It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

A Single Unifying Theory

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 10:03 PM
link   
I'm sure this has been tried before, but let’s give it a shot. I have a theory that blends issues related to the Global Meltdown, 2012, and "The Powers that Be."

Let's say that the powers that be know that 2012, or a similar catastrophe is imminent. Obviously, if all of civilization collapses and an Extinction Level Event occurs, who has the most money will become irrelevant. However, preparing for such and event would require tremendous resources.

Two quick examples from Hollywood. 1) Deep Impact and 2) the movie 2012. In both films, the governments of the world and the wealthy spent an enormous amount of money for their survival. In Deep Impact they built underground shelter, in 2012 they built arcs.

So, how would the rich and powerful pay for their survival? With OUR money. They cause a major crash in the stock market, the cripple world economies, and then they get their hands on $700 Billion (not including Europe's stimulus) in TARP money with no questions asked.

Suddenly, the stock market rebounds with the greatest "recovery" in history, the big banks "return" the TARP money before the "oversight" starts.

I think $700 Billion can go a long way in building shelter for the world's most powerful couple of hundred thousand people.

Is it any wonder why it seems as if they are doing nothing to fix the economy... Why should they if they know they just have to keep this a secret for a couple of more years?

What are your thoughts?




posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 10:31 PM
link   
Whoever has the most money wouldn't matter so much, however if you used that money to either buy gold or commodities and the labor to build some sort of shelter or "arc", then you would be all set and on top of the world if you survived. So in short, money itself wouldn't matter so much as commodities or gold. Whomever has the most commodities or resources, will have the most power.

With that being said, I don't think there is an imminent extinction level event that anyone knows about, at least.

--airspoon



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 11:08 PM
link   
Yes, all the rich people know about the secret doomsday in two years, and they're using the TARP money to build shelters. If you say it fast enough you might be able to fool a small child into thinking it's true. Evidence? Any reason at all think that this is true? It makes sense when you say it, but it makes sense to say that the sun is orbiting the earth. The way to figure out what is really happening is to look at evidence. Evidence is reason to believe. Without evidence, there is so reason. There is no reason to believe this theory. It might be fun to think about, but it's silly.



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 11:20 PM
link   
If something were to happen, I'd like to be able to see how the rich elite handle the situation of having a bunch of old power hungry individuals becoming the new "stock" or average person. Let em all fight to the death over who's going to be in charge.

Not to mention, i don't see how they'd be able to function without all the people that do their work and got them to where they are now.



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 11:35 PM
link   
Money would be useless after such an event but prior to it if they have all the money they can pretend it still has worth and pay ppl to do their biding so to say... I think the ops hypothetical is plausible for the mere fact we all know something fishy is going on with the lack of money in this country atm and the fact the govt still thinks they should take more of our money.
Folks want to make light out of it and what not but it is seriously possible that this whole ( random conspiracy here) was orchestrated knowing that maybe 2012 is real. It's like in the movies where the bad guys make the victim dig their own grave... Just my buck fifty folks. S&F to you.



posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 11:06 AM
link   
reply to post by OnceReturned
 


I never said I had proof, or that I know that this is happening; however, I think it is compelling that in closed door meetings with the congress, the Chairman of the Fed (the real most powerful man in the world) made them completely reverse their position in relation to the TARP which was initially defeated. I also think it interesting that the so called legislation that was passed essentially said, MIND YOUR BUSINESS on how we spend the money. I think it interesting that the Markets fell to around 6600 in March of 2009 and were above 11000 in April of 2010. That is insane.

If 2012 was real, and the elites did know something were coming, they would most certainly start preparing for the worst. It cost a lot of money to be prepared for an ELE.

Remember Deep Impact. The government builds caves for 1,000,000 people, the money is funneled out the Treasury, Treasury Secretary resigns....

Just something I thought might be interesting and there are a number of co-incidences that exist.



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 12:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by finemanm
reply to post by OnceReturned
 


I never said I had proof, or that I know that this is happening; however, I think it is compelling that in closed door meetings with the congress, the Chairman of the Fed (the real most powerful man in the world) made them completely reverse their position in relation to the TARP which was initially defeated. I also think it interesting that the so called legislation that was passed essentially said, MIND YOUR BUSINESS on how we spend the money. I think it interesting that the Markets fell to around 6600 in March of 2009 and were above 11000 in April of 2010. That is insane.


"So called" legislation? Isn't it really legislation?

When you say it's interesting that a single agenda emerged from the meeting. . . don't you think that the point was for each side to have a change to convince the other? Following from that, isn't the expected outcome that one side wins? Couldn't the conspiracy argument have been made no matter what happend? Is it really a sign of something deep and dark that people changed their minds? Presented with good argument against your position, would you have the. . . guts . . . to change yours? There is a reason that he is chairman of the Fed. Like you said: "Markets fell to around 6600 in March of 2009 and were above 11000 in April of 2010." Doesn't that mean that what he did worked? If it had failed and the markets hadn't recovered substantially, would you say that those opposed to TARP were the consiprators? If yes, or no, why? My point is only that it's all nonsense. You can make any argument about anything. The way to tell the difference between a good argument/theory/assessment is that the true ones will have evidence that confirms that theory more than any other, whereas the false ones will involve imagination and intuition more than evidence. See all of history for a case study on this subject.



If 2012 was real, and the elites did know something were coming, they would most certainly start preparing for the worst. It cost a lot of money to be prepared for an ELE.


Yes, but that's just not true. The fields which would first predict any predictable ELE are academic fields, and the people involved are not part of the conspiracy. They are grad students and professors, not bankers.

What if I said that I am an elite, and that we're not privy to the doomsday? For proof, u2u me.

What should we take from the fact that the population most concerned with 2012 is the ATS members - avg or less income earners - whereas the wealthy don't give it a second thought?



Remember Deep Impact. The government builds caves for 1,000,000 people, the money is funneled out the Treasury, Treasury Secretary resigns....


Yes, remember that movie, because if it happend in a movie, that means we should take it seriously . . . seriously?



Just something I thought might be interesting and there are a number of co-incidences that exist.


It's fun to think about, but so are unicorns and Santa. Should we believe what we want, or should we seek the truth? Please answer this question.

I don't mean to be offensive, but I do mean to be dismissive. Just because you can think of something that makes sense at some level doesn't mean that that thing is true, or that you should even take it seriously. . . Remember all the nonsense that people believed for 100000 years before science? All of that made sense, but it was not true. In order to find the truth, we need reason and evidence. Without those things, we are just telling stories. It's important that we not get confused.



new topics

top topics



 
1

log in

join