Conspiracy: The Bailout Is Actually An International Ransom to Prevent Another 9/11

reply to post by ipsedixit


I only brought up Tesla because it is the same principle. Of course, various kinds of "beams" can be used. From ultrasonic to maybe particle beams, lasers, radio waves, etc.

Very neat hypothesis and you're right, it would make a great sci-fi book or even a movie. You may want to take steps to make sure this doesn't get ripped off.

The reality of it is non-existent. Directed Energy Weapons were not involved in 9/11 in any way so I wouldn't worry about that.

I doubt that a super power would use an energy based weapon then cover it up by flying planes into the towers. If someone had such a massively damaging weapon, they could simply tell everyone and hold the world hostage with it and not need to hide it in any way.

I just thought of one more thing that lends credence to my "ransom money theory."

Generally, in ransoms, the ransomers demand HUGE amounts of money to be gathered together in a very short amount of time. (At least, that's what I've seen in movies.) Usually, this amount of money is almost impossible, but not quite impossible.

And usually they give them a very, very, very short time to raise the money.

Have you ever known Congress to only take a week to deliberate on anything that has to do with money, let alone 700 billion dolllars worth? One day, Paulson hands them a 3 page law and says pass it. The next week, it's signed into law with some modifications, but still no oversight.

Now tell me that Congress wasn't under duress to do that.

Plus....there were reports of closed-door secret meetings, and warnings made to Congressmen of "pass this bailout package, or else."

We never heard exactly what the warnings were, did we?

Then again, maybe the bailout is a ransom, but it has nothing to do with 9/11 directly, as the other poster said. Maybe the ransomers are.....the.......Illuminati?? The Central Banks?





[edit on 23-12-2008 by nikiano]

If there is a weapon, the reason a weapon like DEW (if there is one) would make such an amazing weapon is that unlike a nuclear weapon, which renders a place unsafe to live in after it is used, a weapon like DEW or a similar weapon has the potential to completely destroy the economy and the infrastructure of a country by wiping out a few strategic sites.

It is like nuclear war, but without the radioactivity.

Someone could collapse an entire government with a few strategic moves, and then move in and take over the country and the people.

There really is no way to demand a ransom with nuclear war as a threat, because everyone knows that nobody in their right mind would nuke the world because it would destroy it for everyone. But an energy weapon that leaves no harmful radiation? What could be better.

reply to post by nikiano


Instead of paying said ransom, why wouldn't the US simply have those individuals "disappeared" ?
The US has the largest and most advanced military/budget on the planet by far so if anyone were to have this technology and the ability to track it, it would be the US. There is no other country that comes even close with regards to defense spending and research.

If there isn't a weapon or weapon technology involved...what else could someone be using as a threat for ransom?

Give us all your money or we'll...what?

Require you to pay back all your loans?
Collapse the dollar?
Bring the world civillization to a complete and total collpase?

What if China is ransoming us? We owe them so much money already. What if they're saying give us at least 1.2 trillion dollars or we'll call in all of our IOUs and collapse the world economy.

You can't make an entire country like China disappear.


[edit on 23-12-2008 by nikiano]

reply to post by nikiano


China's economy is very much linked to our and the rest of the world. If they chose to do this, it would be like slitting their own throats.

reply to post by prevenge


Directed Energy Weapon (Beam weapon).

the site below has more information.

www.drjudywood.com...

After looking at all the pictures on drjudywood.com website it does look more like a "beam" hit the towers vs explosives.

Brings more questions to the surface then answers at the moment.

reply to post by ofhumandescent


Anyone interested in determining REALLY what Directed Energy Weapons capabilities are, should investigate legit websites.

Can anyone post any scientific data that shows any Directed Energy weapon can destroy a building as shown on 9/11?
Please only post REAL SCIENTIFIC DATA in response to my question.

911
This video documents and questions the energy involved in the WTC attacks. Also, anyone from the US has most likely seen the Discovery Channel video's on energy weapons, which the US military says can strike missiles from hundreds of miles away. The idea of DEW isn't novel, it's been discussed for years. The only people that deny it are/were at the top i.e. Rumsfeld and Co.

www.youtube.com...

Bailout $$$,$$$,$$$,$$$,$$$.00
I've read too that a few investment banks didn't need the money but were told by Paulson they should take it because the offer may not present itself later (heard this on NY NPR news 9.39FM). The mere fact that trillions are given out without disclosure is absurd. The ransom idea is interesting. On a side note, I've studied abroad during college and always remember the introductory lecture centering around the US military size and budget - I always that it was on odd topic as an intro. The point is even NW Euro has been concerned for years about this department.

My guess on connecting the dots...
Wouldn't it be an agent of de Rothchild? Isn't that family worth 50% of global wealth? So once you have control of the central banks you need a proverbial "next step" right? If I had a 'ruthless gene' (avpr1a in case you care) I'd probably create a weapons program to protect my wealth. #, most on here probably have motion lights and a dog to protect their middle class ass, right? Now imagine what you'd do if you were top 1% - body armor and guards only do so much.

Originally posted by jfj123
reply to post by ofhumandescent

 

Can anyone post any scientific data that shows any Directed Energy weapon can destroy a building as shown on 9/11?
Please only post REAL SCIENTIFIC DATA in response to my question.

Here's a legit source that has posted a scaled down version of the technology "MTHEL".

Northrop Grumman

Interesting thread -

here's a few more questions to put into the fire...

It was very important that WTC buildings be insured by the Swiss. And 9/10/02 the Swiss finally entered the UN one year after the event and it was under duress. They really didn't want to, Swiss had held out from being a part of the UN - but since the WTC counted as 2 buildings and 2 incidents it was double the insurance - and it nearly broke Switzerland.

I don't think it's impossible that 9/11 and the banking crisis are related.

Also, I think that Mumbai attacks and 9/11 are related as I've mentioned on other links. That IPI Iranian, Pakistani, Indian Peace Pipeline that was finally supposed to be signed at the OPEC meeting November 28th - but was delayed, of course, because of suspicious Mumbai attacks (supposedly by Pakistanis). And OPEC, Iranian no longer trading oil in $ since April 2008, and oil fluctuations this year all have a lot to do with banking crisis.


As to why do 9/11 at all - or cover up - if it's black ops fighting black ops or aliens or whatever - One good reason is Crowd Control. The US has been drowning in crowd control ever since. From no shoes and eye scanners at the airport, to Marshal Law in Florida... I don't know if the government is trying to protect us or hurt us, but they are clearly trying to control chaos. Right now it looks ridiculous because we don't have chaos so it looks like they're taking freedoms away. And maybe there never will be chaos and they are just taking freedoms away. Or maybe there will be - and these controls will be helpful to keep order. Who knows.

reply to post by evo190


interesting link.
My point to asking my question was, is there any evidence to suggest that there is an energy weapon that can cause a building to collapse on the scale of what happened on 9/11?

A laser could not have been involved for many reasons including the fact that it would need to incinerate everything from the outside in. In addition, the power requirements to incinerate an entire building, using a laser, would be astronomical.

There's a huge difference between knocking down a missile and flattening an entire building.

I'd like to say a couple of things...

1. Many people believe that the U.S. Federal Government is an inept bunch of morons.

2. Former President Clinton had sexual relations with a woman in the White House.

TWO people knew about this....ONE of them told.

I'm to believe that our inept, moronic government is involved in a conspiracy involving THOUSANDS of people?

reply to post by distortion9




Yep, that's what we're saying. Believe that they did it, but so badly that even we figured it out

The auto bail-out is very simple to see, actually. If the NA auto-industry goes bust, then oil profits go down the tube.

Some things in life really are that clear-cut.

reply to post by jfj123


I admit I don't understand the technology and only read about it.

Look at it this way, if you stand a missile upright, hallow it, enlarge it, give it windows and stairs and utilities it can become a building. In fact, it's a much weaker missile in a sense. So, if a leading US military contractor is publicly saying "yes we can shoot a missile in the sky with energy" then why would it be hard to shoot a larger, weaker missile on the ground not moving?

reply to post by distortion9


Sex and organized crime are not exactly the same thing. Lewinsky had something to gain from telling someone else what happened. That's why she told. Even if she only needed a friend to talk to, and nothing else, she had something to gain.

Organized crime exists. Look at the Mafia and how tight-lipped they are when it comes to highest level information. (At least, from what I've seen from the Godfather.) They don't discuss family business outside family.

It's not so far-fetched for me to believe that there is an organized crime wing in the government. Call it what you will: para-military, black ops, organized crime, CIA rogue spies, etc... If this is a ransom situation and the ransomers want to remain hidden from the government, they have nothing to gain by telling.

Think about it this way. Were you ever in a secret club? A fraternity, maybe, with a secret handhsake or a secret password? If you were, then you were surrounded by friends, and it wasn't really hard to keep a secret. If you felt there was no harm in keeping the handshake secret, why would you want to tell?

But maybe we're thinking about this all wrong. Maybe they consider themselves to be the good guys, and their goal is to take down a corrupt government....the "evil American Empire." In fact, maybe they believe in their cause so fervently, that they will do anything to keep it a secret. And for them, it's not hard, because if they are found out, they would most likely be killed. At the very least.

For them, it's akin to keeping war secrets from the enemy. Why would they tell secrets if they truly feel they are the ones who are the "good guys" fighting evil?

Maybe they feel they are ransoming America for the good of the world...that economic collapse would be better than the alternative....total world domination. Or worse.

Good and bad are all a matter of perspective when you think about it.



[edit on 23-12-2008 by nikiano]

Originally posted by evo190
reply to post by jfj123

 

I admit I don't understand the technology and only read about it.

Look at it this way, if you stand a missile upright, hallow it, enlarge it, give it windows and stairs and utilities it can become a building. In fact, it's a much weaker missile in a sense. So, if a leading US military contractor is publicly saying "yes we can shoot a missile in the sky with energy" then why would it be hard to shoot a larger, weaker missile on the ground not moving?

The energy required to knock out a ballistic missile is A LOT smaller then the energy required to knock down an entire building.
The laser only needs to hit a small spot on the missile to de-activate it whereas the laser would need to cut through a lot of steel beam and posts to cause complete structural failure in a massive building.
The reality is that lasers don't work the way you are describing them in this situation.

Maybe we don't know what they are doing with waves. After all we are constantly hearing of newer and newer theories regarding waves and particles. I can't keep up to the Discover articles and now with the collider it can only get worse

Tesla was a long time ago and didn't have stolen trillions and computers at his disposal.

Maybe we understand the physics we were taught, but could be open minded about the new "laws" we're discovering.