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.

 

I found John Titor

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 11:28 PM
link   
Link to Titor

Ok, so I could not resist, but saw the name and just HAD to post it. This is my local paper. So these days he is in the same boat as the rest of us. BTW read the article, it is not in the title.

Anyway, I know its not him, just my dry sense of humor, BUT , you never know!

Ama



[edit on 14-7-2009 by amatrine]




posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 11:49 PM
link   
The main jest of the article is about abandoning your pets when finacial hardships happen, I dont agree.

My pets are my family, and if I had to move I would have to find a place that accepted pets or move on.

This is why spay and neuter programs should be free. It should be government subsidized and according to what you can or cant pay.

It is a huge conspiracy and more money is generated each year for killing abandoned, stolen and set free and you name animal stories.

We could save millions of animal lives per year and undue cost of extermination by allowing programs to help stop the irresponsible owners to make the right choices whether or not they can afford it.

In the cities it should be manditory if you own a pet unless you prove otherwise able to bring litters in with constious responsibility.

As for your sense of humor, well his name was JT.

Edit to say this is in the wrong forum.

[edit on 14-7-2009 by antar]



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 11:52 PM
link   
I agree on the pets. My pets have traveled cross country with me. I would never give them up either. They eat better than us sometimes!



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 11:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by antar



As for your sense of humor, well his name was JT.

Edit to say this is in the wrong forum.

[edit on 14-7-2009 by antar]


He was one that made predictions, so how is it the wrong forum?



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 11:55 PM
link   
reply to post by amatrine
 


It is not cheap that is for sure, but yes I too travel with all of my family.

As for John Titor, I wonder if anyone else discovered this man and have questioned him as to his name? Odd huh?



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 11:57 PM
link   
I was wondering the same thing. This area of Arizona is not the biggest area. Good place to hide out! LOL

If it was him though I doubt he would have been wanted to be interviewed for the newspaper,lol



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 12:35 AM
link   
reply to post by antar
 



I'm sorry but I gotta jump in here. I know this isn't really the point of the thread but I have to respond to what you said about government subsidies.

It's that thought process right there that is the problem with our government, fiscal policies and nation.

It's NOT the governments responsibility to spay or neuter its citizens pets. It is the animals OWNERS responsibility. If you can't afford it, DON'T GET PETS. The ONLY reason you should have a pet is if you can afford to take care of it, no matter what your financial situation is.

If someone is a dumbass and gets a dog, but can't afford to neuter it, it is NOT MY responsibility to pay for it with MY tax dollars. In case you didn't know, the only money the government makes is from our taxes. With all the other wasteful spending going on out there, (Welfare, tax breaks, overseas military spending) I'm damn sick of being told how my money should go to some a hole who can't be responsible.

It's not the governments job to legislate morality. Nor is it their responsibility to allocate MY money to take care of a dog that doesn't have a home.

Now don't think I'm an animal hater...cause I'm not. I give to the ASPCA locally, but that is MY CHOICE. Your sensibilities should have no impact on how I choose to spend my hard earned dollar.



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 12:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by midnightbrigade
reply to post by antar
 




It's not the governments job to legislate morality.


Actually, it really is their job to make legislation that reflects common morality, that's how we achieved equal rights, Women's rights and children's rights over the last century. One question should be asked: Is it anyone's responsibility to reduce suffering in the world? I think it's all of our responsibility to do that. I commend your support of your local animal shelter I couldn't agree more about people needing to take responsibility for their pets. Take a trip to a poorer country that can't possibly facilitate feral animal care. I bet you will appreciate streets clear of feral animals a little more when you get home.

[edit on 15-7-2009 by Mumbotron]



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 12:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by midnightbrigade
reply to post by antar
 


It's NOT the governments responsibility to spay or neuter its citizens pets. It is the animals OWNERS responsibility. If you can't afford it, DON'T GET PETS. The ONLY reason you should have a pet is if you can afford to take care of it, no matter what your financial situation is.


I'm going off topic from the forum thread, I respectfully disagree, while you may think that people who can't afford pets shouldn't have pets, it would be terrible for them since pets are often the only true friends for homeless people. So they keep the pets, and ignore the vet because they can't afford to neuter or spay their pets.

But yeah, John Titor is asking for too much money


I believe that taxation is necessary, but taxation shouldn't go towards the overseas military or unnecessary military tech upgrades, secret programs, foreign handouts to thuggish nations, and that is a HUGE expenditure alone.

I don't mean to sound like a PTB population control death dealer, but it's cheaper to sterilize pets earlier on than having to deal with their babies later on and the with the pro-life and pro-choice crowd that invariably enters the equation.

[edit on 15-7-2009 by star in a jar]

[edit on 15-7-2009 by star in a jar]



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 01:19 AM
link   
reply to post by Mumbotron
 


I can see your point on the feral creatures, and fortunately we don't have that problem here in the states. The reason being is hunting season. However you feel about hunting, it is THE best population control. Now I'm not advocating shooting dogs on the street, however if one is attacking my cattle, I would not wait for a government official to come in and euthanize them. I'll take care of that myself. A bullet is a hell of a lot cheaper than euthanasia chemicals and the employee to capture, transport, and perform said euthanasia.

Also, I have to reiterate my previous post, it's NOT there job to legislate morality. It's OUR job as citizens to find out what our morality is and present it to them to put it on the books. They are our record keepers on morality, nothing more.

Let them decide the small stuff, but keep the important issues close to your chest. It's the only way to remain free.



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 01:27 AM
link   
reply to post by star in a jar
 



I feel for homeless people (In most situations) and its funny, when I was younger I used to skate in downtown Tulsa. Once every payday we would go down there and break out bread, lunchmeat, cheese and beer for the vagrants. Now, first, I never saw any of the homeless folks with pets, but that's neither here nor there.

My point is a PRIVATE institution should take this up. If you feel that spaying and neutering homeless peoples pets is a worthy cause, then create a charity group that does that. Get people to volunteer and donate.

Don't expect the government to take away my right to choose what charity I give to.

Meaning I give to the ASPCA willingly, but if you got the government to tax me and create this program of yours, suddenly I can't choose to give to the United Homeless People Pet Care. I HAVE to...because its not a charity...its an agency. That my friend is not the kind of government I want.



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 01:30 AM
link   
reply to post by midnightbrigade
 


How are we supposed to do it, approach them one at a time. There should be referendums on all matters that cost us money. That way if you or I find ourselves in the minority, we can at least know we represent ourselves to the legislative body. And no way should they use the electronic ballots. P.S. John Titor



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 02:00 AM
link   
reply to post by Mumbotron
 


I understand your point, and maybe I'm wrong, but I think at least the states should get to vote on it. Meaning before it becomes law for all, the state has to ratify it. That way if Montana wants it but Oklahoma doesn't we don't have to pay those Federal taxes.

PPS....John Titor



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 07:34 PM
link   
Talk about how to derail a thread!


Oh well, I guess the thread was misleading anyways right?

Off Topic buffet resume..................



posted on Jul, 19 2009 @ 01:29 PM
link   
u did find him....it really is john titor, but from a different timeline....



new topics

top topics



 
2

log in

join