From: Getting To The Bottom

The Baltic Sea ferry Estonia, which took 852 people to their graves when it sank in 1994, experienced an explosion on board at some point in its tortured existence, according to diver F. Gregg Bemis Jr. of Santa Fe.
Relying on tests done on two metal samples taken from the hull, Bemis said recently an explosion occurred aboard the 57-ton vessel in the vicinity of the starboard forward bulkhead. Bemis could not say for sure when or why the explosion occurred, whether before or after its Sept. 28, 1994, sinking. But, he said the explosion took place at or near the bow door visor, which an official trilateral commission determined opened up in heavy seas and caused the ship to sink.

From: SOME OUTSTANDING QUESTIONS ABOUT THE M/S ESTONIA

Why did the Estonia sink so fast?
This question is not answered at all in the official Final Report. As stated in the introduction the vessel allegedly sank between 01.14/01.15 and 01.51/01.52 hrs due to water on the car deck. It is also suggested that water entered the deck house through broken windows at deck 4 and 5, when the ship listed. This water allegedly flowed through the gas tight (sic) car deck ceiling (deck 4) down into the car deck space, and the water also flowed through the watertight (sic) car deck 2 and filled the 12 watertight compartments below the car deck, so that the ship actually could sink. As it is impossible that water flows through gas tight and watertight decks, the sinking process suggested by the Final Report is simply impossible.

From: The impossible Sinking of the 'Estonia'

The fundamental deficiency of the Final report issued 1997 into the sinking of the 'Estonia' is that it does not explain how and why the ferry actually sank as a result of the published proximate cause of accident - defect locks securing the visor protecting the ramp of the forward opening in the superstructure.

The Commission censored the fact that the ferry floated on its undamaged watertight hull according to the principle of buoyancy of Archimedes developed circa 252 BC and that sinking could only have started, when (or if) the hull started to fill up with water. The Commission never explained how the undamaged hull - 14 watertight compartments - were filled with water so that the ferry could sink. The now infamous Final report into the sinking does not mention or investigate watertight integrity, watertight doors, bilge pumps and bilge alarms in the hull preventing sinking.

From: The Sinking of the MS Estonia: A Chronology of the Disaster

While investigators concluded that a badly designed bow door was the primary cause of the accident, the events of that fateful night are still not fully known. They probably never will be. Too many of the principles involved, including all the officers on the bridge, did not live to tell their versions of what happened. Over the coming years, the story of the Estonia is likely to take on a life of its own. Theories on why it sank-like one already circulating, that the ship hit a Russian sub-are likely to become even more varied and farfetched. Like with the assassination of John F. Kennedy and the sinking of the Titanic, so many aspects of the Estonia tragedy are probably destined to become the stuff of legend and fantasy.

From: AP Wire 09-26-2004 Ferry Sinking Haunts Finland Decade Later

The first Finnish rescue helicopter didn't arrive on the scene about 40 miles off the coast until an hour and 40 minutes after the first distress call.

Its crew was met by a heart-stopping sight - hundreds of life vests, many of them empty but some holding up the dead, and dozens of rafts, some overturned, tossing about in the waves as their reflectors blinked in the blackness.

"It felt like you were in the middle of a movie set. We asked ourselves: 'Is this real? Is this even possible?'" recalled Matti Rytkonen, a rescue helicopter pilot.

***

The ship's German builder, Meyer shipyard, blamed poor maintenance and improper modifications to the bow locks, a finding rejected by the commission. Russian news media claimed the ship was blown up as part of a vendetta between drug-smuggling gangs.

Bereaved relatives of the 500 Swedes who died failed to persuade their government to refloat the ferry from the sea bed some 260 feet down so the disaster could be further investigated.

From: Ten years since the Estonia catastrophe

Most of the people who survived the catastrophe were men between the ages of 20 and 44. Only 26 of the 137 survivors were women. Six Norwegians died. A Norwegian 12-year-old boy was the only child who survived the disaster.

M-S Estonia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The German journalist Jutta Rabe also decided to ignore the imposed sanctity to make her own investigations, mainly based on conspiracy theories. Her investigations resulted in the motion picture Baltic Storm, which portrays the Russian secret service as being responsible for the sinking. The plot portrays the Swedish government as being responsible for using the ship to covertly transport Russian high-tech components to the United States. The story is unveiled by a young female journalist, not unlike Ms. Rabe herself.

In Autumn 2004 a scandal erupted in Swedish media after a revelation made by retired customs officer that about the time of the accident in 1994 M/S Estonia has been used by Swedish military intelligence to bring in electronic equipment illegally acquired in Estonia from Russian Army (former units of USSR Baltic Military District). Swedish court investigator Johan Hirschfeldt later confirmed that the military intelligence indeed used M/S Estonia in September 1994 for bringing in secret military equipment, but the content of the shipment will remain classified for 70 years, thus adding up arguments to possible conspiracy theories.

Estonia Litigation Association

Please help us expose the lies of the official cover-up behind the sinking of Estonia. This passenger ferry was used for smuggling operations of military contraband, approved and aided by the highest levels of the Swedish government.

The covert smuggling of Soviet weaponry turned the passenger ferry Estonia into a military target, using more than 1,000 innocent lives as human shields.

There were 146 survivors on the original rescue lists from which nine names were later deleted. These nine individuals, all Estonian members of the crew, were apparently abducted through an act of "enforced disappearance."

On the very day Estonia sank, NATO's 10-day "Baltic Sea naval exercises" began with the militaries of 10 NATO allies and 10 Partnership for Peace nations, including Sweden, Finland, and the Baltic states. 14 of the 20 nations involved provided ships and aircraft for the "Cooperative Venture" exercise, which was a "peacekeeping, humanitarian and search and rescue operation" exercise. There has been, however, no discussion of NATO's role in or lack of response to the sinking of Estonia.

Preamble 2004 to the English Edition of Katastrofutredning

The conspirators - because it was a conspiracy from the start, the first day - were satisfied. They thought they had managed to cover up the Truth. Many of the conspirators were given high offices in the Swedish and Estonian administrations, where they today regularly praise the work of the Commission and the content of the Final report and ridicule the few professional marine investigators and journalists, who continue to research the accident with the aim to improve safety at sea.

These persons of the investigation are all charlatans. But, and this is sad, they are 'respectable' in Swedish society today. To be respectable in Sweden today is like being a good party man in a communist state - you repeat the official policy without own thinking. It is a virtue in today's Sweden and Finland and Estonia.

The Final report (5) is official party policy in Sweden and Estonia today - regardless what party governs. And a large majority of the public plays along - it has a feeling for what Truth (or Lie) the government wants to adhere to.

Estonia Litigation Association

On the very day Estonia sank, NATO's 10-day "Baltic Sea naval exercises" began with the militaries of 10 NATO allies and 10 Partnership for Peace nations, including Sweden, Finland, and the Baltic states. 14 of the 20 nations involved provided ships and aircraft for the "Cooperative Venture" exercise, which was a "peacekeeping, humanitarian and search and rescue operation" exercise. There has been, however, no discussion of NATO's role in or lack of response to the sinking of Estonia.

epunkt146

'U.S. enforced disappearances from Sweden are nothing new, according to Swedish journalist Sven Anér. More than 10 years ago, on Sept. 28, 1994, nine Estonian survivors from the Estonia ferry disaster "disappeared" in a similar manner.
The day after the sinking, 9 crew members were removed from the lists of 146 reported survivors as a Gulfstream 4 (Reg. N971L), and a Boeing 727-200 (Reg. VR-CLM), left Stockholm's Arlanda airport carrying 4 and 5 unregistered passengers each. Anér has the documents from the airport's archive that show that the fees for the two airplanes were paid by the U.S. Embassy in Stockholm.
Among those who disappeared after having been on the survivor lists from Estonia were one of captains, Avo Piht, and the ship's chief engineer, Lembit Leiger. Piht and Leiger would be key witnesses as to the ship's seaworthiness, its cargo, and causes of its mysterious sinking, which took 852 lives.'

The Independent Fact Group

The Independent Fact Group was originally formed to clear up the many question marks about the MV Estonia disaster, in a structured and methodical manner. There has been considerable speculation concerning the efforts of the Joint Accident Investigation Commission (JAIC) and the political, legal and media treatment of the accident and its tragic consequences.

The aim is to give those in authority an opportunity, based on the facts of the case, to decide to review this matter, with a view to further action. Our efforts also enable the media and the general public to decide on the basis of the objective information which is available concerning the accident, and the conclusions to be drawn from a technical and civic perspective.

The overall objective is the setting up of a new investigation of the accident which can describe the course of the accident in detail, and its causes, with subsequent assessment of the moral and legal responsibilities, where this is feasible. We are motivated by the belief that a properly conducted investigation will contribute to maritime safety and by our concern for Sweden's reputation as a nation which upholds safety at sea and the rule of law.

M-V Estonia - the last voyage

The aim with this report is to show that the route concluded by JAIC is incorrect. The JAIC route was used to support their scenario on how M/V Estonia could loose her visor. This report will reveal the sloppy investigation work performed by JAIC and further more call for a new investigation of the disaster.

The information and conclusions in this report is based on collection of material from a number of sources, such as the Joint Accident Investigation Commission (JAIC), the German Group of Experts representing the Meyer Ship Yard (GGE), the archives at Swedish Board of Accident Investigation (SHK), Swedish National Maritime Administration (SNMA), as well as other independent information and witness statements.


Interesting to note is the fact that both Silja Europe and Mariella had some navigation malfunctions around 23.30, or they had to alter their course by some other unknown reason.

Both JAIC and GGE found two unidentified ships on the scene of the accident. It is likely to believe that they are the same ships that follow close to the M/V Estonia route, and slow down at the time of the disaster.

The Independent Fact Group

Our thoughts stay with all victims, relatives and friends, but also with all survivors and those that continue their work for the truth to be revealed.
We also urge journalists and media to seriously start the enlightment of all facts that prove the JAIC investigation to be wrong.