Was The Titanic Destroyed By A German Submarine?

reply to post by snoopyuk
If a metal ship is plowing into a sheet of ice thats thousands of feet across,perhaps the ice would damage the metal hull of a ship...but the Titanic "supposedly" hit a relatively small "floating" ice berg.

The Titanic was not an ice breaker crashing through solid ice fields and the Titanic didnt sail head on straight into the ice either,it grazed and scraped against it "supposedly",so how is a floating chunk of ice going to punch a 3ft x 4ft hole into the "side" of the reinforced steel hull?

The ice would have had to punch itself inwards and then pull itself outwards very fast in order to have made that sized "original hole" through which the water came pouring in.Especially since the ship was "moving" past the ice,not sailing sideways into it...

reply to post by FLaKK
The torpedo theory has not been debunked...The German U-17 was 203ft long,carried 6 torpedos,was able to release high explosive water mines,had a range of 6,700 miles and was "publicly" launched only a few days after the Titanic sank...

The U-17 was the most advanced submarine in the world in early 1912 and was constructed,in 1911 and early winter 1912 and under as much secrecy as possible,with armed soldiers patrolling the submarine construction facilities and civilians were not allowed to just casually roam around the area...

If the Germans Launched the U-17 a week or two,or however much earlier..."They Would Not Have Told Everyone About It" "It would Have Been A Top Secret Mission"...

Did the USA military tell everyone when they completed and first flew the B-1 Bomber?...No...The public was "allowed to know" about it long afterwards...

And back in 1912,the U-17 would have been just as important and just as secret to the Germans...

the following is one of the most fact filled and important replies of this entire thread and i dont want to see it drifting further and further into the back pages to be overlooked and forgotten...

Originally posted by SonoftheSun

Originally posted by foxhoundone
A rare picture of the alleged iceberg that shattered the Titanic's rivets (from Scottish ore mines).
Not that big to pose a worry..

Interesting, isn't it?

In a conspiracy world it isn't easy to swim against mainstream waters. I do not know if Germans sank the Titanic. I do not know if an iceberg sank the Titanic either.

Is there really a conspiracy? Why would anyone want to sink the biggest ship of its time?

It is almost a hundred years ago and some things have never changed. Money. Power. Greed.

Allright, I supplied a shady source - in my last reply - some might say...but it still weighs in a factor of gash versus holes theory.

Here is a more serious link. It has been mentioned already in this thread that the Federal Reserve was in its creation when the ship sank.

Why would anyone who wanted to instigate a Federal Reserve want to sink the Unsinkable?

One of many Titanic conspiracies floating around, many believe that the sinking of the famous vessel was well planned, well executed, and orchestrated shape the world as we know it today. This is the Federal Reserve Titanic conspiracy.

Wait a minute now....where's the connection?

Here’s how the Federal Reserve and the Titanic are connected. In 1910, seven men met on Jekyll island just off the coast of Georgia to plan the Federal Reserve Bank. Nelson Aldrich and Frank Vanderclip represented the Rockefeller (Illuminati) financial empire. Henry Davidson, Charles Norton and Benjamin Strong represented J.P. Morgan (Illuminati). Paul Warburg (Illuminati) represented the Rothschilds (Illuminati) Banking dynasty of Europe. The Rothschilds were the banking agents for the Jesuits and hold `the key to the wealth of the Roman Catholic Church.’

Let's see...the Rockefellers...the Morgans...the Rothchilds...sounds like 2011, not 1910 now does it??

Was there anyone on that ship that the Elite wanted out? You bet.

Three of the richest and most important of these were Benjamin Guggenheim, Isador Strauss, the head of Macy’s Department Stores, and John Jacob Astor, probably the wealthiest man in the world.

Here starts a good conspiracy...

These three men were coaxed and encouraged to board the floating palace. They had to be destroyed because the Jesuits knew they would use their wealth and influence to oppose a Federal Reserve Bank as well as the various wars that were being planned.

Oh...it gets better...

It can also be mentioned that J.P. Morgan, the individual contracted to build the Titanic was scheduled to be on the maiden voyage, but canceled.

Coincidences right? Sure they are. Like coincidences pertaining to 9/11, coincidences pertaining to JFK's death, coincidences pertaining to most conspiracies that do swim waters against the mainstream flow...

One thing remains and is not a coincidence.

All three men, whom were opposed to the Federal Reserve, died during the sinking of the Titanic.

So there might be a conspiracy after all...perhaps...but what does Germany have to do with any of this?

The Federal Reserve is installed as part of the Federal Reserve act in December of 1913, roughly a year and eight months after the Titanic tragedy, and World War I less than a year later.

Now get this.

Theorists believe that the Federal Reserve and the Jesuits were responsible for funding the United States, Germany, and Russia in the war.

Emphasis is mine. How convenient.

Oh, the source isn't as "shady" as the other one I linked earlier.

Titanic Universe - The Titanic - RMS Titanic Ship Facts & Information

Do I claim that Germany sank the Titanic? No. Do I claim that the Elite sank the Titanic? No.

But I wouldn't be so fast to jump on the iceberg theory either...

ETA/Edit to add: Now if anyone pulled that off...what would the public need to be told? That the Titanic hit an iceberg and sank...or...a that a torpedo sank the Titanic? Food for thought...

Just info. Make of it what you wish. Or as some have said...Move along...nothing to see here...

I sometimes have to remember that ATS is a conspiracy website...

edit on 25-11-2011 by SonoftheSun because: grammar

edit on 25-11-2011 by SonoftheSun because: added ETA

edit on 25-11-2011 by SonoftheSun because: grammar part deux

reply to post by FLaKK


FlaKK-
that the hole came about because of the ship splitting in two, is the "official" explanation. I do not see how that is possible, actually looking at the hole. Some metal is sheared inwards/outwards at the left edge of the hole. The top of the hole shows rivets popped loose at a seam.
The sheared metal in the picture would indicate a blast from inside the ship, if we are looking at the hole from outside the ship. The sheared metal would be from a torpedo if we are inside the ship looking out.

The image URL
encrypted-tbn0.google.com...:ANd9GcTBZjKb-DBKvOBVN1-W5RxjJxT_n34xRSxhMPaU1FoI1I7qvJJA

At 10pm on the night of 14th April 1912 there was a change of watch on the Titanic. Quartermaster Robert Hitchens was at the ships wheel with Quartermaster Alfred Olliver assisting. Also present on the bridge were sixth officer James Moody, fourth Officer Joseph Boxhall, first officer William Murdoch (in command). In the crows nest were lookouts Fleet and Lee.

Now i cannot accept the ridiculus U-17 U-boat scenario,the facts we have about German technology at that time make it impossible, including the launch and commissioning dates for this submarine.

I am still trying very hard to stay on the fence with the conspiracy theory however but we need to keep it realistic. Why was the Titanic steaming full speed through a deadly ice field when other ships in the area had either slowed down or stopped?. Why were warnings about the ice continuously ignored? The people on watch at the time of the collision as i've mensioned above, could there have been a conspiracy there? any of them illuminati jesuits or whatever who wanted to see the end of the ship for the reasons stated by blocula?

Bruce Ismay, chairman of the white star line apparently gave the orders to fire the remaining boilers and race full speed as the Titanic approached the icefield. First officer Will' Murdock dissapeared after the collision. Cameron's film portrays him as shooting himself, afterall he was in command of the ship at the time of the collision. Other reports say he was last seen going back to his cabin and was never seen again.

Come on if there was a conspiracy then the scenario was already set for Titanic to meet with disaster. She was racing full speed through a deadly icefield at night, there was no need for a u-boat, if there was a conspiracy then it was contrived by someone back in europe maybe?, and carried out by those on watch?.

One last thing to think about, The year 1912 spring/summer, was the year Ice flows had moved unusually much further south along the Labrador current, and accross the trans-atlantic shipping routes. Another plan maybe to coincide the Titanics maiden voyage with this event?

I think this theory is more plausable.

reply to post by blocula


The Jesuits are definitely involved. Some information I stumbled upon states the same as the other poster who mentioned the illuminati members. J P Morgan was responsible for the construction of the Titanic and did not board the ship because as an integral member of the cabal/illuminati/whatever he knew what was planned.

Jesuits have a very long history with the Catholic Church and would appear to be a crucial link between the illuminati and the church. It was a priest who boarded the ship - took photographs of all on board and disembarked at the last port before the Titanic sailed into open waters.

The priest was photographing the wealthy as proof for the cabal/illuminati/whatever that those to be on board were actually where they should be - given that the sinking was planned and by no means an accident. When research takes you deep enough into the origins of the cabal/illuminati/whatever it becomes obvious that dark ancient powers and black magic are at the basis of all their doings. They plan and they execute and if hundreds even thousands of people are killed then they are considered offerings to their evil leader.

People will scoff at this but when you research deep enough all roads lead to the same place. The Titanic was a plan and went off without a hitch. It has taken a long time for people to dig her up - literally and study the facts. It was no accident and it was no accident that the entire incident was made to look like an accident. They plan every aspect and know that the sleepers will soak it up.

People who know the facts - and how dark they are - cannot be dissuaded. The Titantic did not merely hit an iceberg and sink. The Titanic was doomed before the plans were off the drawing board.

Much Peace...for all those who died aboard the Titanic you are not forgotten..rest still in Gods arms....

just a general observation on the " logic " of sinking an cocean liner with 2,223 px and crew , in order to attempt the murder of just 3 men

the obvious first hurdle is - how do you ensure that the thre indended victims will perish ?

yes - there was a ` women and children first ` rule but hey - it didnt work

evidence #1 harry anderson

evidence #2 william carter

evidence #3 algernon barkworth

all 1st class male passengers who secured a life boat seat - despite having no required seamanship skills

so unless you are going to claim some a-priori insight into the psyche of your intended victims - you are sinking a ship and a significant portion of her passengers and crew on the hope that the intended victims will perrish

further - what is the motive ? the oft claimed motive was opposition to the federal reserve , but is it true ? i can find no primary source evidence for this claim - can anyone who supports that claim show any primary source to support the 3`s " opposition to the federal reserve" ?

Originally posted by ignorant_ape
just a general observation on the " logic " of sinking an cocean liner with 2,223 px and crew , in order to attempt the murder of just 3 men

the obvious first hurdle is - how do you ensure that the thre indended victims will perish ?

[SNIP]

all 1st class male passengers who secured a life boat seat - despite having no required seamanship skills

so unless you are going to claim some a-priori insight into the psyche of your intended victims - you are sinking a ship and a significant portion of her passengers and crew on the hope that the intended victims will perrish

I will address this first part.



BENJAMIN GUGGENHEIM

No woman shall be left aboard this ship because Ben Guggenheim is a coward

In his own words, after realizing he would not be rescued.

[color=gold]Pride and Honor.

en.wikipedia.org...



ISIDOR STRAUSS

The officer filling up the boat told Isidor that he could get into the boat with his wife, but he refused to before younger men

He was offered a chance and refused. A true Gentleman.**

[color=gold]Pride and Honor

en.wikipedia.org...



JOHN JACOB ASTOR IV

Astor then asked if he might join his wife because she was in 'a delicate condition'; however, Lightoller told him that men were not to be allowed to enter until all the women and children had been loaded. Astor stood back and simply asked Lightoller for the boat number.

He tried but was refused.

[color=gold]Rebuttal

en.wikipedia.org...


This is how it supposedly went. But if they had chosen to force themselves onto the boats - as some did - let us not forget that the officers in charge of helping women and children on the lifeboats were armed and ordered to shoot if necessary. And I believe whole heartily that it would have been necessary in their case.

These three men's fate were already planned. And it was signed, sealed AND delivered.

** I think that the J.P. Morgan and associates knew these men well and knew they would chose death out of pride and honor. Nevertheless, Astor did try. Being refused, he had one last cigarette on deck. I think he would have been shot if he had tried to force himself on the lifeboat.

The motive: The Federal Reserve.

Why would they oppose it? Well, than is a few trillion dollars question...

reply to post by SonoftheSun


you have addressed nothing , as the entire "plot" is dependant on the three men acting in the required manner - with no prior evidence that they would comply

Originally posted by blocula
the Japanese Navy devastated the Russian Navy in 1905 with torpedos fired from submarines,so a torpedo could very easily have sank the Titanic 7 years later in 1912...

Why do you feel compelled to post nonsense? The Japanese only got their submarines (5 of them) in the end of 1905 and they didn't play any role in the battles of 1905.

And the thing about "very easily sank" is equally nonsense -- you can't "easily" sink a ship of these proportions is the damage is localized, as would be the case in a torpedo strike.

Originally posted by ignorant_ape
just a general observation on the " logic " of sinking an cocean liner with 2,223 px and crew , in order to attempt the murder of just 3 men

a few things:

a) submarines of this era simply didn't have enough range, speed or targeting capabilities to attack Titanic at high seas, in the conditions present. PLEASE STOP AND THINK ABOUT THIS. It's impossible, plain and simple.

b) it's very improbable that a torpedo or two would sink a ship this size fast enough to provide ANY degree of assurance that the intended targets are dead.

So there you have it -- even if it were still possible, the perpetrators would have to take significant risks of several kinds, including navigation of a primitive submarine at night in areas known for presence of icebergs, and tremendous political fallout in case the presence of a submarine was accidentally revealed.

All in all, this is one of the weakest and least interesting "conspiracy theories" I've heard in a while.

Originally posted by xuenchen
The U-17 could have easily shadowed the Titanic very soon after Titanic set sail and picked the perfect time and place to fire. We don't know if the first shot hit, or if they made prior attempts.

This statement here invalidates anythign else you had to say on the matter, as it shows you don't know what you're talking about.

With the Titanic at full tilt across the Atlantic, no submarine in the world could "shadow" here, they lacked the speed, even on the surface. The U-17 only had a maximum speed, surfaced, of 14 knots. That is flank speed, which she wouldn't be able to keep up for days on end. The Titanic had a crusie speed of 21 knots, max speed of 24 knots.

Originally posted by Matt1951
Stumason-
You are relying on emotion and insults because your arguments are weak.

My arguments are weak? Oh deary me.

So far, I and others have managed to effectively challenge and debunk any of the crazy u-boat nonsense in this thread. So far, you and blocula have managed to do nothing but insist we're wrong with no evidence whatsoever of any U-boat, much less the U-17 could have possibly sunk the Titanic.

All you have is a single coincidence that one U-boat was launced near the sinking date, despite the technical and physical challenges of lanuching such a mission, much less the why....

Originally posted by bloculaThe U-17 was the most advanced submarine in the world in early 1912 and was constructed,in 1911 and early winter 1912 and under as much secrecy as possible,with armed soldiers patrolling the submarine construction facilities and civilians were not allowed to just casually roam around the area...

I've heard of artistic license, but you take it to the extreme. You just make stuff up now to fit your crackpot theory, don't you? The U-17 wasn't built in 1911. It was only launched in April 1912 and a launched boat is not a finished boat, you know this, we've told you already.

It's also entirely out of the realm of possibility that the U-17 could have launced a few days early, shadowed the Titanic right out to maximum range, shoot her despite the speed she was going and the dirty great berg in the way, then get back to Danzig inside of a day for her "official" launch (Titanic sank 15th April - U-17 launched 16th April)

Just listen to yourself... Jesus...

Originally posted by stumason
With the Titanic at full tilt across the Atlantic, no submarine in the world could "shadow" here, they lacked the speed, even on the surface. The U-17 only had a maximum speed, surfaced, of 14 knots. That is flank speed, which she wouldn't be able to keep up for days on end.

Exactly. Of all the parameters, speed struck me as clearly insufficient, and of course there is range.

Originally posted by bloculaThe U-17 was the most advanced submarine in the world in early 1912 and was constructed,in 1911 and early winter 1912 and under as much secrecy as possible,with armed soldiers patrolling the submarine construction facilities and civilians were not allowed to just casually roam around the area...

I've heard of artistic license, but you take it to the extreme. You just make stuff up now to fit your crackpot theory, don't you? The U-17 wasn't built in 1911. It was only launched in April 1912 and a launched boat is not a finished boat, you know this, we've told you already.

I mean hey, Blocula doesn't think twice before posting something he/she just made up. One example is above in the statement that it was Imperial Japanese Submarine Fleet that defeated the Russians in 1905. It's simply a lie. Makes me wonder when some people do that.

reply to post by ignorant_ape

you have addressed nothing

Of course not...

as the entire "plot" is dependant on the three men acting in the required manner - with no prior evidence that they would comply

Ignorant_ape,

You are right in saying that there is no prior evidence that they would comply. If there was, it wouldn't be a Conspiracy Theory any longer but part of the History books.

We weren't there so who's to tell?

Speculating is part of a conspiracy theory. Assuming with what is at hand. Darn...if it wasn't the case, this very website wouldn't even exist...

The Official Story says that it hit an iceberg and sank. Which is most probably the case. But there are and always has been rumors, surrounding the events. Like in any Official Story. This is what I am addressing here.

When questions abound, there could be more than just the Official Story, wouldn't you agree?


- Full speed in infested Iceberg waters

- The Federal Reserve in creation

- Titanic & Californian owned by J.P. Morgan

- J.P. Morgan scheduled to sail aboard and cancelled

- Father Browne (Jesuit) boards, takes pictures of the three men, gets back to shore as the Titanic sails into Destiny

- Captain Smith (Jesuit) - worked for J.P. Morgan - avoided numerous warnings

- Flares used for signaling distress were white and not red

- The then created Federal reserve finances both sides of the war


I could go on...but I won't...


Finally, what is the link that mentions an opposition to Morgan and associates regarding the Federal Reserve?

Necessary to their plans, the Federal Reserve did have some opposition; those who saw what the future would become if banking was outside of the government’s hands, the rates set by a private company such as the Fed. All the wealthy and powerful men the Jesuits wanted to get rid of were invited to take the cruise.

www.titanicuniverse.com...

reply to post by stumason


You made your points better this time toning down the insults.
Look, all I am saying is that it is possible a German sub sank the Titanic. I am not saying there is proof. However, looking at the metal sheared outwards, if appears the explosion came from the inside.
I still would like your opinion on the hole, if you would take the time to look at it.

reply to post by stumason


Since the Germans had diesel engine technology and torpedo capability, and were in the process of building many submarines in preparation for WWI, it is not beyond belief that they could have built one and tried it out. I doubt British Intelligence or anyone on earth besides the Germans knew what was being built when. These same submarines did a fine job sinking Allied shipping in WWI. Which is what they were designed to do.
Looking at the hole in the Titanic, which evidently you have not done yet, how do you conclude an iceberg collision sank the Titanic?
If not the submarine, the alternatives?
I know an expert metallurgist who does failure analysis. I am going to show him the picture to get his opinion.

The speed of the German was around 16 knots, according to Janes, an excellent source. So the Titanic would have outrun the German sub (if there was a sub) if the sub was trailing from the rear. If the hole is in the front of the ship, it is simple vector analysis to launch a torpedo to hit the Titanic. If the hole is in the rear, it would be near impossible. I thought the hole was towards the front.
Still it appears the metal is sheared outwards, indicating an explosion from inside.

Everybody - don't forget the Germans were all invited to live in America after the second world war. There must have been some friendships forged during the previous war - professionals taking note of the technology coming out of Germany. Oh and the Germans that were invited to live in America (and elsewhere) were all scientists - what a coincidence! Probably some torpedo designers and engineers in the mix - do you think?

And who financed this covert immigration exercise - the cabal/illuminati/whatever - they were the only ones with money after the war??!!

Much Peace...

reply to post by stumason


Here is a diagram of the limits of the German U-boat operational zone for Feb 1915 i thought you would like to see. This is typical for all the coastal boat classes that Germany had in that war.

German submarine zone 1915

The limits i have in my reference books all show the same shadowed area.

I still say that if Germany had the technology to build an ocean going U-boat to chase and sink the Titanic, this technology would have been of vital importance and would have been carried on in further U-boat construction to greatly assist in the German war effort at sea, alas they didn;t have that technology.

just trying to re-enforce your argument here.

reply to post by Matt1951


There was some testing done on samples of Titanic's hull plate that were recovered from the wreck site.

Testing the Titanic's steel

Basically it was crap steel, the methods of Iron production at that time were crude compared to our latest more refined methods. The pot rivetting method adopted to construct the ship was rubbish too.