• 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:
How would they know that without a body? Survivors only got listed when they personally supplied their names to a designated rescuer personnel. Re the twins, someone gave the personnel her nickname, which wouldn't be the name on the staff register, so how did they get to be listed as survivors, together with Piht, when that didn't happen with any other survivor (i.e., an error)? Plus, remember Ken who rescued seven -as reported in early Swedish papers - which then was tallied down to one, and he got the highest military medal for it..? Could that six or seven be the 'missing crew'...?
Click to expand...
Evidence for the highlighted, please.
 
Vixen said:
Not every book is an academic textbook.
Click to expand...
Consequently not every book is suitable for substantiating factual details.

Vixen said:
Nelson taught journalism at...Uni Utah...
Click to expand...
That must be a quaint British phrase for the University of Utah. If you want us to respect the expertise of someone who taught there, why is my having taught engineering there such a problem for you in terms of respecting my expertise on the subject?

Vixen said:
So there is no bibliography. He credits Valeria Kaspar, an Estonian documentary maker, plus he visited Estonia for a month for the purpose.
Click to expand...
Yes, you said all that previously. But the bottom line appears to be that Nelson cannot be a firsthand source for his description of Voronin, and he does not cite any authority for the description he wrote. And you have supplied no evidence whatsoever for the judgment that he was "grossly overweight" or "morbidly obese."

Therefore it is appropriate to reject the claim as unsupported. But I'm certain we haven't heard the last of it.
 
Last edited:
Vixen said:
How would they know that without a body? Survivors only got listed when they personally supplied their names to a designated rescuer personnel. Re the twins, someone gave the personnel her nickname, which wouldn't be the name on the staff register, so how did they get to be listed as survivors, together with Piht, when that didn't happen with any other survivor (i.e., an error)? Plus, remember Ken who rescued seven -as reported in early Swedish papers - which then was tallied down to one, and he got the highest military medal for it..? Could that six or seven be the 'missing crew'...?
Click to expand...
Why are you recycling this lie? All of the individuals supposedly rescued by "Ken" are accounted for in the JAIC report. It wasn't just one person he rescued. We've been over this before. Everybody understands what happened except you and Anders Bjorkman.
 
Last edited:
Reformed Offlian said:
Why are you recycling this lie? All of the individuals supposedly rescued by "Ken" are accounted for in the JAIC report. It wasn't just one person he rescued. We've been over this before. Everybody understands what happened except you and Anders Bjorkman.
Click to expand...
You have to remember that Vixen repeatedly misidentified "Ken" as helicopter Y69.
 
Last edited:
Reformed Offlian said:
Why are you recycling this lie? All of the individuals supposedly rescued by "Ken" are accounted for in the JAIC report. It wasn't just one person he rescued. We've been over this before. Everybody understands what happened except you and Anders Bjorkman.
Click to expand...
Everyone else read the relevant parts of the JAIC report and understood it. Vixen didn't and refused to, going so far as the reason for her confusion was that it was written in a way to deliberately obfuscate the truth. I think in her head it's the only possible explanation for not understanding something. Wonder why everyone else had no problems reading and understanding it, the bits I've read seem to use straight forward and clear language.
 
JesseCuster said:
Everyone else read the relevant parts of the JAIC report and understood it. Vixen didn't and refused to, going so far as the reason for her confusion was that it was written in a way to deliberately obfuscate the truth. I think in her head it's the only possible explanation for not understanding something. Wonder why everyone else had no problems reading and understanding it, the bits I've read seem to use straight forward and clear language.
Click to expand...
Perhaps if it was written in Estonian.....
 
Vixen said:
Not every book is an academic textbook. Nelson taught journalism at Uni California and Uni Utah, and has a further Masters in Creative Writing. It is similar in style to James Patterson's recent book on the Idaho 4, novel-style but based on true events and quoting real people. So there is no bibliography. He credits Valeria Kaspar , an Estonian documentary maker, plus he visited Estonia for a month for the purpose.
Click to expand...
Coming back to this, I have spent a while trying to find out who this Valeria Kaspar is, and how Nelson crediting them might lend greater credence to his physical descriptions of someone who died several years before he wrote his book.

The best (and only) information I have found is this badly translated wiki page, and this obituary about Valeria Anderson-Käsper. They appear to have retired after their last film was released in 1988, and I can find nothing to suggest that she was in any way involved with the Estonia's sinking or any investigation into the Estonia's sinking.

In what way does Nelson credit them? Does he give specifics? is it a general thank-you? did she let him crash on her couch?
 
The hilarious thing about this is none of it has anything to do with the bow visor falling off, and yanking the ramp open while the ship was sailing too fast for the weather. The lone CTist for this thread will never answer why saboteurs would blow off the visor and the ramp, but then also blow a hole in the side of the ship - above the water line.

The JAIC is called into question because it doesn't address conspiracy prattle. Vixen cannot separate ancillary information from peripheral information, and is all to happy to speculate on unrealistic scenarios based upon unrelated historical events. One could entertain some aspects of conspiracy had Estonia sank in 2,500 meters of water where access would be limited. But it sank in reasonably shallow water, at least as far as the wreck can be reached by divers. The ship has now been explored, inspected, photographed, and explored TWICE as of this moment. No evidence of sabotage has been found. All of the collected, observed, and recorded evidence points to a catastrophic failure of the bow-visor exacerbated by a number of designed flaws, and poor crew training which led to the sinking of Estonia.

That's it, that's all anyone needs to know.
 
I'm still confused by this:
Vixen said:
Well, Nelson directly quotes 'Vashya', who says, 'I'm not going to abandon you.' So there you have it. There's his direct source of information.
Click to expand...
Vixen, who is Vashya and how does them saying "I'm not going to abandon you" make her a direct source of information from which Nelson got Voronin's weight and that he was "grossly overweight"? I'm truly lost at the cryptic logic here. I'm sure you'll offer an explanation that is unrelated to the context of the post.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom