest! You should write spy fiction as you are good at this. But seriously, does anyone really believe the diver is simply strolling around the cabin like a tourist and it was a case of, 'Oh look! I've found a briefcase here...amongst a load of other suitcases and bags!" Controller: 'Oh wow. That is so amazing!' Diver, 'Wait, there's a name tag on it!' Controller: 'No! That's fantastic! What does it say?' Diver: 'It's fricking forrin!' Controller: 'Spell it, then.' 'Alpha, romeo, november, india' "OMG! This is so exciting! Spell it again, Sam!" <fx diver repeats various spellings> "Just let me see if that name rings a bell - " Diver: 'There's a babushka here as well, which I'll film so as to show he's a Russian". Controller, 'That's super! Is there anything else that grabs your attention?' We-eeelll!

For someone who prides themselves in dealing only in facts and not conjecture, and with pride in their honesty, integrity and high debating standards, this is quite a post.

 

[dorricc0]

You can have pride in your newly independent nation and flagship cruise/ferry and still retain objectivity. Think about the conflicting interests. IF Sweden did know there was illicit cargo on the ferry, then it is clear the passengers were seen as collateral. If this came out, it could cause a massive public scandal, so decision is made to classify it and give the public a mundane cause. Sweden's rationale might reason it as thus, with Estonia being newly independent and Sweden as allies of USA keen to not give Russia an excuse to reinvade, that was the best solution all round. Estonia, suspecting of a cover up of the circumstances, is angry at the implied assumption it was all their fault. Whilst the maintenance and poor registration of passengers on board were all lacking, ultimately, if the sinking was sabotage (given the circumstances) the Estonians on the other hand have a motive to pass blame onto Sweden. It is not as simple as Meister wanting to protect the reputation of his country, because Sweden also needed to, if there was dodgy cargo on board giving rise to risk of passenger danger.

For someone who prides themselves in dealing only in facts and not conjecture, and with pride in their honesty, integrity and high debating standards, this is quite a post.

 

[Reformed Offlian]

'Disappeared' is the colloquialism of 'renditioned'.

No. You told this lie the last time this came up, and it didn't work then, either. Bollyn cited the relevant provision in international law that was supposedly violated -the one for "enforced disappearance", and you attempted at length to argue that the case of the Egpytians did indeed fit that specific criterion. It was never a colloquialism for anything. You even mentioned the same paragraphs in international law that Bollyn did.

It was only after that didn't work, and you realized that you couldn't find a respectability-adjacent, non-Bollyn source for the "enforced disappearance" claim that you tried to pretend you meant something else.

 

[Vixen]

For someone who prides themselves in dealing only in facts and not conjecture, and with pride in their honesty, integrity and high debating standards, this is quite a post.

Citation please. BTW I'll thank you not to twist my words and to quote me properly in context, in future.

 

[Vixen]

No. You told this lie the last time this came up, and it didn't work then, either. Bollyn cited the relevant provision in international law that was supposedly violated -the one for "enforced disappearance", and you attempted at length to argue that the case of the Egpytians did indeed fit that specific criterion. It was never a colloquialism for anything. You even mentioned the same paragraphs in international law that Bollyn did.

It was only after that didn't work, and you realized that you couldn't find a respectability-adjacent, non-Bollyn source for the "enforced disappearance" claim that you tried to pretend you meant something else.

It is a fact the two Egyptian guys were renditioned at the the request of the CIA and Sweden did so. I suppose if 'Bollyn' says Paris is the capital of France, it becomes untrue,

 

[LondonJohn]

No. You told this lie the last time this came up, and it didn't work then, either. Bollyn cited the relevant provision in international law that was supposedly violated -the one for "enforced disappearance", and you attempted at length to argue that the case of the Egpytians did indeed fit that specific criterion. It was never a colloquialism for anything. You even mentioned the same paragraphs in international law that Bollyn did.

It was only after that didn't work, and you realized that you couldn't find a respectability-adjacent, non-Bollyn source for the "enforced disappearance" claim that you tried to pretend you meant something else.

As far as I can tell, these two men weren't even renditioned either. What appears to have happened is that they arrived in Sweden with dodgy papers, and were flagged for deportation. Then the CIA - who may well have been tracking the men's movements - informed the Swedes that the two were bad actors and the CIA did not want them operating out of a major European country. Sweden then fast-tracked (unlawfully) the deportation order, and flew - possibly in a CIA aircraft - the two men back to Egypt. It was a regular deportation, albeit rushed.

An enquiry subsequently ruled that the deportation was unlawful in two respects: 1) the rushed nature of it and consequent disregard for due process, and 2) Sweden shouldn't have sent the men back to a state that was likely to torture them upon their return (Sweden claimed it had some assurance on this from Egypt but in fact it didn't).

As a result of the enquiry and other related factors, Sweden eventually agreed to repatriate the two men and to pay them monetary damages.

 

[LondonJohn]

It is a fact the two Egyptian guys were renditioned at the the request of the CIA and Sweden did so.

No it's not and no they didn't.

 

[Vixen]

As far as I can tell, these two men weren't even renditioned either. What appears to have happened is that they arrived in Sweden with dodgy papers, and were flagged for deportation. Then the CIA - who may well have been tracking the men's movements - informed the Swedes that the two were bad actors and the CIA did not want them operating out of a major European country. Sweden then fast-tracked (unlawfully) the deportation order, and flew - possibly in a CIA aircraft - the two men back to Egypt. It was a regular deportation, albeit rushed.

An enquiry subsequently ruled that the deportation was unlawful in two respects: 1) the rushed nature of it and consequent disregard for due process, and 2) Sweden shouldn't have sent the men back to a state that was likely to torture them upon their return (Sweden claimed it had some assurance on this from Egypt but in fact it didn't).

As a result of the enquiry and other related factors, Sweden eventually agreed to repatriate the two men and to pay them monetary damages.

The point being, the CIA ordered an independent sovereign state to do its will, and Sweden jumped, even though the USA has no jurisdiction in Sweden.

 

[LondonJohn]

Never lose sight of the fact that the deported Egyptians are only in this thread to stand as an example proving Sweden secretly disappears people. Which their case does not show.

Indeed. It's all rather reductive and pointless.

 

[LondonJohn]

The point being, the CIA ordered an independent sovereign state to do its will, and Sweden jumped, even though the USA has no jurisdiction in Sweden.

Evidence that "the CIA ordered (Sweden) to do its will", please. Plus, there's evidence that the two men had already been flagged for asylum refusal and deportation before the CIA told Sweden what it knew about the men.

 

[Reformed Offlian]

It is a fact the two Egyptian guys were renditioned at the the request of the CIA and Sweden did so.

Bollyn didn't say they were renditioned; he said they were disappeared, as did you initially. And that *wasn't* true. (ETA: and as other posters are pointing out, it is far from clear that "renditioning" is correct, either).

I suppose if 'Bollyn' says Paris is the capital of France, it becomes untrue,

A more accurate analogy is that, if Bollyn says Strasbourg is the capital of France, and you say the same thing, and it later turns out that nobody else besides Bollyn ever said Strasbourg is the capital of France, it becomes apparent that you got that bogus notion from Bollyn.

 

[JayUtah]

It is a fact the two Egyptian guys were renditioned at the the request of the CIA and Sweden did so. I suppose if 'Bollyn' says Paris is the capital of France, it becomes untrue,

You already tried that exact same straw man. Bollyn puts the same legally and factually wrong spin on the story as you do. And you have no other source for that spin.

 

[JayUtah]

Citation please. BTW I'll thank you not to twist my words and to quote me properly in context, in future.

Oh dear, your schtick isn’t working.

 

[Mojo]

Citation please. BTW I'll thank you not to twist my words and to quote me properly in context, in future.

doricc0 quoted your post in full, and the link back to the post shows it in context. The link back to the post also acts as a perfectly good citation, enabling the specific post to be easily found.

 

[Vixen]

Evidence that "the CIA ordered (Sweden) to do its will", please. Plus, there's evidence that the two men had already been flagged for asylum refusal and deportation before the CIA told Sweden what it knew about the men.

Carl Bildt had a special relationship with Bill Clinton, which came after the fall of he USSR, and both were keen to get Estonia fully independent. It also meant the USA helping itself to former-USSR military equipment and valuable metals and minerals, plus military materiel. It is a fact, Sweden transport this stuff at least once on the Estonia ferry, causing high risk to civilians, as the USSR had warned Sweden and Estonia to stop smuggling, which was rife. So yes, it is perfectly possible that after the 28 Sept 1994 disaster, the key Estonia crew were renditioned as by request by the CIA, in a similar procedure to those two Egyptian guys. Perfect solution all round. Saves embarrassment.

 

[MarkCorrigan]

The point being, the CIA ordered an independent sovereign state to do its will, and Sweden jumped, even though the USA has no jurisdiction in Sweden.

Nope. That's both untrue and also a distortion of your original point. Your original point being that because Sweden disappeared the Egyptian men in question (which is not what happened) disappearing people is just what Sweden does (which is also untrue). The only person other than yourself who can be found claiming that the men were disappeared is Bollyn.