Deep Politics Forum

"Curiouser and curiouser" said Alice.

Arctic Sea: More Questions About a Hijacked Ship

By xxxevilgrinxxx | Published: October 11, 2009
MICHAEL SCHWIRTZ | NYT
MOSCOW — The eight men who were said to have commandeered a cargo ship in the Baltic Sea in July were locked up weeks ago. They were declared pirates, hunted down by the Russian Navy, captured without a fight and marched before television cameras to a Moscow jail.
But the swashbuckling tale, rather than ending there, has instead grown more mysterious.

What exactly befell the ship, called the Arctic Sea, is still largely unknown. In fact, nearly eight weeks after it was supposedly liberated by the Russian Navy, the ship is said to remain at sea under military control and has yet to make port for needed repairs. Four members of the ship’s crew have not been able to leave, despite repeated calls by their families for their release.
A dearth of official information has intensified the mystery surrounding the ship, whose travails have whipped up relentless speculation since it lost contact off the coast of Portugal in late July.
And as if the situation were not grounds enough for conspiracy theories, a bizarre detail has emerged: after seizing the ship, the hijackers sought to change its name by painting a new one on its hull, Russian officials said. The new name happened to be one that was already registered to a North Korean ship.
“Something certainly happened out there, but we are not allowed to talk about it,” said Yevgeny Falin, who was second in command on the Arctic Sea. He spoke by telephone from Arkhangelsk, the northern Russian port city where the crew is based.
Like the other 10 crew members permitted to leave the ship who were flown on a military transport to Russia on Aug. 20, Mr. Falin said he was under orders from Russian prosecutors not to provide details about his ordeal.
He did, however, insist that the Arctic Sea was not carrying a secret cargo.
“There was only lumber on board,” Mr. Falin said. “I was personally in all areas and in the ballast tanks. There was nothing else in there. I can say this with 100 percent certainty.”
Russian investigators have said the same thing, but the assertions have done little to dampen the rumors. Why would eight men attempt a brazen act of piracy in heavily monitored European waters? Why would Russia send warships from its Black Sea Fleet to chase them a full three weeks after the hijacking occurred?
In September, a secret visit to Russia by Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, set off fresh talk among some analysts, who suggested, without any proof, that Israeli intelligence agents had uncovered a plot to smuggle missiles or other weapons aboard the Arctic Sea to a so-called rogue country.
Russia’s president, Dmitri A. Medvedev, confirmed Mr. Netanyahu’s visit in an interview last month with CNN, but said only that they “discussed a wide range of issues.”
According to Russian investigators, eight men — two Latvians, two Russians and four Estonians — raided the Arctic Sea, which flies the Maltese flag, on July 24 off the coast of Sweden, having overtaken the ship in a small speedboat.
They then took control of the 4,000-ton vessel, navigating it into the open Atlantic after evading detection by maritime authorities through some 2,000 miles of heavily trafficked waters. The Russian Navy intercepted the ship 300 miles off Cape Verde on Aug. 17, and arrested the hijackers without firing a shot, officials said.
Photographs on the Web site of the Prosecutor General’s Investigative Committee purport to show the lumber cargo and a bullet hole in one of the cabin walls. The photos also show a new name, the Jon Jin 2, and identification number painted on the ship’s stern and bridge. Both the name and an identification number painted on the ship’s stern belong to a North Korean bulk carrier that was docked in Angola at the time, the Russian Foreign Ministry said, but it offered no further explanation.
Nick Blackmore, editor of the British-based maritime safety magazine Safety at Sea International, said the ship’s true identity would be difficult to mask even with the new name, and suggested the hijackers probably picked the name randomly.
“I would be surprised if you could go into port with the vessel named differently,” Mr. Blackmore said. “It is not a general cargo ship, the Jon Jin 2; it’s a different type of vessel and it will look distinct from the Arctic Sea.”
Russian officials first said the Arctic Sea would be taken to the Russian port of Novorossiysk, but then said it would dock at Las Palmas in the Canary Islands. For reasons that are unclear, the ship was not permitted to enter Las Palmas.
For the last week the ship has been anchored in the Mediterranean, 65 miles from the Strait of Gibraltar, said Viktor Matveyev, director of Solchart, the ship’s Finland-based owner. He said he did not know what the navy planned to do with it.
“I know where it is located, but I don’t know what further will happen,” Mr. Matveyev said by telephone. “There has been no contact with the ship.”
This month, Andrei A. Nesterenko, a Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman, said Russian officials had finished inspecting the Arctic Sea and planned to hand the ship over to its owners.
“Given the end of the investigation, Russia does not see the necessity in detaining the ship and does not have those intentions,” Mr. Nesterenko said.
Yet, Mr. Matveyev said the navy had given little indication that it would make good on such promises. Twice, he said, company representatives have sought to board the ship after getting permission from Russian investigators. “Nevertheless, the ship was not handed over,” he said.
A Russian Navy official, who agreed to speak openly on the condition of anonymity, suggested that any delay was the ship owner’s fault and that the navy had “fulfilled our task: we liberated the ship from these hijackers.” The official said that the owners had been having financial difficulties and that Mr. Matveyev was stalling a final resolution in order to avoid costly port fees. When told about the comments, Mr. Matveyev denied the accusation.
The hijackers, meanwhile, continue to deny any wrongdoing, maintaining that they were ecologists conducting research in the Baltic Sea when they encountered inclement weather and sought refuge aboard the Arctic Sea.
Now, the captain and three other crew members still cannot seem to get off the ship, according to their families. The men remained on board to help pilot the ship after the rest of the crew went to Moscow, but have been on board now for almost three months.
Last week, the wives of the men sent a letter to Prime Minister Vladimir V. Putin, asking him to secure their passage home to Arkhangelsk.
One of the women, Irina V. Kuznetsova, said in a telephone interview that she could not remember the last time she had spoken with her husband. “There is no information about them,” she said.
http://qwstnevrythg.com/2009/10/arctic-s...cked-ship/
Thanks Carsten. Very interesting.

Possibly gives more weight to Xymphora's theory.

Mystery vessel hijacker names mastermind

Published 11 June, 2010, 15:32
Edited 11 June, 2010, 23:39
An Estonian businessman contracted the hijacking of the merchant vessel “Arctic Sea”, his accomplice has told a Moscow court. The pirate attack, which drew worldwide media attention in June 2009, was done for ransom.
The alleged organizer of the crime is Erik-Neiliss Kross – an Estonian businessman (and son of Jaan Kross) involved in oil trade and development – according to one of the arrested hijackers, Dmitry Savins.
Savins told a Moscow court that he helped Kross, his business partner and friend, to hire people for the attack and was the one in charge of the operation. Kross planned the hijacking for purely financial reasons. He needed money to cover debts he had accumulated as a result of the economic crisis, which had hurt his business greatly.
According to the convict, two other people had been involved in arranging the crime – Sergey Demchenko from Germany and Aleksey Kertsbur from Israel. The man didn’t provide any proof of his accusations.
Read more

Kross, the alleged organizer of the hijacking, was a prominent official in Estonia in the mid-1990s, reports Interfax. For several years he headed an agency, which coordinated the country’s intelligence. After resignation he worked as a security consultant for several Estonian media outlets. In 2007, he consulted the Georgian National Security Council on how the country should achieve its goal of joining NATO.
Savins said he was to be paid 100,000 euros for the grand theft, while the seven men under his command were promised 10,000 each. Later the fee was doubled.
The group successfully boarded the Arctic Sea as it transported cargo of lumber from Finland to Algeria. Then they demanded 1.5 million euros ransom from the owner and the insurer, but they refused to pay up.
After Kross failed to evacuate the pirates, they decided to release the ship’s crew near Guinea, sink it and flee. However, a Russian Navy battleship intercepted them before they could put their plan into action.
Kross' accomplice Dmitry Savins was proved guilty and sentenced to 7 years of prison. Savins' case was reviewed separately from the other pirates because he chose to strike a bargain with the court.
Earlier in May, another Arctic Sea hijacker had been sentenced to five years for piracy. He also bargained with the court.
The disappearance of the Arctic Sea made headlines after some media speculated that the vessel could have been used for secret transportation of some illegal cargo – drugs, radioactive materials or weapons.
At the time of the incident, President Dmitry Medvedev had demanded swift action from the military to find and rescue the missing ship, which fed the suspicions of conspiracy theorists.
http://rt.com/Top_News/2010-06-11/vessel...?fullstory

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
11.6.10

Arctic Sea: It was Estonians, Germans and Israelis



An Estonian businessman contracted the hijacking of the merchant vessel “Arctic Sea”, a suspect has told a Moscow court. The pirate attack, which drew worldwide media attention in June 2009, was done for ransom.

The alleged organizer of the crime is Erik-Neiliss Kross – an Estonian businessman involved in oil trade and development – according to one of the arrested hijackers, Dmitry Savins.[Who has been a prisoner in Moscow since 2009]. more

Savins told a Moscow court that he helped Kross, his business partner and friend, to hire people for the attack and was the one in charge of the operation. Kross planned the hijacking for purely financial reasons. He needed money to cover debts he had accumulated as a result of the economic crisis, which had hurt his business greatly. Crew - also in custody -story [URL="http://convenientflags.blogspot.com/2009/11/arctic-sea-crews-story.html"]more
[/URL]
According to the defendant, two other people had been involved in arranging the crime – Sergey Demchenko from Germany and Aleksey Kertsbur from Israel. The man didn’t provide any proof of his accusations.


Dmitry Savin, or Dmitri Savino Mālpils (Dmitrijs Savins on the passport), attributed the organization of the corporation owning the phantom vessel Arctic Sea to The Latvian Aquaship Ltd . Dmitris Savins, a resident of Latvia, was the chairman of a tanker company Pakri Tankers - a subsidiary of a larger Estonian company Alexela Logistics. Savin, apparently, is still one of the owners and other firms Juhtimise Partnerid, also associated with Alexela Logistics. Moreover, a couple of years ago the Savin firm rented office at the former coordinator of intelligence in Estonia Eerik-Niylesa Cross.
http://convenientflags.blogspot.com/2010...s-and.html

Very interesting, Magda.
I personally do not think that this story can account for the majority of strange events that were reported at the time, like the alleged renaming (and mysterious un-renaming) of the ship, the large-scale Russian military activities, the obvious standdown of NATO forces, the strange search for radioactive materials before the ship left Finnland, strange meetings with a sister ship and so on and on.
Basically this story explains nothing. This in itself is telling us something. :bandit:

Oh, I'm definitely with you on that Carsten. :flute:

The true story of Arctic Sea case

[URL="http://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&sl=es&tl=en&u=http://www.danielestulin.com/en/2010/10/11/la-verdadera-historia-del-caso-arctic-sea/&prev=_t&rurl=translate.google.com.au&usg=ALkJrhigwnzG14nhji0x6nDDIyGWKAE40w#respond"]

October 2010 November 2010

First read this link: The Case of the Arctic Sea is blurred - The Country - Author Rodrigo Fernández - 04/09/2009
To Understand the troubled case history of the Arctic Sea, first Would Have to Understand the blatant manipulation of the country on this case . El País, is the MOST reactionary half in Spain. Those Who Think That is half of the left, Should think about it a lot. Is half the extreme right, the right MOST ancient and despised in the country. The average Llosa, Bilderberg, the mini genocidal racist state of Israel.
Read, please first article of the country , and post the true story of Arctic Sea For example, in the first line of the country, tells us that "and The journalist Mikhail Voitenko (Estulin note: the Guy Who supposedly has taken information to light) , editor of a magazine in the maritime sector, has left Russia en route to Turkey for HAVING received, According To the Complaint, Death Threats. "Well, That ye know Voitenko May, a journalistic prostitute Juan Luis Cebrian court has left Russia Because of Threats, But Because this is part of the frontal attack Against Russian Interests. I Did not bring anything, normally Fears for His Life. Simply, you get paid for this rubbish and, subsequently Leaving Russia (currently Located in Bangkok).

The Undeclared War Against Russia is Taking on Many Fronts. Arctic Sea, it is Simply a piece of this war.
Arctic Sea WAS operation Carried out by the extremist leadership of the Ukrainian military intelligence (GUR) with the help of American neocons and Vice President Joseph Biden, the enemy of Russia. The Aim of this operation is to end the monumental going efforts of President Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton and Russian President Medvedev and Prime Minister Putin to normalize bilateral relations nuclear Between the two Superpowers.

Arctic Sea and Stock Was Not Carrying Weapons. However, STD charge included five tons of Afghan heroin.

This shipment WAS Purchased from Mr. Makhmadsaid Ubaiduloev, President of the Upper Chamber of the Supreme Assembly of Tajikistan by the agents of a criminal group of Russian military intelligence (GRU). The criminals Were planning to Deliver the goods in the Bay of Biscay to a ship owned by a group of Basques linked to ETA.
The extremist Leaders of Ukraine's military intelligence Had Been aware of this operation and Report it to Competitors of the first group of criminals GRU - another group Within the Russian GRU dedicated to drug crime and the smuggling of Weapons That Can intercept this shipment of heroin. Ukrainian Also Leaders shared this information with Their Counterparts in the U.S. and British intelligence services.
Ukrainians plan WAS to use the drug in the Arctic Sea incautelada for a Political show. The public Exposure of the drug traffickers of Russian GRU and His Accomplice Had Been a setback for Russia's international reputation. This Was Prevented by the strong and Concerted Action of the Russian Navy. But Russian Authorities Have Found Themselves in a Difficult and Demanding. The case of the Arctic Sea is a dramatic confirmation of the Enormous Extent of Corruption and crime in the Russian army, of Some members of the secret services and the Government That threatens survival of the Russian state in equal measure to STI external enemies.
Daniel Estulin

Hmmm, I fail to see any evidence or even hearsay for the drugs claim or anything else in this article. Some of the stranger aspects, like the renaming (and un-renaming) are not mentioned at all. Who the heck is this Estulin guy and what are his sources?

Daniel Estulin is a researcher and his main area is the Bilderberger group. The translation leaves a lot to be desired but so does the story. :marchmellow:
There is much which is not being explained. And probably never will. Did you read the 'El Pais' article? It is in response to that I think.

The El Pais article gives the more "traditional" version of a likely arms transport, while drugs are only mentioned as a "discarded" explanation. You cannot go from this article to the Estulin view without significant new information, which Estulin may have, but if he has it, he fails to mention what he has and where he got it from. So I remain sceptical. But still, Magda, thanks for finding this.
I also gather from Estulin's website that he has a lot of material on Victor Bout, which is also an interesting subject.

Yes, he does and that is an area of interest for me (Victor Bout). Ed Jewitt has just yesterday done a great review of Esulin's new book. Well worth a read. I will definitely be getting hold of that book too.