The Falsification of History: Our Distorted Reality (40 page)

Captain Smith's actions immediately before the event and in its immediate aftermath were totally out of character for this experienced master mariner.
 
Could he have been wrestling with his conscience perhaps?
 
Should he become the heroic Captain, saving the day or against all his instincts, obey his master, sink the ship and in the process cold-bloodedly murder up to 3000 people?
 
Significantly and conveniently (for the perpetrators) Smith in the age-old tradition, as Captain, went down with the ship we are told.
 
Indeed, could Smith have even been ‘allowed’ to survive, knowing as he probably did, the real truth about the incident?
 
One suspects not.

As is well known, there were not enough lifeboats for the full complement of passengers and crew and some of them left the ship as little as only one quarter full in any case and this fact could well have been used to its full advantage in the execution of the master plan.
 
The Captain strangely ordered white flares to be launched, knowing full well that the international standard colour of distress flares was red.
 
Titanic possessed a full complement of white, blue AND red flares.
 
Other ships passing within sight of these flares were intentionally confused and thought that maybe those aboard Titanic were having a fireworks party.
 
This of course was also all part of the master plan.

Even if my hypothesis could be criticised by some as mere conjecture, the true Titanic story is still very, very different to the official, ubiquitous one that we see depicted in books and numerous films and documentaries that have been spawned by this tragic incident.
  
The book, published in the 1950s and the feature film of the same name, ‘A Night to Remember’ (Longmans, Green & Co, 1956) by Walter Lord is the source most responsible for the Titanic myths and legends still prevailing today.
 
Lord was a ‘former’ member of the US intelligence services (OSS and CIA) but given the fact that it is well known that anyone who has been a member of these organisations always in effect remains a member, can we really rely on his accounts or are they just more subterfuge amongst a morass of contradictory stories surrounding the event?
 
What would motivate a former member of one of the world’s elite security services to write a book about an accident involving an ocean liner?
 
As always seems to be the modus operandus in any suspected conspiracy, we are bombarded with these so-called ‘facts’ by the controlled media, to such an extent that we believe that they cannot possibly be untrue or deliberately misleading.
 
However, many of the major Titanic ‘facts’ have subsequently been proven to be false but somehow the same version of the story still persists as the absolute de facto truth.
 
Such is the power of propaganda on the human mind and symptomatic of the methodology by which most history is perverted.

Robin Gardiner further stated, “As I delved deeper into the story, more and more inconsistencies became apparent.
 
Inconsistencies that individually meant little but collectively pointed to a grimmer reality than that usually depicted in the heroic legend”.

He continues, “Officers who were later acclaimed as heroes were exposed as anything but.
 
One in particular removed a little boy from a lifeboat at gunpoint, before escaping in that same boat himself”.

“Descriptions of the collision and damage supposedly sustained by Titanic do not agree.
 
The ‘slight scrape’ with the ice that was hardly noticed by most aboard contradicts solid evidence of structural damage at least 5½ feet (1.6 metres) within the outer hull of the vessel”.

“Then came evidence to show that the ice the ship encountered was seen first not 500 yards (480 metres) ahead but more like 11 miles (17km).
 
I began to wonder if perhaps the sinking of the Titanic might not have been an accident after all”. [my emphasis – JH]

Indeed, did Titanic actually strike an iceberg at all?
 
We only have the eye-witness testimony of four people believe it or not, with which to confirm or deny this fact.
 
First Officer Murdoch would have been the fifth witness but he did not live to tell his story.
 
Gardiner himself offers no opinion on this theory, but the copious amounts of ice on the deck of Titanic reported by many survivors could easily have been the result of any collision dislodging the icy build-up on masts, funnels etc. or it could even have been easily shaken loose from the hundreds of yards of overhead rigging and wiring by the thrusting of the ships engines abruptly into reverse.
 
It was after all, an extremely cold, still night with temperatures below freezing.
 

There have been many legends surrounding the incident but there is plenty of concrete evidence that Titanic was not the only ship at that precise location that night.
 
For example, there is a photograph in existence of a drifting lifeboat that can be discounted totally as being from Titanic herself due to being of different colours and design to Titanic’s lifeboats.
 

Then there is the gouge in the side of the ship itself – 1.6 metres deep through the outer steel plates and into the inner skin!
 
Compacted ice is known to be very strong, indeed stronger than steel under certain conditions, but there is no evidence that I am aware of that it is capable of doing such catastrophic damage to steel.
 
In addition the relatively narrow, 15cm puncture line in the ship’s hull in conjunction with a penetration of around 1.6m would indicate an almost impossibly-shaped ice outcrop colliding with the ship at exactly the most critical point.

Whatever the real truth, the point here is surely that there exist so many different possibilities that the official story is probably just an elaborate fabrication.
 
Both the American and British official inquiries were even thought at the time to be pretty much a ‘whitewash’, with much evidence either ignored and eye-witness testimonies being twisted or indeed fabricated to fit the ‘official’ story.
 
It is staggering also to report that of the 102 witnesses called to the British enquiry, only two were passengers (the influential Gordons of the famous London gin company) and it is even more surprising to learn that none of the witnesses (crew or passengers) were allowed to offer their own first-hand evidence of any kind and were strictly restricted to the simple answering of questions without elaboration.
 
By any standards at all, this sounds very much like a ‘whitewash’ to me.
 
The passage of time has also served to cloud the mystery still further.

We should also note that amongst all the myriad of (probably) deliberately conflicting information unearthed by the two inquiries, the most puzzling of all is the situation regarding the ‘yellow-funnelled steamer’ observed in the proximity of Titanic by the officers and crew of Californian at around the time of the incident and which has never been either identified or explained away at all.
 
Significantly, this odd occurrence does not even warrant a mention in any surviving Titanic legends – very strange to say the least, despite its appearance in several contemporary newspapers.
 
The crew of this ship (who or whatever she was) must have been aware that they were in the approximate area of the Titanic’s demise at the same time, so why did no-one from the ship come forward to volunteer any evidence or information or simply to state that they had seen nothing significant, instead of disappearing into the mists of history forever?
 
It also begs the question as to why no attempts were made to discover the identity of this ship either by the inquiries or subsequently by independent investigators.
 
Even if attempts were made at the time, as far as I am able to tell, they have been very successfully covered-up and no evidence remains today.
 
Could this mysterious yellow-funnelled vessel have been responsible for the devastating damage to Titanic in any way?
 
I personally believe it is a very strong possibility and that the ‘iceberg collision’ is just a cover story concocted to protect the guilty.

“...I saw another steamer approaching, and asked [the wireless operator] what vessels he had within reach; he replied: ‘The Titanic’, whereupon I replied, ‘That is not the Titanic; she is too small and hasn’t enough lights.’
 
Shortly afterwards this steamer stopped and was bearing S.S.E. about five or six miles from our position.
 
...the chief officer was sweeping the southern horizon with his glasses, and finally reported he saw a four-mast steamer with a yellow funnel to the southward of us, and asked if we should try to get down to have a look at her.”
 
Captain Lord of Californian in an interview with an American newspaper, 1914

Lord became the official scapegoat for the disaster for his so-called ‘negligence’ in not rushing sooner to Titanic’s aid as the Californian was probably only about 11 miles from her when she went down.

Furthermore, upon arriving back in England at Plymouth docks, from New York aboard the steamer Lapland, two weeks after the disaster, 173 of the surviving crew members both male and female were firstly, illegally denied their rights to speak with their trade union representatives.
 
Then in addition they were also illegally detained overnight against their wishes (I believe the common terminology for this act is unlawful imprisonment or even kidnapping) in a containing area within the dockyard itself where they were forced to sign a document that they believed was the ‘Official Secrets Act’, promising to keep secret forever, the actual events of the night of 14th / 15th April.
 
Otherwise, they were told, they would be prosecuted and ‘never work again’, not just for White Star but for any other employer.
 
In those now long-gone days, the inability to procure gainful employment could be almost a death sentence to the crews and their families.
 
So, make of that what you will, but I can personally think of no reason why this should happen if the official story was the truth.
 
It is also worth noting that also in those now distant days it was far easier without mass and instantaneous communication devices, to invent or twist facts and bury individuals’ own stories.
 
Today of course, any of the survivors’ personal experiences would be viral on the Internet within hours of the event.

The Red Star liner Lapland, which carried Titanic crew survivors home.

So did Captain Smith deliberately steer Titanic into a huge ice-field without reducing speed in order to create the cover-story of the iceberg collision knowing that he was setting-up Titanic to be rammed by the yellow-funnelled mystery ship, in fulfilment of the Elite’s dastardly scheme?
 
There were hardly any eye-witnesses to what actually happened after all, so the proposition would seem very plausible to me given all the circumstantial evidence.
  
Along with the officer on duty on the Bridge at that time, First Officer William Murdoch and Quartermaster Hitchens plus Quartermaster George Rowe on the after-bridge, lookouts Frederick Fleet and Reginald Lee were the only other ones known to have personally witnessed the appalling events.