• 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

Pretty much identical, but even more obvious (being just a little trawler) you could easily see every shape of the ribs beneath it (probably good enough to take measurements through the steel plate lol)
These are just some of the locals trawlers from there... (little bit smaller than yours there lol)
1758038660942.png

And that was just from water/waves on the surface- not rocks on the seafloor bashing into the hull!!!!

Steel boat hulls are far from the 'armoured tank' surface some people seem to think they are...
 
Last edited:
Vixen said:
I am not looking for 'reassurance' or 'alternative explanations'. I am a problem-solver; it's what I do.
Click to expand...
No, you chase your own tail.

Vixen said:
So when people's response to the claimed 'missing Estonian crew' is 'oh, they're dead', 'must have drowned' or 'it must have been a mistake', I am not sure how that solves the problem of why, how and when they were listed as survivors in the first place.
Click to expand...

It's simple math. The crew is dead. You have never linked to this mysterious list, and have never explained if the person making the list was writing names down, or crossing them off a list. You also have not detailed if this "list taker" spoke the relative languages because that's a serious issue. And you, as all conspiracy theorists who've come before you, have ignored the human factors. This was a kinetic event spread across multiple platforms involving multiple countries in a dire situation. People make mistakes. Shame on you for ignoring this basic fact.

Vixen said:
In the case of Piht, I want to understand why so many reliable sources, including Interpol, seemed to presume he had survived. It isn't something that someone made up.
Click to expand...
Your version of "reliable sources" differs from what the real world would consider reliable. In every major catastrophe mistakes in reporting are made. You ignore this because you embrace the lie of conspiracy.

Vixen said:
o I want to understand why the hole in the hull as reported and filmed by at least two different film crews wasn't mentioned by the JAIC, and if the hole was indeed caused by a rocky outcrop after the sinking and had nothing at all to do with the sinking, I want to understand how come it hasn't been explained properly before, and to understand the exact mechanism of how this happened, if true.
Click to expand...
This has been explained repeatedly. The film crew that found it was also a bunch of delusional conspiracy theorists who carefully edited their footage to make the hole conspicuous, and fool the willingly gullible such as yourself. The fact that this gash is OBVIOUSLY from impact with the rocky outcrop and yet you prefer to ignore this fact says much about you, and your willingness to be objective. You have zero interest in understanding this disaster. You have your mind made up, and reality is inconveniently making you look silly.

Vixen said:
So you, you happy not to even think about it; me, I want to understand it. I want to understand what happened to the captain and the senior crew. So there is no point offering platitudes such as <fx scouse accent> 'the ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ died'.
Click to expand...
You're not interested in any of those things. They drowned. Period. This is not rocket science. This is a very old story.
 
Vixen said:
You said in an earlier post that you were called out by some ghosthunters, fearing they had a ghost and you reassured them it was just the pipes, but they weren't happy. I would just remark that if you believe you have a ghost, you are better off employing an exorcist if you are into that kind of thing.
Click to expand...
Exorcists don't do plumbing. Ghosts aren't demons (technically neither exist). First rule of ghost hunting is: It's never a demon. The Second rule of ghost hunting is: It's probably not a ghost, either.

You are most definitely haunted. Not by ghosties, but by the need to live in a fantasy world full of spies, and political intrigue. A world were nothing is as it seems, and you can't believe no one else can see these things but you. Every claim, and counter-claim you've made in these threads has been soundly debunked, and other explained in great detail. You choose to learn nothing, and instead you repeat your claims. You need this conspiracy to be true. Maybe it reflects your world view, I suspect it does, or maybe there is something deeper that is wrong, but you are allergic to facts. You are not searching for explanations. Explanations have been handed to you multiple times. Your sources are all questionable, assuming you bother to site them at all.

You can't help yourself. You need to be right all the time in spite of the mountains of evidence to the contrary.

Case in point: The Estonia's EPIRBs.**

You ignore the fact that they had to be manually activated on the night of the accident.

**stands back to watch**
 
Axxman300 said:
It's simple math. The crew is dead. You have never linked to this mysterious list, and have never explained if the person making the list was writing names down, or crossing them off a list. You also have not detailed if this "list taker" spoke the relative languages because that's a serious issue. And you, as all conspiracy theorists who've come before you, have ignored the human factors. This was a kinetic event spread across multiple platforms involving multiple countries in a dire situation. People make mistakes. Shame on you for ignoring this basic fact.
Click to expand...
Also, let's not forget that Vixen herself, when she brought up the alleged missing crew way way back earlier in this soap opera, said it was probably just a clerical error. She clearly does not think that, at least not anymore.

Vixen, do you think it's probably just a clerical error? I bet you can't give a clear yes or no answer .
 
Axxman300 said:
..You are not searching for explanations. Explanations have been handed to you multiple times. Your sources are all questionable, assuming you bother to site them at all.

You can't help yourself. You need to be right all the time in spite of the mountains of evidence to the contrary.

Case in point: The Estonia's EPIRBs.**

You ignore the fact that they had to be manually activated on the night of the accident.

**stands back to watch**
Click to expand...

Andy_Ross said:
You joust couldn't leave it alone could you?
Click to expand...

As Vic and Rob said: "you wouldn't let her lie".

ETA: That's not quite right, is it? Oh well, as Posie Gaines sang: "It's close, closer than close", or something like that anyway. Maybe not those exact words, but I will not be saying where I found this nugget, because it's common knowledge to anyone of above average intelligence (like what I am - did I mention how much cleverer I am than most people?) with an interest in current pop culture news from 30-odd years ago. I'm going to call that a citation, and therefore this is all now facts.
 
Last edited:
Axxman300 said:
Exorcists don't do plumbing. Ghosts aren't demons (technically neither exist). First rule of ghost hunting is: It's never a demon. The Second rule of ghost hunting is: It's probably not a ghost, either.

You are most definitely haunted. Not by ghosties, but by the need to live in a fantasy world full of spies, and political intrigue. A world were nothing is as it seems, and you can't believe no one else can see these things but you. Every claim, and counter-claim you've made in these threads has been soundly debunked, and other explained in great detail. You choose to learn nothing, and instead you repeat your claims. You need this conspiracy to be true. Maybe it reflects your world view, I suspect it does, or maybe there is something deeper that is wrong, but you are allergic to facts. You are not searching for explanations. Explanations have been handed to you multiple times. Your sources are all questionable, assuming you bother to site them at all.

You can't help yourself. You need to be right all the time in spite of the mountains of evidence to the contrary.

Case in point: The Estonia's EPIRBs.**

You ignore the fact that they had to be manually activated on the night of the accident.

**stands back to watch**
Click to expand...
The simple point I was making about people believing they have a ghost, is the same strategy a psychiatrist might adopt: humour the patient. So, if someone believes they have a ghost, what better way to get rid of that idea than by bringing in an exorcist to get rid of it. (Psychiatrist: "And is the ghost in the room with us now, Mr Jones?")

The reinvestigation of the MV Estonia is not a conspiracy theory because it actually exists, as a matter of fact, based on factual information.
 
Vixen said:
The reinvestigation of the MV Estonia is not a conspiracy theory because it actually exists, as a matter of fact, based on factual information.
Click to expand...
The reinvestigation isn't the conspiracy theory. The minisubs, blank torpedoes, wheeled submarines, communications blackout, explosives charges, truck containing nuclear material which dissolved bow doors, the bridge being hijacked, assassination on the bridge, series of explosions at the stroke of midnight, escort Royal Navy submarines, emergency beacons sabotaged, explosives charges, secret helicopter flights, CIA cargo planes, black sites, secret trials, Spetsnaz, mysterious unauthorised body on the bridge, hugely overweight crippled Estonian space technology smugglers spritely hopping on one leg into lifeboats, secret dive, hunt for an attche case, cover-up that goes right up to the top levels of government, pseudonymous Russian disinformation agents, limpet mines, etc. *that's* the conspiracy theory nonsense everyone is talking about.
 
Axxman300 said:
No, you chase your own tail.



It's simple math. The crew is dead. You have never linked to this mysterious list, and have never explained if the person making the list was writing names down, or crossing them off a list. You also have not detailed if this "list taker" spoke the relative languages because that's a serious issue. And you, as all conspiracy theorists who've come before you, have ignored the human factors. This was a kinetic event spread across multiple platforms involving multiple countries in a dire situation. People make mistakes. Shame on you for ignoring this basic fact.


Your version of "reliable sources" differs from what the real world would consider reliable. In every major catastrophe mistakes in reporting are made. You ignore this because you embrace the lie of conspiracy.


This has been explained repeatedly. The film crew that found it was also a bunch of delusional conspiracy theorists who carefully edited their footage to make the hole conspicuous, and fool the willingly gullible such as yourself. The fact that this gash is OBVIOUSLY from impact with the rocky outcrop and yet you prefer to ignore this fact says much about you, and your willingness to be objective. You have zero interest in understanding this disaster. You have your mind made up, and reality is inconveniently making you look silly.


You're not interested in any of those things. They drowned. Period. This is not rocket science. This is a very old story.
Click to expand...
Here's how I go about problem solving and why the sinking of the MV Estonia is a problem to be solved, and not a 'conspiracy theory'.

Assumptions: The persons lobbying for a reinvestigation of the sinking are not 'conspiracy theorists', they are reputable, highly-educated and persons well-informed of the facts. Rabe, Bemis, Evertsson, and Kurm have all visited the wreck in person. Andi Meister, as former Transport Minister for Estonia and former JAIC head, is another person well-informed of the facts. The assumption is: these persons are of good character and high repute and have gone to some great lengths to point out flaws in the JAIC report.

The Issues:

  1. The hole in the hull appears to have been known of as of the time of the JAIC investigation. Meister points out an incursion into the vessel of up to five metres of muddy sludge; it's not just the windows of the bridge that appeared broken to the divers but that the infrastructure had been breached. Later, in year 2000, on Eagle One, F Gregg Bemis and Jutta Rabe relate they were surprised by the sheer number of bodies lying on the seabed, as though they had fallen through the hull. Again, neither of these matters were mentioned in the report.
  2. The repot omits - according to the aforesaid - identification of the bodies on the bridge, when the bridge crew could be identifiable by their crew uniform. Divers reported seeing a guy in a brown jacket, or covered in mud, across the door of the bridge; the Captain reportedly with clear bullet wounds to the forehead, it is claimed and some guy covered with a flag from the flagbox (and tattoo on hand, meaning he can't be Captain Andresson).. Given the disaster, it is natural to suppose the JAIC would at least identify what was observable on the bridge, given the Captain of the ship in any disaster is a key figure for investigation as the captain is the person in charge and in control, just as a driver would be a person of interest in a car accident.
  3. The fact that so many persons are absolutely adamant seven of the senior crew and bar/entertainment staff were notified as being survivors and then allegedly removed from the survivor list, together with Swedish government minister, Stenmark, declaring second Captain, Pith, as having been interviewed, the JAIC needs to provide an explanation as to how these notions came about.
Outcome:
  1. Owing to the efforts of, most recently, Henrik Evertsson, and earlier, by Rabe, Braidwood and Bemis - a survey carried out by a Swedish newspaper at the time showed that 73% of the Swedish public were in favour of their expedition to the site on Eagle One in August 2000 - due to strong pressure especially from the Estonian parliamentary 'working party' headed by justice minister, Margus Kurm, it was decided to carry out a fresh survey of the wreck. This commenced circa 2021.
  2. Margus Kurm carried out a rival expedition to that of Rene Arikas, for the new JAIC, which shows the lack of trust and confidence in the official investigations.
  3. The new investigation spokesperson has announced a preliminary result, that the holes found in the hull were likely due to a nearby rocky outcrop and that ten thousand different images had been undertaken of the wreck from all sides, with new technology. The report is still under progress, due to be released by the year end.
  4. In the interim, Evertsson and Andersson, the filmographer, have been charged and convicted under the Estonia Treaty (gravesite peace). Rabe is under a Swedish arrest warrant. Nobody has heard any more from Margus Kurm about his rival expedition.
  5. The new investigators say they have identified two further vessels that were in the region the night of the disaster.
Conclusion: There has been a genuine reason for the reinvestigation, designed to answer the questions raised by the various actors, who cannot be classed as 'conspiracy theorists'. We won't get answers as to why there was a mix up over the senior Estonian crew, or the bodies on the bridge. It remains to be seen whether the upcoming report satisfactorily answers the question posed by persons lobbying on behalf of public disquiet. Already one of the directors of the Evertsson production, 'This Changes Everything' Lars Borgnås has tried to submit a 30-page 'confidential document', which the Swedish investigators say is a 'fake'. This, too, is real, and not a product of a conspiracy theorist's imagination. Again, this is a reputable journalist (who may or may not be misguided). Then there will be the scrutiny of the final report by various recognised experts. Swedish prosecutors have already said there will be no further action. So certainly not a conspiracy theory but a valid and well-justified reinvestigation. The report will need to explain the timeline of the 'rocky outcrop' damage and whether it explains all or just some of the concerns raised by legitimate parties.
 
Last edited:
JesseCuster said:
Also, let's not forget that Vixen herself, when she brought up the alleged missing crew way way back earlier in this soap opera, said it was probably just a clerical error. She clearly does not think that, at least not anymore.

Vixen, do you think it's probably just a clerical error? I bet you can't give a clear yes or no answer .
Click to expand...
M opinion doesn't really matter. My belief is that the public are owed an explanation. Piht's wife, Sirje, spent the rest of her life trying to find out what happened to her husband (as did the other relatives of other crew and staff), and even wrote a book. She died of a brain tumour without ever getting an answer. The relatives who were 'misinformed' deserve a proper explanation as to how this could have happened.
 
Last edited:
JesseCuster said:
The reinvestigation isn't the conspiracy theory. The minisubs, blank torpedoes, wheeled submarines, communications blackout, explosives charges, truck containing nuclear material which dissolved bow doors, the bridge being hijacked, assassination on the bridge, series of explosions at the stroke of midnight, escort Royal Navy submarines, emergency beacons sabotaged, explosives charges, secret helicopter flights, CIA cargo planes, black sites, secret trials, Spetsnaz, mysterious unauthorised body on the bridge, hugely overweight crippled Estonian space technology smugglers spritely hopping on one leg into lifeboats, secret dive, hunt for an attche case, cover-up that goes right up to the top levels of government, pseudonymous Russian disinformation agents, limpet mines, etc. *that's* the conspiracy theory nonsense everyone is talking about.
Click to expand...
Given Sweden admitted in the Riksdag it carried out exactly that type of smuggling during September 1994, makes it a real, possible scenario, not a CT, given we are talking about a passenger ferry carrying up to a thousand passengers from all over the world and including little children and babies. You can be blasé if you like but the government has to be held accountable for its actions, even if embarrassing. The eyewitness accounts if looked at and analysed chronologically - and not as a hodge-podge of anecdotes, as presented by the JAIC - one can see accounts of bangs and collisions happening at Swedish midnight, just as it hit international waters, and with verified reports of the communications being down. Why shouldn't people question whether it was sabotage, given the military-like precision by which the vessel sank? The CIA were involved, it was in charge of the Rockwater dives. Given it was post-Cold War and Russia was virtually bankrupt, one can see resentment arising over the perceived 'looting' of their former military bases, and interfering in communications is Classic Russian behaviour. Jutta Rabe came to the conclusion a Swedish escorting submarine collided with the vessel. Braidwood found evidence of incendiary devices on the forward front bulkhead of the bow car ramp and explosives-style deformations in the sample of metal taken, on the expedition in 2000.. Eye witnesses did see two extra trucks, described as military, board the ferry at the last minute. None of this is conspiracy theory, given almost a thousand ordinary people were trapped inside a vessel that sunk at midnight within virtually just half an hour. Including little babies and children who must have been utterly terrified.
 
Last edited:
Why would bodies have 'fallen through the hull '?
What were all those people doing in the compartment where the hull breach is located?
How would they have 'fallen through'?

Is this something new you are adding to the mix?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom