It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The American Civil War of 2005 as predicted by John Titor

page: 57
31
<< 54  55  56    58  59  60 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 8 2005 @ 12:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeirdWhere2Hide....there's a good reason why that crap is in the trashbin. Please tell me you believe that. I want to confirm something.




No actually i just found it an interesting read. But there were reports of troop movements to the New Madrid fault zone...and i do think that a major earthquake is going to hit the st.louis area




posted on Sep, 8 2005 @ 07:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
Roth: Wow. This is a place to deny ignorance not spread propaganda.

Info from people who know what they're talking about


Look who's talking here. What you've just presented is a perfect example of spreading propaganda. What I have presented to you are the facts. And you have the nerve to say you fear for America? Your hypocritical behavior only knows one reward from me: my utter contempt.



Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
(just a side note and way off topic: building the levees higher raises the water level and still wouldn't protect if from a large cat 5 storm. You'd just have worst flooding. I'm not sure what they'll do in this case, especially with alot of the city below sea level. Have two sets of levees maybe?)
Wiki
www.msnbc.msn.com...
Bottom line: hindsight is always 20/20


Bottom line: your beloved present US Administration will do anything to put the blame on others and flee from their responsibility. However the facts are clear. This entire present war mongering Administration is to blame for the New Orleans deaths because of their recent cuts in funding for levee maintenance and development. Cuts that were decided upon to feed their war in Iraq. Without these recent cuts the levees would not have crumbled on Monday night from saturation and scour erosion from a Class 3 hurricane. Because that's a fact! No excuses here: Hurricane Katrina did not directly hit New Orleans in its full strength.

www.chicagotribune.com...
"Does this mean we should blame President Bush for the fact that New Orleans is underwater? No, but it means we can blame Bush when a Category 3 or Category 2 hurricane puts New Orleans under."

www.cbc.ca...
"Katrina, which weakened slightly overnight to a strong Category 4 storm, turned slightly eastward before hitting land, which would put the western eyewall - the weaker side of the strongest winds - over New Orleans.

"It's not as bad as the eastern side. It'll be plenty bad enough," said Eric Blake of the National Hurricane Center in Miami."

www.wistv.com...
"The National Hurricane Center estimates the strongest winds to hit New Orleans were about 100 miles-per-hour. Authorities in New Orleans say at least 40,000 homes have been flooded."

svs.gsfc.nasa.gov...
Blue-Green shows a Class 1 Hurricane with winds between 74 and 95 miles per hour. Green displays a Class 2 Hurricane with winds between 96 and 110 miles per hour. Yellow is a Class 3 Hurricane where winds are sustained between 111 and 130 miles per hour. Orange is a Class 4 Hurricane with winds between 131 and 154 miles per hour. Red is the most deadly classification where winds are greater then 155 miles per hour.

The facts are clear and simple. New Orleans wasn't hit by a Class 5 Hurricane. New Orleans was hit by Katrina with a strength of no more then Class 2 or 3. Which brings us back to:

www.chicagotribune.com...
"Does this mean we should blame President Bush for the fact that New Orleans is underwater? No, but it means we can blame Bush when a Category 3 or Category 2 hurricane puts New Orleans under."

And now the other interesting part: well prepared and informed about the coming of Hurricane Katrina....

Where was our well prepared and well informed President “leader” in 2005 on Day 1 of the New Orleans tragedy?

[edit on 8-9-2005 by Roth Joint]



posted on Sep, 8 2005 @ 07:12 AM
link   
Yes, let's blame Bush for Clinton not funding the levees, and Bush Sr not funding the levees, and the New Orleans gov't not funding the levees. It's ALL Bush's fault. The lack of funding and diversion of funds for the levees has been going on for a LONG TIME.



posted on Sep, 8 2005 @ 07:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
Yes, let's blame Bush for Clinton not funding the levees, and Bush Sr not funding the levees, and the New Orleans gov't not funding the levees. It's ALL Bush's fault. The lack of funding and diversion of funds for the levees has been going on for a LONG TIME.


So what exactly is your point?



posted on Sep, 8 2005 @ 07:41 AM
link   
Oh I'm sorry, did I not make that clear enough? I thought it was easy enough to understand.

How is it Bush's fault that President Clinton diverted funds? How is it Bush's fault that the New Orleans city government diverted funds? If someone like Roth Joint is going to blame him for diverting the funds for fighting the war, I'd like to see exactly how it's his fault that those other people were also responsible for it.



posted on Sep, 8 2005 @ 07:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
Oh I'm sorry, did I not make that clear enough? I thought it was easy enough to understand.

How is it Bush's fault that President Clinton diverted funds? How is it Bush's fault that the New Orleans city government diverted funds? If someone like Roth Joint is going to blame him for diverting the funds for fighting the war, I'd like to see exactly how it's his fault that those other people were also responsible for it.



.....uuueeh wah? Whatever you are smoking, I wouldn't smoke that again if I were you...



posted on Sep, 8 2005 @ 07:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
Oh I'm sorry, did I not make that clear enough?

No you didn't. It was just incoherent rambling, like everything else you post on ATS.


Originally posted by Zaphod58
I thought it was easy enough to understand.

Your perception on your own thoughts is understandable. However, they make no sense to the rest of the world.



posted on Sep, 8 2005 @ 07:55 AM
link   
Nice answer. Glad to know that not only am I stupid, but I'm incomprehensible too. Thanks! Always glad to know things like that.


JAK

posted on Sep, 8 2005 @ 08:17 AM
link   
Let's keep it civil (pun intended) and refrain from personal insults/attacks.

If it's not on topic - then it's not wanted here.

Jak



posted on Sep, 8 2005 @ 09:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by Roth Joint
Look who's talking here. What you've just presented is a perfect example of spreading propaganda. What I have presented to you are the facts. And you have the nerve to say you fear for America? Your hypocritical behavior only knows one reward from me: my utter contempt.

How?
Explain how this is propaganda? You talk talk talk but that's all you, but you never explain.
Explain how people who work on the levees know less than people who have no clue as to what they're talking about. Explain to me people how posting articles from those people is propaganda while posting articles from anti government or bias websites aren't.


Bottom line: your beloved present US Administration will do anything to put the blame on others and flee from their responsibility.

Why won't you read? What are you scared of?
I can't believe you're so terrified of being wrong. Amazing.


However the facts are clear. This entire present war mongering Administration is to blame for the New Orleans deaths because of their recent cuts in funding for levee maintenance and development. Cuts that were decided upon to feed their war in Iraq. Without these recent cuts the levees would not have crumbled on Monday night from saturation and scour erosion from a Class 3 hurricane.

Again.....READ!!!!!!!!!!!!
It's not that hard. This is your major problem. You don't take time to read FACTS. You only take time to read propaganda and then try to present it here as facts.This levee system was built in the 60s. It was only built to withstand a fast moving Category (not class, lol. This isn't really a big deal....but it's so typical of people who have no clue to what they're talking about) 3 hurricane. Katrina was a large cat 4 (close to 5) meaning the chances are very great the levees wouldn't have held.
Also, you keep talking about the Admin playing the blame game, but THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT YOU'RE DOING!!
You keep blaming the admin, when local officials had 100X more responsibility for what happened. GET THAT THROUGH YOUR HEAD! I'm not sure what's so hard to comprehend about that. Even the local officials have APOLOGIZED for their mistakes. Tell me why would they do that if only the Bush admin was responsible?

More on the money LA recieved:
Money flowed to questionable projects


Because that's a fact! No excuses here: Hurricane Katrina did not directly hit New Orleans in its full strength.

No one said it did...
Not sure what this has to do with anything

It's a good thing it didn't!


www.chicagotribune.com...
"Does this mean we should blame President Bush for the fact that New Orleans is underwater? No, but it means we can blame Bush when a Category 3 or Category 2 hurricane puts New Orleans under."

No Cat 3 or Cat 2 put NO under.
A Cat 4 did.


www.cbc.ca...
"Katrina, which weakened slightly overnight to a strong Category 4 storm, turned slightly eastward before hitting land, which would put the western eyewall - the weaker side of the strongest winds - over New Orleans.

Winds have nothing to do with rain or storm surge. Even though it was weakening, it still had it's 28 foot storm surge it had when it was a Cat 5. And tropical storms, not even hurricanes yet, can bring tremendous amounts of rain. And as it stated NO was on the west side, meaning as the storm pushed northward the winds were coming from the NE, pushing all that water in Lake P. toward NO.


The facts are clear and simple. New Orleans wasn't hit by a Class 5 Hurricane. New Orleans was hit by Katrina with a strength of no more then Class 2 or 3. Which brings us back to:

lol
This kid trying to talk to me, a meteorologist, about weather

I've just explained all this above. Hopefully you'll actually read it, but I seriously doubt it.



posted on Sep, 8 2005 @ 10:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird

Originally posted by Roth Joint
Look who's talking here. What you've just presented is a perfect example of spreading propaganda. What I have presented to you are the facts. And you have the nerve to say you fear for America? Your hypocritical behavior only knows one reward from me: my utter contempt.

How?
Explain how this is propaganda? You talk talk talk but that's all you, but you never explain.
Explain how people who work on the levees know less than people who have no clue as to what they're talking about. Explain to me people how posting articles from those people is propaganda while posting articles from anti government or bias websites aren't.


Bottom line: your beloved present US Administration will do anything to put the blame on others and flee from their responsibility.

Why won't you read? What are you scared of?
I can't believe you're so terrified of being wrong. Amazing.


However the facts are clear. This entire present war mongering Administration is to blame for the New Orleans deaths because of their recent cuts in funding for levee maintenance and development. Cuts that were decided upon to feed their war in Iraq. Without these recent cuts the levees would not have crumbled on Monday night from saturation and scour erosion from a Class 3 hurricane.

Again.....READ!!!!!!!!!!!!
It's not that hard. This is your major problem. You don't take time to read FACTS. You only take time to read propaganda and then try to present it here as facts.This levee system was built in the 60s. It was only built to withstand a fast moving Category (not class, lol. This isn't really a big deal....but it's so typical of people who have no clue to what they're talking about) 3 hurricane. Katrina was a large cat 4 (close to 5) meaning the chances are very great the levees wouldn't have held.
Also, you keep talking about the Admin playing the blame game, but THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT YOU'RE DOING!!
You keep blaming the admin, when local officials had 100X more responsibility for what happened. GET THAT THROUGH YOUR HEAD! I'm not sure what's so hard to comprehend about that. Even the local officials have APOLOGIZED for their mistakes. Tell me why would they do that if only the Bush admin was responsible?

More on the money LA recieved:
Money flowed to questionable projects


Because that's a fact! No excuses here: Hurricane Katrina did not directly hit New Orleans in its full strength.

No one said it did...
Not sure what this has to do with anything

It's a good thing it didn't!


www.chicagotribune.com...
"Does this mean we should blame President Bush for the fact that New Orleans is underwater? No, but it means we can blame Bush when a Category 3 or Category 2 hurricane puts New Orleans under."

No Cat 3 or Cat 2 put NO under.
A Cat 4 did.


www.cbc.ca...
"Katrina, which weakened slightly overnight to a strong Category 4 storm, turned slightly eastward before hitting land, which would put the western eyewall - the weaker side of the strongest winds - over New Orleans.

Winds have nothing to do with rain or storm surge. Even though it was weakening, it still had it's 28 foot storm surge it had when it was a Cat 5. And tropical storms, not even hurricanes yet, can bring tremendous amounts of rain. And as it stated NO was on the west side, meaning as the storm pushed northward the winds were coming from the NE, pushing all that water in Lake P. toward NO.


The facts are clear and simple. New Orleans wasn't hit by a Class 5 Hurricane. New Orleans was hit by Katrina with a strength of no more then Class 2 or 3. Which brings us back to:

lol
This kid trying to talk to me, a meteorologist, about weather

I've just explained all this above. Hopefully you'll actually read it, but I seriously doubt it.


You are an utter fool. Not only that, but I am presenting you facts from people who truly work on those levees (why don't you read them again on this thread) whilst you were merely showing propaganda from the influenced U.S. Army Corps of Engineers officials through a telephone interview.

What a pathetic performance! "Good job" ThatsJustWeird.

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers said Thursday that a lack of funding for hurricane-protection projects around New Orleans did not contribute to the disastrous flooding that followed Hurricane Katrina.

In a telephone interview with reporters, corps officials said that although portions of the flood-protection levees remain incomplete, the levees near Lake Pontchartrain that gave way--inundating much of the city--were completed and in good condition before the hurricane.



So far the propaganda. And now for the facts:

www.tpmcafe.com...
"It appears that the money has been moved in the president's budget to handle homeland security and the war in Iraq, and I suppose that's the price we pay," Maestri said. "Nobody locally is happy that the levees can't be finished, and we are doing everything we can to make the case that this is a security issue for us."

"I needed $11 million this year, and I got $5.5 million," Naomi said. "I need $22.5 million next year to do everything that needs doing, and the first $4.5 million of that will go to pay four contractors who couldn't get paid this year."

www.philly.com...
For the first time in 37 years, federal budget cuts have all but stopped major work on the New Orleans area's east bank hurricane levees, a complex network of concrete walls, metal gates and giant earthen berms that won't be finished for at least another decade.

www.editorandpublisher.com...
The Corps never tried to hide the fact that the spending pressures of the war in Iraq, as well as homeland security -- coming at the same time as federal tax cuts -- was the reason for the strain. At least nine articles in the Times-Picayune from 2004 and 2005 specifically cite the cost of Iraq as a reason for the lack of hurricane- and flood-control dollars.

www.politicalaffairs.net...
In Louisiana, specifically, local officials fought for, begged for, and demanded federal funding to implement hurricane defense plans that could have avoided the widespread flooding of New Orleans.

But the Bush administration has continuously slashed funding for those projects. Robert Hartwig, chief economist for the Insurance Information Institute, was quoted early last week in Newhouse News Service as saying, "It’s going to be very evident that there were an enormous number of vulnerabilities that weren’t addressed."

Furthermore your utter childish reaction about the difference in wording a Hurricane in Categories or Classes won't hold:

en.wikipedia.org...
Category 1=74–95 mph
Category 2=96–110 mph
Category 3=111–130 mph
Category 4=131–155 mph
Category 5=≥156 mph


www.wistv.com...
"The National Hurricane Center estimates the strongest winds to hit New Orleans were about 100 miles-per-hour. Authorities in New Orleans say at least 40,000 homes have been flooded."

So AGAIN, THE FACTS ARE CLEAR AND SIMPLE AND GET THAT THROUGH YOUR HEAD:
New Orleans wasn't hit by a CATEGORY/CLASS 5 Hurricane. New Orleans was hit by Katrina with a strength of no more then CATEGORY/CLASS 2 or 3. Which brings us back to:

www.chicagotribune.com...
"Does this mean we should blame President Bush for the fact that New Orleans is underwater? No, but it means we can blame Bush when a Category 3 or Category 2 hurricane puts New Orleans under."

[edit on 8-9-2005 by Roth Joint]



posted on Sep, 8 2005 @ 02:03 PM
link   
this thread is still active ?

why ?


since simulacra declared the NO tragedy the start of the civil war, and the war never happened, its over right ?


I'll give anyone a cookie if they can clearly demonstrate;

Perhaps our definition of war is different. I would define it as a conflict where Perhaps our definition of war is different. I would define it as a conflict where organized groups engage in maneuver and armed conflict." ."



posted on Sep, 8 2005 @ 02:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Roth Joint
www.politicalaffairs.net...
In Louisiana, specifically, local officials fought for, begged for, and demanded federal funding to implement hurricane defense plans that could have avoided the widespread flooding of New Orleans.

But the Bush administration has continuously slashed funding for those projects. Robert Hartwig, chief economist for the Insurance Information Institute, was quoted early last week in Newhouse News Service as saying, "It’s going to be very evident that there were an enormous number of vulnerabilities that weren’t addressed."


I am sorry, but this sort of criticism is exaggerated and unfair. No matter what the preparations were, the damage of a hurricane like Katrina can't be avoided. However, the recovery measures can (and should have been) much better planned, and it is an obvious fact that the more money is spent in war, the less is left for prevention of natural disasters.

The results of all this (what happens to FEMA, what is done to N.O.) will tell us if it was a mistake (caused by carelessness and underfunding) or if this is indeed the new way that the Federal Government treats people.



posted on Sep, 8 2005 @ 02:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by syrinx high priestPerhaps our definition of war is different. I would define it as a conflict where Perhaps our definition of war is different. I would define it as a conflict where organized groups engage in maneuver and armed conflict." ."




You missed it. It was there the whole time right in front. see if you can follow my logic here.


This is what Titor Said... "Perhaps or definition of war is different..."

then he goes on to explain how HE would define war...knowing that there

is a difference between how he defines war and what the civil war looked

like in its infancy stage.

I know that make sense to you... This is just the begining!



posted on Sep, 8 2005 @ 03:00 PM
link   
Hey dude, what of the troop movements to New Madrid, I live right outside of st louis???????

A friend in the national guard said that a magnitude 8 quake down there would destroy 90% of the bridges and overpasses here, and that they have purchased 5 circus tents to house the approximate 500,000 homeless such a quake would cause


Civil war starting off by natural disasters, and the governments response or lack there of to them, hmmm just a thought


hopefully
peace



posted on Sep, 8 2005 @ 03:06 PM
link   

Is everyone seeing this??
lol, I'm rolling here!!



First of all you posted the same articles you posted before. In not one of those articles does it say the levee if completed would have been able to withstand a large hurricane like Katrina. This is the part you fail to comprehend. A FULLY FUNDED COMPLETED LEVEE SYSTEM STILL WOULDN'T HAVE WORKED (it also wouldn't have been completed in time of this hurricane). Some areas would have been spared alot of damage, but others may have recieved worse. As I stated earlier, every time they raise the levees, the delta gets deeper raising the water level. So not only do you have more water, you have more pressure, from the water, on the levees as well. Meaning if they broke, the water would have gone through the city with much greater force.

Also, none of those articles you posted also state how funding has been cut since before Bush.
Take the time to read the articles I posted. You'll get a much clearer undertanding of everything.


Furthermore your utter childish reaction about the difference in wording a Hurricane in Categories or Classes won't hold:

en.wikipedia.org...
Category 1=74–95 mph
Category 2=96–110 mph
Category 3=111–130 mph
Category 4=131–155 mph
Category 5=≥156 mph


What are you talking about??
lmao You didn't even understand what I was talking about. See this is what I mean by your reading comprehension problem.

(also, what part of I study the weather constantly is so hard to understand?)


www.wistv.com...
"The National Hurricane Center estimates the strongest winds to hit New Orleans were about 100 miles-per-hour. Authorities in New Orleans say at least 40,000 homes have been flooded."

So AGAIN, THE FACTS ARE CLEAR AND SIMPLE AND GET THAT THROUGH YOUR HEAD:
New Orleans wasn't hit by a CATEGORY/CLASS 5 Hurricane. New Orleans was hit by Katrina with a strength of no more then CATEGORY/CLASS 2 or 3.

omg

What part of "WIND DOESN'T AFFECT RAIN OR STORM SURGE" is so hard to comprehend?? The levees didn't break because of the wind you (edited for content), they broke because of the flooding rains and a 28 foot high storm surge. I don't know how to make that clearer.


Seriously, is everyone seeing this. This is a clear cut example of what Roth has been doing throughout this thread. He takes facts, twists them, then presents his twisted (and wrong) arguments on here to fit his agenda.

Then has the nerve to call me a fool.

Silly Rabbit, your tricks don't work.



posted on Sep, 8 2005 @ 04:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by syrinx high priest



since simulacra declared the NO tragedy the start of the civil war, and the war never happened, its over right ?


I'll give anyone a cookie if they can clearly demonstrate;

Perhaps our definition of war is different. I would define it as a conflict where Perhaps our definition of war is different. I would define it as a conflict where organized groups engage in maneuver and armed conflict." ."





I don't know if you have read a page of this thread because if you did you would have found out that John T said the war would start with Waco type events each month and by 2008 it was an all out Civil War.



posted on Sep, 8 2005 @ 04:38 PM
link   
Apparently federal incentives to have such construction done were being ignored:

"research into more than ten years of reporting on hurricane and flood damage mitigation efforts in and around New Orleans indicates that local and state officials did not use federal money that was available for levee improvements or coastal reinforcement and often did not secure local matching funds that would have generated even more federal funding.
... No new state money had been allocated to the area's hurricane protection projects as of October of 2002, leaving the available 65 percent federal matching funds for such construction untouched."


www.cnsnews.com...\Nation\archive\200509\NAT20050907a.html

There is a reason for different levels of government; you can't expect the President to act as and for the political leaders for every state and city in the United States.



posted on Sep, 9 2005 @ 04:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by syrinx high priest
this thread is still active ?

why ?


since simulacra declared the NO tragedy the start of the civil war, and the war never happened, its over right ?


I'll give anyone a cookie if they can clearly demonstrate;

Perhaps our definition of war is different. I would define it as a conflict where Perhaps our definition of war is different. I would define it as a conflict where organized groups engage in maneuver and armed conflict." ."



This is completely unverified information that I found out from a friend, but there was a program on the Discovery channel the other day about a group of men who were fighting authorities in a major american city. Apparently something to do with a van and shooting at cops with assault rifles.

If there is organized conflict going on do you think the American news media is going to report on it? Before 9/11 I thought that Fox News was propaganda, but that certain news organizations like CNN or MSNBC were at least somewhat independent of the government. Now I know that all our major News outlets are basically state sponsered propaganda. Do you remember the death tolls that the major news organizations released in the first five days of the hurricane? All of them were less than a hundred, but we now know that figure is at least ten thousand. None of them are showing any images of bodies floating in the water getting eaten by crocodiles, none of them are showing any images of the armed conflict between the (now) US military and the "looters". Also, EVERY major news organization was involved in the 9/11 cover up. NO ONE questioned Bush or took a close look at the footage of the actual plane crash, and if they did they turned the other way. That footage is on the internet and on several DVDs. I suggest you go watch it, zoomed in and frame by frame.



posted on Sep, 9 2005 @ 04:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by syrinx high priest
since simulacra declared the NO tragedy the start of the civil war, and the war never happened, its over right ?


I never stated that Hurricane Katrina was the onset of the American Civil War. But thanks for trolling.



new topics

top topics



 
31
<< 54  55  56    58  59  60 >>

log in

join