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.
Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
But it was supposed to start there. He said it would progressively get worse until it's on everyone's doorstep in 2008.
It's 2006 now and it hasn't even started! lol
Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
then at least half the country should be engaged in a civil war right now....
Titor:
On my worldline in 2011, the United States is in the middle of a civil war that has
dramatic effects on most of the other Western governments.
Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
quote: the division between the "cities" and the "country" was well defined.”
I'm glad you highlighted this. Name one place in the US where this is clear.
Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
quote: John Titor:
"The year 2008 was a general date by which time everyone will realize the world they thought they were living in was over."
"By 2008, I would say the civil conflict is pretty much at everyone's doorstep."
Why is that? Why do people realize that?
It's because they're in a civil war that has progressively gotten worse in the past four years!!!
Not once does he EVER say that the war starts in 2008 as you're trying to suggest.
Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
Tell me Roth...what exactly have I twisted? I patiently await your answer....
Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
Originally posted by Vitchilo
Also, Roth never changed what he said, he always said that the civil war began in 2004, by little waco events, like tasers and some other stuff we probably will know later.
Then you haven't read Roth's posts...
Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
If it takes 8 years (2004-2008) to get to everyone's doorstep, then at least half the country should be engaged in a civil war right now....
Question: Does the civil war start in such a way that those willing will have time to remove themselves to safer locations.
John Titor: “Yes. You will be forced to ask yourself how many civil rights you will give up to feel safe.”
Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
Originally posted by Roth Joint
Now here comes the other interesting Titor part:
John Titor: ”From the age of 8 to 12 (READ: FROM 2006 TO 2010), we lived away from the cities and spent most of our time in a farm community with other families avoiding conflict with the federal police and National Guard. By that time (READ: BY 2010)
BS
When he says by that time, he's talking about that whole time period 2006-2010. Why are you changing his words??
He didn't just leave in 2006 for nothing. Which means conflict is going on in 2006.
Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
Originally posted by Roth Joint
the division between the "cities" and the "country" was well defined.”
I'm glad you highlighted this. Name one place in the US where this is clear.
Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
Originally posted by Roth Joint
"By 2008, I would say the civil conflict is pretty much at everyone's doorstep."
Why is that? Why do people realize that?
It's because they're in a civil war that has progressively gotten worse in the past four years!!!
Not once does he EVER say that the war starts in 2008 as you're trying to suggest.
Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
Originally posted by Roth Joint
“Outright open fighting was common by then and I joined a shotgun infantry unit in 2011.”
Why did you cut off the first part of this quote? lmao!!
See this is exactly what I'm talking about. You're trying to manipulate the people here but fortunately....hopefully the people here are smarter than that and know better.
”From the age of 8 to 12, we lived away from the cities and spent most of our time in a farm community with other families avoiding conflict with the federal police and National Guard. By that time, it was pretty clear that we were not going back to what we had and the division between the "cities" and the "country" was well defined. My father made a living by putting together 12-volt electrical systems and sailing "commodities" up and down the coast of Florida. I spent most of my time helping him.
Outright open fighting was common by then and I joined a shotgun infantry unit in 2011.”
Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
Originally posted by Roth Joint
"That conflict flares up and down for 10 years."
This is part of when he mistakenly said 2005 instead of 2004. 2005-2015 is ten years buddy. Why did you even quote this?
It's 2004. I apologize for a missed key (very observant - we all need good critics). Perhaps our definition of war is different. I would define it as a conflict where organized groups engage in maneuver and armed conflict.
Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
One quote at a time though so they'll be no more excuses.
Quote 1:
Hey John Titor, when will the war actually start. You keep saying 2004 but then you slipped a 2005 in there, what gives?? Oh and some (namecalling is bad so I'm told) thinks war means tasers lol. Yeah I don't know where he or she got that from, what do you say?
It's 2004. I apologize for a missed key (very observant - we all need good critics). Perhaps our definition of war is different. I would define it as a conflict where organized groups engage in maneuver and armed conflict.
Ahhh ok. I'll wait for Vit or Roth or X to prove you're own quote is wrong....
Originally posted by John Titor
“The civil war in the United States will start in 2004. I would describe it as having a Waco type event every month that steadily gets worse. The conflict will consume everyone in the US by 2012 and end in 2015 with a very short WWIII.”
”It's 2004. I apologize for a missed key (very observant - we all need good critics). Perhaps our definition of war is different. I would define it as a conflict where organized groups engage in maneuver and armed conflict. The first U.S. civil war lasted 4 years and the English civil war lasted 6. How long is too long?”
“There is a civil war in the United States that starts in 2005. That conflict flares up and down for 10 years.”
“For a few months now, I have bee trying to alert anyone that would listen to the possibility of a civil war in the United States in 2005. Does that seem more likely now?”
It's 2004 blah blah blah
Perhaps our definition of war is different. I would define it as a conflict where organized groups engage in maneuver and armed conflict.
Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
To Roth and gang:
Please show me wher TITOR'S definition of war is happening. That's all I ask. I want a simple straight answer, because it's a simple straight request.
All you have to do is say the name and then that's it, we'll move on to the next quote.
Originally posted by XPhiles
LMAO.... TJW I would have to say our definition of war is different as well.
You refuse to see it like a Waco event..........You refuse to see it as civil unrest..........You refuse to see blah blah blah..........
And though the picture below shows organized groups, you would probably deny that as well.
It's so simple TJW, the answer is right in front of you.
www.abovetopsecret.com...
groups engage in maneuver and armed conflict.
Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
I posted Titor's definition of war, not mine.
Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
If you can find just one sane person who thinks that was civil unrest or a waco event then lol, please show this person. He should be put on display and marvelled at
Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
Serious question:
Do you honestly think police looking for a murderer is an act of war?
Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
Edit:
I should add Titor said the monthly events would steadily get worse.
[edit on 12-11-2006 by ThatsJustWeird]
Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
You always do this Roth, trying to change the subject. But, no! Not this time
I'm going to quote Titor again and await your answer proving his own post wrong.
When does the WAR start Titor?
It's 2004 blah blah blah
What's YOUR definition of WAR Titor?
Perhaps our definition of war is different. I would define it as a conflict where organized groups engage in maneuver and armed conflict.
To Roth and gang:
Please show me wher TITOR'S definition of war is happening. That's all I ask. I want a simple straight answer, because it's a simple straight request.
All you have to do is say the name and then that's it, we'll move on to the next quote.
www.thephoenix.com...
More taser madness
You heard it here first: sooner, rather than later, a famous athlete is going to die in a Taser incident, and the mother of all lawsuits is going to follow. Taser-happy police have flown under the radar in the past few years, but Amnesty International claims that more than 150 Americans have been killed in Taser attacks since 2001. The Louisville Courier-Journal this year reported that Louisville metro police have Tasered some 70 mentally ill people in the last two years, zapped 15 people already in handcuffs, shot a 15-year-old in the penis, and even zonked a brain-damaged paraplegic who had fallen out of his wheelchair.
www.greens.org.nz...
Minister ducks her taser critics
“Ms King’s approach stands in stark contrast to the approach taken by the Bush administration, which has just launched a federal investigation into the 184 deaths that have occurred following police use of stun weapons. Clearly, the White House is not taking Ms King’s approach. The Bush administration is not treating the taser as simply an internal operational matter for the police.
“It is disturbing to see the Bush administration being more accountable about these weapons than the New Zealand Government,” Mr Locke says.
Originally posted by XPhiles
I know lol.... but I'm sure yours is different from Titor's as well, it's relatively obvious.
On this page here www.abovetopsecret.com... Did you not read modese7en post? He said some people where tasered in this event. There is definite civil unrest that took place.
It's not a Waco event TJW, No one said it was a Waco event? but hey! it looks like a Waco event
TJW.... monthly events would steadily get worse beginning when? Give me a time frame of these Waco like events. I have a feeling we read it different lol.
The civil war in the United States will start in 2004. I would describe it as having a Waco type event every month that steadily gets worse.
No, this looks like a Waco event
George Stephanopoulos on the State of Our Union on a Special Edition, June 30, 2006 —“ Members of Congress may not come to the floor armed with pistols as they did in the days leading up to the Civil War, but their words are as toxic as any time since then. And we are(USA) — in many ways — a more divided nation than any time since then.(the civil war) In interviews with political leaders, media analysts, and people in communities around the country, ABC News found what appears to be a new phenomenon: the polarization is feeding on itself. It's not just politicians, business or religious leaders, liberals or conservatives — or the media: It's each of us. And it's alarming.”
Originally posted by ThatsJustWeirdYou're completely clueless aren't you. My definition of war is EXACTLY like Titor's. Where in the world are you getting that it's different?
Originally posted by ThatsJustWeirdTitor's definition is groups manuvering and engaging in armed conflict. That's my definition as well.
I asked a simple question. Where is this going on right now? Since it's now 2006, this should be easy for you to answer.
Originally posted by ThatsJustWeirdmod posted a bunch of unverified hearsay....
Even if there wasn't someone tasered, that's still not by ANYONE'S definition civil unrest.
If you want to know how the rest of the world defines civil unrest, the US only has a few examples. One example was after MLK was killed in the 60s and the riots that followed. More localized civil unrest occured in Los Angeles in 1992.
Originally posted by ThatsJustWeirdHey, what do you know. Groups in armed conflict!
Originally posted by ThatsJustWeirdHow are you reading it different?
Titor's quote is plain and simple:
quote: The civil war in the United States will start in 2004. I would describe it as having a Waco type event every month that steadily gets worse.
What's so difficult to understand? (oh and he didn't say these events would just "look" like Waco, I'm not sure where you got that from)
Originally posted by ThatsJustWeirdIf it's going to be on everyone's doorstep by 2008 then it would HAVE to start in 2004 or earlier.
Roth Joint
And you may ask, how do ‘Taser deaths’ fit into all of this?…. Well…..
Originally posted by XPhiles
Roth, something I have been wanting to ask for awhile..... Why is your text different from everyones? Are you a foreigner or Time Traveler with a IBM 5100 lol.....
Maybe it's nothing, but it's been bugging me.
ah! maybe it's my font or yours?
Roth Joint
And you may ask, how do ‘Taser deaths’ fit into all of this?…. Well…..
The United States has ensured Japan's security since the end of World War II, when the country was stripped of the right to maintain its own military.
Originally posted by XPhiles
I get it from your transparent posts. It's quite apparent where you are going with this, it has been repeated several times
I seem to recall answering this several times lol....
Titor said "same way you see coverage of Waco, Ruby Ridge and Elian Gonzalez."
No matter how much abuse of federal power or paramilitary policing anyone puts in this thread, you will refuse to see it as groups manuvering and steadily getting worse.
TJW, do you not know what Waco, Ruby Ridge and Elian Gonzalez is all about? " Where is this going on right now?" It's probably happening in all kinds of places, maybe even near your neighbor hood. It's a world of deception NOW, you probably want see it in the media.
John Titor: I don't remember a great deal about media coverage during the civil conflicts.
John Titor: If the federal forces learned anything from WACO it was to install more reliable suppressors on their automatic weapons and don't use flash grenades that leave shell casings after the fire.
You already have my answer.......................
"The US only has a few examples" lol your so wrong, yeah a few they are willing to show you.
Your using media coverage of civil unrest, certain events are emphasized while others are neglected by a significant portion of the media. My guess is, you are the clueless one Using people of notoriety and political significance..... shame on you.
You see, that is what I'm talking about right there, you expext it to be strictly like Waco.... shame on you again.
Titor: I would probably characterize it the same way you see coverage of....... Titor descibes it with distinctive features we see, the "look"
Originally posted by ThatsJustWeirdIf it's going to be on everyone's doorstep by 2008 then it would HAVE to start in 2004 or earlier.
Good for you, you are learning lmao.........
Hmm, In '02 in Portland I felt the same way until I took a club to the face and watched my 5 year old daughter (at the time) take a blast of pepper spray directly (and intentionally) to the face. "Shut dad up by macing his little girl". Yeah, democracy hard at work.
You took a 5 years old to a protest?
Yeah, well I wouldn't now. But then, just like a few hundred other parents who had their children with them, I was under the impression that we had the right to "peacefully protest without fear of reprisal". Now that I know this right doesn't exist, I would not consider bringing anyone to a "peaceful protest" who isn't in the mood to be beaten, pepper sprayed, and pelted with rubber bullets and pepper balls.
I suppose I should apologize for my ignorance back then in thinking that we, the people of the United States of America had a constitutional right to think differently than our leaders. And FYI, my daughter wasn't the youngest to be deliberately targeted by those who took an oath to "protect and serve".
It's just too bad I didn't realize how things really worked as early as my daughter has.