The American Civil War of 2005 as predicted by John Titor

I stand corrected, don't know why I thought he was born in the UK but I remember reading that he once held a british passport.

TJW did you read any of the threads i suggested, particularly the economic crash. within the einter thread it contain not 1 but many respectable ppl claiming this is an inevitable outcome, unless the USD can achieve global acceptance once again. also stating within is quotes of officials claiming rejection of the dollar. there are real factors listed within

according to many sources(plz dont make me give them, i assure you they exist) the draft is the only logical solution for the middle east conflict.

your guarantee means little to me. and the Dems will not revert these bills just past, because who ever has the seat(Rep/Dem) will have control. its done, the gov't has nearly all the power it wants regardless of political position.

"JOHN - FEB. 21, 2001: Consider that you are a time traveler who goes back in time to the first week of February 1970 and you are confronted with the same problem. What do you remember right now about the second week of February 1970?

Naturally, the conflict in Vietnam and the Middle East come up but as someone has already stated here, "that's old news". I suppose I could predict the failure of Apollo 13 spacecraft but since time travel is ridiculous, I would be blamed for sabotage. I might even decide to tell you about an earthquake in Peru but then people that would have died by chance will now live and vice versa. "

Southern Peru, June 23, 2001 — A magnitude-8.1 earthquake (originally thought to be 7.9) toppled adobe homes and stone buildings, on Saturday afternoon (June 23)

Peru earthquake


he did say something about 100,000 ppl dieing but did not say when.where,how.

JAN 29, 2001 - JOHN: "I get no pleasure out of being right when it comes to CJD disease, war in the Middle East or suffering people in far away lands. There's nothing like the look on someone's face when you tell them 100,000 people will be dead tomorrow. In my travels, I have discovered that most people really don't want to know about the future because if its different than what they want it ticks them off. Actually, I don't blame them. "

The official death toll from the quake now stands at more than 6,000, but India's Defense Minister, George Fernandes, told CNN on Tuesday that he believes the final toll may reach as high as 100,000, making it one of the deadliest quakes in the past century.

cnn.com- indias earthquake

now you can call these coincidence, thats why i labeled them as minor.


where do you live becuase i never hear of any FBI, CIA(to name a few) invovled incidents being broadcasted. and you better know they are very much active and would be the one dealing with these waco type events. and i bet you the gov't never wanted that incident leaked but were ill prepared to contain. now they know how to deal with blackout scenarios.

"Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me"

im sure the CIA leak was intentional, becuase thats the death penalty and no one was sentenced. and not to mention the men who were leaked appeared to be incompitant old men, probably all were out of service too.

lets suppose aliens are real, if they are according to the ppl who believe there is a huge cover up. if aliens are real the same ppl covering them up would cover up a civil revolt.-- heres a question: what color is my hair? you dont know becuase you've never seen it right, but i assure you i have hair.

becuase a civil war doesnt do much harm untill many ppl join in. one way to prevent a civil war would be to squash any and all events related to it from reaching the mainstream, under the guise of national security.

i

m not really concerned with your look on the events, becuase i see your point. your point is titor if a fake becuase you say so. your not providing any logical position in this.

with the exception of you, weve been trying to provide evidence to support our claims.

yes you position is different becuase your point is its not there. why is it not there? is it really not happening or are you just not paying attention.

and we givin strong statments to suggest the possibility. but you refuse our data as if it corrupt. what if your data is the one thats corrupt?

i think your position is wrong and very short sighted. i honestly dont know what to tell you. maybe youll believe when your dieing from the enforcement aggents that envade your home and shoot you , when you tell them you dont have to listen to them becuase there not real

Originally posted by Glyph_D
TJW did you read any of the threads i suggested, particularly the economic crash. within the einter thread it contain not 1 but many respectable ppl claiming this is an inevitable outcome, unless the USD can achieve global acceptance once again. also stating within is quotes of officials claiming rejection of the dollar. there are real factors listed within

Again, tell me a time when people haven't been saying this!
Seriously. I honestly can't think of a year where someone "respectable" hasn't claimed the economy will go down the tubes.

according to many sources(plz dont make me give them, i assure you they exist) the draft is the only logical solution for the middle east conflict.

You need to check your sources then. Only congress can initiate a draft. This congress certainly isn't going to do it and everyone in congress agrees that a draft would be a disaster.
Solution for the middle east?
lol, have you seen all the articles lately? We're trying to pull people out. No one in thier right mind would vote for a draft because of the Iraq war.

A draft is unnecessary anyway.
US military (all branches - not including reserves) - 1.4+ million
Troops in Iraq - 150K max

Southern Peru, June 23, 2001 — A magnitude-8.1 earthquake (originally thought to be 7.9) toppled adobe homes and stone buildings, on Saturday afternoon (June 23)

Peru earthquake

lol
I thought it was some real prediction.

Yet another newsflash:
Peru is an earthquake prone country! lol
They just had a good sized one there last week (5.8)

I'm going to pull a Titor and predict that it will rain in the Amazon

The official death toll from the quake now stands at more than 6,000, but India's Defense Minister, George Fernandes, told CNN on Tuesday that he believes the final toll may reach as high as 100,000, making it one of the deadliest quakes in the past century.

cnn.com- indias earthquake

As I stated, there have been several events in which 100,000+ people have died since Titor

I'm going to predict that in the next 10 years there will be at least one more.

where do you live becuase i never hear of any FBI, CIA(to name a few) invovled incidents being broadcasted. and you better know they are very much active and would be the one dealing with these waco type events. and i bet you the gov't never wanted that incident leaked but were ill prepared to contain. now they know how to deal with blackout scenarios.

I live about an :30 away from FBI headquarters and an hour away from CIA headquarters....
I know they are not dealing with waco type events, because there are no waco type events. Trying to hide a waco type event is impossible.
I don't know why you think we live in the 18th century....

becuase a civil war doesnt do much harm untill many ppl join in.

What? This doesn't make sense...
Do you know what a civil war is?

your point is titor if a fake becuase you say so. your not providing any logical position in this.

My point is Titor is fake because every single shred of evidence points that way.
Logical?
What's logical about believing in some random person claiming to be a time traveler with absolutely no evidence to support his claim?

and we givin strong statments to suggest the possibility

No you all are not.
You all are taking events and trying to twist them to fit Titor's predictions.

i think your position is wrong and very short sighted. i honestly dont know what to tell you. maybe youll believe when your dieing from the enforcement aggents that envade your home and shoot you , when you tell them you dont have to listen to them becuase there not real

Is this how you're living your life?
Being afraid they're going to break into your house and kill you??

How sad a life you must live...

When none of that stuff occurs, what will you say then?

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
Finally, some decent answers from Roth!

Well, thatsjustweird, at least we’ve got it straight now when exactly John Titor was talking about the second US Civil War and when he was talking about the Nuclear War…. it will be my pleasure to correct you on other mistakes you will make in the future.

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird

Originally posted by Roth Joint
Titor is right on track. One only has to look at the recent decisions made by this Administration to see how accurate Titor ‘predicted’ the events. Titor must have had his own personal reasons to describe the second US Civil War as he did.

Yeah, he lived through it

Not only that, he describes it from his point of view as well.

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird

Originally posted by Roth Joint
From his viewpoint that war started in 2004/2005. But it’s crystal clear he knew it wouldn’t escalate that much in the sense of fighting until around 2008.

Again with the "viewpoint"
From history (remember he's from the future) the war started in 2004.

He said it would steadily get worse and be at everyone's doorstep by 2008.
It's 2007 in a few weeks.
What's taking so long?

Taser-death events (law enforcement conflict) are steadily getting worse. I guess indeed by 2008 it will be “pretty much at everyone’s doorstep”…..

The decisions made by the present Administration are steadily getting worse and not helping matters in the Homeland (security conflict). I guess by 2008 the results of this will be “pretty much at everyone’s doorstep”….

The Immigration Conflict is…well…a conflict….and steadily getting worse….. I guess it will be felt by many….. when by 2008 it will be “pretty much at everyone’s doorstep”….

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird

Originally posted by Roth Joint
Let’s take a closer look at some of his very interesting quotes:

”The President or "leader" in 2005 I believe tried desperately to be the next Lincoln and hold the country together but many of their policies drove a larger wedge into the Bill of Rights. The President in 2009 was interested only in keeping his/her power base.”

If Titor believed there would be fighting in the US around 2005, he wouldn’t have said the above.

What? That doesn't make sense.
The only reason why the president would try to hold the country together is because there IS fighting. If you're trying to hold something together that means it's been torn apart.
By trying to stop the fighting and division they passed laws that drove a bigger wedge which would lead to even more division and more fighting.

One is merely trying “to hold the country together” before fighting breaks out! When the fight is on…. one chooses sides…. just as Lincoln chose the better part, even when it meant violence….

The part you missed was that the President or "leader" in 2005 tried desperately to be the next Lincoln…(apparently John Titor knew very well the President in 2005 would be a Republican….) … Before the Civil War outbreak in 1861, Lincoln speaking in 1858 stated in his speech that “a house divided against itself cannot stand” and “I do not expect the house to fall, but I do expect it will cease to be divided.” I am absolutely convinced Titor hinted at this. Lincoln was trying to hold the country together before push came to shove.

Our Republican President in 2005 campaigned for President in 2000 as "a uniter, not a divider."

2005:
www.washingtonpost.com...
”Instead of uniting the country through his choice, the president has chosen to reward one faction of his party at the risk of dividing the country,” Leahy said.

2006:
www.opinionjournal.com...
Despite how painful it would prove to be, Lincoln chose the road to victory. President Bush today finds himself in precisely the same dilemma Lincoln faced 144 years ago. With American survival at stake, he also must choose. His strategies are not wrong, but they are failing.

Again, if Titor believed there would be fighting in the US around 2005, he wouldn’t have said that “the President or "leader" in 2005 tried desperately to be the next Lincoln and hold the country together.”

And how true that “many of their policies drove a larger wedge into the Bill of Rights.” (read: strip people of their hard earned constitutional freedoms)

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird

Originally posted by Roth Joint
Titor hinted at the great divide (read: hold the country together) we find ourselves in and how the decisions (read: policies) of the Administration around that time would only strip people of their hard earned constitutional freedoms (read: larger wedge into the Bill of Rights).

This country has never been in complete agreement on ANYTHING. Presidents usually don't care and continue to do what their party wants. If this president Titor speaks of is trying to hold the country together, that means it must be bad.

Yes, it IS bad! Very, very bad.

www.commondreams.org...
"Not since the civil war has the country been so divided," argues John White, professor of politics at the Catholic University of America. Whether Bush wins or loses, these rifts will endure. America is not just a nation at war with the world; it is a nation at war with itself."

www.thebcobserver.com...(c1si3e55m0yqp155pjcufajj)/Article.aspx?ArticleID=495&IssueID=14
"This election season has witnessed a political polarization and
division between Americans that has not faced this country for
generations. Such animosity between political rivals has been seen
only a few times since the founding of our successful experiment. We
have had regional conflicts (the Civil War) and generational
conflicts (The World War II and Vietnam generations). In 2004, a new
clash has divided this country more than it has been torn for over a
century. Cultural and ideological differences which transcend region
or ancestry have torn this country asunder and have defined the
extreme polarization of this election. The divisions at Boston
College embody these cultural conflicts."

www.dfw.com...
"The bitter ideological conflicts that predate this election year
will persist in 2005." "Rather, the president in 2005 will be forced
to deal with a toxic political climate, decades in the making, that is
now virtually institutionalized." "And with liberals now dominating the
Democrats, there are fewer people on either side willing to compromise."
"Acrimony aside, the ideological divide also reflects a profound philosophical
disagreement about the future path of the nation." "Or, as the poet William
Butler Yeats once penned, "Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold.""

www.sptimes.com...
"The [Inauguration] day included reminders that the nation remains
deeply divided"

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird

Originally posted by Roth Joint
It is a very clear description of the behaviours of our present Administration and apparently from Titor’s point of view

lol, hardly.
Name one thing Bush has done to try to hold this country together?

He is trying desperately to be the next Lincoln, but failing.
www.opinionjournal.com...
Despite how painful it would prove to be, Lincoln chose the road to victory. President Bush today finds himself in precisely the same dilemma Lincoln faced 144 years ago. With American survival at stake, he also must choose. His strategies are not wrong, but they are failing.

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird

Originally posted by Roth Joint
Then Titor proceeds by showing us the situation in 2009 and a “power base” that would have been created by then. Apparently fighting is now happening, otherwise there would be no need for the President in 2009 to keep that “power base.”

Do you know what power base means?
The president here is just trying to hold on to power. It's obvious the president here is becoming less and less of a player as the country deepens into war.

Yes, that’s true. He is holding on to the “power base” provided by the President in 2005….

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird

Originally posted by Roth Joint
Why is Titor comparing the situation in 2005 with the situation in 2009?

lol, because those are the years in which the presidents take office. It would only make sense to use those years.

Ofcourse, Titor was comparing 2 different Presidents in office and because the President in 2005 apparently created that comfortable “power base” that would be so necessary to defend by the President in 2009 (read: fighting).

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird

Originally posted by Roth Joint
From the age of 8 to 12 [starting 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 [by 2010], 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.

Titor states here that starting from 2006 to 2010 they lived away from the cities avoiding conflict with the federal police and National Guard. So during that time period [2006-2010] we will see National Guard troops playing a more prominent role.

We would see conflicts with the national guard.
It's 2007
No national guard. No division between city and country.

Be patient. You will be served soon between now and 2010.

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird

Originally posted by Roth Joint
It is very interesting to see that exactly in this year 2006 (October 17), the H.R. 5122 2007's National Defense Authorization Act was signed into law. This will make it very easy for the President to quickly send out the National Guard in Federal Service.

We've been through this before. Read the law.

I certainly did. It explains that it will make it very easy for the President to quickly send out the National Guard in Federal Service.

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird

Originally posted by Roth Joint
Other things that are put in motion starting from 2006: on September 30 the Department of Homeland Security awarded the Secure Border Initiative Network (SBInet), an "indefinite delivery, indefinite quantity (IDIQ) contract” estimated at $2.5 billion to build a seamless web of new surveillance technology and sensors with real time communications systems for Customs and Border Protection (CBP). Included in the plan are "funds for additional personnel, vehicles and physical infrastructure for fencing, and virtual fencing for U.S. borders."

Time will tell us how this project will evolve into what Titor calls a “division between the "cities" and the "country"”……

lol
That's a real stretch Roth, even for you.

We will see thatsjustweird, we will see what happens when we get there…. Time will tell….

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird

Originally posted by Roth Joint
The two sentences are indeed related, the war starts in 2004 and that war can be described as “having a Waco type event every month that steadily gets worse”….. Nothing about Waco type events beginning in 2004….just a description of that war……

And if that war starts in 2004, then that would mean the Waco type events would start in 2004.
War = waco type events

War = 2004

2004 = waco type events

Waco type events=US law enforcement against US civilians (you may include taser-deaths)
War=“having a Waco type event every month that steadily gets worse” + ”That conflict flares up and down for 10 years”
2004=”You will be forced to ask yourself how many civil rights you will give up to feel safe”
2008=”pretty much at everyone’s doorstep”
2012=”consume everyone in the US”

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
With the last part, glad to see you're paying attention!

I just did EXACTLY what you all have been doing this whole thread. Funny how you can saw when I did it, but refuse to see when you and your buddies are doing that. Don't you find that strange?

Yes, I am paying attention to Titor’s warnings….. and I can see them clearly coming into our reality…..

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird

Originally posted by Vitchilo
In the future, we could see things like tasers events and things like that as a civil war growing part. So not yet, but with the bigger picture we could.

I can guarentee you tasers will not trigger or be a part of any civil war.
Don't fall into Roth's trap. That is one of the more ridiculous notions put forth in this thread.
1. The number of people who die from tasers is EXTREMELY low for it's usage.
2. Tens of THOUSANDS of more people are and have been killed by guns over the past 150 years. Why no civil war?
If there's no civil war over guns then to even suggest Americans will start killing each other because of tasers is beyond ridiculous.

Taser-deaths will not be the only cause. But they will be a contributing factor. Especially since so many innocent and defenseless men, women and children are killed by tasers. So far I haven’t heard of any innocent and defenseless US citizen shot to death by his/her officer of the law…. Not one! But tasered to death….. many!

Roth, before I go over any of your post....
Well, actually, I may not need to go over anything.

One quote says it all.
One quote proves exactly what I'm saying.

Originally posted by Roth Joint
So far I haven’t heard of any innocent and defenseless US citizen shot to death by his/her officer of the law…. Not one! But tasered to death….. many!

You know, this statement should be hillarious but it's not, because I know you're probably serious.
So, this is just sad.

It also proves exactly what I've been saying.

You're not doing any research.
You could care less about Titor's predictions. You probably don't believe a word he has said. But you're using him to spread YOUR views (and lies)

You're going around looking for stuff that fits YOUR views, and completely ignoring reality. This is the reason why this thread is so long, because you (and your buddies) refuse to look at reality and do unbiased research. Your quote there is clear evidence of this.

This website has almost 3,000,000 posts in almost 300,000 threads.
If anyone can find a more ridiculous quote than what Roth just stated I'd like to see it. I can guarentee you there isn't one.

I can't even debate you any more Roth, because I know you're not looking for the truth. You're only here to spread your views...

Not good

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
You could care less about Titor's predictions. You probably don't believe a word he has said. But you're using him to spread YOUR views (and lies)

Just asking, not trying to interfere.

ThatsJustWeird do you believe anything Titor said, is there even one ounce of you that might believe?

Could you accept Titor may be from a another worldline, and the stuff that happened during his time will not necessarily happen in our world-line?

If you don't believe, who are you trying to help with YOUR views? It certainly can't be the Titorites, you think they all need to be in straight-jackets.

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
You're going around looking for stuff that fits YOUR views, and completely ignoring reality.

Our views is our reality, your views is your reality and Titor's views is his reality. Maybe there is a actual reality, but it's seen differently with others. Reality for some is that they see more tyranny and war, whereas another would see peace and love.
Reality can become fiction, and fiction can come into reality.

What if a time-traveler popped into your reality and told you not to fly for the holidays, that something disastrous terrible happens in that time period. Would you listen to him or be repulsive towards him? Would you think for a moment that general relativity is a reality, thinking maybe time-travel is possible and there could be percent chance he is real? Or would you think anything can happen anyway, and it wouldn't effect you............. OK, I asked to many questions, you don't have to answer them........

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
I can't even debate you any more Roth, because I know you're not looking for the truth. You're only here to spread your views...

Not good

TJW maybe the truth is in front of your eyes, maybe from a Titorite view you not seeing the truth.

[edit on 30-11-2006 by XPhiles]

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
Roth, before I go over any of your post....
Well, actually, I may not need to go over anything.

One quote says it all.
One quote proves exactly what I'm saying.

Originally posted by Roth Joint
So far I haven’t heard of any innocent and defenseless US citizen shot to death by his/her officer of the law…. Not one! But tasered to death….. many!

You know, this statement should be hillarious but it's not, because I know you're probably serious.
So, this is just sad.

It also proves exactly what I've been saying.

You're not doing any research.
You could care less about Titor's predictions. You probably don't believe a word he has said. But you're using him to spread YOUR views (and lies)

You're going around looking for stuff that fits YOUR views, and completely ignoring reality. This is the reason why this thread is so long, because you (and your buddies) refuse to look at reality and do unbiased research. Your quote there is clear evidence of this.

This website has almost 3,000,000 posts in almost 300,000 threads.
If anyone can find a more ridiculous quote than what Roth just stated I'd like to see it. I can guarentee you there isn't one.

I can't even debate you any more Roth, because I know you're not looking for the truth. You're only here to spread your views...

Not good

No thatsjustweird, it is really you and only you who who should stop spreading your lies and start doing some research, or better, finally open up your eyes. Just because you are ignoring things, doesn't mean they aren't there and steadily getting worse.

web.amnesty.org...
USA
Amnesty International’s continuing concerns about taser use
28 March 2006

As with Amnesty International’s previous report, the organisation has gathered information from press, autopsy reports and police and paramedic reports and statements from coroners’/medical examiners’ offices. Amnesty International remains concerned that the large number of deaths in the past year fall into the same pattern as those deaths which had occurred previously. Of the 152 taser related deaths documented by Amnesty International:

* Most of those who died in custody were unarmed and were not posing a serious threat to police officers, members of the public, or themselves
* Those who died were generally subjected to repeated or prolonged shocks
* Use of the taser was often accompanied by the use of restraints and/or chemical incapacitant sprays
* Many of those who died had underlying health problems, such as heart conditions or mental illness, or were under the influence of drugs
* Most of those who died went into cardiac or respiratory arrest at the scene

Amnesty International considers that the use of the tasers in many of the cases which resulted in death was excessive, amounting in some cases to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. In many of the cases reviewed by AI, those who came in contact with the police were not armed, or had already been restrained.

John Titor:
"However, there are a great many "non lethal" weapon systems in development that turn out to be quite lethal. Sometimes I watch your television programs that show SWAT teams using new non-lethal weapons. They usually start out with, "In the future, the army and police will fight its enemies with new weapons systems…" When they use the word "enemy", they're talking about YOU!"

X and Roth, you are completely ignoring the point.

My post was in response to Roth's statement that:
"So far I haven’t heard of any innocent and defenseless US citizen shot to death by his/her officer of the law…. Not one! But tasered to death….. many!"

Justify this ridiculous statement before saying anything else

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
X and Roth, you are completely ignoring the point.

My post was in response to Roth's statement that:
"So far I haven’t heard of any innocent and defenseless US citizen shot to death by his/her officer of the law…. Not one! But tasered to death….. many!"

Justify this ridiculous statement before saying anything else

You just can't have such a reading comprehension problem. Read my post above and stop playing these puberistic games. Again, grow up and open up your eyes.

Originally posted by Roth Joint
You just can't have such a reading comprehension problem. Read my post above and stop playing these puberistic games. Again, grow up and open up your eyes.

Roth, your post didn't address that one bit!
It's you who's playing these silly little games trying to change the subject.

Do you honestly in your right mind think there are more innocents killed by tasers than guns?

If so, you're an idiot....

Yeah I know that's harsh, but there's just no other way to describe any person who would think that. As I said before, I don't think I've ever heard of anything more ridiculous. Your obsession with tasers has clouded your reality.
Those 152 deaths occured over YEARS (and not all of them were innocent as you're trying to make them)
You can have over double that number in less than a year with shootings.

You're talking about you never heard of any innocents killed by guns is well past the ignorance stage into the realm of stupidity.
Look at the last 2 weeks for crying out loud!!
It's even posted in this thread! The 92 year old in Atlanta!
And that groom in New York this past weekend are just the latest two events that are being talked about right here on ATS.

So either you're purposely ignoring all that to go on your taser rants, or you're just not very intelligent.



[edit on 30-11-2006 by ThatsJustWeird]

damn TJW you are a fool. you dont listen to anyone, nor comprehend what has been shown.

Roth wrote

So far I haven’t heard of any innocent and defenseless US citizen shot to death by his/her officer of the law…. Not one! But tasered to death….. many!

and if you read his post and presumed he chose his words with the intent to prevent such idiocy from occurring, you might learn somthing. but you dodged the idiot proof post like a master.

READ THIS ---> innocent and defenseless are not being shot by law enforcement. the ppl being shot down are criminals and/are considered armed and dangerous. the reason cops are using tasers is becuase the person in question is a problem, but one that does not warrant deadly force. and all that are tasered are defenseless, becuase if they had a weapon by procedure they are to use firearms.

there now your 1 insignificant question has been addressed, now will you accept titor as a possibility?

I'm going to pull a Titor and predict that it will rain in the Amazon

hahah i really laughed thats was a good one, but thats why i said minor(take it/leave it)

becuase a civil war doesnt do much harm untill many ppl join in.

What? This doesn't make sense...
Do you know what a civil war is?

well i agree my penmanship is bad but it does make sense.

WAR 101-
objective - he who can control an enemy can dictate the outcome
numbers - he who has more can do more

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird

Originally posted by Roth Joint
You just can't have such a reading comprehension problem. Read my post above and stop playing these puberistic games. Again, grow up and open up your eyes.

Roth, your post didn't address that one bit!
It's you who's playing these silly little games trying to change the subject.

Do you honestly in your right mind think there are more innocents killed by tasers than guns?

If so, you're an idiot....

Yeah I know that's harsh, but there's just no other way to describe any person who would think that. As I said before, I don't think I've ever heard of anything more ridiculous. Your obsession with tasers has clouded your reality.
Those 152 deaths occured over YEARS (and not all of them were innocent as you're trying to make them)
You can have over double that number in less than a year with shootings.

You're talking about you never heard of any innocents killed by guns is well past the ignorance stage into the realm of stupidity.
Look at the last 2 weeks for crying out loud!!
It's even posted in this thread! The 92 year old in Atlanta!
And that groom in New York this past weekend are just the latest two events that are being talked about right here on ATS.

So either you're purposely ignoring all that to go on your taser rants, or you're just not very intelligent.

[edit on 30-11-2006 by ThatsJustWeird]

So thatsjustweird, now that I have explained that when reading Titor’s words carefully and properly one must come to conclude that Titor meant there would be no fighting (yet) in 2005 nor in 2006, I would like to state the following:

As I said before, taser-deaths will not be the only cause, trigger or part of the second US Civil War as described by John Titor. But surely, they will be a contributing factor. Especially since so many innocent and defenseless men, women and children are killed by tasers. And yes, so far I haven’t heard of any innocent and defenseless US citizen shot to death by his/her officer of the law…. Not one! But tasered to death….. many!

Give me an answer, give me one, just one example thatsjustweird, of a US officer of the law who shot an entirely defenseless, unarmed US civilian to death? Just one example please. Get my point now? Good. Your pathetic example of the 92 year old lady.... is that all you can? Ofcourse it's a tragic event, but remember, she was armed and started shooting. In none of these 152 taser deaths documented by Amnesty International since 2001 (but I can guarantee you there are many more as I have showed you already in 2005!) the victim was armed.

As supported by Amnesty International and as referenced in my previous post , many US civilians have been tortured to death by tasers whilst they were entirely defenseless, unarmed, restraint, handcuffed and/or not even posing the slightest serious threat. It’s a crying shame! It’s so dead wrong! And yes thatsjustweird, I am very, very serious and very concerned about this. We all should be, it’s a situation that concerns us all. And I can guarantee you…. it will crawl to everyone’s doorstep…..

And yes thatsjustweird, ALL of these people were innocent until proven guilty in the court of law..... tragically enough, they never got that chance.....

Originally posted by Glyph_D
READ THIS ---> innocent and defenseless are not being shot by law enforcement. the ppl being shot down are criminals and/are considered armed and dangerous. the reason cops are using tasers is becuase the person in question is a problem, but one that does not warrant deadly force. and all that are tasered are defenseless, becuase if they had a weapon by procedure they are to use firearms.

Well spoken Glyph_D, very well spoken and right to the point!

Originally posted by Roth Joint

Give me an answer, give me one, just one example thatsjustweird, of a US officer of the law who shot an entirely defenseless, unarmed US civilian to death? Just one example please. Get my point now? Good. Your pathetic example of the 92 year old lady.... is that all you can? Ofcourse it's a tragic event, but remember, she was armed and started shooting. In none of these 152 taser deaths documented by Amnesty International since 2001 (but I can guarantee you there are many more as I have showed you already in 2005!) the victim was armed.

The three men in Queens were unarmed. Before you say that the car was a weapon, remember this. The NYPD are NOT allowed to fire at, or from, a vehicle, in any circumstance. Just being in a car that hit an unmarked police van does not constitute being armed, nor does almost backing into someone not in uniform, in a really bad neighborhood, in the very early morning, waving a gun at you. I dont care who you are, if you're in a neighborhood like Jamaica, Queens at 4 am, and some guy comes running up at you with a gun, you're not going to sit there like a target. You try to get out of there. Not one of those men had a weapon on them, and were fired at over 50 times, 31 of them by one officer alone.

Think about that.

31 shots from one officer. Meaning he undoubtedly had to reload more than once.

In any case, I'm no fan of taser use myself. I think they are used too much on people that should never be exposed to any type of weapon.

Also, just to help the conversation along a little, lets talk about this.

Gangs might target police officers after shooting

Imaging a police officer sitting in his squad car, a guy walks up to his window and opens fire. Imagine that happening even one more time. Think about how that situation would escalate.

Could it lead to groups engaging in combat? Gangs getting into fire fights with police. Probably not, but the chance is definately there.

And to touch on the Atlanta shooting. Why is it that no one has brought up the no knock clause of the warrant they issued on the woman's house? What kind of image does that bring to mind?

Edit: the "not" in "not one of those men were armed" somehow got lost between the time I typed this and submitted it.
[edit on 30-11-2006 by modese7en]

[edit on 30-11-2006 by modese7en]

to bad TJW has a 7th grade reading lvl.

check this out not sure if you guys caught this.
link

the thread is speculation(chip implants) but even with just the card.could mean big problems, it also would be a major event should they take the implant step many ppl would revolt(i would).

i personally dont like the card idea either, im not to keen on the idea of ppl i dont know knowing me. this would be a be problem for anonymity

could this be the doorstep?

Originally posted by modese7en

Originally posted by Roth Joint

Give me an answer, give me one, just one example thatsjustweird, of a US officer of the law who shot an entirely defenseless, unarmed US civilian to death? Just one example please. Get my point now? Good. Your pathetic example of the 92 year old lady.... is that all you can? Ofcourse it's a tragic event, but remember, she was armed and started shooting. In none of these 152 taser deaths documented by Amnesty International since 2001 (but I can guarantee you there are many more as I have showed you already in 2005!) the victim was armed.

The three men in Queens were unarmed. Before you say that the car was a weapon, remember this. The NYPD are NOT allowed to fire at, or from, a vehicle, in any circumstance. Just being in a car that hit an unmarked police van does not constitute being armed, nor does almost backing into someone not in uniform, in a really bad neighborhood, in the very early morning, waving a gun at you. I dont care who you are, if you're in a neighborhood like Jamaica, Queens at 4 am, and some guy comes running up at you with a gun, you're not going to sit there like a target. You try to get out of there. one of those men had a weapon on them, and were fired at over 50 times, 31 of them by one officer alone.

Think about that.

31 shots from one officer. Meaning he undoubtedly had to reload more than once.

True. This is a clear example of police brutality and excessive force with the use of guns. Shameful and unacceptable. These events should make us all alert to what becomes of our law enforcement officers. Titor warned that things indeed would escalate. This is a very good example of that. It's clearly growing and getting worse. I consider this to be another Waco type event.

Originally posted by modese7en
In any case, I'm no fan of taser use myself. I think they are used too much on people that should never be exposed to any type of weapon.

Also, just to help the conversation along a little, lets talk about this.

Gangs might target police officers after shooting

Imaging a police officer sitting in his squad car, a guy walks up to his window and opens fire. Imagine that happening even one more time. Think about how that situation would escalate.

Could it lead to groups engaging in combat? Gangs getting into fire fights with police. Probably not, but the chance is definately there.

And to touch on the Atlanta shooting. Why is it that no one has brought up the no knock clause of the warrant they issued on the woman's house? What kind of image does that bring to mind?

You make some very good points here. Yes, this all could lead to the "organized groups engaging in maneuvre and armed conflict" Titor spoke about....

mode, it's just going to go on deaf ears. These people wouldn't know reality if it smacked them in the face.
Why do you think they ignored that?

Dozens of innocent, defenseless people are killed every year by police, this is common knowledge. Too bad these people have an 7th grade education....

Just pick up any big city newspaper you (rhymes with borons)...


And this happens everywhere. Remember in London the police shot that man because they thought he had ties to that bombing?

Get real people.

lol @ Roth trying to say all people shot by police are criminals while all people tasered are innocent. Are you stupid? What does your report say? Not even your report says they were innocent. You and you alone are saying that. Why were the police there if they were innocent? Why is it that the vast majority of those who die have drugs in their system?

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
mode, it's just going to go on deaf ears. These people wouldn't know reality if it smacked them in the face.
Why do you think they ignored that?

Dozens of innocent, defenseless people are killed every year by police, this is common knowledge. Too bad these people have an 7th grade education....

Just pick up any big city newspaper you (rhymes with borons)...


And this happens everywhere. Remember in London the police shot that man because they thought he had ties to that bombing?

Get real people.

lol @ Roth trying to say all people shot by police are criminals while all people tasered are innocent. Are you stupid? What does your report say? Not even your report says they were innocent. You and you alone are saying that. Why were the police there if they were innocent? Why is it that the vast majority of those who die have drugs in their system?

Instead of making silly insults, how pathetic, why don't you present us all some facts?

And stay tuned to the US and not the UK. Titor wasn't talking about the UK.

Give me those cases where dozens of innocent, defenseless people are killed every year by police with guns.

Give me evidence of that vast majority that had drugs in their system when they were tasered to death.

And even if that was true (I know it's not ofcourse) does it make it any less evil to kill an unarmed, defenseless US civilian by the use of taser if that person was on drugs?

This is the most ridiculous statement I have heard from you.