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.

 

Titanic - No accident? + Video

page: 2
9
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 15 2011 @ 04:43 PM
link   
If they really meant to hit the iceberg, then Robert Hitchens who was at the wheel did a fantastic job, considering that if he had hit the iceberg head-on then the chances are that the ship would have been crippled but would have stayed afloat, and if the ship had turned fractionally quicker then the iceberg would have been missed.
As it is, the ship just caught enough of the ice under the water to buckle the steel plates, pop the rivet heads and open up the first 6 watertight compartments. This is what ultimately doomed the ship.
I think the idea that it was sunk on purpose is ludicrous.
And I imagine that if orders were in place to have something happen to the ship, then the natural reaction would have been to ram straight into the iceberg, which may have been fatal for some passengers and crew and required extensive repair woks, but would not have resulted in sinking.




posted on Apr, 15 2011 @ 11:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by ignorant_ape
reply to post by contrafear
 


ok - if you want mer to consider your theory - please explain how the people you cite were prevented from surviving ?

you dismiss the notion of self sacrifice

but fail to explain how they were prevented - if they wanted to survive - they had the promise of reward beyond the dreams of the crew

as you admit - power

so how were they prevented - from escaping - if they actually tried to ?


1.) I'm actually not real familiar with this conspiracy surrounding the alleged planned/accidental death, so I won't even take a guess as to the reason why they didn't make it out. I was merely stating that it was odd that they (being who they were) somehow didn't...

2.) I don't dismiss the notion of self sacrifice at all. But let's be realistic...rich and powerful people don't become that way because they are self-sacrificing. They become that way because they are ambitious. They had businesses to run, money to spend, and matters to tend to.

It would be expected that these men and their guests would be given a royal treatment. Afterall, it would be a great honor, and very beneficial for the image of the White Star Line to have such significant guests. Otherwise, they could have taken their business to White Star's direct competition- Cunard. That would have been rather insulting, as the two companies were bitterly slugging it out for the "biggest and fastest" trophy.

At the time, ocean travel was a fierce and booming business. And it was all about business and money. Lord Pirrie and J. Bruce Ismay were two of the most powerful men in the shipbuilding business. Both of which were in White Star's corner. As was JP Morgan, who was the main proprietor of International Mercantile Marine, as to which White Star Line was a subsidiary. Very powerful people.

And wasn't Bruce Ismay on the Titanic that night?...Funny how he made it out, isn't it...

I study Titanic for the historical value. But it is peculiar how the whole ordeal turned out.



posted on Jun, 18 2014 @ 11:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: lewman

the thing that puzzles me is that when you leave from Ireland and want to go to New York, why do you need to travel through places with large icebergs.


The icefields were a lot further South in the Atlantic than they would otherwise have been at that time of year. And she was actually swinging further South to avoid any potential icebergs than she had originally been planned to.



posted on Jun, 19 2014 @ 09:18 AM
link   
Saw this in website talking about the Conspiracy. Can't remember which one though.



Had a look for the book and downloaded it. And yes it mirrors the Titanic story but it is written 14 years earlier!

Basically the Billionaires on board the Titanic were travelling to New York to oppose the creation of the Federal Reserve. Those behind the Federal Reserve needed rid of the opposer's. So they came up with the Titanic 'Disaster' based on the book 'Futility' or 'Wreck Of The Titan'.

The captain of the Titanic was a high up Freemason and he agreed to do it. That's all I remember from the Website!
edit on 19-6-2014 by Hilux1996 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 19 2014 @ 09:27 AM
link   
I was able to watch one minute and 55 seconds of this tripe. Satire? You could have added, in an evil voice (and he may have in the remaining minutes) 'Why do you think an iceberg was involved????? Because ice is nine-tenths hidden, and so is the plot as dark as the Witching Hour". It's almost unwatchable.
edit on 19-6-2014 by Aleister because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 20 2014 @ 03:15 AM
link   
The whole Titanic thing is basically used as a metaphor for society without a safety net. Or something like that. How the wealthy people just don't care about poor people and let them suffer and die. That's how it generally comes off in almost every documentary. There's no doubt that it was stupid to send that ship out with not enough lifeboats. But the reason they keep dredging this story back up is to take advantage of the circumstances. Not enough lifeboats. The lavish luxury for the rich. The uncaring attitude of the White Star Line. And particularly, how the steerage passengers (because of the segregation) were kept from escaping until it was too late. It's great Marxist propaganda.



posted on Jun, 20 2014 @ 03:35 AM
link   
I watched a documentary called 'Titanic - The Ship That Never Sank'. It was good and had a lot of compelling theories about the possibility that the Titanic was actually the Olympic. This documentary was based on Robin Gardiner's book of the same name.


One of the most controversial and complex theories regarding the sinking of the Titanic was put forward by Robert Gardiner in his book 'TITANIC: The Ship That Never Sank?' (published 1999).
In it, Gardiner draws on several events and coincidences that occurred in the months, days and hours leading up to the sinking of the Titanic to form his theory. Put simply, his theory is that the ship that hit the iceberg on 14 April 1912 was in fact the Titanic's sister-ship the Olympic, disguised as the Titanic. All this was part of an insurance scam of huge proportions by the White Star Line.
The Olympic was the older sister to the Titanic, built alongside the more famous vessel but launched much earlier, in October 1910. She was to all purposes identical to the Titanic, save for small detailing such as the promenade deck windows. These were not glazed in the Olympic. In the Titanic the front half of the promenade deck was fitted with smaller glazed windows to protect passengers from spray.
On September 20, 1911, the Olympic was involved in a collision with the Royal Navy cruiser HMS Hawke near Southampton. The cruiser smashed its ram into the side of the Olympic, seriously damaging both ships. The inquiry (an internal Royal Navy one) found its ship free of all blame. This set in motion Gardiner's theory.


Titanic - The Ship That Never Sank

That is quite a plausible explanation. With the killing of the Billionaires stopping the opposition to the Federal Reserve and White Star Line's owner's JP Morgan switching ships? That is very plausible.

What get's me is, why was the launch of Titanic a big deal if 2 years earlier it's sister ship of exactly the same size and design sailed?

In the news after the 'Titanic' sunk there was the big commotion and advertisement of the Biggest Unsinkable Ship sailing to New York and all the stories preceding it and 2 years earlier the Olympic which is exactly the same get's no big commotion?


edit on 20-6-2014 by Hilux1996 because: spelling errors



posted on Jun, 20 2014 @ 03:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: Hilux1996

In the news after the 'Titanic' sunk there was the big commotion and advertisement of the Biggest Unsinkable Ship sailing to New York and all the stories preceding it and 2 years earlier the Olympic which is exactly the same get's no big commotion?



Pretty good question.



posted on Jun, 20 2014 @ 04:36 AM
link   
a reply to: Hilux1996

Yes, but Gardiner's book has been shot full of holes ever since it came out. The two ships were not the same - there were some differences between the two.



posted on Jun, 20 2014 @ 04:54 AM
link   
Plausible???? That video was the biggest load of rubbish ever. A wasted 10 minutes of my life I will never get back. Admittedly, Thinking Cap, no I did not watch the whole thing, but I did watch more than 1 minute.

For me to consider a theory plausible I need more than the fact that in the English language and alphabet there are sounds and letters that are used often and that a particular species of tree grows in an irrelevant place. Even I, when I speak out loud, can draw out a word and add more syllables and sound like an idiot ("ow....wEL" anyone?)



posted on Jun, 20 2014 @ 05:27 AM
link   

originally posted by: Mura44
Plausible???? That video was the biggest load of rubbish ever. A wasted 10 minutes of my life I will never get back. Admittedly, Thinking Cap, no I did not watch the whole thing, but I did watch more than 1 minute.

For me to consider a theory plausible I need more than the fact that in the English language and alphabet there are sounds and letters that are used often and that a particular species of tree grows in an irrelevant place. Even I, when I speak out loud, can draw out a word and add more syllables and sound like an idiot ("ow....wEL" anyone?)


Agreed - the video is a total load of nonsense. What worries me is that some people will think that it's plausible.



posted on Jun, 20 2014 @ 11:38 AM
link   
I agree with you guys about the video the Op posted. Witching hour? Jack Dawson? Blue Diamond?

Firstly, what has Jack Dawson and the Blue Diamond got to do with the Titanic. It has something to do with to do with the movie yes! But nothing to do with the actual event as Jack and the Diamond were fictional just for the movie!

And what I said about Titanic and Olympic being switched? Yes I know the conspiracy for that was proved false. It told you near the end of the documentary I watched of the same name.



But my real reason for introducing the Olympic was the question I earlier put. Why was the Titanic launch so special when the sister ship Olympic launch 2 years previous was not a big deal?

The Captain of the Olympic went on to Captain of the Titanic. His name was Captain Smith. He was a high up initiate of the Illuminati!



Here's a little more info n why the Titanic was in effect Sacrificed!

Titanic Conspiracy


edit on 20-6-2014 by Hilux1996 because: Getting facts straight

edit on 20-6-2014 by Hilux1996 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 20 2014 @ 12:06 PM
link   
Oh man thanks for posting that vid


It's Friday evening here and I haven't laughed so hard in I can't remember how long, I actually had to stop watching for a while as I was in danger of wetting myself, thanks man


I'm sure you meant to post this in the jokes and pranks forum, either way it's hilarious.

I've been on ATS 9 years and thought I'd seen it all. You just proved me wrong, either the best prank or worst thread I've ever read.

Cody



new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 1   >>

log in

join