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.

 

John Titor's prediction of civil war soon

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 2 2004 @ 10:42 PM
link   
Am I the only one who reads John Titor civil war prediction as taking a long time to get started. I think he was saying most people don't even relalize it until around 2008 when it will be at everyones door step. It's not like the # is going to hit the fan over night people. As John said, it starts out with very small waco type events and with our mainstream media, most of them problaby just get a small blurb in the paper and will be down played.




posted on Nov, 2 2004 @ 10:54 PM
link   
Check out my posts at the bottom of this page:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

I believe I found a flaw with Johns story...

Kt



posted on Nov, 2 2004 @ 11:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by netobrev
Am I the only one who reads John Titor civil war prediction as taking a long time to get started. I think he was saying most people don't even relalize it until around 2008 when it will be at everyones door step. It's not like the # is going to hit the fan over night people. As John said, it starts out with very small waco type events and with our mainstream media, most of them problaby just get a small blurb in the paper and will be down played.


Am I still here or did you plonk me like other people on this group because I'm a very un-politically correct Texas a hole? I agree with you! I don't believe him but I do agree with you.



posted on Nov, 2 2004 @ 11:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord

Originally posted by AssassinWell, look up more for yourself... John Titor


We have an extensive Titor archive right here on ATS, the result of the hard work of many members:
www.abovetopsecret.com...



Thanx for the link SO.



edit:

Just wondering... Did JT ever visit ATS while on his 'trip'?

[edit on 11/2/2004 by Assassin]



posted on Nov, 2 2004 @ 11:39 PM
link   
You stole my Avatar!!!!!!


Originally posted by W4rl0rD

Another big one is his claims of Civil Unrest and indeed a Civil War in the US in 2004/2005. (He actually contradicts himself a few times, saying 2005 instead of 2004 and vice versa).
The civil war in the United States will start in 2004. I would describe it as having a Waco type event every month that steadily gets worse.
and again:
This becomes apparent around 2004 as civil unrest develops near the next presidential election.

Now, we haven't seen any Waco type events so far. Nor any Civil Unrest leading up to this coming election.


Another large thing with all of Titor's comments and predictions. Is that he never once mentioned 9-11, the Bali Bombing, the Madrid Bombings, the Invasion of Afghanistan or Iraq. In fact nothing about the war on terror at all.

He does however comment on the Palestinian/Israeli conflict (the Intifada started in September 2000, so that had already happened when he started posting). He claims this conflict has a hand in bringing the US into civil war. As it stands, this conflict has settled down somewhat, and there are far far greater international issues that affect the US.



Now, why would Titor post a fake picture of his 'Time Machine' in action?
Why would he be wrong about the start of a Civil war in the US?
Why would he not mention the War on Terror or any of the attacks/invasions?

Simply put, because his story is a hoax. A quite well researched and executed hoax. But a hoax nonetheless. My guess is he didn't click about the light-bending picture (or perhaps didn't notice the error). He was guessing about the Civil war. At the time there was a big fuss about the 2000 US elections, (he hinted that Florida's votes would be discounted at one stage). He timed the 'civil war' to start around the next US elections. Fairly safe guess at the time because it was still 4 years down the track. He didn't mention the War on Terror because he didn't know, he, like the rest of us, didn't see it coming.

What other errors and inconsistencies are out there in Titors posts? This is just from a cursory look.


This was also posted by Kano,use the search option nubs



It has already been proven;YES!THIS IS A DAMN HOAX!

[edit on 2/11/04 by W4rl0rD]



posted on Nov, 3 2004 @ 12:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by SomewhereInChina
You stole my Avatar!!!!!!



Who stole your avatar???



posted on Nov, 3 2004 @ 12:13 AM
link   
This is the way I see it: I don't support Bush, nor do I support Kerry; however, if Bush wins, there could possibly be riots very similar to the 1992 riots that happened in Los Angeles, but on a national scale. A lot of the people I've been talking to keep on mentioning this.

[edit on 11-3-2004 by EmbryonicEssence]



posted on Nov, 3 2004 @ 12:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by EmbryonicEssence
...however, if Bush wins, there could possibly be riots very similar to the 1992 riots that happened in Los Angeles, but on a national scale. A lot of the people I've been talking to keep on mentioning this.

[edit on 11-3-2004 by EmbryonicEssence]


Civil unrest.



I think the obvious thing to say would be: there might never be another Civil War, but rather a Revolution of the people against a crooked Government. Maybe thats what Titor meant, a second Revolution against the American government.

If I am saying something that has already been rehashed, and restated many times, then please put me in the stockade for a few years.



posted on Nov, 3 2004 @ 09:15 AM
link   
John Titor did say it would consume everyone by 2008. So I am imagining, the civil war would start as a renegade group, that people hear about in the news, and ignore, because in their mighty ignorance "nothing is really happening" and then gradually realize they cannot escape it anymore.
However, if something is going to happen, there should be at least indications now. I do not know of any WACO type events in 2004, do you?
Can we be sure, if they did actually happen, the media will even cover it?

I am about 50/50 on Titor now.



posted on Nov, 3 2004 @ 10:29 AM
link   
This is something I've been thinking about for awhile now.

Maybe Waco style event means religious groups holding up inside a certain place, when the US Government (and other Governments, possibly) tear through them and waste alot of innocent heads along the way. Maybe it doesn't have to be on US soil.

The "insurgents" hold up in their "strongholds" could be similar to a Waco style event, we're already bombing Fallujah. If theres ANY innocents inside, bullets and bombs don't have names on them, so they kill indiscriminately.

Just a thought, not trying to push this idea on anyone, just think about it for awhile.




posted on Nov, 3 2004 @ 10:40 AM
link   
That makes sense Weise. I would definitely call the slaughtering of iraqi people, WACO style events. However, that has little impact on the US population, and I don't see how that could trigger a civil war. Most Americans don't even care what's happening in Iraq.



posted on Nov, 3 2004 @ 10:43 AM
link   
Well think about it, alot of people who defintely dont support the war are against it. Fighting terrorists in middle-east has stirred up a hornets nest from the people who've lost loved ones.

It does affect the American population on some level, just imagine when (if) more major combat operations against insurgents or a different enemy flare up. Alot more people will probably fall to a "flimsy" cause.



posted on Nov, 3 2004 @ 11:21 AM
link   
I think further wars, against Syria or Iran, could incite a revolution back in the US, but I still have doubts, the impression I get from the American people, they are simply too ignorant to care. I do think however if we have repeats of Miami and Seattle on anti-war protests, that could lead to something.



posted on Nov, 3 2004 @ 11:29 AM
link   
Theres an infinite amount of possibilities as to what could happen, you just have to be open minded enough to accept them all.

I know alot of people, escpially younger people my age, are against Bush. Alot I've told "like" the idea of a Civil war, so theres always going to be Freedom Fighters.

(Not saying I'm planning ANYTHING, just continuing the conversation.
)



posted on Nov, 3 2004 @ 11:43 AM
link   
I think that before anybody judges this they should consider that
there is quite a bit of civil unrest at this point, Never in history has there been such a nasty finger pointing election not to mention the tires slashed here, and confiscated voting machines there, I think that currently America is very divided and this saddens me greatly I saw a post earlier that said we should put the whole thing behind us and I hope that is what happens and we return to the pre-election United States intead of republicans and democrats battling it out.

Though I am not a supporter Congratualtions Bush Supporters
and peace be with you all....


geo



posted on Nov, 3 2004 @ 01:07 PM
link   
My take, is that Bush has 4 more years to carry out his agenda. He's going to want a legacy. So I expect the momentum, to pick up quite a bit. He didn't care about what the world thought, or half of the US popluation. When it came to going into Iraq. He said before the last election, that he was a uniter not a divider. As soon as he took office, everything was put into play quickly. To include rushing into Iraq. Anyone that didn't agree with him. Either lost their job, or was flat out ignored etc.. I find it very hard to believe, that the US is going to come together after this election. I don't think Bush, will try to unite this country at all. He is going to be just as head strong, if not more so. Since he won the popular vote this time around.

So all of the people that dread four more Bush years. Are going to be on edge as it is. Bush is going to continue to do his thing. To include confrontations across the globe. North Korea, Syria, Iran, take your pick. (To include all of the above.) So we have two very different momentums, that are going to colide here. The question in my mind, is when. We have the momentum of the, MTV consumer society. Where everyone doesn't have any patience, and wants everything done right now. That is going to colide with the momentum of having to endure four more years of Bush. Four years is a LONG time. So the more and more things change. I.E. more wars. The Supreem Court, a very probable draft. Women being used in combat situations. Which means daughters etc., being drafted to actually fight in war zones. Imagine the mobilization durring WWII. Expansion of Civil Service type jobs etc.. All for the war effort.

The more we move into this reality. The more people are going to say enough is enough. Sooner or later, it will get to the point. Where half of this country isn't willing to wait for 4 more years to pass. I hope I am wrong. I hope Bush does try to actually unite this country. Unfortunately, for him to do so. He would have to back out of alot of his campaign promises. I don't think he is going to do that. He has a plan, and he's going to stick with it. He has said so himself, pretty clearly.

So I don't really think, it's a matter of if it is going to happen. It's a matter of when. Who knows, maybe the election will be the spark. Maybe it's the next war Bush starts. My guess, would be there is going to be more terrorist attacks. Bringing in martial law, national ID cards. Possible manditory chip implants, etc..

Durring the past couple of years. Talk about a draft has been brought up. Now the military wants to use women in combat by January. We already have a back door draft. Our troops are spread too thin. Rumors of a coup in the US government etc.. What happens, if Bush keeps starting more wars, but never finishes any of the battles? It is very likely, that that will be the case. We don't have the troops, to engage everywhere in the world that Bush and the hawks want to. So won't the hawks start calling for nukes, so we don't have to get tied down in another war? We all know what they said after Japan. "Look at how many troops lives were saved!"

Terrorism is an un-winnable war. It's like the British trying to march in straight lines toward the enemy. While we were hiding in the woods to ambush them. It's unconventional fighting. You don't know who the enemy is. In a situation like that. It is impossible to win, especially while being fought in urban areas. Look at Israel. They have been fighting for around 60 years. In this type of war. It is a never ending "war".

Will the world put up with that? China has now warned the US against taking pre-emptive strikes. How many more conflicts, without resolutions are they going to put up with? My impression, is there will be more terrorist attacks on our soil. Then we will become a true military police state. People will "revolt" in the US, starting a "civil war". Waco type events, could be malitias etc.. Or people trying to survive in self sustaining groups. That don't want to be part of the system. I.E. don't want to take the mark of the beast etc.. During that time, other nations will try to step in. Possibly involving UN troops. Bringing in the NWO. Isn't it the only way to bring the US to it's knees? Get us fighting eachother, so they can sweep up the mess. I can just hear them saying. "Thanks for all of the weapons you built for us, by the way!"

Tom Sawyer



posted on Nov, 5 2004 @ 06:46 AM
link   
He said build up to civil war starting in 2005. And a visable civil war by 2008.

Read it again incase your still confused



posted on Nov, 5 2004 @ 09:30 AM
link   


I think that before anybody judges this they should consider that
there is quite a bit of civil unrest at this point, Never in history has there been such a nasty finger pointing election not to mention the tires slashed here, and confiscated voting machines there, I think that currently America is very divided and this saddens me greatly I saw a post earlier that said we should put the whole thing behind us and I hope that is what happens and we return to the pre-election United States intead of republicans and democrats battling it out.


Oh my, you have no idea what you are talking about here. Im sorry, but this was not even CLOSE to the most contentious election in U.S. History. Good lord dude, take a look at how badly Lincolns own party was trashing him back during the civil war.

Weve had duels and murders for goodness sake!

This was actually a pretty civil election, all things considered.


Link

Link

Link



posted on Nov, 5 2004 @ 08:51 PM
link   
I am someone who has never been inclined to believe John Titor as anything other than a good hoax. However, when reading one of Assassin's posts, I saw something that is really rather spooky.

While I'm inclined to continue to believe that the "Titor" author was very good, I now have a new found respect for the level of detail used in his writing. Let me explain:

Assassin presented the following Titor quote:


Originally posted by Assassin

Does the current relationship between Arabs and Jews have anything to do with the coming war?

...Wavering western support for Israel is what gives Israel's neighbors the confidence to attack. 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.



What struck me was that JT used the phrase "weapons of mass destruction" at a time when that phrase wasn't really a part of the common consciousness. I find that fascinating!

JT's use of the phrase, I believe, occurred in a post dated December 13, 2000 12:44.

www.johntitor.com...

According to this, the phrase really didn't become common place until after the invasion of Iraq. JT uses it nearly a full two years earlier.



Weapon of Mass Destruction

This term for a nuclear, biological, or chemical weapon is older than you might think. It actually dates to 1937, before the existence of nuclear or biological weapons. It was first used by the London Times on 28 December of that year, "Who can think without horror of what another widespread war would mean, waged as it would be with all the new weapons of mass destruction?" The original reference is to aerial bombing of cities, which had become a reality that year in the Spanish Civil War, chemicals, and other modern weaponry.

In the 1960s, the term weapons of mass destruction became a jargon term of the arms control community. Throughout the rest of the 20th century, the term pretty much remained an arms control jargon term, until 2002 when events in Iraq brought the term into the public eye.

www.wordorigins.org...


This obviously "proves" nothing. However, at a minimum, JT was a skilled hoaxer to have selected such an important phrase in advance of its widespread public acceptance and use. Beyond the minimum, if JT is real, then use of the phrase would have been as natural to him as it is now for all of us....

Food for thought....





[edit on 5-11-2004 by loam]



posted on Nov, 6 2004 @ 01:35 AM
link   
He may be for real. He did go back in time with a 1% failure rate to save his world, getting an old computer.


Let's see, he could go back in time but he couldn't make a 60 year old computer?????????


The general concept makes since but if he couldn't figure out that old code then he is retarded.

Kids now know how to hack XP so how come a military man of the future can't understand old code? I still remember code from 25 years ago. If you know code then you don't need an old computer to convert it. He said the computers were still around in his time that used it. Crazy!

But then again, who knows?



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join