• 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

Vixen said:
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.
Click to expand...
Do you know how American and other astronauts get to the ISS most of the time? Do you know where they launch out of, and where the train? That cat has been out of the bag for a while.
 
Vixen said:
There is the anomaly of how many people were rescued.
Click to expand...
Which *you* initially said was probably a clerical error. Have you changed your mind on that? Do you still think the "mystery" of the "missing" crewmen is probably just a clerical error, because it sure doesn't sound like that's what you're arguing here.
 
Vixen said:
Not knowing who they are -other than papers to show they are from Germany - or what they are doing in their dive is as good as a secret dive. So you have a name. How does that help you?
Click to expand...
By that logic, *any* dive to the Estonia's wreck would be a "secret dive" because the coastguard doesn't know the exact specifics of what the divers were doing at the wreck. This is getting kinda sad.
 
JesseCuster said:
By that logic, *any* dive to the Estonia's wreck would be a "secret dive" because the coastguard doesn't know the exact specifics of what the divers were doing at the wreck. This is getting kinda sad.
Click to expand...
That is correct because the only authority allowed to dive to that spot is the Swedish and Finnish navy.
 
I thought the Germans were allowed to dive? Otherwise the Finnish or Swedish coastguard would stop them? But you're saying that the coastguard just ignores any dive vessels flying a German flag. So clearly the Germans have permission to be there, because they didn't sign the treaty. You're really tying yourself in knots here, aren't you?
 
Vixen said:
Want to do a secret dive? Just turn up in a German boat. That's the loophole.
Click to expand...
No. The US Navy frequents North Korean waters in submarines, and SEAL delivery vehicles (check last week's news), and has done so since the 1950s. The British SBS has done the same in the Baltic. You won't find much documentation about this, and those who participate never talk...because it's secret.

Oh, and seems that German vessels yield to Swedish Coast guard patrols just like everyone else. And the owners of German ships are not immune from Swedish lawyers who would jump at the chance to sue on behalf of the families if that German ship is owned by a company with a fat bank account.
 
JesseCuster said:
I thought the Germans were allowed to dive? Otherwise the Finnish or Swedish coastguard would stop them? But you're saying that the coastguard just ignores any dive vessels flying a German flag. So clearly the Germans have permission to be there, because they didn't sign the treaty. You're really tying yourself in knots here, aren't you?
Click to expand...
It's the same this here with the Canadian coast guard if someone is lingering around the Edmond Fitzgerald too long in Lake Superior.
 
Axxman300 said:
No. The US Navy frequents North Korean waters in submarines, and SEAL delivery vehicles (check last week's news), and has done so since the 1950s. The British SBS has done the same in the Baltic. You won't find much documentation about this, and those who participate never talk...because it's secret.
Click to expand...
Don't give Vixen ideas. Now she's sure to work SEAL delivery vehicles into her espionage thriller about secret dives to the Estonia to find the truth of what was going on.
 
Vixen said:
Well, Johan Hirschfeldt confirms it was smuggling stuff.

Transport av försvarsmateriel – Estoniasamlingen - Riksarkivet - Sök i arkiven

Riksarkivet bevarar samhällets arkivinformation och ser till att den kan användas. Sök i arkiv från statlig förvaltning, privata företag, föreningar och personer.
sok.riksarkivet.se


Transport of defense equipment

The TV program Kalla fakta stated on November 30, 2004 that defense equipment was smuggled on M / S Estonia on two occasions during September 1994 and that this was done on behalf of the Swedish defense. No responsible authority wanted to comment on the whole thing, but on December 3, the Government instructed the President of the Court of Appeal Johan Hirschfeldt to clarify the facts.



Hirschfeldt submitted his report to the Government on 17 February 2005. Hirschfeldt states that defense equipment was transported to Estonia on two occasions in September 1994. He also writes that there was nothing to indicate that defense equipment was transported on other occasions.{/quote]



IOW he had no choice but to confirm what Customs Officer Lennart Henriksson who witnessed illegal arms smuggling by 'higher forces than the government' to wave them through customs. He was on holiday leave 28.9.1994 which is why Hirschfeldt doesn't confirm it for that date.



Hirschfeldt in an interview 2021 says he now regrets having destroyed all of his materials in this case. He provided interesting information about his "investigation" into the transport of military equipment in Estonia. Göran Persson suddenly limited the investigation directives and omitted KSI, which was probably the body responsible for the transports. IOW KSI was exempt from the investigation and of course being secret services would have classified everything, anyway.


This is a known fact.
Click to expand...
No, just repeated lies and your opinion, not facts. All has been addressed several times in the Estonia threads. Actually only two weeks ago I linked to old posts that show that you are still wrong.
 
Everyone seems to be missing the point that ALL unauthorised diving or ROV usage around the wreck of the Estonia is now a criminal act. The wreck is officially designated a protected marine grave site, and it is strictly prohibited for anyone - of any nationality - to conduct unauthoraised dive surveys. The German-flagged dives were illegal acts, with repercussions.

news.err.ee

Swedish court finds MS Estonia filmmakers guilty of violating burial site

Gothenburg District Court in Sweden has found two documentary filmmakers guilty of violating a burial site in filming the wreck of the MS Estonia in 2019. The MS Estonia sank in the Baltic Sea in 1994, killing 852.
news.err.ee news.err.ee
 
Vixen said:
Seriously?

SWEDISH COASTGUARD: Chap over there, says his name is Heinz Schmidt from Germany.
FINNISH COASTGUARD: Right, I'll just make a note of that on my crib sheet.
SARCASTIC GUY: So you saw him. So you saw a guy about to dive down to the wreckage.
COASTGUARD: I don't know how, but I saw him!
Click to expand...
Citation, please.
 
Vixen said:
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.
Click to expand...
No, the dive ship would be seen, you can't go out there in a little cabin cruiser and jump in. It needs a proper dive support ship.
There are only so many of them and their whereabouts can be seen and followed.
 
Vixen said:
It doesn't change the salient point of no-one knows what that person is doing around the wreck. That was the thrust of the argument, that it's not possible for unauthorised divers to access it...and here we go back to my original point: turn up in a German boat under a German flag, being sure to set off from a country other than those eight 'Baltic' countries listed under the Treaty. <sfx Here we go round in circles to nowhere, Mulber-ry Bush>
Click to expand...
And the country with jurisdiction would come alongside and ask wheat you were doing on a restricted grave site?

Do you think a German flag on your ship would make you immune?
 
Vixen said:
What is being disputed here is the cause of the accident. Now, the JAIC assumed an intact hull, so it had to hypothesize a scenario where a huge ingress of water managed to breach the superstructure. i.e., it put forward an explanation that windows on Deck 4 must have smashed and that is how. This is because even with >2,000 tonnes <6,000 tonnes of water filling the car deck, even the JAIC realised that would not be enough to make it sink, with out it turning upside down first. However, it does work if as is argued, there was a breach in the hull. We know now there is a massive 22m gap in the hull. The explanation now is that this breach in the hull happened more recently due to the vessel turning 12° onto a 'rocky outcrop' and not because it was already there causing it to sink the way it did.
Click to expand...
What bollocks is thi?

The ship was doomed as soon as power was lost due to flooding in the engine room.
Without power it would turn broadside on to the waves and rolled on to it's side causing more flooding through the openings in the deck and superstructure.

We know the breach in the hull was caused by the rocks the ship sank on to.

Or are you proposing some kind of deliberate breaching of the hull?

What do you think would cause a 22m hole in the hull while the ship was at the surface?
 
Vixen said:
Seriously?

SWEDISH COASTGUARD: Chap over there, says his name is Heinz Schmidt from Germany.
FINNISH COASTGUARD: Right, I'll just make a note of that on my crib sheet.
SARCASTIC GUY: So you saw him. So you saw a guy about to dive down to the wreckage.
COASTGUARD: I don't know how, but I saw him!
Click to expand...
Look a dive support vessel over the wreck site with divers in the water.

Maybe they are just after crabs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom