The American Civil War of 2005 as predicted by John Titor

So no one knows who Titor supported in his "future?"


Ethan, ATS forum, Suvival Techniques forum, there is info there or there SHOULD be info there about nuclear attack and surviving.


2008, as I said earlier, is the date of the next elections, should something happen that does NOT favor the masses, civil war is a strong possibility. People are fed up enough as it is with 2 elections stolen and the clamp getting tighter and police state being reved up. In 2008 maybe people will find out that republicans and democracts are two sides of the same coin when the democrats do the exact OPPOSITE of what the masses wanted them to do. Maybe there will be a "terror strike" or just an outright declaration of martial law on the last few days that will drive people over the edge. Here is something that must be realized: 2008 is one full year, anything could happen BEFORE, DURING, OR AFTER the elections should there be one. There is one full year for something to happen.
Europe is bickering with itself so I doubt they would come after us, China REQUIRES the USA and Europe (USA #1) for exports, so if EITHER fall into war or civil war in our case, China will collapse.

Implications of a civil war or revolution, those are important too, just remember that, because it not only affects those in the USA, but all around the world thanks to corporations.

Originally posted by Vekar
So no one knows who Titor supported in his "future?"

It has been explained before on this thread:

Originally posted by Roth Joint
www.abovetopsecret.com...
posted on 17-8-2005 at 06:22 AM Post Number: 1618577 (post id: 1640470)

First:

Titor specifically mentioned the civil war starting out as “WACO-type events” firstly happening every month. That doesn't sound like a sudden full blown civil war does it? Titor meant it would grow into a full blown US Civil War. And that conflict would “flare up and down for 10 years.” JT: “I would describe it as having a Waco type event every month that steadily gets worse.

These monthly “WACO-type events” steadily getting worse can be recognized by observing the same methods being used by law enforcement officers upon American civilians in the WACO massacre. Innocent and defenseless parents with their children died a horrible death in presence of their own officers of the law. They died whilst their own law enforcement officers should have avoided their cruel death.

Was Titor referring to WACO because of the great fire or because in his viewpoint the law enforcement officers were responsible for the death of innocent/defenceless people? Why don’t we let Titor say it himself:

“Have you see the documentary on Waco? Just for argument's sake, what do you think would happen if information were discovered that confirmed the worst accusations made against the law enforcement officers there? Would you hope nothing?”
"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."

The ”groups engaged in maneuver and armed conflict" would develop later on as a result of the “WACO-type events/methods” being used by officers of the law against US citizens. It doesn't make any sense if these "organized groups" would "engage in maneuver and armed conflict" without any particular reason to do so or without any particular enemy to fight with wouldn't you agree? That would be totally absurd ofcourse.

John Titor
Q: Does the civil war start in such a way that those willing will have time to remove themselves to safer locations?
"Yes. You will be forced to ask yourself how many civil rights you will give up to feel safe."
Q: Will you readily be able to identify the enemy?
"They will be the ones arresting and holding people without due process."
“I would describe it as having a Waco type event every month that steadily gets worse.
"By 2008, I would say the civil conflict is pretty much at everyone's doorstep."
"On my world line in 2011, the United States is in the middle of a civil war that has dramatic effects on most of the other Western governments."
"Outright open fighting was common by then and I joined a shotgun infantry unit in 2011. I served with the "Fighting Diamondbacks" for about 4 years. "
"I would define it as a conflict where organized groups engage in maneuver and armed conflict."
”The conflict will consume everyone in the US by 2012…”

Now "Syrinx High Priest," back to the part of your question regarding the “urban” vs “rural” groups. Also this has been discussed and explained on this thread long ago.

Lets see what kind of definitions there are for "civil war?"

- Recent civil wars in Central America have been uprisings of poor, rural people who are the majority against a small ruling class made up of the wealthy elite and the military.

- Some civil wars are also categorized as revolutions when major societal restructuring is a possible outcome of the conflict.

Exactly the type of civil war as described by John Titor:

1. Titor never stated that American civilians in the cities were his enemies. Even Titor himself ones lived in the city. However, the oppressing Government isolated the cities from the country to gain more control over the people. From thereon the division between the "cities" and the "country" was well defined.” When Titor was asked if it was a stalemate with the resistance/militia hiding out until the cities are wiped out allowing them to surface, he answered:

“The cities were not isolated because of them [ the Militia ]; they were isolated because of us.” [ the US population
outside of the cities – the “country” ]

“When the civil "conflict" started and got worse, people generally decided to either stay in the cities and lose most of their civil rights under the guise of security or leave the cities for more isolated and rural areas. Our home was searched once and the neighbor across the street was arrested for some unknown reason. That convinced my father to leave the city.”

“From the age of 8 to 12, [2006-2010] 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, 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.”

G° : not north and south again was it?
TimeTravel_0 : In 2036, they are our largets trading partner.
TimeTravel_0 : No...more like city angainst country.'
wyrmkin_37 : majorities against minorities.......
TimeTravel_0 : Yes.
TimeTravel_0 : You know...guns versus no guns.
TimeTravel_0 : Power versus no power.
wyrmkin_37 : time to pour another jack and coke
TimeTravel_0 : Un troops versus no UN troops."

2. Titor didn't mean that American civilians would be killing eachother, though that might be a possibility around 2011 when "outright open fighting" becomes common by then. When Titor mentioned “us” (the country) vs “them” (the cities) he didn’t mean the cities themselves but he meant his enemy who was IN the cities:

”Also, please be aware that from my viewpoint, Russia attacked my enemy who was in the U.S. cities. Yes, the U.S. did counter attack.”

Q: Your enemy was in the cities. Was the President in 2005 also on the enemy side? was the President in 2009 on the enemy side? How did you feel personally about these Presidents?
”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.”

3. Titor’s enemy was the “American Federal Empire”

”The US cities are destroyed along with the AFE (American Federal Empire)...thus we (in the country) won”.

4. John Titor and his fellow countrymen fought against the Military (apparently around 2011):

Q: You say you were in the militia fighting the US Army. I would think civilians would have no chance of successfully fighting the military.
“You must realize that why people are fighting is more important that what they are fighting with. The conflict was not about taking and holding ground it was about order and rights. They were betting that people wanted security instead of freedom and they were wrong.”

“Outright open fighting was common by then and I joined a shotgun infantry unit in 2011. I served with the "Fighting Diamondbacks" for about 4 years. (Hearing in my right ear isn't as good as I would like it).”

Q: Will soldiers be asked to kill their countrymen?
“I'm not positive but don't they sign a small piece of paper now asking them if they would have a problem with that?”

There’s no doubt whatsoever as to what John Titor meant with a “US civil war.”
It wasn’t about American civilians against eachother. It was about American civilians against the oppressing forces of the Government they were living under. Titor clearly mentioned the two opposing sides of the US Civil War. Two enemies opposed to eachother:

One side of the US Civil War – Titor’s and his fellow countrymen’s enemy:
"The “enemy” that was attacked by Russia in the U.S. was the forces of the government you live under right now."
"Also, please be aware that from my viewpoint, Russia attacked my enemy who was in the U.S. cities.

The other side of the US Civil War – The forces of the Government’s enemy:
”I'm not aware of any "mind control" devices being used on you now. 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! You don’t really think the Marines are going to jump out of helicopters overseas with sticky goop, pepper spray and seizure lights, do you?
Q: Will soldiers be asked to kill their countrymen?
“I'm not positive but don't they sign a small piece of paper now asking them if they would have a problem with that?”

It is interesting to observe Titor's viewpoint regarding the intentions of his enemy -the American Federal Empire- and the true causes behind their rapid implementation of their "NWO-type" of measures.

Who would have thought in 2000 our freedoms would be at stake in 2005 because of a "new" enemy opposed to the Anglo-American imperium? But indeed, that time period has arrived. For any power that was waiting for the right moment to implement it's new limiting rules in a democratic country, this is the perfect time to do so.

John Titor
"You must realize that why people are fighting is more important that what they are fighting with. The conflict was not about taking and holding ground it was about order and rights. They were betting that people wanted security instead of freedom and they were wrong."

It is clear Titor is pointing to something greater then just a country tightening up it's security measures for the sake of it's citizens. They (Titor's enemy) apparently calculated the people would be willing to give up their freedoms in change for the new "security" offered by their Government.

That's why Titor said "they were betting." Apparently this "bet" was perceived by them as an easy one to win. And ofcourse, as sociology and marketing proves us time and time again, people's behaviors are quite predictable. However according to Titor, they will proven to be wrong and find themselves on the wrong side of that "bet."

AND

Originally posted by Roth Joint
www.abovetopsecret.com...
posted on 2-9-2005 at 06:25 AM Post Number: 1655179 (post id: 1677072)

Don’t worry Syrinx, it isn’t a full blown US civil war yet, but we are definitely speeding up in that direction. As you’ve been shown many times over, the “WACO-type events” are already happening. They are represented by the many civilian deaths by the hand of their own law enforcement officers using their purported 'non-lethal' taser weapons upon them. Opposition, anger and hatred against the use of 'non-lethal' taser weapons by police is growing rapidly.

The ”groups engaged in maneuver and armed conflict" would develop later on as a result of the “WACO-type events/methods” being used by officers of the law against US citizens. It doesn't make any sense if these "organized groups" would "engage in maneuver and armed conflict" without any particular reason to do so, or without any particular enemy to fight with, or without any particular reason to organize against that enemy wouldn't you agree? That would be totally absurd ofcourse. Helloooooooooooooooo..... knock knock..... anybody home?

Titor specifically mentioned the civil war starting out as “WACO-type events” firstly happening every month. That doesn't sound like a sudden full blown civil war does it? Titor meant it would grow into a full blown US Civil War. And that conflict would “flare up and down for 10 years.” JT: “I would describe it as having a Waco type event every month that steadily gets worse.

And it most definitely is getting worse.

Remember:
WACO=
- Innocent/defenseless people dying cruelly & unnecessary
- by the hand of their own officers of the law
- while their deaths should have been avoided
- while their voices and pleas haven't been listened to
- while the law enforcement officers responsible for their
death are cleared without any prosecution for "wrongful death."
- authorities spreading disinformation regarding the incident to the mass media

For a further detailed explanation I refer to my previous posts at:
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

With regards to the type of civil war as defined by John Titor, let’s have a look again at these two interesting definitions of civil war:

1. Recent civil wars in Central America have been uprisings of poor, rural people who are the majority against a small ruling class made up of the wealthy elite and the military.

2. Some civil wars are also categorized as revolutions when major societal restructuring is a possible outcome of the conflict.

Exactly the type of civil war as described by John Titor. Titor never said it would be a war between urban US citizens vs rural US civilians. It would be a war between the Government and its people. American civilians against the oppressing forces of the Government they were living under.

1. Titor never stated that American civilians would be killing eachother. When Titor mentioned “us” (the country) vs “them” (the cities) he didn’t mean the cities themselves but he meant his enemy who was IN the cities:

”Also, please be aware that from my viewpoint, Russia attacked my enemy who was in the U.S. cities. Yes, the U.S. did counter attack.”

Q: Your enemy was in the cities. Was the President in 2005 also on the enemy side? was the President in 2009 on the enemy side? How did you feel personally about these Presidents?
”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.”

2. Titor’s enemy was the “American Federal Empire” the forces of the Government we live under right now:

”The US cities are destroyed along with the AFE (American Federal Empire)...thus we (in the country) won”.
"The “enemy” that was attacked by Russia in the U.S. was the forces of the government you live under right now."
"Also, please be aware that from my viewpoint, Russia attacked my enemy who was in the U.S. cities.

3. The US Military soldiers were killing their countrymen (apparently around 2011 when "outright open fighting was common by then"):

Q: Will soldiers be asked to kill their countrymen?
“I'm not positive but don't they sign a small piece of paper now asking them if they would have a problem with that?”

4. John Titor and his fellow countrymen fought against the Military (apparently around 2011 when "outright open fighting was common by then"):

Q: You say you were in the militia fighting the US Army. I would think civilians would have no chance of successfully fighting the military.
JT: “You must realize that why people are fighting is more important that what they are fighting with. The conflict was not about taking and holding ground it was about order and rights. They were betting that people wanted security instead of freedom and they were wrong.”

“Outright open fighting was common by then and I joined a shotgun infantry unit in 2011. I served with the "Fighting Diamondbacks" for about 4 years. (Hearing in my right ear isn't as good as I would like it).”

5. Titor never stated that American civilians in the cities were his enemies. Even Titor himself ones lived in the city. So it wasn't about urban US citizens vs rural US civilians. Titor meant that the division between "cities" and "country" was well defined by the oppressing Government isolating the cities from the country to gain more control. When Titor was asked if it was a stalemate with the resistance/militia hiding out until the cities are wiped out allowing them to surface, he answered:

“The cities were not isolated because of them [ the Militia ]; they were isolated because of us.” [ the US population outside of the cities – the “country” ]

“When the civil "conflict" started and got worse, people generally decided to either stay in the cities and lose most of their civil rights under the guise of security or leave the cities for more isolated and rural areas. Our home was searched once and the neighbor across the street was arrested for some unknown reason. That convinced my father to leave the city.”

“From the age of 8 to 12, [2006-2010] 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, 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.”

G° : not north and south again was it?
TimeTravel_0 : In 2036, they are our largets trading partner.
TimeTravel_0 : No...more like city angainst country.'
wyrmkin_37 : majorities against minorities.......
TimeTravel_0 : Yes.
TimeTravel_0 : You know...guns versus no guns.
TimeTravel_0 : Power versus no power.
wyrmkin_37 : time to pour another jack and coke
TimeTravel_0 : Un troops versus no UN troops."

As you can see there’s no doubt whatsoever as to what John Titor meant with a “US civil war.”

Again, it wasn’t about American civilians against eachother. It was about American civilians against the oppressing forces of the Government they were living under.

Originally posted by Ethan
I am wondering what to do in a real case of nuclear war. Yes, first I can buy a "NukAlert" detector

!

Does it exist survival guides for example ? I would be very interested.

DHS should issue everyone in the country a nuke alert keychain.


Also DHS should make this publication available to everyone in the country.

www.nukepills.com...

And anyone who lives around washington DC should consider moving to Winchester, VA. Winchester has cleverly positioned itself just outside the blast zone.

www.washingtonpost.com...

[edit on 31-12-2006 by In nothing we trust]

Shotgun regiment... not logical against body armor. Still Titor did bring up a few things that would be HIGHLY if not ABSOLUTELY possible: The need for the federal government to isolate cities from the rest of the population. In doing so they breed the sense of "helplessness" in the cities, people cannot get IN without government clearance, and those INSIDE cannot get OUT without government clearance.

2008, 2009, 2011, 2036. Four dates of events given by a "time traveler." 2008: "ELECTIONS" 2009: One year AFTER and things solidify and become FAR more apparent, 2011: Things cannot be denied, 2036: we will never know.
2008 and 2009 sound logical as a start point for civil war since those are "election" dates. 3036... yee gods pray that a civil war would be over by then.
Here is something to think about though: Cities are off limits to those OUTSIDE of the city, so HIGHWAYS would become MILITARY ONLY roads, anyone on those roads who is non-military or does NOT have clearance: missile on the way. Corporate farms would FLOURISH during this time.

Here is a question: What would happen to China? They require the USA as a source of income and by 2011 or even 2050 they would still REQUIRE the US economy to survive unless they have a plan or work twice as hard. China would collapse more than likely if the WEST COAST was taken, it would be harder to get goods into the USA even using the Panama Canal which could be "blockaded" easily. Europe? Who knows.

Here is another thing to think about: How high would the death toll be if it was ever to be established? Thousands? Millions? Hundreds of millions? IF hundreds, that would mean Mexico and the USA were part of the conflict and it streched beyond the current boarders.


Shotgun brigade or unit, however Titor called it would only serve a few purposes, if they all fired a solid .50 caliber musketball like round. At close quarters combat in cities it would be DEVESTATING to anyone wearing body armor. ALSO: If he is from the future, that would mean there is a 2nd copy of him running around somewhere. The federal would figure this out with face and fingerprints and I doubt they would just stand by and watch, capture one of them, preferably the "time traveler" and force him to tell all he knows so the can counter it as it happens.
Edit: Added above paragraph

[edit on 31-12-2006 by Vekar]

G'day all,


Ive been looking for this game trailer for ages but never knew the name till I cam across it now. If this isnt based on John Titor's story and future claims of a civil war between cities and country after 2008 election with militias and all then I dont know what is.

Click the link below to check it out, goes for 2 minutes or so -

Called - "Shattered Union - A chilling warning to America"

www.youtube.com...

Tell me what you think?

nothing is going to happen as long as we have strabucks mcdonnalds and walmart in this country (USA)
here is a prediction:
Beware: Hillary Clinton is the anti-christ
i said it first bwah hahahaha

[edit on 1/1/2007 by razor1000]

Happy New Year everyone!
Welcome to 2007!


First up:

Originally posted by Melbourne_Militia
G'day all,


Ive been looking for this game trailer for ages but never knew the name till I cam across it now. If this isnt based on John Titor's story and future claims of a civil war between cities and country after 2008 election with militias and all then I dont know what is.

Click the link below to check it out, goes for 2 minutes or so -

Called - "Shattered Union - A chilling warning to America"

www.youtube.com...

Tell me what you think?

I actually have this game and love it
It's just called "Shattered Union" btw...
And it's not a city versus country scenario. It's 7 different regions going at it. And besides the civil war part, there's really nothing else similar to the Titor story (though Russia is in the game - they take over Alaska).

In nothing:

And anyone who lives around washington DC should consider moving to Winchester, VA. Winchester has cleverly positioned itself just outside the blast zone.

lol, I live within that big circle and have absolutely no intentions of moving...
You draw those circles around every city and most Americas will fall within one of those circles.
Winchester was established in 1752 btw. Well before nukes were even thought of


Vekar:
Wow...
lol, very entertaining posts. Belong in the Personal Dreams and Predictions section over in BTS and not this Titor thread but they are still entertaining nonetheless


**
Quick question:
Do any of you Titorites ever visit any other sites that have been discussing Titor (even longer than ATS)?
Like over at anamolies and timetravelportal?

Ok first: I am not here for your personal amusement, I am here because I have something to say.

NEXT:
Shattered union is an alternate reality in a way, part of it stands as a warning the rest is just fantasy gameplay. Should A (singular) nuke hit DC with the president and ALL of the cabinet, etc etc etc there and the chain of command IS lost, I would doubt states would pull into regions. Bible belt just might though but the rest would be anarchy. Not to mention every corrup senator left alive would be gunning for presidency and declaring themselves next in line. The corruption would devestate the nation on the whole.
If during a civil war Europe DID though take over a section of the USA, wich would probably be the East Coast logically, what would be the responce? HOW would people respond? Wake up one morning, just another day in the civil war, you hear rumbling outside, you look out, and you see a column of European NATO and UN forces moving past your home. Europe would probably NOT intervene though, they have no interests here anymore since they are working with other nations now, they would probably go after the UK should they also disolve into civil strife.

Originally posted by Vekar
Ok first: I am not here for your personal amusement, I am here because I have something to say.

What?
I didn't say you were. I only stated your posts are entertaining. The scenarios you keep coming up with are pretty cool (though not really realistic if you were going for that).

NEXT:
Shattered union is an alternate reality in a way, part of it stands as a warning the rest is just fantasy gameplay. Should A (singular) nuke hit DC with the president and ALL of the cabinet, etc etc etc there and the chain of command IS lost, I would doubt states would pull into regions. Bible belt just might though but the rest would be anarchy. Not to mention every corrup senator left alive would be gunning for presidency and declaring themselves next in line. The corruption would devestate the nation on the whole.
..........

Shattered union is a game, plain and simple. There are millions of other games and movies. Tons similar to that.
Just as you keep coming up with these different scenarios, other people do also, and they make a game or movie out of it.



What is your obssesion with the "bible belt" btw? Do you even know what the bible belt means or who's a part of it?
(Have you ever actually traveled across the U.S.? Based on your posts, I'm thinking no.)

The bible belt streches from east Texas to the East coast of the USA, it is an area of HEAVILY concentrated KKK, Neo-Nazi and religious fanatics. The bible belt is the main area of bush support vs. the rest of the USA which is not with the acception of Utah and Idaho.
Entertainment is amusement, thus I am not here for your personal amusement. Shattered union is a game, and I did say that, re-read what I said. They offered up an alternate reality, or what you could call an alternate future for the USA based on a nuclear attack in ONE city, DC. Being realistic is what I do, being realistic is more important than being unrealistic. If you think I am unrealistic, then it is because you think there is only ONE future of the USA or maybe two if you are pushing it. I offer different possibilites based on WHAT happens and HOW it happens. Each one IS a scenario, just like your own speculations of what would happen. However when a scenario becomes FACT, YOU ARE PREPARED FOR IT! THAT is why you make scenarios of all kinds. NO ONE, ESPECIALLY YOU have a crystal ball that tells the future, NONE OF US have a clue, we can ALL speculate, but that is all. Speculation is hypothesis, from that we can be prepared for whatever will happen.
I have traveled the USA, I have been to the South Pacific, I have talked to a woman who was IN Hiroshima when the atomic bomb went off, I have talked to WW2 veterans who still have nightmares about what they saw, I HAVE traveled. What is MORE important though, IS I HAVE LISTENED TO WHAT THEY HAD TO SAY! THAT is more important, being someplace means NOTHING if you do not LOOK and LISTEN. YOU assume too too much. I LIVED in the bible belt for a year, and I can tell you without a doubt in my mind they are crazed bu#es. There are VERY VERY few good people in that lot, the rest are crusaders. You have ENCLAVES in the bible belt of good people, the rest is a bunch of bible thumpers.
BACK to the discussion at hand: 2007 is HERE, 2008 is one year away, not much longer untill ONE question is answered: will they rig the election again, have a phony one, or none at all. One year is not very long.

I also had the honor of meeting a man who was a soldier in the Emperors Army during WW2 fighting AGAINST the US marines. I also stood on an island that was bombed to hell in a handbasket by the US airforce and got to see what war can bring on people. Ever stand next to a Japanese WW2 tank that was blown up and see the hole in the side and KNOW that the person inside was splattered? How about walk around an area that is riddled with bullet holes from people firing at each other and see the small gunner stands the Japanese used to mount sniper rifles on? How about being in a bunker with a 6ft hole in the side and the inside of the bunker has little "holes" all over the place from shrapnell? THIS is how I grew up and THOSE are the people I grew up around.

Edit: added above paragraph

[edit on 2-1-2007 by Vekar]

Total amnesty for illegal aliens, the hate-speech law that restrict freedom of speech, gun grabbing, war with Iran, the economy and others things will AT LEAST bring some major protests...

With the new laws Bush passed, the parties can use whatever sum of money they want, the estimation goes for 100-125 millions in 2007, and up to 300 to 450 millions in ads and things on TV for 2008. Even if a third party was created, it would be VERY hard to counter those two parties, those supported by the corporations and the medias.

Also, the democrats and republicans don't want to get out of Iraq, threaten Iran, want to merge Canada, Mexico and the USA, the NAFTA highway, maybe a draft.... hottest year EVER, major things will happen because of global warming... hurricanes?

It's gonna be a 2005-like year, maybe worse. In Europe, France, it will be a year of riots after the elections, because it will be either Sarkozy, a bush-like, LePen, a nazi, or segolene, a blair-like. And maybe a terrorist attack just before the elections.

[edit on 2-1-2007 by Vitchilo]

Hmm....not sure what happened to my reply...but...here it is again....


Vekar, when I said some stuff isn't realistic, it's because some of your assumptions are inaccurate. Such as the whole bible belt thing. More on that in a sec.

If you think I am unrealistic, then it is because you think there is only ONE future of the USA or maybe two if you are pushing it

Not quite sure what you mean
Of course there's only one future.
There are an infinate number of ways this country could go in the future, but there's only one future....

NO ONE, ESPECIALLY YOU have a crystal ball that tells the future, NONE OF US have a clue, we can ALL speculate, but that is all.

I'm in 100% complete and total agreement.

Alright back to the bible belt:
You come across as someone who has a personal grudge against Christians. Your posts show this in their inaccuracies....

I LIVED in the bible belt for a year, and I can tell you without a doubt in my mind they are crazed bu#es. There are VERY VERY few good people in that lot, the rest are crusaders. You have ENCLAVES in the bible belt of good people, the rest is a bunch of bible thumpers.

The fact that you just stated something like this tells me that if you actually did live somewhere in what's called the bible belt you were either in one place the whole time or you were young. Too young to rememer anything and you're going by what people have told you. There's absolutely nothing accurate in that statement. I travel the U.S. ALL the time so I'm pretty sure I've spent MUCH more time in the "bible belt" than you. May I ask you where you stayed? Or who told you all of that?

The bible belt is the main area of bush support vs. the rest of the USA which is not with the acception of Utah and Idaho.

Again, this isn't totally accurate...
This is the areas that voted for Bush:


and this is what's considered the "bible belt"

Here is one fact: The bible belt and the bible thumpers will side with the govnment, they are the core contingency that supports the government right now.

Is this based on actual facts or your own feelings?

You say we know how fanatical these people could get. Care to cite any recent examples?
And how is your fanatical hatred of these people any different?

(highly annoyed) my CPU just erased EVERYTHING I typed out so let me sum it up as fast as I can before it does it again:

1. I lived in North Carolina, spent time in Florida
2. Harry Potter book burning, FOR PEATS SAKE ITS A BOOK! DONT LIKE IT DONT READ IT! THE BOOK IT FANTASY!
3. Bible belt you show is somewhat accurate, your first map did not work
4. If you can travel that much you must have A LOT of money
5. red state blue state maps are BS, 50%+ of the nation never votes, some do not care since it all turns out the same. Yes there is always those who are too fat and lazy to vote, but they are few
6: 2008 will be an interesting year.
7: I was persecuted for being a buddist in North Carolina, thus I left after 1 year (contract ended)
8: I use my own eyes and ears
9: Do not insult people based on age, I met children in the south pacific who had FAR more honor than people on this forum
"AGE DOES NOT MATTER, WHAT IS IN THE HEART AND MIND DOES!"
-ME (Vekar)-
10: Argument is to end now, this does not relate to the topic AT ALL, this is your personal vendetta against what I have said. Back to Titor predictions and civil war.

Edit: added 7-10

[edit on 2-1-2007 by Vekar]

Vekar is it not possible that the bible belt would be the very ppl to start the civil war. they blindly follow bush and his plans, when they find out hes a fraud they will go absolutely mad and demand a hanging.

according to titor the govt will betray the citizens of the US. and who of all citizens consider themselves to be more worthy of citizenship than any other demographic group in the US?

earlier you asked who is on titors side. he implies that the farmers are the major force on his side. bush tries to act like hes a farm boy from texas[acting like lincoln(down to earth kind of guy)], when they find hes everything but a farmer they to will go mad.

HAPPY NEW YEAR EVERYONE!!!!

It's 2007!....... Just one question for today.... after John Titor left this worldline prior to 9/11.... just a little more then 5 years ago.... tell me, how many US civilians now still believe America should go to war against ''terrorists?'.....

Aaaahhh..... such a beautiful year ahead.... ofcourse it depends how you look at it.....

Originally posted by Vekar
Shotgun regiment... not logical against body armor.........

Shotgun brigade or unit, however Titor called it would only serve a few purposes, if they all fired a solid .50 caliber musketball like round. At close quarters combat in cities it would be DEVESTATING to anyone wearing body armor.........

It says everything about the nature of this war........ if your enemy is using "microwave weapons" to control crowds…… and soldiers wearing specific "body armour" for protection in the cities..... what do you do?......

You probably create your own homemade directed energy weapon.... or converted microwave oven portable "HERF gun" ......... www.amazing1.com... ……. and ofcourse you create a "shotgun brigade" to break through the first line.....

Rothjoint- I made an error, it should have read: "Not very logical unless used AGAINST body armor." This is what happens when you type at 2 AM.
A shotgun regiment as I said WOULD be effective in close quarters combat IF you used the .50 caliber type rounds that are solid shots not the birdshot. A solid STEEL or IRON round vs. a lead ball would rip the guy to pieces pending on where it hit.

Glyph-D- I never said the bible belt would be the ones to start a civil war, they would be the ones who would support the government the LONGEST considering they have backed what bush and his masters have been doing for the past 7 years. They would be a problem because of that unless they had a MAJOR change in heart at the last minute, and even then they would still be a threat because of their over-zealous nature.
If anyone would start a civil war it WOULD be the countryside since they would be the LAST ones standing, it is hard if not IMPOSSIBLE to find someone in the vast US countryside, especially if they keep moving and never stay in one place more than twice, once to get seen, twice to get reported since someone will recognize you by then and get nervouse about your presence. I am glad to say I live in the countryside, in fact I live in a backwater that is 3+ hours from a medium sized city and 1.5+ hours from a somewhat large town. Dang I love living in the desert! No reason to bother anyone out here! That does not mean they will not TRY though.
Titor did have a good point, the civil war will rage in the country, it will be the last bastion of freedom, country vs. city. City= dominated by the elite and military, oppression of the people who live inside who were unlucky or had no real choice but to stay (starve or stay, get shot when trying to run the blockade or stay). I would still run for it if I was in the city, take my chances but I have no sons or daughters to look out for, so I have only two things to lose. Cities would be hard hit, and if you think about gangs, ouch, the government for once would take a 0 tolerance stance towards them and just shoot them for once. Gangs would be overthrown in a short time, but for the wrong reasons, not to keep people safe, but to keep the government safe from the gangs.

Originally posted by Vekar
Rothjoint- I made an error, it should have read: "Not very logical unless used AGAINST body armor." This is what happens when you type at 2 AM.
A shotgun regiment as I said WOULD be effective in close quarters combat IF you used the .50 caliber type rounds that are solid shots not the birdshot. A solid STEEL or IRON round vs. a lead ball would rip the guy to pieces pending on where it hit.

Glyph-D- I never said the bible belt would be the ones to start a civil war, they would be the ones who would support the government the LONGEST considering they have backed what bush and his masters have been doing for the past 7 years. They would be a problem because of that unless they had a MAJOR change in heart at the last minute, and even then they would still be a threat because of their over-zealous nature.

shot guns are effective no matter what kind of armor your enemy wears(except for sci fi armor), they have a huge force factor, and it would disarm a person easily if they got shot in the midsection. then any weapon would safice after that .....a knife even


i know you didnt say they would; im saying they could. if the govt proves to be a traitor to their faith....they would cry mutiny, and cannibalize their leaders(bunch of crazies they are)

-------

i wonder what 2007 will bring i hope the govt protects us

EDIT: those crowd control weapons are insane. i forget where i heard about the one where it make you feel like your skin is burning(which makes you run away)

[edit on 2-1-2007 by Glyph_D]

Well so far we have a few kinds of crowd control:
Microwaves (makes your skin burn)
Radio waves (EXTREME pain)
Tear gas
Pepper spray
rubber bullets
Batons
Bullets (the kind that kill, thoug the above can do the same, this one is more... "effective" if you will at crowd control if your a tyrant)

2007 will be a highly interesting year, 08 will be one HECK of a year.

In response and to add to the topic of increased police powers and reducing public freedoms etc I have just come across this article which I think is relevant in regards to Titor and the claims that law and order will get too tough on the public and the public will react -

Titled - ' Provate Security Firms to get police powers'

www.truthout.org...

Quote - "It is one of dozens of private security companies given police powers by the state of North Carolina - and part of a pattern across the United States in which public safety is shifting into private hands."

Quote - " Private firms with outright police powers have been proliferating in some places - and trying to expand their terrain. The "company police agencies," as businesses such as Capitol Special Police are called here, are lobbying the state legislature to broaden their jurisdiction, currently limited to the private property of those who hire them, to adjacent streets. Elsewhere - including wealthy gated communities in South Florida and the Tri-Rail commuter trains between Miami and West Palm Beach - private security patrols without police authority carry weapons, sometimes dress like SWAT teams and make citizen's arrests."

Quote - "Private security guards have outnumbered police officers since the 1980s, predating the heightened concern about security brought on by the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. What is new is that police forces, including the Durham Police Department here in North Carolina's Research Triangle, are increasingly turning to private companies for help. Moreover, private-sector security is expanding into spheres - complex criminal investigations and patrols of downtown districts and residential neighborhoods - that used to be the province of law enforcement agencies alone."

If this is a growing trend in the States, and in the near future all or most of policing is given to private security firms, then government regulation of it would be reduced, and who knows if security checks would be given to potential applicants and you would in effect possibly end up with private police armies writing their own laws and doing what they want for they are the privately run law of a particular area.

I know that this would really get me angry

Sounds like they are trying to start a precedent.