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 Roth Joint
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.
Many of those who died had underlying health problems, such as heart conditions or mental illness, or were under the influence of drugs
"This is a serious problem that will lead to a serious debate about the First Amendment, but I think that the national security threat of losing an American city to a nuclear weapon, or losing several million Americans to a biological attack is so real that we need to proactively, now, develop the appropriate rules of engagement.
www.abovetopsecret.com...
posted on 18-12-2005 at 08:23 AM (post id: 1889947) - single - this post
This thread should resume the topic of John Titor's prediction, or it will be closed. If you wish to examine the issues related to tazers, please start a new thread.
The three men in Queens were unarmed.....
Dozens of innocent, defenseless people are killed every year by police, this is common knowledge. Too bad these people have an 7th grade education....
becuase if they had a weapon by procedure they are to use firearms.
Originally posted by XPhiles
Will the U.S. Constitution be obsolete some day soon, replaced by a new orderliness?
"This is a serious problem that will lead to a serious debate about the First Amendment, but I think that the national security threat of losing an American city to a nuclear weapon, or losing several million Americans to a biological attack is so real that we need to proactively, now, develop the appropriate rules of engagement.
So when Newt say's, "This is a serious problem that will lead to a serious debate about the First Amendment," He's basically just saying you are the enemy. Why is this? because he is targeting the First Amendment. "Newt Gingrich: we need to proactively, now, develop the appropriate rules of engagement."
This is really not about losing a city, it's about loosing your Bill of Rights.
Titor:
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.
Originally posted by Glyph_D
Dozens of innocent, defenseless people are killed every year by police, this is common knowledge. Too bad these people have an 7th grade education....
have you not the creativity or courage to come up with your own insults?
to bad TJW has a 7th grade reading lvl.
ill say this im sure somewhere someone was killed unlawfully(that not my argument).
however 99% of assailants being shot down, are worthy by law of being shot down.
its very safe to say the ppl killed by tasers, were not a serious threat.
Originally posted by Glyph_D
i agree this is going in a bad direction for us(US citizens) all.
its disgusting to know ppl out their hate what others have to say so much they want to silence them.
if you think about it, its like religious persecution or SpyvsSpy. senseless retaliation.
Originally posted by ThatsJustWeirdDo you honestly believe him when he says they're the good guys??
Originally posted by XPhiles
Good luck to you, when it's knocking at your door.
Police say ‘no-knock’ warrants valuable tool
Despite criticism surrounding “no-knock” warrants after Atlanta police shot 88-year-old Kathryn Johnston to death during a recent drug raid, county police departments in the South Metro area maintain the warrants are a useful and necessary law enforcement tool.
Rein in state's 'no-knock' SWAT team home raids
As these so-called SWAT squads increasingly become America's favored search warrant delivery service, bungled raids - including many to the wrong address - have skyrocketed. In these assaults on private property, scores of innocent citizens, police officers and nonviolent offenders have died.
Originally posted by Glyph_D
I TOOK THE BAIT:/
ok as i understand it the vehicle hit an unmarked car and nearly hit a pedestrian?
first they could be charged with assult with a deadly weapon, secondly they could be charged with attempted vehicular man slaughter. also if the demogragh is as bad as you say it is then tasered event are goining to be less common, than being apprehended by firearms(are officers in queens issued tasers?). were these ppl charged with anything ? link plz
a police officers job is to protect and serve. however a officer is to protect thier own lives as well. it is not procedure to be a hero(thats a choice made by the officer).
lol, I was not insulting you.
I was mocking your pathetic attempt to "insult" me.
Too bad these people have an 7th grade education....
lol, I'm done talking about this after this post. This is ridiculous.
That link is great, as it also has a quote from an NYPD detective stating that the shooting is just like the Amadou Diallo shooting. He was shot over 40 times for, guess what, pulling his wallet out of his pocket.
Originally posted by deltaboy
Since there is no civil war in America and we are about to be two years past, I don't see the reason as to why this topic is being discussed now unless posters are just here to say I TOLD YOU SOOOO.
We don't need you to paraphrase the article for us in your own words, leaving out the parts that don't justify your ideas.
Originally posted by Glyph_D
ok i read your your post and tried to use your innocent eye on the link you gave me.
first the police are on stake out
the men get into an argument and mention claims of a gun.
the undercover relay to fellow officers about the possible gun(these men are now under suspision of being armed and dangerous)
the men hit a van back up (nearly hit a pedestrian) strikes a store gate, then gases forward hiting the van again.
ok im not a police, but this is how i would have observed the situation.
RADIO: suspect may be armed
ME(thinking to my self): ok we got us a possible
i get to the scene, i witness a car raming into a vehicle.(confirming that this is a situation)
the car reverses wildly into a near by establishment, almost striking a fellow officer(further confirming that this is a hostile suspect)
then gases forward stiking the first vehicle a second time.
that right there is/can be called wreckless driving and givin the sitation can be considered assult with a deadly weapon and attempted vehicular manslaughter.
are the cops right for shooting the men? NO
are they wrong? NO
yeah, I think that spells it out well enough.
(g) Police officers shall not discharge their firearms at or from a moving vehicle unless deadly physical force is being used against the police officer or another person present, by means other than a moving vehicle.
the assaliant was said to have a weapon and attempted of fleeing a crime scene.
what crime scene you ask, becuase they did do nothing? the car accident was then/there a crime scene. Now does the polices action seem alien to you? they thought he had a weapon and was capable of using it, and on top of that the suspect behaved as if he had broke the law.
if he was innocent and defenseless he would have got out he car and filed an accident report. but no he had to drive like a maniac.
and the racial accusation just further cloud the reality of the situation.
Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
lol, I'm done talking about this after this post. This is ridiculous.
Just read a newspaper. Read a book. Research.
Even though you shouldn't even have to do that, you should know this stuff already. Time to step from under that rock you've been living under Roth.
Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
No, it's Roth's.
He claims he has never heard of any one being shot down by police. lol
Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
Even worse, he claims more people have been killed by tasers than guns.
Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
Next question:
For all you who actually believe Titor.
Do you honestly believe him when he says they're the good guys??
Apparently, they have no problems allowing a foreign nation to completely destroy this country by nuking it. As if the war wasn't enough. Reality is even without the nukes, if a civil war were to break out now in the this country that's it. There's no light at the end of the tunnel as Titor tries to make it seem like. Chaos and anarchy would reign. Since there's no way the militia would win by themselves, you would just have endless violence (ala Iraq). This would just provoke the government and make it worse for the people. Reality is there would be absolutely no good that would ever come from a civil war, especially not in just 30 years lol. (Look what happened with the civil war. Slavery ended during it, but it wasn't until 100 years later until blacks had their basic rights. Blacks and other minorities STILL have a long way to go before being equal)
Now throw in a nuclear world war on top of that
lol
If anyone allows their country to be nuked, for any reason at all, they should be hanged for treason. You just screwed your country for another 50+ years on top of however long it would have took to recover from the pervious war. Using nukes period is unjustifiable, let alone letting someone nuke your country. That's just insane!
So, after the nukes and half the world's population gone. Titor's happy because they won. What do they do to celebrate? They continue killing for another 5 years! WTF
How is this justified??
He didn't say they people they continued to kill had any trials so apparently they were doing exactly what they were fighting against.
Alright, the country is destroyed. The economy is gone (Titor stated the nukes were good at destroying economies). Half the population gone. The world is a mess.
What do they do?
Rebuild of course! Get the country back on track.
Right?
Nope.
The spend their money, resources, and energy coming up with time travel.
Since the war debt would be astronomical, where did they get the money to fund such a project?
They would have had to have either taxed the remaining population to death, or used any and all money that would have gone to rebuilding into this project. Did the people approve of either option?
Since there was a 10 year war followed by a nuclear war, where could they possibly find all the resources and energy needed to even test such a project let alone having an actual working program?
John Titor
"There was a resistance on my worldline but their goal was to maintain power and control over other people. We killed most of them by 2020."
Originally posted by Terapin
yep that thar civil war back in '05 was a doozy.
Originally posted by Terapin
Meanwhile I manage to travel around the globe without incident on a regular basis. No travel restrictions, no labor camps, just a basic ID check which is no big deal. We have been getting an ID check just for buying liquor forever. Heck we even managed to take the power out from under the President with a simple good old fashioned American vote. Yeah ... that sounds to me like a civil war never happened. Citizens getting out to vote, sure, ... civil war ... not even close.
Originally posted by Terapin
Hey even Australia and China are good buddies these days.
Originally posted by Tiloke
Roth Joint has anyone commented on the John Titor anagram?
You are not helping the Titor crowd by using an anagram when many many people think he may still be posting on the internet somewhere....
[edit on 3-12-2006 by Tiloke]