Well, Johan Hirschfeldt confirms it was smuggling stuff.
Did he? Citation, please.
It's ok. No need to apologize.
This is a perfect example of what people are talking about. You were specifically asked about smuggling of space technology and responded with something that says *nothing* about smuggling space technology. This is why people are asking you facetiously if you're ok, because you appear to be entirely incapable of following a simple flow and ebb of conversation and responding to what people actually said, and remember what you yourself said only a few posts previously.
Russian software to do what, exactly? Please be specific.
Which Russian spacecraft, exactly? Please be specific.
These are not "semantic games" but a matter of specifically cited criminal law. While Bollyn certainly does not own the facts pertaining to the case of the Egyptians, he does own the error of calling it an enforced disappearance. And in case there was any ambiguity in what he was saying, he cited to the 1998 Rome Statute to explain just what he meant by "enforced disappearance." As you may be aware, the people who write statues choose their words carefully. What happened to the Egyptians does not fit the elements of the crime of enforced disappearance as given in the statute cited to. And this is why that particular detail doesn't appear in any of the other accounts of the case.
In a previous post I explained a little about what it takes to plan and execute a commercial saturation diving job, including the 100+ persons onboard the dive support vessel at sea, and the same again (at least) in office support staff. As well as the port records, communications with relevant authorities, the presence of Finnish and Swedish coastguard vessels patrolling the area of the wreck (you said). So all of these people and organisations are complicit in the cover-up are they? Like all good conspiracy theories, the extent of the cover-up just keeps getting wider.
Sounds like there should be plenty of evidence for those things. Any chance of a linky? (primary source preferred obvs).
Oh I dunno. If he looks like a conspiracy theorist, sounds like a conspiracy theorist, and quacks like a conspiracy theorist, he's probably a conspiracy theorist.
How would the dives be unknown?
Yes, he does, because he made it up. The fiction in question is his intellectual property.
Before you get excited about advocating for Meister you should pay closer attention to his claims. It doesn't matter whether Meister had access to inside information by virtue of his position at JAIC. He said specifically that none of his suspicions came from that information. He said his accusations were based on research he did after leaving JAIC, which ostensibly puts that into the realm of information anyone can access. Further, the nature of the claim precludes your advocacy. If he's trying to tell the world that the Swedes were hiding exculpatory evidence, then the claim is based on what was not known but instead rumored to exist.
It takes two to communicate, so a Simonton gap also involves the difficulty of communicating effectively with those who are more intelligent.
Given the Swedish Navy have prime authority over the official dives, and Finland together with Sweden (due to it being in Finnish waters) act as coastguards. All their dives are closely project managed and reported on. It should be very obvious that anyone else's dives are ipso facto 'secret dives'. You don't know what the heck they are doing down there. We know about Rabe, Bemis, Evertsson and Kum because they have publicised it. You nor Axxman are able to state there are no secret dives when theoretically, you can hop on a German boat under a German flag, wave the coastguards away and do your own thing, with no-one being none the wiser.
