I don’t think so and I will show you what really happened!

Listen in English here.

Listen to the player by clicking the play button.
Please write a comment in Swedish or English below this article!

Listen in Swedish here.

PS. OBS! Gillar du denna eller andra artiklar här på Honesty4u, så skicka gärna länkar till alla du känner samt ut på sociala medier.
Glöm inte att även kommentera krönikan nedan. Det är alltid trevligt med lite feedback. DS.


September 28, 1994 will go to the history for more than one reason.
It was not only the day for the biggest catastrophe in sea ever in Scandinavia.
It was also the beginning of the biggest lie ever told to common people!
The big passenger ship Estonia sank that night!
852 people died and only 138 people were saved by other ships and helicopters.

Accidents happen and it is impossible to avoid them. It can also be a lot of reasons to an accident.
In this case it was not an accident!
It was an explosion under the waterline that sank Estonia!

Already the same morning in the biggest newspaper in Sweden, Dagens Nyheter, DN, a civil engineer and expert said, that the main reason for the accident was because the main bow visor to car deck in the front of the ship was broken.
How could he possibly know that?
No survivors had been heard yet and the ship was in the bottom of the sea!
This is also a really stupid and ignorant remark coming from a technical ship expert.
The car deck is over the waterline and the ship is watertight from there down to the bottom deck.
This actually means, that even if the ship takes in a lot of water on car deck it will never sink.
There is still something called Archimedes law!
That law makes every ship in the world to float despite how big they are.

What possibly can happen, is that the ferry will turn around and float with the bottom up.
That did not happen this night.

Every word in media from now on were focused on that Estonia took in water on car deck.

One of the surviving crew member told that Estonia’s big water pumps was already trying to get the water out from the bottom deck of the ship.
How did the water get in to the bottom of the ship if the construction is watertight from car deck and down?
Nobody discussed that question! Some tried but they were silenced immediately.
Logical questions were probably prohibited.
Was it something in this tragedy that should be hidden?
Yes, there were a lot of details and secrets that went down with Estonia that night.

Why would anybody lie about what happened and try to block logical questions?
Well, the reason for lying is the same as when a friend lies to you. The lie will protect the liar because he will lose something if the truth will come out.
Sometimes you don’t have to lie. Instead you just put out a smoke screen so people will start to think in a wrong direction.
The official investigators did a lot of that.

The only interesting question; how it is even possible that this type of ferry can sink if it takes in water from the car deck, was never answered!
It will never be answered either!
The only way for a ferry like this to sink, is if it is a hole in the bottom!
If it is not, it may turn around bottom up but it will never sink!
I don’t think Archimedes was wrong!

Were there any proof that it was a hole in the bottom of the ship?
Yes it was!
A diver, Gregg Bemis, was down there and took photos on a big hole in Estonia’s bottom.
Estonia hål
I’m not an expert in this but the hole shows clearly that it must have been an explosion or a collision that made the hole.
What caused the explosion?
Was it a torpedo, an explosion device or a collision?
The steel plates was bent in to the ship, which means that the force is coming from outside.
It was not an explosion from inside.
A collision seems to be impossible because it was almost 100 meter deep in that area.
Or was it maybe not impossible?

According to the investigating commission the hole in the ship bottom does not exist!
The investigating commission didn’t like to talk about it anymore.
Funny story!
I mean, if there is a photo showing the hole, either there is a hole or the photo is a fake.
Why not investigate it or go down with other divers and make a new photo?
Maybe someone did not like the truth?

If we just use some common sense here we have another fact that actually proves that the leaking water came from below the car deck.
People were running up in panic from deck 1 and deck 2 under the waterline and below the car deck.
That means that the leak in the ship must come from below the waterline.
The water can’t possibly come from car deck and go down, because of the ship’s watertight construction.

The car deck bow visor was blown away and was found 1 560 meters from Estonia.
It was loosen from the ship according to the official theory!
If the hole below the waterline was caused by, that the bow visor in car deck was loosen, then it is absolutely impossible that the bow visor itself was found so far away from the ship.
That fact creates a new question!
Was the bow visor blown away before or after Estonia sank?
Many terrible facts say, after!

In that case it also explained why Swedish Navy marked the wrong place in the water for that bow visor.
For several months they also marked Estonia’s position with a bleu floating device wrong! About 2, 1 kilometre wrong!
Was there a reason?
Of course it is always a reason for everything in this world.
Was it to keep curious people away from Estonia?
No hardly! In that case there are better ways to do that.

A relative organization held a sea funeral for the dead ones more than 2 100 meters away from Estonia. They thought they were standing right above Estonia marked with that blue floating device.

In my mind I can think of one more reason they marked the place wrongly!
Maybe it was to be able to blow away the bow visor from the ship under the water, and transport it 1 560 meters west away from the real position of the ship!
It would have looked stupid if the bow visor was still attached to the ship if someone wanted to take more photos.
I mean an enormous big ship like Estonia is really not hard to find with sonar or other technologies.
If someone tried to find her and take new photos, it would be a hard time for the commission to explain their previous lies.
Then the official explanation why Estonia sank would not hold water.

There is of course a reason why the government won’t like us to know why there was a big hole in Estonia under the waterline.
I will explain that too for you later on in this text.

Estonia was covered with concrete there at the bottom of the Baltic Sea. It also became the last resting place for 852 dead people.

The only thing the investigating commission really did, was to create more question marks!
These questions will never be answered.

So what happened then?

Why all these strange facts with wrong positions in the sea of the bow visor and the ship?
Why are there edits in original video tapes from several diving expeditions made by the Swedish and Finnish Navy?
Why are video logs missing?
Why does none of the official videos show the part of the ship were Gregg Bemis found a big hole under the waterline and took photos of it?
About 30 hours of videos were taken but none shows the part of the ship were Gregg Bemis took his photos. How is that even possible?
The best question of them all; why are there so many question marks?

The answer is simple! It’s a cover up!

So, what was behind this tragic “accident”?

The answer is, I don’t know, but somebody else knows!
I can only guess according to certain facts.
One of these facts was that Estonia was used to transport secret electronic devises from the Russian military to Sweden from the country Estonia.
The USSR was just falling apart and when that happened some of these secret high tech electronic devises was stolen from former USSR.
The passenger ferry Estonia was used to bring the devices over to Sweden and later on they were transported from Sweden to USA.
This had been going on for awhile.

The Swedish military did admit that, but they could not say if Estonia had that type of secret devises in her cargo this particular night.
Of course they knew, but they are not allowed to say!
They were not allowed to admit other things either, but finally so many people were talking that it was impossible to keep these secret cargos as a secret anymore.

Another little strange coincident was a photo of a Russian submarine coming in to the harbour of Murmansk up in northern part of Russia. The tower of the submarine was heavily damaged.
How can a submarine get damaged in the tower?
According to a drunken crew member of that submarine they just came from a mission in the Baltic Sea.
According to the submarines own log book it had never left the harbour at all. Where the damage came from, nobody knew.
The photo shows the submarine coming in to the harbour with that damage on the tower, so obviously that was a lie!

If you compare the damage of that submarine’s tower to the big hole in the side of Estonia that Gregg Bemis took a photo of, it seems to fit in rather well. Maybe the submarine came to close to Estonia in the hard weather and actually collide with her?

According to German divers they also saw another big hole in the bottom of Estonia. That hole was covered with lots of sand. The sand did not belong to the surrounding bottom of the sea.
Someone obviously put it there to cover something.

My theory about the Russian submarine also explains the big explosion some of the survivors talked about. If there was a collision it also explain the big bang and “hit” some of the passengers told about a few minutes later.
One torpedo and one collision!

That also explains why this big ferry did not turned around bottom up and also why Estonia sank in about 20 minutes. That’s a very short time for this type of ferry.
Normally these types of ferries don’t sink at all!
Archimedes was not wrong!

Another thing is of course that the Russians sooner or later found out which way the stolen secret devices took. They have intelligence too and of course they try to stop the devices getting in to the hands of the Americans.
Where and how is the best way to stop the transport?
Of course at sea with a submarine so nobody can see who you are!
Otherwise you have to invade another country.

For sure I can be wrong about everything in my little investigation here, but every other investigation I’ve seen doesn’t hold water better than the bottom of Estonia.
The guessing is free!
What I do know for sure, is that the official explanation of this tragedy is a lie.
The truth is in the bottom of the Baltic Sea.

/Lasse A.


  1. ..no explosion …..possibly a dent ,followed by a rupturecould be a dent from contact with an other body?.. that is what comes up in my mind …but no explosion, and certainly from the inside …, I would dare to bet for that!… allmost certain I would win this bet ……..very intrigueing+impres
    sive footage …..

  2. Dåligt sjömanskap.
    Fartyget skulle vänts direkt.
    Vattnet hade sugits ut och mycket kunde räddats.
    Andres Andresen sade flera år före haveriet, ”att skulle något hända, så skulle han gå med fartyget ner”. Fruktansvärt att detta fick hända.

    • Hej Birgit!

      Nja, jag tvivlar starkt på att dåligt sjömanskap var orsaken till att fartyget sjönk.
      Denna fartygstyp skulle sannolikt kunna korsa Östersjön i hårt väder även helt utan bogvisiret.
      Fartyget skulle självklart gå oerhört ”tungt” i vattnet men skulle knappast sjunka då det var konstruerat med vattentäta skott från bildäck och nedåt.
      Med tanke på att fartyget sjönk mycket snabbt, så kan det bara finnas ett sätt för att det ska kunna ske, ett hål nedanför vattenlinjen!

      Liknande fartygskonstruktioner har historiskt ”bara” slagit runt och sedan legat med botten upp och flutit på den luft som finns innanför kölen. Det kallas Archimedes lag!
      Jag tvivlar på att den lagen plötsligt har blivit felaktig, då samtliga fartygskonstruktioner i världen tillverkas efter denna lag.

      Tack för att du kommenterar här på Honesty4u! Det betyder mycket för att kunna sprida ljus och sanning över denna katastrof.

      /Lars Agerstig

    • Hej Anders!

      Det är riktigt, Estonia hade vattentäta skott från bildäck och nedåt.
      Det enda som skulle kunna hända henne, vilket kan vara allvarligt nog, är att hon skulle kunna slå runt och flyta med kölen uppåt!
      De vattentäta skotten skulle därmed hålla henne flytande ändå!

      Med tanke på att hon sjönk oerhört fort, tyder på stora hål under vattenlinjen.
      Svamlet om bogvisiret duger ju inte eftersom bogvisiret sitter över de vattentäta skotten.
      Estonia kunde i princip ta in hur mycket vatten som helst på bildäcket om visiret skadades men hon skulle inte kunna sjunka ändå!
      Jag tvivlar på att Archimedes lag plötsligt har blivit felaktig.

      Tack för att du kommenterar här på Honesty4u! Fortsätt med det!

      /Lars Agerstig

    • Hej Åke i Trosa!

      Ja, varför inte? Enligt en del uppgifter så finns det två hål i botten på Estonia. Det andra hålet ska nu vara täckt med sand som definitivt är dittransporterat, eftersom bottenmiljön där inte har denna sand.
      Var det hålet är beläget på Estonias botten har jag dock tyvärr inte hittat någon exakt uppgift om, så därmed är det omöjligt att veta om det skulle kunna röra sig om ett utgående hål från denna typ av torped.
      Inget förefaller längre vara omöjligt i denna soppa, mer än möjligtvis att tro att den officiella versionen stämmer. Det förefaller helt omöjligt!

      /Lars Agerstig

  3. Greg Bemis never photographed a hole in the bottom of the boat. He did have photos taken of the tear at the bow. That tear, caused by the visor when falling off, has not widely reported in the media, hence the possible confusion.

    • Hi Gilbert!

      Well, the photo is published and has absolutely nothing to do with the bow!
      There is absolutely no doubt that it was a hole in the bottom of that ship, otherwise it is not possible for her to sink that way.
      All the presented evidences are overwhelming!

      /Lars Agerstig

  4. Okej here we go!
    A ship is WATER tight and NOT air tight and when the machines came crashing down so it was no longer waterproof.
    And if bow visor was tamped with a blow torch then I thinking why do so?
    You only kill yourself and maybe the ship…. so no that is not the case.
    And that was not one but several investigations!

    • allready been killed four times i know how itis to lie on sofa and your dad sad to you after wards you sleep! yes of course i sleep awake itś called freedom it past many years sence the boat sank the words of freedom. why even bother about after so many years sweden have already lost that battle every one knows who made it! Sweden KBT me then i was a child already they cut both my tendons and so on! thatś what sweden do!

    • Hi Christian!
      Well, you said, ”when the machines came crashing down…”.
      What machines and where will they crash down???
      If you mean the ship’s engines, they will never move anywhere!
      And even if the ship turns around bottom up, the machines will
      stay in the engine room and never make any holes in the bottom
      of the ship anyway, so the air will stay inside in the bottom.

      The big question is, if the bow visor was taken away before or after
      she sank? My guess will be that they took it off after she sank,
      to get some kind of explanation why she sank. Constructors of
      these type of ships say, she will not sink even without the bow
      visor, but at least the official investigators had something to
      say to the public, even if it’s a lie.
      There are a lot of smoke screens around this event!

      /Lars Agerstig

      • I have heard that, swedish goverment have a phonecall from the White house, that its gone be o transport from Sweden direct to Norway, when it came to swedish hamn..
        USSR marine was around Estoniaship before its Leave Tallinn that morning….
        They may have explosion on the ship round it because the Russian not Will have the ship to Sweden, because IT gone show how russia built there militarisering and so on….

        So……the ship was blomning up…..

        • Hej Jonas!

          Ta det på svenska istället. Din engelska blev lite krånglig att förstå.
          Att Estonia fraktade hemlig elektronisk utrustning till Stockholm för vidare transport till USA, är ingen hemlighet längre!
          Det blev till slut så många munnar som glappade att det inte gick att hålla det hemligt.
          Att ryssarna ogillade detta är ju fullständigt logiskt och de gjorde vad de kunde för att se till att lasten inte skulle hamna hos USA.
          Allt detta finns ju redan med i min rapport!

          /Lars Agerstig

  5. if the bogvisir should been lost as in the KTH report the ship should dive as a submarine! the finnish sea forces have already show the trooth

    • Hi rebbe!

      No, I really doubt even that would bring Estonia down!
      She was water tight from car deck down to bottom deck,
      which means she will float anyway. She would probably
      turn around and float upside down though.
      You are correct about that the bow visor had nothing to do
      with this ”accident”. In nasty weather she will dive like
      a submarine and turn around.
      Normally she can float upside down for years, until corrosion
      make a hole in the bottom and let the air out!
      So, it’s either way! A hole under the waterline to let water
      in, or a hole in the bottom if she turns around, to let the air
      come out.
      Estonia never turned upside down, which means there is only
      one alternative here. It was a hole under the water line!

      /Lasse Agerstig

      • Estonia turned upside down, that was enough evidence from survivors pic!
        And I think it has some air in the wreck to day.

  6. This is the perfect site for anybody who would like to find out about this topic.
    You understand so much its almost tough to argue with you (not
    that I personally would want to…HaHa). You certainly put a brand new spin on
    a topic that has been written about for ages. Great stuff, just wonderful!

  7. She was probably covered in concrete because she had one or more of the famous “missing” Russian nuclear suitcases, aka “Dirty bombs” onboard?

    • Hi Aaron!

      Well, that might be the case!
      According to my knowledge it was about stolen secret electronic devices
      from Soviet Union that was shipped over from Estonia to Sweden, and then
      from Sweden to USA.
      The cover in concrete is probably so no one can see why she sank.
      Hopefully we will get the truth about this one day!

      Thank you for your comment and welcome back!

      /Lasse Agerstig

  8. Sic no Estonia was not sank of a submarine!
    how you twist and turn so you may not go together with that you sinks the submarine too!
    And if it’s was hit with torpedo then you have BIG hole or broken ship.

    • Well, read or listen to the article again.
      There was a big hole in the bottom of Estonia.
      Actually there were two holes and Gregg Bemis photographs
      shows it clearly. The official video for more than two hours
      down there didn’t show any hole because they filmed everywhere
      but not were the holes were located. They didn’t want us to
      know the truth about it!
      The submarine didn’t sink. So, read again then you know!

      /Lars Agerstig

      • I have talked with a person who has seen all the movies and pic from Estonia and there is no hole created with torpedo or some explosion.

        • Hi Christian!
          Well, if there is no hole below the water line Estonia will
          never sink! The pics and movies is the official pics and movies,
          and of course they wont show any hole!
          Gregg Bemis pictures showed a big hole though, but the official
          pics avoided that area.
          They took more than 30 hours video around Estonia, but no video
          was shot where Gregg Bemis photograph the big hole under the
          water line. They avoided that area like the plague!

          The fact is still, that this type of ship is water tight from
          car deck and down, so it will not sink because of million gallons
          of water on car deck. Even if it will turn around, it will contain
          so much air in that water tight deck, so instead she will float like
          a balloon with the bottom up.

          The truth is on the bottom of the Baltic sea and I doubt we will
          ever see the truth from this event.

          /Lasse Agerstig

          • If you studied the bogvisir you find that it was cut with a blower! wounder why they dont show the boat. Det kanske är så regret får ängest av båten anna? typ filmens bästa action scen med berg vid control tornet!

  9. It’s a pity you don’t have a donate button! I’d certainly donate to this brilliant blog! I suppose for now i’ll settle for book-marking and adding
    your RSS feed to my Google account. I look forward to
    brand new updates and will share this website with my Facebook group.

    Talk soon!

Lämna ett svar till blast 4 traffic review Avbryt svar

Fyll i dina uppgifter nedan eller klicka på en ikon för att logga in:


Du kommenterar med ditt WordPress.com-konto. Logga ut /  Ändra )


Du kommenterar med ditt Google-konto. Logga ut /  Ändra )


Du kommenterar med ditt Twitter-konto. Logga ut /  Ändra )


Du kommenterar med ditt Facebook-konto. Logga ut /  Ändra )

Ansluter till %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.