The American Civil War of 2005 as predicted by John Titor

Funny how you all are trying to change the subject of the topic now
This discussion has NEVER been about the circumstances in which someone is shot or someone is tasered. NEVER
This whole discussion stemmed from Roth's quote.

I'll quote it again.

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!

That was it. That was ALL he said. This is how this whole thing got started, by that quote and that quote alone. No where in that quote is Roth talking about the circumstances.
So here's your chance to correct yourself Roth. Fix this quote (because it's horribly wrong - I know for a fact that you have heard of innocent and defenseless people being shot. It's impossible for you not to have heard any) to show us what you're really talking about.

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
Funny how you all are trying to change the subject of the topic now

This discussion has NEVER been about the circumstances in which someone is shot or someone is tasered. NEVER
This whole discussion stemmed from Roth's quote.

I'll quote it again.

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!

That was it. That was ALL he said. This is how this whole thing got started, by that quote and that quote alone. No where in that quote is Roth talking about the circumstances.

as i see it Roth is speaking of the circumstances. when he wrote "innocent and defenseless" he was narrowing down all cases to a select few. that few being incidents that involved "innocent and defenseless".

if you really wanted to know what roth was stating, youd have asked your self what constitutes "innocent and defenseless" and the criteria their in. leading you all the way to the "circumstances". its the "circumstances" Roth was addressing the whole time. and hes right.. under those circumstance i myself have yet to hear of any gun-deaths by police.


we(I) are/am not trying to change the debate. you have failed to address the parameters of this debate from the word go. you failed to see what he was saying when you guys argued this very topic nearly a year ago, and you still dont get what hes saying.


the only thing that i can think of that would fuel your debate is a video i saw a long ways back. the video was of a man being apprehended, he was handcuffed and pinned to the ground. while being pinned a female police officer still had this man at gun point, and she accidentally fired a round into the pavement next to the mans head. immediately realizing see did not have the gun on safety, she promptly safetied and holstered her weapon.(if i can find the video ill post it) but that all i can legitimately come up with to support your position using Roths statement as a guideline.

Originally posted by Vitchilo
2008? Before the election? I think it will be the last resort of the establishment if Ron Paul have any chances to get elected.

you know whats worse is ive tried to tell people about all this and they refuse to look at it:/ all this is right out in the open and no one is gonna do a d*mn thing till is to late

Originally posted by Glyph_D
as i see it Roth is speaking of the circumstances. when he wrote "innocent and defenseless" he was narrowing down all cases to a select few. that few being incidents that involved "innocent and defenseless".

if you really wanted to know what roth was stating, youd have asked your self what constitutes "innocent and defenseless" and the criteria their in. leading you all the way to the "circumstances". its the "circumstances" Roth was addressing the whole time. and hes right.. under those circumstance i myself have yet to hear of any gun-deaths by police.

Then you're either blind, deaf, or just plain stupid.

Don't be ridiculous.

Roth only stated innocent and defenseless. Meaning innocent and defenseless. If you're innocent and defenseless and a normal person or if you're innocent and defensless and in a wheelchair is irrelevant. You're still innocent and defenseless.
Those "circumstances" are just BS Roth JUST made up since he finally realized how ridiculous his previous post was.

why are we arguing john titor was wrong its 2007 still no civil war so i dont see the problem just go with it already he has made a fool of us all there is no more need for an arguement he sucked us into his scheme for fame i believe he had tried to make a cult so chilax people

ArtemisFowl, try to make capital letters, comma’s and full stops. It surely helps to make a sentence look a lot better. But wait, you are a criminal mastermind of 13 years old. That’ll explain it.

Let’s play a little game. It’s called “connect the dots”..

Titor said the following on November 12, 2000: “For a few months now, I have been trying to alert anyone that would listen to the possibility of a civil war in the United States in 2005. Does that seem more likely now? Actually it's quite amazing to see what's happening. I have been trying to get people to pay attention for the last few months but to see it unfold is very interesting.

What could it be that Titor observed in 2000 as the possible cause for a civil war? Why did he feel the need to warn us in the pre 9/11 world? Money? Fame? Hmmm.. not very likely.

Could it be that Titor knew about the consequences of the “Project for the New American Century” (PNAC), a NeoCon US think tank group established in early 1997..

I guess some of you probably heard of the “Wolfowitz-doctrine” ..to adopt a more aggressive and unilateral foreign policy that would allow the US to act offensively and pre-emptively in the world..

Here’s an enlightening (short) YouTube video:



Is that perhaps why Titor said to Pamela in a personal email just a few months before 9/11: “I would also urge you to keep an eye on the world. It is capable of changing very quickly now."

Is that perhaps why Titor pointed to the Constitution, the “American Federal Empire” .. “degrading US foreign policy and consistency”….

Is that perhaps why Titor said: “Are you really surprised to find out that Iraq has nukes now or is that just BS to whip everyone up into accepting the next war?”

Titor must have known the Constitution alone would NOT be able to provide enough protection against their intent to -->establish the NWO rapidly....

On Titor's worldline the Constitution was lived by it's people. Is that perhaps why Titor said: “On my worldline, we are no longer afraid of the "NWO". Are you afraid of Nazis?” + "With 5 (presidents), foreign policy is more consistent, power shifting between parties has less of an impact on the overall government"..

....-->establish the NWO rapidly. Rapidly? As in “by 2012?” Will they succeed?
What was it again Titor said: "Yes, I think the New World Order idea tried to establish itself. I would consider them the combination of the old U.S. federal system, Europe, Canada and Australia." + "If the Egyptians knew the Red Sea was going to drown them, do you think they would have pursued Moses?"..

Yes I believe that’s why Titor said all these things. Titor knew more of our possible future. Without any doubt. All the more reasons for us to pay attention to his comments about Israel: “The last resort for a defensive Israel and its offensive Arab neighbors is to use weapons of mass destruction. In the grand scheme of things, the war in the Middle East is a part of what's to come, not the cause.”..

Think about it.. this may be just a few months away from us..

According to G.W. Bush, America is now safer...
According to Titor: “You will be forced to ask yourself how many civil rights you will give up to feel safe.” + “They were betting that people wanted security instead of freedom and they were wrong.”

Will they be wrong? We will see.. very soon..

John Titor
"The year 2008 was a general date by which time everyone will realize the world they thought they were living in was over."


[edit on 28-5-2007 by Roth Joint]

If the Egyptians knew the Red Sea was going to drown them, do you think they would have pursued Moses?

I never understood this quote... is it that the government would have never started all this and go after the resistance if they knew that they would end up hanged to a tree? Or something like that?

What do you all think this means?

Also, Titor said he left his home because his neighbor was raided by SWAT or something like that during the night. You don't hear it on the news, but the no-knock warrants are much more used, and ABUSED.

In North Carolina, if you refuse to open your door, they can shoot you dead and get away with it.

Protect and serve my .... well.

[edit on 28-5-2007 by Vitchilo]

Originally posted by Vitchilo

If the Egyptians knew the Red Sea was going to drown them, do you think they would have pursued Moses?

I never understood this quote... is it that the government would have never started all this and go after the resistance if they knew that they would end up hanged to a tree? Or something like that?

What do you all think this means?

On 2 accounts Titor mentioned the “Red Sea and the Egyptians.”

The first time with relation to 2012.

“Yes, there are unusual events in 2012 but they do not cause the world to end. Unfortunately, I have decided not to discuss events that you or I can do anything about. It is important that they be a surprise. Perhaps you are familiar with the story of the Red Sea and the Egyptians?”

The second time with relation to a catalyzing event (Pearl Harbour)

“If the Egyptians knew the Red Sea was going to drown them, do you think they would have pursued Moses? If you could go back in time to 1941 and tell the radar operators to take a second look at the radar screen on December 7th, would you? Before you say yes and accept that parade in your honor down Main Street, perhaps you should go forward in time and see if the U.S still had the motivation to make the A-bomb before Hitler did.”

My take on this: 9/11 is THE catalyzing event that legitimized the “War on Terror.” However, the true purpose behind this war remains at least disputable.

It could very well be that Titor cryptically pointed to this war as a huge mistake that would become pretty obvious in 2012.. therefore, “If the Egyptians knew the Red Sea was going to drown them, do you think they would have pursued Moses?”.. + "Yes, I think the New World Order idea tried to establish itself.”

Originally posted by Vitchilo

If the Egyptians knew the Red Sea was going to drown them, do you think they would have pursued Moses?

I never understood this quote...

What do you all think this means?

I see this as a reference to how powerful hindsight truly is. The quote its self is defining a few things- firstly and most importantly it reveals the arrogance of those who claim to be in power. the second is that knowledge is a two edged sword and should be controlled and kept away from those that would use it against you.

"Loose lips, sink ships"

Titor is stating the reasons why he does not reveal specifics about our future. if he were to reveal "how/when" we discovered the truth and what that truth contains. that truth would be pursued by the enemy to conceal it from the eyes of the people. and further he has stated that the people do revolt and win, but refused to release the "how" of our victory. leaving those in power on the edge of their seat, making them question themselves and if possible to create errors in their judgment.

im not sure if you guys take the bible as the "word", but for now lets suggest it is the "word". of all the people involved in the parting of the red sea who knew of the things to come? moses knew; he knew what path to take and what event would unfold to allow that path to secure their future. he kept that information out of the hand that would use it against him and his people.

In a way Titor himself was playing moses then. not in a biblical sense but in the way that he knows of the events to come.


Egyptians=NWO, Israelites=the people. in these regards history is repeating itself. and the nwo will be choked out by the tides again.

More like Titor was talking out of his...you know what


What's with the heartagram Roth lol?

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
More like Titor was talking out of his...you know what

Most definitely something you know all about... lol.

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
What's with the heartagram Roth lol?

The "Heartagram" gives the finger to all other occult symbolism used by the NWO builders.. yes.. rituals and symbols are powerful.. NOT playing that game.. is so much more powerful..

Other then that, I thought it was about time to change my avatar. I thought about something with "The Matrix" but then I remembered you had been using that already

Actually this avatar will be temporary.. my new avatar must have something to do with 2012 and the word "NEW".. you know, that word our New Government likes so much.. like:
New Citizenship Project
The Project for the New American Century
Neo-Conservative
New Pearl Harbor
The New Freedom Initiative
etc..

Everything "brand new".. and so appropriate.. a new avatar! Soon..

Yes, I have it! It will be the New WTC tower design!.. to be ready in 2012..

[edit on 29-5-2007 by Roth Joint]

Oh no....
Don't tell me you're jumping on the 2012 bandwagon too now Roth
*sigh*



The Mayans couldn't even predict their own demise, I don't know where people get off that they could predict anything with any accuracy....

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
Oh no....
Don't tell me you're jumping on the 2012 bandwagon too now Roth
*sigh*

The Mayans couldn't even predict their own demise, I don't know where people get off that they could predict anything with any accuracy....

Enjoy the ride.. it's going to be a very interesting one.. and you don't even have to wait that long..

John Titor
"The year 2008 was a general date by which time everyone will realize the world they thought they were living in was over."

why didn't titor warn us about katrina, 9/11 or the tsunami ? screw him, selfish bastard

have the titorites looked in the mirror and seen millerites yet ? when is jesus coming ? 2004 ? 2005 ? 2008 ? 2012 ? 2036 ?



[edit on 29-5-2007 by syrinx high priest]

9/11 or the tsunami

He did. 9/11: In his last letter to Pamela. Tsunami: 100.000 are dead tomorrow... that thing.

You really don't see where the USA is going don't you? Complete train wreck, this is where it's going.

Originally posted by Vitchilo

9/11 or the tsunami

He did. 9/11: In his last letter to Pamela. Tsunami: 100.000 are dead tomorrow... that thing.

lol, no he didn't. If he told us about a civil war, there's no way he wouldn't tell us about 9/11. So, what's the excuse? One of the biggest events in world history somehow slipped his mind? lol

And well over 200,000 people died in the tsunami, and there were other events in which 100,000 people died. How do you which one he was talking about?

You really don't see where the USA is going don't you? Complete train wreck, this is where it's going.

You don't even live in the U.S. so what do you care?
Based on your posts I have to say that this is what you WANT to happen.

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
Based on your posts I have to say that this is what you WANT to happen.

i want something to happen to "this" america. im getting real tired of all the BS people have to go thru on a day to day basis. the american system is all but broken, and needs to be broke. we need a "new"(

lol, no he didn't. If he told us about a civil war, there's no way he wouldn't tell us about 9/11. So, what's the excuse? One of the biggest events in world history somehow slipped his mind? lol

Yes he did, read the last letter he sent to Pamela. And as he said, he wouldn't say it exactly for obvious reasons that obviously you can't understand. And your comparaison doesn't work, a civil war is a general term, not 9/11.

So I want the US to fall eh? Yeah right. I live in Canada, so everything going on in the US affect us directly genius. If your economy crash, our economy crash even more because we're dependant on your market. I don't want the USA to fall, it's full of great people like Glyph or even you. I want it to CHANGE DRASTICALLY. Get rid of the constant propaganda, lies, murder, torture, wars, oppression... I want to see a better country than it is now, I want it back to the 1776 days.

It's not hatred about your country, but hatred about your government and many other governments in the world. If a major worldwide change is to happen, it needs to start in the USA then in the UK then in Europe. It's not Chinese elite going around funding terrorists and engineering wars, it's western elite. So the people of the world need to wipe out the western elite once and for all, then we can wipe out the world elite.

There's no chinese in Bilderberg, CFR, Club Of Rome, Bohemian Grove, that kind of thing. Of course they would if they could, but they can't right now, so we better wipe our traitors so we can help chinese and russians to wipe out theirs.

To have all the changes needed, the society need something big, because if you look at history, major changes don't happen if something big that leads to a significant portion of the population to really get involved to overthrow the regime by any means possible.

And I about the population being nuked, sorry, but I wouldn't cry for the brainwashed population (28%) that still support Bush. Those braindead morans aren't important for humanity, they have huge psychological problems of denial, it's sad in a way, but it's better for them to die than be slaves.

[edit on 30-5-2007 by Vitchilo]

Originally posted by syrinx high priest
why didn't titor warn us about katrina, 9/11 or the tsunami ? screw him, selfish bastard

He did.. cryptically.. but sticking to his code he did not openly discuss events we couldn't do anything about.

Originally posted by syrinx high priest
have the titorites looked in the mirror and seen millerites yet ?

You will have to ask the "Titorites" lol. Me: do you mean Miller Lite? It's still a great tasting beer you know..

Originally posted by syrinx high priest
when is jesus coming ? 2004 ? 2005 ? 2008 ? 2012 ? 2036 ?

Actually that's a pretty interesting question you know. What if someone would tell you that Jesus is already here for a couple of decades but not in the visible flesh? ("for as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.")

And what if that someone would tell you that Jesus isn't here to bake apple pies? ("I did not come to bring peace, but a sword.")

Interesting eh?

Originally posted by Vitchilo
Yes he did, read the last letter he sent to Pamela. And as he said, he wouldn't say it exactly for obvious reasons that obviously you can't understand. And your comparaison doesn't work, a civil war is a general term, not 9/11.

As I stated, he didn't even hint at 9/11....
Any letters or emails to Pamela only reiterated what he said on the message boards. There's was nothing new in any of them.

And a civil war IS specific. He even stated how many people would die and when and how it would begin. If he did all of that, there's no way he wouldn't be able to tell us about 9/11.
It would have been his moral obligation to do so, which is another problem with time travel. You run into the same problems as shown in the movie Minority Report.
The moral and political issues surrounding time travel would assure that if it is ever developed the general public wouldn't know about it, and assure that it would have a TON of red tape and EXTREMELY stringent regulations associated with it. You would also have to have a small army guarding any "time machines."

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
And a civil war IS specific. He even stated how many people would die and when and how it would begin. If he did all of that, there's no way he wouldn't be able to tell us about 9/11.

revealing a civil war is to take place is not specific. he did not state how the civil conflict would begin. there are a hundred reasons why he would have refused to reveal 911, the most important is to "not" give us the opportunity to remove it from our timeline. 911 is the only(openly admitted) reason all the BS across the globe is taking place.

It would have been his moral obligation to do so, which is another problem with time travel. You run into the same problems as shown in the movie Minority Report.

im wondering if you meant to say "timecop"?? MR was about psychics.

The moral and political issues surrounding time travel would assure that if it is ever developed the general public wouldn't know about it, and assure that it would have a TON of red tape and EXTREMELY stringent regulations associated with it. You would also have to have a small army guarding any "time machines."

this is wrong according to titor. titor states the "nature of time" removes the effectiveness of corruption. so policing is not that big an issue due to that fact that if a change was to take place it would be of another timeline and not of the original. titor states(thru context) that a 1-2% divergence is the maximum allowance for a successful return, anything more would create an entirely different timeline(ie very risky).

im sure some people have tried to change a great many things by using timetravel. they created a new timline either one of great success or one of great failure. im most certain the traveller would try to return to their real timeline at some point, makeing all their efforts moot in the end. and im sure that if this is the case, this thought experiment would be provided in a manual to discourage any rogue attempts at time altercations.