Titanic submersible: the theory linking the Rothschilds and the Fed

Titan, Titanic and the theory mixing the Federal Reserve and a psyop

A 10,432-kilo submersible, with a single porthole, the rest controlled by screens and a video game controller, was descending toward the Titanic wreck. It never came back. Barely hours after contact was lost, the story stopped being a maritime emergency and became something else: a magnet for theories linking the 1912 sinking to the creation of the Federal Reserve, the Rothschild family and a textbook psychological operation.

The hard facts are few and in plain sight. The Titan, owned by the company OceanGate, was heading to the wreck site with several wealthy passengers on board. The vessel had a single window, and the rest of its systems depended on screens and a game console controller, a detail that by itself is enough to make anyone ask who certified that thing. No one has given a convincing answer.

From the 1912 Titanic to the creation of the Federal Reserve

Here is where the main vein begins. The claim is that several opponents of John Pierpont Morgan and of the creation of a central bank died on the Titanic, and that the Federal Reserve came into being shortly after, in 1913. From that coincidence springs the suspicion that the sinking was not just an iceberg. And there is a popular add-on: the idea that the ship never sank, or that the one that went to the bottom was actually the Olympic, its twin.

The slogan that sums up this line is hard to beat: "If they make a movie about a ship that sank, that's instant proof the ship didn't sink." With that bar set, any tourist expedition to the wreck site is doomed to become a symbol. 111 years have passed and the question of what interests were traveling on that deck remains open.

June 16 and the 135 that fits too well

Two numerical coincidences sustain the esoteric side. The first: an image circulated dated June 16, 2020 showed a submarine; three years later, that same June 16 would be the official departure date of the Titanic submersible. The second comes from gematria: OCEAN GATE TITAN adds up to 135; STOCK EXCHANGE, also 135. Hence the question thrown into the air: if the submarine imploded, will we also see an implosion of the Stock Exchange?

Neither of the two pieces of evidence survives serious scrutiny. They work as hooks, and that is what the show is about.

Rothschild on the board and James Cameron's silence

The name circulating most is David de Rothschild, linked to OceanGate's board of directors according to the posts that spread online. To that, two more pieces are added, always according to those posts: the CEO's vvife was descended from Titanic victims, and one of the occupants was tied to the World Economic Forum and the SETI program. With that cocktail, the conspiracy reading writes itself.

There is a silence that draws as much attention as the messages making the rounds: that of James Cameron. The director of Titanic is the person who has descended to the wreck, located in 1985, more times than anyone, and he has said nothing publicly about what peine. The media looked for him without success. In a story where every absence is read as proof, that silence counts double.

Implosion, simulation or smokescreen

The explanations are divided. One holds that the craft imploded and that death was instantaneous. Another points to the submersible being the same one used in the attack on the Nord Stream pipeline and a Ukrainian dam, and that it was destroyed to erase evidence. A third, more down-to-earth one, speaks of an agreed disappearance: faking death to escape the tax authorities or the courts, plastic surgery included and off to live the good life.

There are also those who lift the matter to another plane: news of such impact would be the physical echo of something that peine on an ethereal plane, later manipulated to confuse. And a fourth line, spread by a New York Post columnist, claims the Biden administration knew about the implosion since Sunday and waited to make it public in order to cover up the testimony of IRS whistleblowers in the Hunter Biden case. The latter is a published accusation, not a proven fact.

What still doesn't add up

The verifiable part ends quickly: a missing craft, an implosion taken as fact, and a company that has explained nothing convincingly. Everything else —the 135, June 16, the board of directors, the filmmaker's silence— hangs unanswered. The Titanic sank more than a century ago and still drags down any news that comes near it. That is where the analysis gets stuck.