Cont: The Sinking of MS Estonia: Case Re-opened Part III

[Andy_Ross]

Why else would then-USA-puppets Sweden

Evidence that Sweden were 'then-USA-puppets'?

*As evidenced by then PM Carl Bildt (for an independent sovereign state) sending Bill Clinton (a foreign power) his desired coalition government for approval.

What is your evidence for this claim?

What was their input to the report?

 

[Andy_Ross]

It was not in Hamburg University's remit to discover sabotage.

But then you knew that, didn't you?

So how does any report they produced support your claims for sabotage?

 

[abaddon]

The thread was opened in Current Affairs about the newly announced expeditions to the wreck in July 2021 and Sept 2021, one official and the other on behalf of private individuals (relatives and supporters of same of the deceased).

When did you get to refine the topic to what you consider relevant or irrelevant?

Round about the time your wild claims of submarine collision/mini-subs/limpet mines/torpedos/specops suicide missions/nuke waste dissolving stuff and vanishing without trace and so on.

If you are going to make such mad claims without no evidence of any sort then fine. Estonia was sunk by winged monkeys sent by the wicked witch of the west to protect her Nazi gold from falling into the wrong hands.

Sure, it's absurd. Just like anything you have posted about the matter.

 

[Steve]

Round about the time your wild claims of submarine collision/mini-subs/limpet mines/torpedos/specops suicide missions/nuke waste dissolving stuff and vanishing without trace and so on.
If you are going to make such mad claims without no evidence of any sort then fine. Estonia was sunk by winged monkeys sent by the wicked witch of the west to protect her Nazi gold from falling into the wrong hands.

Sure, it's absurd. Just like anything you have posted about the matter.

But we have Vixen's word that all those things are facts based on iron-clad and irrefutable evidence (ref: Bjorkman ) posted in these very threads. They were all organized and put into operation prior to the fateful sailing, and all contributed to the sinking and to the not-a-conspiracy cover up.

 

[Vixen]

Welcome back Vixen. Please deal with my points regarding Bjorkman, or admit that you should not be using him as an expert.

Instead of starting from sweeping generalisations, let's begin with the specific errors you keep mentioning.

What factual error has this character got wrong in respect of the Estonia and why or how in your opinion is it incorrect?

 

[Vixen]

And in a storm specially created for the exact purpose.

According to the captain of Europa:

Esa Mäkelä, the captain of Silja Europa who was appointed on-scene commander for the subsequent rescue effort, described the weather as "normally bad", or like a typical autumn storm in the Baltic Sea.

Wiki

 

[Vixen]

If that is the case it is, at best for you, irrelevant to your claim.

How and why?

 

[Vixen]

Bow Visor damage Diana II (sister ship to Estonia)

11.3 The DIANA II incident



Notice any similarities?

Comparisons are odious.


Let's stick to the accident investigation at hand, the Estonia and not false equivalents.

 

[Vixen]

Why do you think this?

Where in that report you quoted does it indicate any saboatage?

You know perfectly well Hoffmeister of Hamburg University was looking at the bow visor nuts and bolts.

 

[Vixen]

No, it shows a breach in to the car deck. You can see vehicles.

You can also see further down a towel lodged in the breach of what is presumed the swimming pool area.

 

[Vixen]

How would they know when there were no standards laid down for the construction or strength of bow locking systems?

Why do you think the people that designed and built the bow locking system would claim there wasn't a design fault?

Meyer-Werft strongly disputed it. It and Bureau Veritas won its case brought in France. It obviously convinced the court of its case.

This of course was deeply disappointing for the victim's families as they have yet to receive proper compensation for the loss in which they were in no way to blame, apart from a nominal sum. (€18,000 according to a Swedish survivor, who could not work for two years afterwards anyway. The deceased families' likely got more than this, but nowhere near what they would get had there been someone to sue.)

 

[Vixen]

You are claiming that the Estonia was sabotaged. Any report that was forbidden to investigate the possibility of sabotage is by its very nature incapable of supporting your claim.

IMV it probably was sabotage, from what I know of the case so far.

Why did you expect Hamburg University to look into sabotage when their remit was to analyse the nuts and bolts of the bow visor?

 

[Steve]

According to the captain of Europa:

Wiki

Yes, I said a storm. Your confirmation is appreciated but not at all required.

 

[Vixen]

There is some kind of fascination with Carl Bildt. He was replaced as PM oct 7th 1994. JAIC delivered it's report in december-1997.

Please explain what you mean about Clinton approving a government.

See wikileaks memo re Carl Bildt and the CIA. Bildt appointed the Swedish-led JAIC member. His military defence leader, Svensson announced almost on Day One the bodies should not be recovered.

There were reports of fifteen men in US Marine uniform escorting two mysterious trucks onto the vessel. One entered onto the consignment notes at the last minute and the other - oddly - notified to the Port Authorities/Customs by Andresson during the journey.

Likewise at the time, there was still controversy over the assassination of Olof Palme, and with 70 Stockholm police officers - of whom only four to six survived - there is every reason to look towards the politics, given it was Bildt who announced the accident was the bow visor falling off within hours of the accident when it vessel wasn't even located until two days later and a sonar imaging - which showed a bow visor shape under the bulbous bow - six days later, retracted and the bow visor then not found until circa 17/18 October 1994.

Bildt led the narrative, that is why he is mentioned.

 

[Vixen]

Evidence that Sweden were 'then-USA-puppets'?



What is your evidence for this claim?

What was their input to the report?

It is well-documented.

 

[Vixen]

So how does any report they produced support your claims for sabotage?

It undermines the JAIC conclusions. Hoffmeister's report was dated September 1996. Why didn't the JAIC acknowledge the challenge in their report, being for the shipbuilders and their right of reply at being blamed?

 

[Andy_Ross]

According to the captain of Europa:

Wiki

How is that any different from any of the other storms that sink ships?

Any storm is dangerous.

 

[abaddon]

Meyer-Werft strongly disputed it. It and Bureau Veritas won its case brought in France. It obviously convinced the court of its case.

This of course was deeply disappointing for the victim's families as they have yet to receive proper compensation for the loss in which they were in no way to blame, apart from a nominal sum. (€18,000 according to a Swedish survivor, who could not work for two years afterwards anyway. The deceased families' likely got more than this, but nowhere near what they would get had there been someone to sue.)

This is the kind of ill informed opinion that makes me doubt that you are even an accountant of any shape. I have operated as an auditor for ISO 9000, 14000, 18000, 22000 and a motley selection of other minor standards. In general, one can only be certain that whatever company/facility/whatever is compliant on the date of audit. Or not. On that date and time. Once the auditor leaves, there is no way to know if the candidate simply chucks the rules out the window after the auditor leaves the building.

Have I failed anyone? Yup. One has to. Them's the rules. I would have thought that an actual accountant would be familiar with such things. Seems I was wrong.

 

[Vixen]

But we have Vixen's word that all those things are facts based on iron-clad and irrefutable evidence (ref: Bjorkman ) posted in these very threads. They were all organized and put into operation prior to the fateful sailing, and all contributed to the sinking and to the not-a-conspiracy cover up.

Bjorkman has nothing to do with the German Group, Braidwood, Hummel, Jutta Rabe or Kurm.

Talk about logical fallacy. Find a bum rock star you think is bum and then label all rock stars as bum.

 

[MarkCorrigan]

Instead of starting from sweeping generalisations, let's begin with the specific errors you keep mentioning.

What factual error has this character got wrong in respect of the Estonia and why or how in your opinion is it incorrect?

I will freely admit that I am unsure of what he has said regarding the Estonia. My point however, is not "He got this wrong" but "his opinion is worthless because he's not a credible expert". He could, for example, be correct in some specifics regarding the Estonia, however my knowledge of how much of a delusional moron he is indicates that this is unlikely.

You do understand my point, right? My point isn't "This specific thing he said is incorrect" it is "You can't use this guy as an expert". Joe Bloggs could say that taking asprin is good for thinning the blood, that doesn't make him a medical expert.

That said, let's have a little look at his site and see if I can find any glaring errors of fact or ideas that violate physics specifically regarding the Estonia shall we?

Again, I'm not an expert on maritime disasters, physics, boat building or metallurgy so anything I spot will have to be really bad.

From the front page. Not the front page of his estonia page, but the very front page of his poorly formatted disaster of a website.

M/S Estonia didn't lose its bow visor 1994

Even you agree that the Estonia did indeed lose it's bow visor. You disagree on how and how important this was, but this is a clear statement of nonsense from a deluded crank.

Here he repeats the lie, and couples it with another lie!

The ramp was never pulled open and the visor never fell of the ship, when it was upright or floating. The visor hanged on to the wreck, when it sank!

That's two in as many minutes. Again, I do not have the technical expertise to go into his calculations, but having done so on 9/11 and with his insane ideas about nukes and the Apollo missions, I have no doubt they are wrong.

Again though, back to what my point actually was, which you know full well but are transparently and desperately trying to avoid. If someone can get physics so wrong as to think that nuclear weapons and the Appolo missions are impossible, how can you trust anything he says regarding anything physics based? He has shown previously that he is either so grossly incompetant that anything he says should be given no weight, or so willing to lie about things to serve his own delusions that anything he says should be given no weight.