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

Hi, everyone-

I just wanted to take a moment to wish everyone around the world who may be reading this a Merry Christmas!

And a late Happy Hanukah to those of you who celebrate Hanukah.



Ok, and now back to our regularly scheduled programming....

Originally posted by Anonymous ATS
reply to post by merky

 

Wow - people are still posting this Jenkins video. Such a shame that more people do not know the full circumstances surrounding it. So here's an article and at the bottom a re-edit of the video to emphasise some points which are easily missed if you're not paying attention to the "slight of hand" in use.

www.checktheevidence.co.uk...

Thank you for that post. It clears up why she seemed so flustered in her interview...it was an ambush interview, with no advance warning. I would be flustered, too.

I enjoyed the video embeded above. It exposes "argument by propaganda" for what it is, a propaganda technique that has nothing to do with the search for truth. The video was made by a 9/11 truther who lumps so-called nutcases like Judy Wood in as useful, though unwitting, tools of an administration intent on obfuscating the truth of 9/11 with preposterous theories.

Her theory and other fringe theories should, according to the film maker, be avoided by 9/11 truthers, who should just stick to things that they have hard facts to back up, if the 9/11 truth movement is to progress.

I think that is true out in the world of politics, where the truth movement should be in high gear.

However, the 9/11 conspiracy forum on ATS is not a branch of the truth movement.

People should be free here to discuss any kooky theory they want to talk about. In doing so they may decide that the theory is not so kooky after all or, on the other hand, that the theory is not worth their time.

Originally posted by anti72

Originally posted by nikiano

There are transcripts of eye witnesses stating that people around the base of the WTC just dissappared right into thin air right in front of other people's eyes, in a wave of energy. Other people told how they saw planes instantly disappearing into puffs of fire that were flying nearby.
[edit on 23-12-2008 by SkepticOverlord]

can you please post all information about that witnsses ?

I know the site of Judy Wood, very interesting. but I´m not sure if thats a disinfo site.

greetz

Sorry about that....I addressed this issue on page 1 or 2 of this thread, and I posted the transcript from the fireman who gave his eye witness account.

When I re-read the transcript of his account, I'm thinking that maybe I misinterpreted what he meant by disappearance. He said that a wave came towards them and they disappeared. But when I re-read it again, I'm wondering if he meant a wave of black dust?? Go ahead and read it yourself, and tell me what you think.

This is what I get from his testimony he saw a huge amount darkness....then he saw a wave come towards people in front of him...then he said the people just disappeared. (In a wave of dust, or just in a "wave"?) Then he said that he was blown back 30-40 in feet in the air, landed on his back and everything was quiet.

Was the wave just dust? Was it something else? Could that be evidence of an energy weapon? Could a thermite explosion do that, and have him still survive? Honestly, I have no idea. I'm not a weapons expert.

But if it was just a fire from the planes that collapsed the building under it's own weight, I don't think that would cause an explosion that would throw him back 30-40 feet in the air. It would have just crushed him.

reply to post by ipsedixit


Thanks for the video, ipsedixit. So the army had been playing around with high powered microwaves. Good to know. Thanks.

And I agree with you on the video from the 9/11 truth movement, who basically said that anyone who diverges from the "official 9/11 truth movement" only discredits the movement. What a load of bull.

Hmm...like I said before, if the 9/11 truth movement can be discredited that easily by other people bringing out their own theories, then you have to wonder why. Maybe it's because a lot of the 9/11 truthers themselves sound a bit paranoid.

Take for instance Alex Jones. Now, I respect him in a of ways. I really do. I admire him standing up for what he believes in, and I admire some of the films I've seen him in. But in some of his radio shows, he sounds completely and totally paranoid.

I heard a recording of his radio show just the other day, where he was interviewing the head of the Architects and Engineers for truth, and I seriously thought he needed to take a time out right then and there on the radio show. He wouldn't even let his guest finish a complete thought, because he kept interrupting him and going off on these paranoid rants about the NWO. I really wanted to hear what his guest had to say, but he kept interrupting him! Sometimes he spouts off so much and gets on such a rant he sounds like a paranoid crazy person. In my opinion, his unprofessional behavior on that radio show discredited the 9/11 truth movement a heck of lot more than someone like me coming along and posting an alternative theory.

So, I guess what I'm saying is that if they (the 9/11 truthers) are worried about the official image they are projecting to the rest of the world, they should focus on the image of those on the INSIDE of the 9/11 truth movement first. Although I respect much of what he does and says, I wouldn't call Alex Jones the perfect example of a perfectly rational person.

It sounds like some of the 9/11 truthers are starting to do exactly what they accuse the "establishment" and the "NWO" of doing....sounds like they are trying to control the rights of free speech. Maybe they should think about that before they release their next video telling people to stop talking about alternative theories in "gray areas." It only makes them look bad. We should always be wary of any group trying to shut anyone else up because it conflicts with their message....that's usually a red flag in my book.






[edit on 25-12-2008 by nikiano]

[edit on 25-12-2008 by nikiano]

[edit on 25-12-2008 by nikiano]

Originally posted by kiváncsi777
reply to post by nikiano

 

Thats interesting, can one know who the website you got your info from, please,
or is it there , and i haven't noticed it? Thank you

Her website address is as follows:

www.drjudywood.com...

reply to post by danman23


Wow...thank you Danman for all that amazing work you did. I have to admit, I don't understand much of it at first glance (I'm not really a numbers person), so I'm going to print it out and try to see if I can completely understand what you've found.

Thanks also for the video on HAARP. It brings up a lot more theories for me than answers....but I'll save those for another thread.

[edit on 25-12-2008 by nikiano]

Originally posted by danman23
reply to post by jfj123

 

Why is the US Navy getting blamed for this?

They aren't the only ones who have a part in this program, yet the OP would have you believe that they caused this.

Wait? What?? I said nothing about the Navy. You have me confused with someone else. I never mentioned the Navy once.

Originally posted by nikiano

Originally posted by danman23
reply to post by jfj123

 

Why is the US Navy getting blamed for this?

They aren't the only ones who have a part in this program, yet the OP would have you believe that they caused this.

Wait? What?? I said nothing about the Navy. You have me confused with someone else. I never mentioned the Navy once.

Sorry... that was a post from a thread a while ago. jfj123 did not say that.... It was someone else replying to me on a thread I started over 8 months ago. I was just posting it as a little bit of insight from someone who is knowledgeable in HAARP technologies... Re-read it.. it should make sense... if not ask me to elaborate.

Originally posted by danman23
reply to post by jfj123

 

I have a lot more info to share, but check this post out...


"Originally posted by COOL HAND
Why is the US Navy getting blamed for this?

They aren't the only ones who have a part in this program, yet the OP would have you believe that they caused this.

Is there any chance that the author could come up with some solid evidence, like an order for the "test" that was signed by someone from the Navy?

I am also a little confused how HAARP could cause earthquakes."

Reply by PhyberDragon:

"I have a degree in acoustic intelligence technologies from the US Navy and clearances for life through to the Pentagon. It includes qualifications and field experience with the frquenciy types in question, as well as, the area of ionizing radiation. All I'll say is you'd be surprised what's possible and what exists in functioning use. I will not discuss whether such things as are suggested are occuring. I will say it is not technologically impossible, and further, that it would be relatively complex by design but easy to accomplish.
As to Naval involvement...It is their area of expertise, that, and they far oustrip the other branches combined in resources and assets. What's more the Ionosphere falls into the realm of space and space is the jurisdiction of the NAVY.
I wonder if CyberSpace falls under Navy Jurisdiction as well, I mean, it does qualify as a virtual Ocean more than it does airspace.
As to why earthquakes, well, as these are just theories )right) why not check out Phase One of Project Blue Beam."

Not to mention pages and pages of information, declassified documents and wikipedia/reliable sources, that says HAARP is capable of these catastrophes.

That is what I posted.. notice COOLHAND is the person that said that. (From like 8 months ago on a different thread)

The point of me posting that here is that a guy with a "degree in acoustic intelligence technologies from the US Navy and clearances for life through to the Pentagon." said that: "you'd be surprised what's possible and what exists in functioning use" (in reference to HAARP) and: " I will say it is not technologically impossible, and further, that it would be relatively complex by design but easy to accomplish."


Make sense?

Originally posted by nikiano
reply to post by danman23

 

Wow...thank you Danman for all that amazing work you did. I have to admit, I don't understand much of it at first glance, so I'm going to print it out and see if I can understand what you've found.

Thanks also for the video on HAARP.

Ya no prob.. I actually put that all that together many months ago.

Basically... what that says is that HAARP was being used at high power perfectly coinciding with the collapse of each tower. It gained power before the collapse of the first tower and lost power immediately after... then recharged for the next (approx) 30 min then abruptly lost power after the collapse of the second tower.

That is not necessarily 100% proof that the towers were brought down by HAARP, but obviously shows they were using it with a higher power than it takes to cause an earthquake and coincided with the collapse of each tower.

I think I explain it pretty well in the graphs though... do print them out and look at/read them carefully. It takes time, but it makes sense.

But back to your main topic... IF this HAARP technology is capable of this.. and some "evil" people are in control of it.. they very well may be using it as ransom to not cause the next catastrophe. Honestly... I am worried they want to use it to set of the New Madrid fault line, which would result in millions of lives lost. Say, 90% of our government is good and 10% is "evil" and in control of the HAARP technology.. they very well may have the rest of the government by the balls... saying.. "We will do it again, but much worse this time, if you don't give us trillions of dollars"... This is obviously all just speculation. I never thought of it that way before you brought this up. I just assumed all of the government is corrupt and they dropped the towers to get into Iraq and Afghanistan and to put the Patriot Act into effect.. not to mention make the world absolutely petrified of "Terrorism".

Originally posted by mike dangerously
An interesting theory,this whole war on terror and subsequent economic meltdown as a means of blackmail would make a lot of sense if it were not for the fact that the PNAC had talked about their new pearl harbor.Here is another idea what if the Neo-cons used this death ray on the Pentagon?

I actually had not even thought of the Pentagon. But it is interesting that everyone says that there was no way an aluminum plane could not have created the hole that went through the pentagon. And nothing was ever caught on tape going in....yet a hole was clearly burned into the pentagon walls.

Hmmmm....good theory.

What are the pentagon walls made of?? Anyone?

[edit on 24-12-2008 by nikiano]

reply to post by nikiano


Okay ,who's asking 4 the ransom ?
Who's threating the U.S. ?
One way or another,I believe in our country's power and that's why
I know & believe that 9/11 is an inside job period.
WHY ? at the airport,they didn't miss 1,2, or 3 planes but 4 planes !
two of them hit the WTC & desapeared inside the building.
The other two crashed on lands.what is the first thing we see on TV
when there's a plane crash ? fire,fire fighters,police force to protect
the area,wharever left from the travelers belonging and the passengers
family members.....Did we see any of that ? and the answer is no ! why ?
the answer is here :
www.ratical.org...

what about those planes & who's flying them ?
what about the unknown plane that was flying over the white House ?
www.youtube.com...

As you see it's not civilian plane but a larger size of the remote control
that's used today in Afghanistan & Pakistan to attack al Qaeda.

It's true you can fly a plane like 747 from city to city using a remote control with someone close by flying side by side .when a new passenger plane is built they fly it first with dommies as a pssengers with cameras
all over the plane to try it before sale to be used for people.

I would like all of you to read Joe Kennedy. Jr secrt mission back then
to show you we had the remote control technology 4 large planes.

www.b-29s-over-korea.com...

Are you intersted to read more about 9/11 ?
C:\Documents and Settings\Owner\My Documents\inv911.htm

reply to post by nikiano


There's a simple question to ask in response to your theory. "Who do you see getting richer?"

Originally posted by mark38
reply to post by nikiano

 

Okay ,who's asking 4 the ransom ?
Who's threating the U.S. ?

Thanks for the post and the links. Good question. But in my opinion the question we have to ask first is not "who", but "WHAT".

WHAT threat would be big enough to spook the President, the Treasury Secretary, The House, and The Senate enough to vote in a 1.2 trillion dollar bailout.... that nobody really understood..... in a week??? That must have been SOME threat.

All I know is that nothing about the bailout adds up. The way the bailout was proposed (on a 3 page handout), the way Congress was coerced behind closed doors (only 3rd time in history), speedily passed (in 1 week), is not just unusual....it's just freaky. And I've heard rumors of many members of Congress saying that they were basically being forced to vote on it under duress, and many of them said that they were "terrified" after the meeting. What would terrify a member of Congress??

It all just reeks of ransom to me.


Especially since that AFTER the Congress passed the bailout that Paulson told them MUST be passed, becuase there was NO OTHER WAY to avoid a depression....Paulson suddenly decides that his original idea wasn't going to work after all, and the best idea is to just flood the system with money and hope that it stimulates the economy. With no oversight at all.


So, I think if we figure out the "WHAT" first...what spooked our government so much to pass such a ridiculous bailout....THEN we can figure out the WHO it is that is behind them.




[edit on 25-12-2008 by nikiano]

Oh, and I just thought of something else....

Ok, so you know how in all the ransom movies, there are some things in common with each ransom demand, such as:

1. The money amount is so high to be impossible, but not quite impossible.
2. They are forced to come up with the money in a very short amount of time.
3. They are told to not call the cops, or else.

Ok, so I hadn't thought of the third aspect... isn't giving away 1.2 trillion dollars WITHOUT ANY OVERSIGHT OR GOVERNMENT REGULATION something akin to "not calling the cops"?? Government regulators are kind of like cops, right???

Plus, any oversight would bring in a lot more people....more people that could find out what was really going on with the bailout.

In the movies, you always hear the ransomers say "Tell no one, or the girl gets it." or "You warn the cops, and I'll blow up the amusement park."

What if the ransomers (if there are, indeed, ransomers) has told everybody involved "If you whisper any of this to the general population, we'll blow up an entire city, or something like that.

Plus, when the press asks the banks "Where did the money go?" The bankers say "Sorry, but I can't tell you. We cannot disclose that information." Absurd!

But...what if they're giving that excuse NOT because they are corrupt and greedy, but rather because the government told the bank presidents that they cannot tell anyone where the money went, because if they do....something terrible will happen to another city.

You know, everyone assumes that all bankers and that all government officials are just all greedy and corrupt. Well, I know that they can't ALL be corrupt and greedy. What if they're trying to save us from some terrible fate, and they can't say anything or "Dr. Evil" (for lack of a better name) pushes the button, and.... BOOM?

Ok, so it's another "what if", I admit. But....it could be possible.




[edit on 25-12-2008 by nikiano]

[edit on 25-12-2008 by nikiano]

[edit on 25-12-2008 by nikiano]

reply to post by ipsedixit


I started watching this video, and literally 45 seconds into it, both videos were no longer available. Wierd.

Ok, I just thought of two more ransom scenarios:

The first hypotheis is this: The bailout ransom has nothing to do with 9/11, and it is a ransom being paid to economic terrorists. Computer hackers have figured out how to crash the stock market, and they are demanding that we give them all our money as ransom, or they'll cause a world-wide depression.

Also:

1. only the people at the VERY top know about it? (The president, vice president, and treasury secretary, Paulson.)

2. The computer hackers know how to bring down the stock market by hacking into the stock market

3. The web bot program (which I follow) said something interesting: they said the "events of the weeks of sept 22-29, would be a WARNING of what was to come on Oct. 7th."

Well, Sept 22-29 was a week when all the big investment firms and AIG, etc... started to fall, one by one. What if the economic terrorists told Bush/Cheney/Paulson that those were just warnings, and that something big was going to happen on Oct 7th.

4. When Oct 7th did happen, the market dropped big time as predicted. And almost every day, the market kept dropping. Huge points every day. What if the mini-stock market crash in October was a demonstration.... they showed them that they could drop the market over 500 points in 1 day, 3 or 4 times in October

5. Right after that was when the bailout package was proposed to Congress. That's when suddenly Paulson came up with his famous "3 page bailout bill" out of the blue. What if that was when the ransom was demanded??

6. What if Paulson knew he had to get Congress to pass it, but was told to tell no-one, or they crash the market. So, what if he just told Congress that if they didn't pass the bailout package, we would sink into an economic depression worse than the greatest depression. Congress, always being worried about their next vote, did whatever they had to to avoid a depression.

But Paulson was warned to keep the government regulators out of it (don't tell the cops), so that's why he demanded there be no government oversight.

7. What if he was instructed to give every bank money (even the ones who didn't want it. If these computer hackers were good enough to crash the market, they would be good enough to be able to track all the money that was flooded into the economic system, and gather it themselves.


So, if we take 9/11 out of it entirely....it just leaves economic terrorists threatening to completely crash the world econonomy, unless we flood the market with money....and they scoop it up without anyone noticing.


The second hypothesis....well it is so wild and crazy, I am afraid to post it here. I'm sure I would get yelled at by everyone, because it brings in a different conspiracy theory altogether. And I really don't feel like getting yelled at again, so I'll just keep that one to myself and just put it in my little conspiracy theory notebook where nobody else can see it. LOL!





[edit on 25-12-2008 by nikiano]

It becomes more apparent as the years go by that those who believe the US was complicit in the destruction of the WTC are narrowing their search for proof to details of the recorded footage and accounts of the buildings' destruction.

Why aren't those seeking the 'real truth' out there tracking down the thousands and getting testimony from the thousands of Americans who were involved in planting thermite, faking reports, fighting fires, placing phony news reports, knocking down street lamps near the Pentagon, planting phony evidence, etc, etc.

There are serious indpendent researchers who did do this, and their documentation is an appendix official record, which overwhelmingly deonstrates the buildings collapsed as a result of airplanes that were flown into two towers.

Googling conspiracy sites, watching Youtube videos, ordering revelatory DVDs, listening to talk shows, etc - beats doing homework.

We're still waiting for the documented and annotated 'unofficial' report from those thousands of people concered with getting to the bottom of this.


Mike F

This whole DEW thing is getting so silly.

I'm waiting for someone to start bringing up the whole hologram garbage again.

I think it's really important to stop passing along ignorance here. I'm not calling people stupid, I'm saying that if you understand what DEW's were and how they work, we wouldn't be discussing them here. I encourage people to stop posting and start researching the various DEW tech and you'll start to see how they simply don't imply in this case.

Look, I know we all still have questions as to what happened on 9/11 and would like answers but lets not make up answers, lets find the real answers.