The sinking of MS Estonia: Case Reopened Part VII

[MarkCorrigan]

I didn't say ypu were incapable of following along, I wad complaining of being victimised when I have done nothing wrong at all.

Well that's a lie.

I am perfectly well thanks. Looks like the Simonton gap is kicking in again or please tell me what you find incomprehensible and I'll try to explain.

So come on Simonton gap, how much smarter are you that I am not following along?

 

[Vixen]

Well that's a lie.


So come on Simonton gap, how much smarter are you that I am not following along?

You said you couldn't follow what I posted, when you rushed to stick up for zooterkin when he lambasted me because he couldn't follow the point. You also said I must be ill because you couldn't follow it either. Is this my correct understanding?

 

[Jack by the hedge]

'Bollyn' does not have ownership of this fact.

Fact? No. Bollyn has authorship of this opinion about the facts, which does not appear to be an opinion shared by anyone else at all, except perhaps yourself when it seemed momentarily useful in support of what you wished to claim was the typical behaviour of the Swedish government.

 

[MarkCorrigan]

You said you couldn't follow what I posted, when you rushed to stick up for zooterkin when he lambasted me because he couldn't follow the point. You also said I must be ill because you couldn't follow it either. Is this my correct understanding?

1. No, that's not correct. I didn't "rush" to stick up for Zooterkin and he did not "lambast" you. He pointed out that your post did not address the post it was ostensibly replying to. I pointed out that it was an accurate assessment of the conversation. I asked if you were ok because you were literally forgetting a conversation that you could scroll up to read and only occurred 3 hours prior. Forgetting what happened 3 hours ago is not normal Vixen.

2. Even if your assessment of the situation were correct, which it is not, that doesn't answer my question or address my point. You claimed that there was possibly a Simonton gap issue with my comments on your post, intimating that I was unable to follow the discussion correctly because of the gap of intelligence between you and me. That's what the Simonton Gap is Vixen. It's the inability of someone to be able to communicate effectively with people they are considerably smarter than. You were intimating that the lack of understanding you were claiming I was displaying was due to the Simonton gap, ergo I wasn't able to follow along because you're so much smarter than me.

 

[zooterkin]

Which post are you referring to?

Don't be so disingenuous, I'm sure you're perfectly capable of using the little arrows to follow a chain of posts back. For the benefit of those who aren't 'triple nines', and who have difficulty with simple reading comprehension, though, here it is:

Has anyone pointed out how damned hard it would be to dive on the Estonia unnoticed? For Vixen's claim to be real, Sweden would have to fear some rogue dive team sneaking aboard the ship to retrieve the briefcase, and whatever else, and then slipping away. That would be hard for the US and Royal Navies to pull off, even with our cool sneaky submarine technology. This entire rabbit hole is an exercise in delusional thinking.

The Estonia Treaty (grave peace) excludes Germany as it didn't sign it, so what people do is visit under a German flag. Swedish and Finnish coastguards patrol the area but German boats are exempt from breaking the treaty.

Your reply does nothing to address the point of Axxman's post, which is about the difficulty of mounting a secret dive that goes unnoticed. Instead, you witter on about who might be permitted to do it, because they are not signatories to a particular treaty.

 

[Vixen]

Fact? No. Bollyn has authorship of this opinion about the facts, which does not appear to be an opinion shared by anyone else at all, except perhaps yourself when it seemed momentarily useful in support of what you wished to claim was the typical behaviour of the Swedish government.

No, not typical behaviour, one most specifically relevant to their complying with CIA requests during a comparable period.

From Svenska Dagbladet 20.12.11 page 18:

When two human organizations wanted to map the CIA's secret air transports of suspected terrorists in the world, they asked 28 countries for information. Sweden is one of only three countries that directly refuses to provide information.

A high-profile CIA flight concerns the plane that transported the Egyptians Mohammad Alzery and Ahmed Agiza from Bromma to Egypt in December 2001, where they were then tortured in prison.

Caroline Karlsson, political expert at the Minister of Infrastructure Catharina Elmsäter-Svärd (m), states security and personal integrity as reasons why the information has not been provided.

Thus, it is not a far-fetched possibility the 'missing' Estonian crew, including Piht, were handed over at the request of the CIA, especially if the cargo was intended to be theirs.

 

[MarkCorrigan]

No, not typical behaviour, one most specifically relevant to their complying with CIA requests during a comparable period.


Thus, it is not a far-fetched possibility the 'missing' Estonian crew, including Piht, were handed over at the request of the CIA, especially if the cargo was intended to be theirs.

Evidence for any of this wild speculation?

 

[Vixen]

Don't be so disingenuous, I'm sure you're perfectly capable of using the little arrows to follow a chain of posts back. For the benefit of those who aren't 'triple nines', and who have difficulty with simple reading comprehension, though, here it is:







Your reply does nothing to address the point of Axxman's post, which is about the difficulty of mounting a secret dive that goes unnoticed. Instead, you witter on about who might be permitted to do it, because they are not signatories to a particular treaty.

It is not to do with 'permission'. There is nothing official about it. If you disagreed you should have stated why you disagreed.

 

[zooterkin]

Please explain.

Ironically, your post immediately followed yet another example.

Why would the USA want Russian software? What software? Where is the evidence for this?

Er, you haven't heard of the Russian spies working in current day USA? Spies are everywhere, keeping an eye on what everybody else is doing. Especially in the Cold War era and immediately after,

Your reply completely fails to address any of the questions in the post it is replying to. Of course we're aware there are Russians spies. You don't explain what software the USA might be interested in, why they would be interested, and what evidence you have.

 

[Vixen]

Evidence for any of this wild speculation?

The 'disappearance' or whatever semantic games you want to play of the two Egyptian gentlemen.

 

[Vixen]

Evidence for any of this wild speculation?

It might explain the mysteriously 'missing' crew.

 

[zooterkin]

It is not to do with 'permission'. There is nothing official about it. If you disagreed you should have stated why you disagreed.

Again, you miss the point, which is about dives to the wreck which are unnoticed.

 

[zooterkin]

It might explain the mysteriously 'missing' crew.

What mysteriously 'missing' crew?


And again, you don't answer the question you're replying to.

 

[Vixen]

Ironically, your post immediately followed yet another example.



Your reply completely fails to address any of the questions in the post it is replying to. Of course we're award there are Russians spies. You don't explain what software the USA might be interested in, why they would be interested, and what evidence you have.

I said space craft. In which MC thought it referred to 'rockets'. Why would a sovereign nation want to keep their advances in space craft secret? That is easily googled.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

No, not typical behaviour, one most specifically relevant to their complying with CIA requests during a comparable period.


Thus, it is not a far-fetched possibility the 'missing' Estonian crew, including Piht, were handed over at the request of the CIA, especially if the cargo was intended to be theirs.

As has been discussed at tedious length, this case is very clearly not the same thing as you wish to claim is "not far-fetched" about the Estonia.

There is no record of Sweden detaining or deporting the Estonia officers. There is nobody at all who ever met any of the missing officers after the sinking. There is no plausible reason the CIA or anyone else would want to cause the ferry's officers to disappear just as if they had simply drowned in the sinking, as they very clearly did.

 

[MarkCorrigan]

The 'disappearance' or whatever semantic games you want to play of the two Egyptian gentlemen.

1. It's not semantic games. You claimed they were disappeared and attempted to use the very specific legal definition. You were wrong.

2. That isn't evidence. Even IF they were disappeared, that has nothing to do with the Estonia sinking.

It might explain the mysteriously 'missing' crew.

That isn't evidence either. That's speculation based on your own imagination of what might have happened. If we decide to get some biscuits from the jar and find the jar is empty I could say that aliens took them. It could explain the empty jar, afterall, but the empty jar is not therefore evidence of aliens.

 

[zooterkin]

I said space craft. In which MC thought it referred to 'rockets'. Why would a sovereign nation want to keep their advances in space craft secret? That is easily googled.

Then why did you start wittering about Russian spies?

I had more focused conversations with my grandchildren when they were about 3 years old.

 

[MarkCorrigan]

I said space craft. In which MC thought it referred to 'rockets'. Why would a sovereign nation want to keep their advances in space craft secret? That is easily googled.

1. Rockets as in, you know, space rockets? How spacecraft get into space?

2. Russian space tech was lightyears behind the USA in 1994. Why would the Americans want crappy Russian space tech? Sure, the USSR had at one point been ahead in the space race, (RIP Yuri Gagarin) but that was decades prior.

 

[Vixen]

Don't be so disingenuous, I'm sure you're perfectly capable of using the little arrows to follow a chain of posts back. For the benefit of those who aren't 'triple nines', and who have difficulty with simple reading comprehension, though, here it is:







Your reply does nothing to address the point of Axxman's post, which is about the difficulty of mounting a secret dive that goes unnoticed. Instead, you witter on about who might be permitted to do it, because they are not signatories to a particular treaty.

Ipso facto dives nobody knows about remain unknown. But Bemis - under a German flag - observed tracks indicating activity which 'nobody knows about'.

 

[MarkCorrigan]

Ipso facto dives nobody knows about remain unknown. But Bemis - under a German flag - observed tracks indicating activity which 'nobody knows about'.

This is yet more gibberish.

Even IF Bemis observed tracks indicating a submarine had been there that isn't evidence of a secret dive, which is what you were claiming happened, remember?

Also Axxman is pointing out that no one would be ABLE to make a secret dive without being seen doing so, so you can't just say "well if no one knew about it of course it would be unknown". That's ridiculous.