The American Civil War of 2005 as predicted by John Titor

Originally posted by Glyph_D
after the war, the debt we have now, wont matter becuase we(the ppl) wont have to collect the bill becuase other countries will believe it was a corupt administrations fualt and allow the New America a fresh start as long as the country agrees to conform to certain global contingencies(the new constutution). mean while corupt politicians will(volunteer)take a fall, (either through assaination or the path bin laden took, vanishing from sight).

which at that point the NWO has complete control over the decisions made to regulate the new country, no more debt, no more obligation to other countries, truely a clean slate.

Doctrine of Odious Debts (dettes odieuses)

"If a despotic power incurs a debt
not for the needs or in the interest of the State,
but to strengthen its despotic regime,
to repress the population that fights against it, etc.,
this debt is odious for the population of all the State."

- Alexander Sack, 1927

Originally posted by Melbourne_Militia
www.lvitv.com...

The guest speaker is George Green.

I suggest you read his book "Handbook for the New Paradigm"; worthy read AND FREE.

The messages contianed in this handbook are intended to lift mannkind from the entrapment of the victim consciousness that keeps the level of experience ensnared in fear and frustration. Humanity was intened to live, not in luxury, but in abundance.

I am,

Sri Oracle

Titor will be proved or disproved after 2008 because he original posts stated that a Civil War would occur between 2005 - 2008. And to be fair, there has been talks of a Civil War in America for decades and there is a Civil War watch thread in the NWO section.

Titor is interesting, i'll give you that, but i still stand by my original statement that its a very well researched hoax.

en.wikipedia.org...

One statement he makes is interesting. Television via the internet, YouTube or google video anyone?

Plus Texas becoming Hispanic too.



[edit on 24-12-2006 by infinite]

Originally posted by Sri Oracle

Doctrine of Odious Debts (dettes odieuses)

"If a despotic power incurs a debt
not for the needs or in the interest of the State,
but to strengthen its despotic regime,
to repress the population that fights against it, etc.,
this debt is odious for the population of all the State."

- Alexander Sack, 1927

i did not know such a doctrine existed...interesting. from my research of the doctrine it seems that if this were a globally excepted clause, it could very easily be used to a nations favor. that of coarse being only if they create an oppressive state and that state were to be over turned...Hmmmmmmm

This debt is not an obligation for the nation; it is a regime's debt, a personal debt of the power that has incurred it, consequently it falls with the fall of this power.

Even when a despotic power is replaced by another, no less despotic or any more responsive to the will of the people, the "odious" debts of the eliminated power are not any less their personal debts and are not obligations for the new power....

link


there some backbone to this conspiracy

Originally posted by infinite
Titor will be proved or disproved after 2008 because he original posts stated that a Civil War would occur between 2005 - 2008.

[edit on 24-12-2006 by infinite]

actually he says 2004(after correcting himself about 2005)-2015

but you couldnt be more right, 2008 is the year to watch.

What is the entertainment industry like in 2036?
Again, entertainment is less centralized. There are "movies" and "TV" but everything is distributed over the net and more people produce their own "shows".

Isn't what's happening now? All the youtube and the home-made shows broadcast on internet? The bloggers and the internet medias were the personality of the year of TIME... Again, JT was right. People are tired of the crappy mainstream propaganda with ads everywhere. Internet gives real information, no ads, no propaganda, fast entertainment.

Sorry about the lateness of this post.
I've been enjoying myself with friends and family during this time. Which apparently you all don't know how to do and are on here discussing a nonexsistent civil war

I would tell you how sad that is, but I'm sure you all already know.

If you do get a chance to crawl out of your basements and spend time with your family this holiday ask them about this civil war. See how many laugh at you

Originally posted by Glyph_D
1st all ppl who are against titors claims use the same excuse "wheres the war at if it started in 2004"

Actually, that's not an excuse. That's a valid question. Titor stated then reiterated that the Civil War would start in 2004. If he didn't mean that then why would he say that?

2nd we showed how the title IS misleading

No you didn't.
The author of this thread put 2005 instead of 2004, but there's nothing misleading about the thread title. This thread is dealing with the civil war aspect of Titor's predictions hence the title.
There's nothing to mislead.

3rd you distort the CONTEXT of our posts(youve just done it to my entire post:/)

BS
I take Titor's quotes DIRECTLY and in context. I back up everything I say with facts that can be verified. I dare you to show anywhere where I've distorted the context of a post.

civil unrest is every where, i dont know how to say it any other way?

1. Do you know what civil unrest is?
2. Again, if it's everywhere you can give specific examples. So, be specifici. Where did civil unrest occur today?

there is so much more to go over, and yes you will deliberately brush it off.

What a lame excuse. How do you know what I'm going to do?

youve brushed me entirely off

BS
I've address all of your posts...

and cliamed its becaus i dont know anything(which is utter nonsense but....)

I've never claimed that but since you mentioned it.....
Why don't you show it's nonsense?
None of your posts have been thoroughly researched, and you come across as undecuated just following which ever way the wind blows.
Why don't you do some real reseach into the world around you? Not based on Titor, but based on reality.

They're passing legislation to LIMIT taser use.
They're CHARGING more police with brutalitiy.
If we were in a civil war the COMPLETE OPPOSITE would be happening!

right here youve shown you cant read, im sorry but the link does not say they are reducing taser use it says they are increasing it. and by your deff of above, since that is the case (the complete opposite) a civil war is indeed ocurring?!?!?!

I left my quote up there so you can see what I said. I said they're passing legislation to limit taser use.

Just to clear things up a bit...
You do know the alternative to tasers is to go back to guns which are over 100% more deadly. This is what you're rooting for?
I'm curious about this for all you Titorites. What do you suggest the police do? Mace? Eh...that would be good but unfortunately they'er affected by it too. The batton? lol, can you say police brutality.

tho science has not got timetravel working yet does not mean it cant happen , but scientists are far more optimistic about the subject than you are. i really dont care if you believe its not possible. im sure your that kind of ppl that existed back in the day who thought the world was flat(or maybe you still do?)

As a scientist I can assure you that I would be thrilled if (human) time travel were possible.
But I'm looking at reality

all i can say to this is how the hell do you know what titor would say and wouldnt say?

Because unlike you when people say something they usually mean what they say.
If Titor stated (several times) that the civil war would begin in 2004, who are you to say he didn't mean that?

ok the TYPE comment is not for me its for you , i know titor says type thats why im making an issue about it. becuase we think when you read the word type in your twisted head your comprehending STYLE.

Are you mentally challanged?
Go back and read my repsonse to your definitions of type and style and stop being silly....

ok the only reason you know of the incident in cinncinati is becuase it was a race issue and the news wanted exposure.

No that's not the only reason. Every incident of civil unrest in this country is HUGE news and ALWAYS gets exposure. I challage you to present one incident of civil unrest that got no exposure.

titor says that most of the events that occurr are not televised or even reported in newspapers.

lol
No he doesn't.
Typical Titorite. Putting words in his mouth. How sad....

so if your watching FOXnews to get your up to date info on the civil war your not gonna get any. your actually gonna have to search for this info your self, and not rely on corporate news to inform you.

Helllllllooooo
I'm on a conspiracy site!
You think I don't have access to every secondary media outlet known to man??
Funny how none of them show this civil war going on...

i wondered about you last night TJW do you have autism? dyslexia? or are you a woman?

Why would you be thinking about me? Don't you have a life to live?

And why would you think that? Because I don't believe Titor? Again, I have to call into question your mental capabilities.
"He doesn't believe in a fictional character so he must have some disease or be a woman."
Seriously, who thinks that?
Do you even know what autism and dyslexia is? It's obvious you don't...

Quite sad you have to resort to this type of stuff instead of sticking with intelligent conversations (which you have yet to show the ability to do). Does being right mean that much to do?
*sigh*
Ok.
Show me every wrong statement I've made. Every quote you think I twisted and I'll gladly corrct myself.

Roth:

In this one it will be pretty much at everyone's doorstep in 2008 and will consume everyone in the US by 2012.... just as it did in Titor's worldline....

Ok, so who's doorstep is it on now? 2007 starts next week so surely it's on someone's doorstep right now right? Especially since it started 3 years ago. And this isn't Titor's worldline so how do you know what's going to happen?

Titor never said the West collapsed in 2005. He said that Western stability collapsed…..just as it did in this worldline…..

Again, any suggestion that western stability has collapsed is BEYOND ridiculous. You have absolutely NOTHING to back that ridiculous statement up.

Twister. Time travel was never magically created in Titor’s worldline. They just never stopped the project throughout everything that happened…. Just as it will happen on this worldline…..

Who never stopped the project?
And how do you know this? Titor never stated that.
And wouldn't you find that a bit strange? There's a 10 year civil war and then a nuclear war on top of that. Billions of people are dying. And these people instead of worrying about their families, their futures, and trying to survive, they're sitting up there trying to come up with time travel?
Are you serious?




I'll possibly go over the rest of these ridiculous posts later but alas...I have a life and these are the holidays.
Happy Holidays everyone!

Enjoy yourself.....unless of course you insist on being locked up in your basement or room thinking the big bad civil war is going to get you

Concluding that TV over the internet will be a reality, while making that conclusion(prediction) via the internet, is not a hard conclusion to make—especially when computer screens are basicly TV sets.

Really not a strong point of support for his theories.

Eyewitness Agate Alphonse said she passed a group of 10 to 15 people punching and grabbing one another moments before shots rang out.

Christmas Eve Boynton, Florida, USA

ad hominem

And TJW, you didn't adressed my post that showed the timeline and proved that JT HIMSELF never said a open-fighting civil war would happen until at least 2007. And stop denying everything about time travel and currents events.

IT'S impossible that a open-fighting civil war could happen over night unless a police state or something BIG against the people.

by TJW
Who never stopped the project?
And how do you know this? Titor never stated that.
And wouldn't you find that a bit strange? There's a 10 year civil war and then a nuclear war on top of that. Billions of people are dying. And these people instead of worrying about their families, their futures, and trying to survive, they're sitting up there trying to come up with time travel?
Are you serious?

im not goin to argus with you but to say it would stop is foolish imo. every war that hit this planet be it alexander, hitler, or bush, development in to technology was at the spearhead of the wars. its a history that repeats itself, the best inventions are done during a time of war. why would this war be any different? the ppl involved with its conception are no more benevolent than ppl of the past.

by TJW
Again, any suggestion that western stability has collapsed is BEYOND ridiculous. You have absolutely NOTHING to back that ridiculous statement up.

if you truly disagree with this claim why dont you get involved in the countless other threads on this site, because they have far superior evidence than i possess. and they can clear up your perspective a bit.

Originally posted by Glyph_D
ad hominem

im not going to adress everything in your post but i have to address a few.

ok first i must point out your deff for civil war, ill quote a point im going to address>

A state of hostility or conflict between elements within an organization:
"The broadcaster is in the midst of a civil war that has brought it to the brink of a complete management overhaul" (Bill Powell).

clearly this example does not imply weaponry, its a point of discord within a group.

This doesn't even make sense.
The author of this thread created this thread to talk about the Civil War as predicted by John Titor. Are you saying he didn't do that?

im saying just becuase you dont see rioting or destruction doesnt mean a civilwar is not occurring.

Yeah I didn't think you knew what civil unrest was....
Civil Unrest includes riots, demonstrations that get out of hand (protesters gone bad - like what happened with the WTO and world bank protests a couple of times), illegal disruptive demonstrations, and general disorder. I'm not sure what definition you're using but this is how the rest of the world defines civil unrest.

your perspective of civil unrest is an extreme example, i defined civil unrest acouple of posts back and the deff doesnt mention rioting(though rioting is civil unrest). there are degrees to this concept.

you mentioning im young is in fact being condescending toward me, your suggesting that becuase i lack age, my opinion is faulty. though i assure you im not as stupid as you claim i am.

*yawn*
He was a little KID, how would he remember stuff like that.

and i counter with this same point, how does he truly know the civil war started in 2004?

Name one war which wiped out half the earth's population and completely decimated the earth's natural resources?

titor never said that natural resource were decimated, his main point was the water was contaminated, by the way do you really think that a time machine would be built from natural resources?

EDIT: i forgot to mention i wasnt saying you have autism or dyslexia or even your a woman , what i was getting at was there has to be a reason why you dont see the current state as we do?



[edit on 26-12-2006 by Glyph_D]

Originally posted by Glyph_D
clearly this example does not imply weaponry, its a point of discord within a group.

1. These are the world's definitions
2. lol, why did you just take that one definition out of all the others? Because your trying to find stuff that fits your views not looking at reality. Anyway, we're talking about a country here not an organization. What does the first definition say?

im saying just becuase you dont see rioting or destruction doesnt mean a civilwar is not occurring.

Actually...
Yes it does. Otherwise it's not a civil war. Period.
Again, if the past was much worse than it is now and it wasn't considered a civil war then, who in their right mind would call it one now? Who are you to change the definition?

your perspective of civil unrest is an extreme example, i defined civil unrest acouple of posts back and the deff doesnt mention rioting(though rioting is civil unrest). there are degrees to this concept.

My definition is based on the world's definition.
Your definition is based on your own views and yours alone.

you mentioning im young is in fact being condescending toward me, your suggesting that becuase i lack age, my opinion is faulty. though i assure you im not as stupid as you claim i am.

I only mention your age because you still have a lot to learn. You're still trying to figure things out now.
Just a warning to you during this time period.....don't be so gullible....
If you're letting someone on the internet claiming to be a time traveler influence you....that's a scary state.

and i counter with this same point, how does he truly know the civil war started in 2004?

I'll look for the quote but I'm pretty sure he said he studied history.
Besides, how do we know when the Iraq war started? How do we know when we invaded Afghanistan?
He's not a retard and this is the 21st century. How would you not know something like that?
You probably know when the first Gulf War started right? Since you were even younger then (or not alive?) do you remember the media's coverage of that war? No, more than likely not.

titor never said that natural resource were decimated, his main point was the water was contaminated, by the way do you really think that a time machine would be built from natural resources?

If water, the most abundant natural resource on earth, is contaminated then what do you think is going to happen to everything else?
And hmmm good question. How do people make and power anything?
Must be magic.

EDIT: i forgot to mention i wasnt saying you have autism or dyslexia or even your a woman , what i was getting at was there has to be a reason why you dont see the current state as we do?

The only reason why I don't see things as you all is because I'm looking at reality based on factual events that are presently occuring.
You guys are looking at things based a someone who came on the internet 6 years ago and claimed he was a time traveler.

1. These are the world's definitions
2. lol, why did you just take that one definition out of all the others? Because your trying to find stuff that fits your views not looking at reality. Anyway, we're talking about a country here not an organization. What does the first definition say?

look i read the whole deff, let me educate you on how a dictionary works
see they have multiple explanations of a word, and how that word can be used. yes your deff applies but so does mine, the question is what excerpt does titor refer to?!?!?!?

your deff is the worlds view, but its the far end of the spectrum of the worlds view.

there has been wars won and lost without any forms of violence, by your extreme deff these dont qualify as wars...which is nonsense YOU HAVE GOT TO BALANCE YOUR PERSPECTIVE!!!!!!

civil unrest
Civil disorder is a broad term that is typically used by law enforcement to describe one or more forms of disturbance caused by a group of people. Civil disturbance is typically a symptom of, and a form of protest against, major socio-political problems. Typically, the severity of the action coincides with public outrage. Examples of civil disorder include, but are not necessarily limited to: illegal parades; sit-ins and other forms of obstructions; riots; sabotage; and other forms of crime. It is intended to be a demonstration to the public and the government, but can escalate into general chaos.

if your wondering why it says civil disorder its becuase i was redirected to it from civil unrest. the point is its a broad term and your neglecting the low profile forms of civil unrest.

I'll look for the quote but I'm pretty sure he said he studied history.

yeah but why is this quote not valid

I don't remember a great deal about media coverage during the civil conflicts.

I only mention your age because you still have a lot to learn. You're still trying to figure things out now.
Just a warning to you during this time period.....don't be so gullible....
If you're letting someone on the internet claiming to be a time traveler influence you....that's a scary state.

your to d*mn thick headed, i dont blindly believe titor is real. as i mentioned earlier i believe timetravel is possible. so ill consider any one who claims being a timetraveler the benefit of the doubt. and as soon i find a legitimate reason to disregard this person i will do so. titors story is on the chopping block and until 2008 comes and goes, i will support that which holds up. and yes all that ive claimed and mentioned is holding up.

your the only person here who blindly disbelieves, regardless of what info we put in front of you. your doubt is not justifiable, not scientifically nor rationally.

and so we will continue to go back and forth as long as you continue to reply with your approach, seeing how im the younger ill live longer, and will be granted the final word

Originally posted by Glyph_D
look i read the whole deff, let me educate you on how a dictionary works
see they have multiple explanations of a word, and how that word can be used. yes your deff applies but so does mine, the question is what excerpt does titor refer to?!?!?!?

Well seeing as by this time the militia are supposed to have organized infantry units, which definition do you think applies?

your deff is the worlds view, but its the far end of the spectrum of the worlds view.

LMAO!!!
How is it the far end? IT'S THE NUMBER ONE DEFINITION! No one EVER uses the word "civil war" any other way.
WTF are you talking about!?
Go to ANY dictionary and see what the primary definition is.

The far end? LMAO!!! You're really stretching now buddy....

there has been wars won and lost without any forms of violence

Such as?

(even the cold war had deaths on both sides so I'm really curious to know which wars you're talking about)

by your extreme deff these dont qualify as wars...which is nonsense YOU HAVE GOT TO BALANCE YOUR PERSPECTIVE!!!!!!

1. War is war. If it's not a war then no, it's not a war.
2. My definition is used by 100% of the human population. If you're calling it extreme, blame them, not me.

if your wondering why it says civil disorder its becuase i was redirected to it from civil unrest. the point is its a broad term and your neglecting the low profile forms of civil unrest.

Lower forms would be classified as civil disorder, civil disobedience, or civil disturbance.
It becomes "civil unrest" when...well....unrest breaks out.
Do you understand now?

yeah but why is this quote not valid

I don't remember a great deal about media coverage during the civil conflicts.

How said it's not valid?
If he can't remember he can't remember.....

your to d*mn thick headed, i dont blindly believe titor is real. as i mentioned earlier i believe timetravel is possible. so ill consider any one who claims being a timetraveler the benefit of the doubt. and as soon i find a legitimate reason to disregard this person i will do so. titors story is on the chopping block and until 2008 comes and goes, i will support that which holds up. and yes all that ive claimed and mentioned is holding up.

Not a single thing you've said has held up...
Not one thing....

Unless I missed something
But I just went back over your posts and can't find anything....

your the only person here who blindly disbelieves, regardless of what info we put in front of you.

The info you all put out is distorted and twisted. I disbelieve because of reality.

your doubt is not justifiable, not scientifically nor rationally.

lol are you serious?
Read through this thread!!!
Scientifically - read all the links presented on time travel. Read all the RESPECTED scientists who have disproved Titor's story. Look at reality! The science part is the easiest part to disprove.

Rationally - Are you serious? So looking at all the evidence and concluding that some random person who popped up on the internet 6 years ago claiming to be a time traveler on a time travel conspiracy website is a hoax is being unrational? You seriously got it twisted. Oh did I mention the fact that his wild claims aren't coming to pass?
Still waiting for your answer...
If the past few decades were much worse and no civil war broke out, why would one break out now?




and so we will continue to go back and forth as long as you continue to reply with your approach, seeing how im the younger ill live longer, and will be granted the final word

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
Well seeing as by this time the militia are supposed to have organized infantry units, which definition do you think applies?

wrong titor never said anything like this, he said that between the time his family leaves thier house-and the time he joins the infantry, is the time frame open militia fighting starts to occur(2006-2011).

LMAO!!!
How is it the far end? IT'S THE NUMBER ONE DEFINITION! No one EVER uses the word "civil war" any other way.
WTF are you talking about!?
Go to ANY dictionary and see what the primary definition is.

The far end? LMAO!!! You're really stretching now buddy....

i have no clue why you are not understanding this, but the order of presentation does not warrant truth from lesser truth.

yes ppl do use the term in a different way from time to time. if you read my post i did infact provide such a usage

"The broadcaster is in the midst of a civil war that has brought it to the brink of a complete management overhaul" (Bill Powell).

lol learn to dictionary

1. War is war. If it's not a war then no, it's not a war.
2. My definition is used by 100% of the human population. If you're calling it extreme, blame them, not me.

1. no one group has a monopoly on the requirements of that which constitutes war. not webster not britanica

2. its not 100%, the matter that i disagree lowers your percentage to 99.999%, and im sure im not the only one.

Lower forms would be classified as civil disorder, civil disobedience, or civil disturbance.
It becomes "civil unrest" when...well....unrest breaks out.
Do you understand now?.

first , refrain from trying to change history and altering concepts- civil disorder, civil disobedience, civil disturbance,and civil unrest. can all fall under the same category. The fact that I was redirected to unrest from disorder shows that the words are SYNONYMOUS!

but regardless your wrong, unrest more often than not leads to illegal behavior(ie chaos or disorder)

Unless I missed something

But I just went back over your posts and can't find anything...

becuase you lack very basic skills in reading comprehension.

Scientifically - read all the links presented on time travel. Read all the RESPECTED scientists who have disproved Titor's story. Look at reality! The science part is the easiest part to disprove.

NO legit scientist has said titor is a fraud, i ve read many scientist say his claims seem unconventional, but becuase the mechanics of time travel are unknown they refuse to get further involved.

Rationally - Are you serious? So looking at all the evidence and concluding that some random person who popped up on the internet 6 years ago claiming to be a time traveler on a time travel conspiracy website is a hoax is being unrational? You seriously got it twisted. Oh did I mention the fact that his wild claims aren't coming to pass?
Still waiting for your answer...
If the past few decades were much worse and no civil war broke out, why would one break out now?

hahahahah, this made me laugh. your a fool plain and simple. and actually his claims are coming to pass from the non-lethals to the unrest.

2nd the time we are in now IS far worse than the last few decades, we no longer have rights, you damned fool.

your non-conformist logic was a novelty act, but now its just foolish


by the way i have an ace in the hole, if you so choose to push the subject.

Where is everyone else?
I'm tired of dealing with kids. They think they know everything but all they're doing is embarrasing themselves.
This is getting silly.

Originally posted by Glyph_D
wrong titor never said anything like this, he said that between the time his family leaves thier house-and the time he joins the infantry, is the time frame open militia fighting starts to occur(2006-2011).

I thought we were talking about Titor here? Cause if you read what Titor stated you would see I said nothing Titor didn't.
1. He says he joins a shotgun infantry unit. Meaning what? Meaning the militia is organized and have infantry units. This is common sense.

2. Infantry units don't pop up overnight. Militias don't get that organized overnight.

3. Titor never once stated that open militia fighting doesn't start until then. He says by then it's COMMON as stated many times before. If the militia had to organize themselves into infantry units then obviously there was fighting.

i have no clue why you are not understanding this, but the order of presentation does not warrant truth from lesser truth.

The order indicates primary and secondary definitions. As you see in that link, most dictionaries have just the one definition. The one you choose has a secondary definition that could be used but it isn't used as much as the primary.

yes ppl do use the term in a different way from time to time.

Who does?

if you read my post i did infact provide such a usage

"The broadcaster is in the midst of a civil war that has brought it to the brink of a complete management overhaul" (Bill Powell).

That's the sentence the dictionary used to show how it could be used. That doesn't mean people actually use it that way. Have you ever heard anyone use civil war that way?

1. no one group has a monopoly on the requirements of that which constitutes war. not webster not britanica

If you can find some other weird definition then please present it...

2. its not 100%, the matter that i disagree lowers your percentage to 99.999%, and im sure im not the only one.

You don't count.
You're just trying to be difficult...
And yes you're the only one.

What exactly are you disagreeing with? That civil war means more than just arguing?


As far as the civil unrest....using wiki as a dictionary is funny lol
Anyway, I've asked this before with no answer so I'll ask again....
Where in the U.S. is civil unrest currently occuring.
BY ANY DEFINITION

becuase you lack very basic skills in reading comprehension.

*sigh*
1. No, it's because you're lying. Otherwise all the times I've asked you to show these so called claims that have come to past, you would have done so by now.

2. I've been reading since before you were born. You're just some kid who's parents gave you access to the internet.

NO legit scientist has said titor is a fraud, i ve read many scientist say his claims seem unconventional, but becuase the mechanics of time travel are unknown they refuse to get further involved.

Again, read through this thread....

and actually his claims are coming to pass from the non-lethals to the unrest.

Oh boy
1. Non lethal weapons have been around since forever. Titor stated they would develop new weapons systems. Can you name these systems?

2. Again, where is this unrest occuring? Use any definition you want.

2nd the time we are in now IS far worse than the last few decades, we no longer have rights, you damned fool.

lol
Silly boy calling me a fool. You got some nerve.
1. Read a f'in history book you.......nope....not going to slip all the way down to your level
2. See #1

This here is absolute PROOF you're trying to twist things to fit YOUR views. How absolutely ridiculous. You're just trying to be funny now. I can't even take you seriously any more (well...not that I took you all that serious to begin with, but just about takes the cake).

So again, where is everyone else? Preferably people who've lived longer than 15 or 16 years.
I'm ready to discuss Titor not some little kid's fantasies....

(and by discuss Titor I mean rip his story to shreds....just read over his original posts again and there are so many holes in the story, picking where to start is difficult, lol. So which aspect do you want to to discuss first?)

its funny TJW nearly every comment you make about my claims. i should be the one to make these claims toward you. i just dont get it, its like you see my point of veiw and are using it against me when i dont use it against you.

very twilight zoneish

1. He says he joins a shotgun infantry unit. Meaning what? Meaning the militia is organized and have infantry units. This is common sense.

2. Infantry units don't pop up overnight. Militias don't get that organized overnight.

3. Titor never once stated that open militia fighting doesn't start until then. He says by then it's COMMON as stated many times before. If the militia had to organize themselves into infantry units then obviously there was fighting.

yeah thats what i said, by that time the fighting is already common, ill quote my self

he said that between the time his family leaves thier house-and the time he joins the infantry, is the time frame open militia fighting starts to occur(2006-2011).

this quote does not in any way say fighting starts in 2011(one of many points you fail to realise)but its the only dates he gives toward open fighting, so ive compiled them just for you.

your dictionary BS needs to stop im right your wrong, ive proven im right period.

That's the sentence the dictionary used to show how it could be used. That doesn't mean people actually use it that way. Have you ever heard anyone use civil war that way?

does anyone see the stupidity of this quote??? or is it just me, plz any one come to my aid becuase this guy has lost his grip. if you havent been following , basically this dousche bag is saying that even tho its in the dictionary its not really a definition, becuase its not the first reference.

1. No, it's because you're lying. Otherwise all the times I've asked you to show these so called claims that have come to past, you would have done so by now.

seriously Roth, Xphiles, Vitchilo, TigerKing, and a few others(sorry for the lack of reffrence if your one) have been doing just that, and i refuse to quote what weve already stated many times over. you need to go back and read our claims. and quit saying we havent showed any, becuase its the reason most have posted(showing claims).

ive mentioned my age once before, but i quess you just skimmed over my post as ive come to expect. im not 15 nor 16.......I WANT YOUR AGE NOW either your 15 or your 93 and have lost your damn mind.


we can agree on one thing tho we do need a third perspective.


in closing titor has more credibility than you do TJW, i know this discussion is off topic but seriously a MOD plz straighten this guy out or straighten me out(not sure i need it but anything is possible) this guy will continue to distort the topic until we flame him so hard we get banned, or he gets a brain transplant.