The American Civil War of 2005 as predicted by John Titor

I'll go over the rest of your nonsense (sorry - best word I could find) later. I'll hit a couple things now

Again, stop ridiculing yourself. Israel’s attacks on Lebanon are acts of self-defense.

Israel is attacking to
1) detroy Hezbollah (something Lebanon should have done) and prevent Hezbollah from attacking. Preemptive strikes.

and

2) get their soldiers back.

I am observing wavering Western support….. here’s a quote:

You're always observing stuff that isn't there. Like your phantom Waco events.

You can quote whoever you want from Europe. Europe has NEVER fully supported Israel. Titor was likely talking about the U.S.
How can the rest of the western leaders' support waver when there wasn't support there to begin with?
And as you can see US support is NOT wavering.

Personal attacks won’t help here ThatsJustWeird.

What I said was correct

He was not. Why else the words “everyone” and “the world they thought they were living in”….time to wake up ThatsJustWeird….

You like taking things out of context....
And why is it that before you NEVER spoke of this as if he was talking about the whole world. Everytime you've mentioned that phrase it was in reference to the civil war. Why the sudden change?

Titor's next sentence (in the same paragraph - meaning he was keeping with a certain thought) after that was talking about when the Civil War would start.

Here’s an answer for you: let’s just wait and see what happens.

Why do we have to wait in see? You should already know since it's happened already.

Western stability collapsed after May 29, 2005 when both France and The Netherlands rejected the constitutional treaty for Europe in their respective referendums. From there on things got worse.

lmao!
wow...
1. Answer the rest of the questions
2. France and the Netherlands still have the same government in place, they still are doing well economically, nothing has changed since that date. Perhaps you should look up the meaning of stability...

Just because a country wants to keep at least some of it's sovereignty does not mean it's country isn't stable

Titor never said the second US Civil War would lead everyone to believing the world they are living in was over.

1. He states that the war would be on everyones door step by 2008. When that happens, what do you think people will be thinking?
2.

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

The only thing he talks about is the civil war...

You like cutting of Titor's quotes...

Titor never said that. He said there would be civil (social) unrest. There was social unrest around the 2004 elections and actually there still is.

Titor said there would be CIVIL unrest.
Please show me your definition of civil unrest and why is yours different from everyone else in the world?

No he did not. Titor gave his impression of how that second US Civil War would be remembered…..

Yes he did. Plus civil wars don't just start off at their peak. How could it not steadily get worse?

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.

You are making a thinking error again. Titor said: “By 2008, I would say the civil conflict is pretty much at everyone's doorstep” meaning that by 2008 will be pretty much at everyone’s doorstep…….it’s not so long now ThatsJustWeird……let’s wait and see what happens…

How is this an error? You just said exactly what I said?
Titor also said though that things would grow worse. Meaning as the years go by starting from 2004, things get worse and the war spreads so that by 2008 it's everywhere. How can a war like that just pop up out of nowhere?

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
He said it would be war and he gave HIS definition of what "war" meant.

Titor gave his impression of how that second US Civil War would be remembered…..

You are sad ThatsJustWeird…. Titor is right on track and you know it. Why are you so upset if you believe he is a “proven hoaxer?” That simply doesn’t make any sense….

What are you talking about? Who said I'm upset?
I'm just in shock that there are segments of the population that are so gullible that they're willing to believe everything the read...


grim:
Perhaps when you are older you will readily see anti-government propaganda when it pops up. Oh, and I thought you had me on ignore

vit:

ooo, i'm a time traveler TJW!

I knew it!!!
So please tell me! Will it rain this weekend? I may be heading out of town

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
I'll go over the rest of your nonsense (sorry - best word I could find) later.

That’s oke. Meanwhile I’ll go over your nonsense now….
We could go over and over about whether Israel’s actions are acts of self-defense or not, but I’ll leave the last word to President G.W. Bush and Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper:

news.yahoo.com...
"Israel has the right to defend herself," Bush told a news conference after talks with German Chancellor Angela Merkel. His comments were echoed by Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper who endorsed Israel's incursion into Lebanon and strikes on Gaza as measured self-defense.

We also could go over and over about whether Western support for Israel is wavering or not but I’ll simply leave it with this quote:

euronews.net...
G8 leaders divided on Middle East conflict
At the G8 summit in St.Petersburg, world leaders have taken differing positions on the Middle East crisis. While the US refuses to tell Israel to halt its bombardment, France and the EU have called Israel's response excessive.

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird

Originally posted by Roth Joint
He was not. Why else the words “everyone” and “the world they thought they were living in”….time to wake up ThatsJustWeird….

You like taking things out of context....
And why is it that before you NEVER spoke of this as if he was talking about the whole world. Everytime you've mentioned that phrase it was in reference to the civil war. Why the sudden change?

Come on ThatsJustWeird….if you want to play it dirty you can at least come up with something that isn’t so easily to be disproved. Everyone can read up on all my posts and see I always mentioned that phrase in reference to the Middle East War including the second US civil war …. Actually, we have had this discussion before…. so what’s your problem?

posted on 12-5-2005 at 01:29 PM Post Number: 1380473 (post id: 1402366)

Originally posted by Roth Joint

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
1. 2008 is not the date when everyone looks out the window and says "wow a civil war!?" It's the date when they realize their old world is over. The point of no return.

You amuse me. Titor did not mention 2008 as a general date where only American's will realize the world they thought they were living in was over, clearly he meant that everyone including citizens in Europe and the Middle East would realize that.

posted on 21-7-2005 at 05:46 PM Post Number: 1552357 (post id: 1574250)

Originally posted by Roth Joint
Middle East War after 2005 and around 2008
Arab countries opposed to each other and War on Israel by it’s Arab neighbours

Israel attacked by Arab neighbours as a result of wavering Western support:

Ø “They [ Arabs & Jews ] are not directly involved [ in the US civil war ] but political situations are dependant on Western stability, which collapses in 2005.”
Ø “The year 2008 was a general date by which time everyone will realize the world they thought they were living in was over.
Ø “The Jewish population in Israel is not prepared for a true offensive war. They are prepared for the ultimate defense. 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.”

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
Titor's next sentence (in the same paragraph - meaning he was keeping with a certain thought) after that was talking about when the Civil War would start.

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird

Originally posted by Roth Joint

Titor never said the second US Civil War would lead everyone to believing the world they are living in was over.

1. He states that the war would be on everyones door step by 2008. When that happens, what do you think people will be thinking?
2.

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

The only thing he talks about is the civil war...

You like cutting of Titor's quotes...

It’s another thinking error you make. In that specific paragraph (01-31-2001 03:41 PM) , John Titor speaks about several issues such as the IBM 5100, and the distortion unit. He mentions the year 2008 as a general date by which time everyone will realize the world (so not solely America) they thought they were living in was over. Then he proceeds by saying that (from his viewpoint) the second US civil war will start in 2004, remembered by the Waco-type events gradually growing worse. Just a few hours in the paragraph before this one John Titor posted: “(4) I'm glad to see it's so easy for to dismiss the Middle East. Yes, I suppose it is a no brainer but pretty soon it will be a "no arrmer" and a "no legger".

Titor’s remark about the second US civil war being pretty much on everyone’s doorstep comes in an entire other paragraph (02-27-2001 10:15 AM) about a month later! and is simply an answer to a question about the civil war:

Question: You say the civil war lasts from 2004 to 2008 and then the short big war in 2015. What do the years from 2008 to 2015 look like? How long does WWIII last.
John Titor: I'm not sure I said that exactly. By 2008, I would say the civil conflict is pretty much at everyone's doorstep. Western instability during the conflict leads to the attack in 2015. WWIII is very short with a longer period of mop up.

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird

Originally posted by Roth Joint
Western stability collapsed after May 29, 2005 when both France and The Netherlands rejected the constitutional treaty for Europe in their respective referendums. From there on things got worse.

lmao!
wow...
1. Answer the rest of the questions
2. France and the Netherlands still have the same government in place, they still are doing well economically, nothing has changed since that date. Perhaps you should look up the meaning of stability...

Just because a country wants to keep at least some of it's sovereignty does not mean it's country isn't stable

Fact is, Western political stability collapsed from that moment on…..

msnbc.msn.com...
The clash at Hampton Court is a symptom of the crisis gripping Europe. The economic integration of the Continent's 450 million consumers into a prosperous single market—the EU's raison d'etre since its creation after World War II—has come to a virtual standstill.

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird

Originally posted by Roth Joint
Titor never said that. He said there would be civil (social) unrest. There was social unrest around the 2004 elections and actually there still is.

Titor said there would be CIVIL unrest.
Please show me your definition of civil unrest and why is yours different from everyone else in the world?

Titor is not the first and will not be the last who mistakenly translates “social unrest” into “civil unrest.”

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird

Originally posted by Roth Joint
No he did not. Titor gave his impression of how that second US Civil War would be remembered…..

Yes he did. Plus civil wars don't just start off at their peak. How could it not steadily get worse?

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.

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird

Originally posted by Roth Joint
You are making a thinking error again. Titor said: “By 2008, I would say the civil conflict is pretty much at everyone's doorstep” meaning that by 2008 will be pretty much at everyone’s doorstep…….it’s not so long now ThatsJustWeird……let’s wait and see what happens…

How is this an error? You just said exactly what I said?
Titor also said though that things would grow worse. Meaning as the years go by starting from 2004, things get worse and the war spreads so that by 2008 it's everywhere. How can a war like that just pop up out of nowhere?

Actually it’s quite simple ThatsJustWeird…. When the second US civil war will be pretty much at everyone’s doorstep in 2008…..and exact copies of Waco-type events are growing steadily worse by then…”the conflict will consume everyone in the US by 2012”……and looking back….we probably will trace the initial spark of that conflict…. possibly leading us to 2004…just as historians do not all agree on which event signified the start of World War 2…..

John Titor
“By 2008, I would say the civil conflict is pretty much at everyone's doorstep.”
“The conflict will consume everyone in the US by 2012 and end in 2015 with a very short WWIII.”

[edit on 19-7-2006 by Roth Joint]

Ok for a moment I would like people to chew on this for a little bit. between 2004-2008 titor would be supposively 5-9 years old. I would like you to take an event from when you were 5-9 years old and take a description of what happen during that time. Now I think it would be pretty reasonable to say, your description of the events, especially if you believed these events lead to an event that was very life changing, may be a bit exaggerated.

Memory has a funny way of changing how things actually happened. Titor may say "I would describe it as...blahblah blah." but you know what, hes giving you the description of something from 25-30 years ago for him, when he was like 6 years old. Now keeping that in mind, couldnt you at least toy with the idea that Waco type events werent everything he made them out to be? That maybe a civil war does break out, but its not as big, but ultimately the US does get nuked. You have to remember this guy wouldnt have been older then 18 before all of this happened. for a majority of it, he wasnt even a teenager. Now looking back at any story you have from before you were a teenager, how accurate would you say it was?

I know that stories from when I was 5 I can hardly remember, and stories from when I was like 9 were pretty exaggerated by my point of view, and I didnt even realize it. When your caught in the situation as a kid, your imagination will fill in the blanks at times. So what may be a simple incident, you blow out of proportion. And though it may be a big deal, it does get exaggerated. Just telling it how it is. Maybe these Waco type events werent so Waco like coming from a person recalling memories from when he was 6.

We have to take the possibility that everything that happened while he was still a very young child, may not be as big as he saw it. Ill tell you one thing though. I didnt even know about the oklahoma city bombing when I was 6, let alone the media coverage about it. How I would describe the oklahoma city bombing is pretty much what I would read out of a history book probably because I was 6 at the time. History books have a funny way of twisting history to bias toward the victors...Who won the war again?

Originally posted by grimreaper797
Ok for a moment I would like people to chew on this for a little bit. between 2004-2008 titor would be supposively 5-9 years old. I would like you to take an event from when you were 5-9 years old and take a description of what happen during that time. Now I think it would be pretty reasonable to say, your description of the events, especially if you believed these events lead to an event that was very life changing, may be a bit exaggerated.

Memory has a funny way of changing how things actually happened. Titor may say "I would describe it as...blahblah blah." but you know what, hes giving you the description of something from 25-30 years ago for him, when he was like 6 years old. Now keeping that in mind, couldnt you at least toy with the idea that Waco type events werent everything he made them out to be? That maybe a civil war does break out, but its not as big, but ultimately the US does get nuked. You have to remember this guy wouldnt have been older then 18 before all of this happened. for a majority of it, he wasnt even a teenager. Now looking back at any story you have from before you were a teenager, how accurate would you say it was?

I know that stories from when I was 5 I can hardly remember, and stories from when I was like 9 were pretty exaggerated by my point of view, and I didnt even realize it. When your caught in the situation as a kid, your imagination will fill in the blanks at times. So what may be a simple incident, you blow out of proportion. And though it may be a big deal, it does get exaggerated. Just telling it how it is. Maybe these Waco type events werent so Waco like coming from a person recalling memories from when he was 6.

We have to take the possibility that everything that happened while he was still a very young child, may not be as big as he saw it. Ill tell you one thing though. I didnt even know about the oklahoma city bombing when I was 6, let alone the media coverage about it. How I would describe the oklahoma city bombing is pretty much what I would read out of a history book probably because I was 6 at the time. History books have a funny way of twisting history to bias toward the victors...Who won the war again?

This is what I was talking about in my first major post. What are the future history books going to say about what's going on today? If things got as bad as JT described, what are the causes that our children will attribute to them?

We can wax on and on whether JT was a hoax or not, but why now when someone had the incredible forsight tried to over 6 years ago? Who here believed things would be this bad when they woke up on 9/10/2001, let alone months beforehand? Quit arguing over the symantics of the thing. Who the hell cares if JT was a hoax or not, or whether he actually came here from the future. Regardless, the guy was pretty damn intelligent to have seen what was happening and hit things pretty close to dead on. That is assuming, of course, it was just one guy, or even a guy to begin with. Maybe someone just wanted people to start to think about things differently because they saw things heading down hill pretty damn fast.

Personally, I take great offense at being told that because I have an interest in all this that I either hate the government, am crazy, or am just stupid. I'm neither. Nor do I want what JT described as having happened in his "time" to happen, as much as I hate what is happening in the world today.

*edited because I went a little over board with the commas, sorry.*

[edit on 19-7-2006 by modese7en]

Where are you TJW? We're waiting for your answer!

About the defense/attack from Israël, with all the medias saying it's a defense move, when it's not one, the JT parents, as many americans, believe the propaganda, so they would say to their son that Israël defended their country back then. We know it's not true, but the majority of american don't know, they believe CNN.

Also, when you say Israël is always at war, it's not quite true, the last war they fought, was when they invaded Lebanon, and it was in 1982. So the last war was 24 years ago, and the period he was talking about was only between 2001 and 2015, a 14 years wide period, that's not that long. So it was a good guest but he could have been wrong if he would have predicted, in 83, a conflict with Israël in the next 20 years. You understand what I mean?

The first and second intifada are not ``real`` wars.

[edit on 20-7-2006 by Vitchilo]

Originally posted by Vitchilo
Where are you TJW? We're waiting for your answer!

I'm right here.
I'm waiting for Roth to clean up his previous post. It's a jumbled mess....

About the defense/attack from Israël, with all the medias saying it's a defense move, when it's not one, the JT parents, as many americans, believe the propaganda, so they would say to their son that Israël defended their country back then. We know it's not true, but the majority of american don't know, they believe CNN.

Israel has been prepared to do this for quite some time, as I'm sure they have plans on dealing with all the countries surrounding them. When you have neighbors who want nothing more than to wipe you off the planet, you have to prepare. It took the kidnapping of those soldiers to set Israel on this current offensive.


Israel's neighbors won't attack them as Titor predicted. It would be suicide and they know it. Why do you (well....mainly Roth) think that those countries support terrorists groups like Hezbollah? It's because they have to resort to underhanded tactics as they know they can't defeat Israel.

Also, when you say Israël is always at war, it's not quite true, the last war they fought, was when they invaded Lebanon, and it was in 1982. So the last war was 24 years ago, and the period he was talking about was only between 2001 and 2015, a 14 years wide period, that's not that long. So it was a good guest but he could have been wrong if he would have predicted, in 83, a conflict with Israël in the next 20 years. You understand what I mean?

The first and second intifada are not ``real`` wars.

Israel has a major war every decade. The 90s were an anomoly. Another war was overdue, so predicting a war in that time period was not hard.

The intifads may not have been called "wars" but they were still major conflicts for Israel....

.
quote: Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
And Titor said there would be riots because of the 2004 eletions.


Titor never said that. He said there would be civil (social) unrest. There was social unrest around the 2004 elections and actually there still is. Posted by Roth Joint


Whether one wishes to call it civil or social unrest, there can be no doubt that there was plenty of it, which was directly related to the 2004 election and its' aftermath.

Keep in mind that just because the main stream media couldn't be bothered to cover much of it doesn't mean that it didn't happen. Here are a few links, but there are many more out there.


Crowds protest as GOP gathers: Hundreds of thousands march against Bush, war

Beyond the Protest Cage: Blanking out dissent

Will the Inaugural protests be covered?

New York to RNC: Drop the **** dead

Challenge Ohio's Electors

Election hearings underscore the need to keep opposing

Quiet Settlements being made with protesters arrested during 04 RNC

Bush 'the king' blows 50 m on coronation: seen as obscene while troops lack armor, and die

The war on dissent

Welcome to New York...oudamyway

.

[edit on 20-7-2006 by ShadowEyes]

Originally posted by ShadowEyes
Whether one wishes to call it civil or social unrest, there can be no doubt that there was plenty of it, which was directly related to the 2004 election and its' aftermath.

Keep in mind that just because the main stream media couldn't be bothered to cover much of it doesn't mean that it didn't happen. Here are a few links, but there are many more out there.

Protests are hardly civil unrest. It's extremely rare that protests expand into civil unrest.
Prostests btw have occured in this country since before it was formed

It's impossible to hide any incidents of civil unrest from the mainstream media. Not in this day and age.

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird

Originally posted by ShadowEyes
Whether one wishes to call it civil or social unrest, there can be no doubt that there was plenty of it, which was directly related to the 2004 election and its' aftermath.

Keep in mind that just because the main stream media couldn't be bothered to cover much of it doesn't mean that it didn't happen. Here are a few links, but there are many more out there.

Protests are hardly civil unrest. It's extremely rare that protests expand into civil unrest.
Prostests btw have occured in this country since before it was formed

It's impossible to hide any incidents of civil unrest from the mainstream media. Not in this day and age.

Are you being paid by the government to say such things ?

Originally posted by DrExtravaganza
Are you being paid by the government to say such things ?

Yep
$1000 per post!

Seriously though, why don't you address what I said.



Funny how not being gullible enough to believe someone on the internet claiming to be a time traveler somehow makes me some government agent
You can't make this stuff up, lol

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird

Originally posted by DrExtravaganza
Are you being paid by the government to say such things ?

Yep

$1000 per post!

Seriously though, why don't you address what I said.



Funny how not being gullible enough to believe someone on the internet claiming to be a time traveler somehow makes me some government agent

You can't make this stuff up, lol

TJW, what do you think of the deepening rift between liberals and conservatives? In the past year I've seen liberals move from being called "bleeding hearts" to out right treasonist.

Who in pre 9/11 2001 could have seen the erosion of the Constitution that's going on in recent years. Its not hard to realize that whoever was posting as Titor saw that the next president was going to be one that would allow the people's freedoms to be abused, or that some event was close on the horizon that would allow that to happen. In the first case, anyone who knew anything about politics knew that Gore would never had been one to do something like that, Bush on the other hand, well... hind sight is indeed 20/20 but for the longest time until 9/11 Bush was treated like a powerless idiot by just about everyone.

The main argument would be that JT had a 50/50 chance of being right about who he thought would be elected, so I'm going to go ahead and say that for you. But, I usually like to look a little deeper into the logic and take into consideration the average person's outlook on the presidential candidates. Most people felt sorry for Bush because he was painted by the media as unintelligent and lazy. Then all of a sudden 9/11 happened and he got off his ass.

No one knew that 9/11 was going to happen other than the terrorists (or if you're inclined to believe such things, the government itself), and no one could have forseen the major shift that happened after 9/11 that would transform a relatively peaceful time into one full of war and political problems.

How did JT know that Iraq did not have WMD's? The general consensus back then was that they indeed did have them, and were hiding them from inspectors. I mean, that's how they got the war kicked off to begin with, everyone believe Iraq had WMD's. Again, I know, 50/50 odds there, actually, statistically its a little more convoluted, because you have the dual aspects of whether Iraq had WMDs or not, and whether we'd go to war with them over it. But, JT is so far 2/2 on the most major things that would happen, and an ambiguous foresight into some sort of major event that would trigger a huge change in world affairs.

Of course, the other side of it is JT probably saw the election as being the event that would kick all this off. That would be up to debate, but he posted well after the elections, if my memory serves me well.

Whew, I have some things to support the debunkers, but my characters countdown is depleting pretty fast.

First off, the argument that JT wouldn't really remember things from so long ago in his past. He himself said that he vividly remembers his childhood, and the where he was when the nukes dropped on Jacksonville. Also, he said that he noticed little things that were different from his own time line, such as football games, etc.

Secondly, While Jacksonville would definately be a target for a nuclear attack, what about Tyndall, Pensacola, and Tampa. I lived my entire life in the area that JT claims to be from, and the only rivers that he could have lived on in his "tree house" would be the Alafia, Hillsborough, and Suwannee river. I think it's obvious he lived in the West/Central area of Fl, North of Tampa and South of Tallahassee. Gainesville or Ocala would be most likely places, especially for him to identify heavily with Jax. In any case, why is the military base in Tampa (Macdill would be the only one available) still there? Centcom and Specopscom are there, it would definately get hit.

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
Protests are hardly civil unrest. It's extremely rare that protests expand into civil unrest.

They do when the rights of the citizens are stepped upon, or do you feel that caging people in 'free speach zones' or making them sign loyalty oaths in order to hear the president talk at a PUBLIC function, paid for by TAXPAYERS, do not violate those citizen's rights???

Strange that you didn't even mention the articles I posted that listed NUMEROUS incidents of voter fraud. Hmmm, did you even read them? Are you aware that there is a lawsuit pending right now because of it? Or do you think it's alright to either prevent citizens from voting or just not count those votes? Do you have any idea at all how this is already impacting the upcoming election later this year?

Now these next two links may be labeled as off topic, 'by some', but the fact that Titor did address this area and that something like this could just add another straw to the camel's back puts them very on topic. Furthermore, they are important and people need to see them.

U.S. Agriculture Department reduces testing for mad cow disease

And for our neighbors in Canada...you are not off the hook yet either.

Latest mad cow in Canada was pregnant

.

Originally posted by Vitchilo
Where are you TJW? We're waiting for your answer!

Just let him be Vitchillo. While all world leaders call Israel’s moves an act of self-defense, it’s only ThatsJustWeird who likes to hang on so desperately to his illusions (I should say delusions but I won’t). Furthermore Israel’s neighbours (Hizbollah) are attacking Israel. And ofcourse ThatsJustWeird ignores my previous post in which I clearly show how pathetically he tries to play it dirty , but of course he won’t succeed.

I think it is much more important to stay focused on the developments in the Middle East. Perhaps not for this thread but I also believe that Titor’s “predictions” may even turn out to be synchronous with the “predictions” of Nostradamus regarding developments in the Middle East…

I believe we might be very close to the “horrible undoing of people….”…..perhaps a result of the “ultimate defense” by Israel?

news.yahoo.com...
Even as Hizbollah has been condemned by some Arab governments, Israel's targeted destruction in Lebanon is provoking widespread anger and dismay.
Hizbollah is not just a "Lebanese militia," but is Iran's proxy army, with Syria as the middleman. Hizbollah's actions, and Israeli reactions, could spark a regional war. "I'm afraid that if the Iranian president allows Hizbollah to use its long distance missiles against Israel" and they hit Tel Aviv, says Cheshin, "very soon we will find ourselves in a third world war."

Rize and Bush will go on talks with Saudi Arabia, i'm sure they'll go there to convaince them to help them against Iran, that would be a great benefit for Saudis influence and government... Also, the saudi army is very well equiped.

Saudis siding with US against could spark a war between other arab countries and Saudi/Israël/US.

Source


Arab countries against arab countries eh?

Also, saw on CNN, Lebanon army will side with Hezbollah when the Israëli invasion will come, and Israël is preparing it.

[edit on 21-7-2006 by Vitchilo]

Originally posted by ShadowEyes
They do when the rights of the citizens are stepped upon, or do you feel that caging people in 'free speach zones' or making them sign loyalty oaths in order to hear the president talk at a PUBLIC function, paid for by TAXPAYERS, do not violate those citizen's rights???

AHHH...this is your misake. You don't know what civil unrest is.
Civil Unrest has nothing to do with what the police do or people's rights being violated - well actually, people's rights being violated sometimes leads to civil unrest. Remember the Rodney King riots? The clashing at the World Bank and IMF protests? More recently riots and clashes in Michigan and Cincinnati? Those are examples of civil unrest. The most widespread case of civil unrest this country has seen was after Dr. King was assasinated. For things to get worse than that would take something HUGE happening.


The rest of your post and your previous post is based on your misunderstanding of what civil unrest is, so I won't bother to go over them.
Except for the Mad Cow thing, that ISN'T off topic! In fact, thank you for bringing the thread back on topic. This thread is about Titor and his predictions.
Mad Cow peaked in Europe. In 1993. There's no sign if it coming back, expanding, or whatever. Of course you'll have a few cases here or there, but that's been the case since it was first discovered.
**

modese:

TJW, what do you think of the deepening rift between liberals and conservatives? In the past year I've seen liberals move from being called "bleeding hearts" to out right treasonist.

Deepening? I can't ever recall them being close
There has always and always be a rift between liberals and conservatives. Will it get to the point where they start killing each other? No.
If there is ever a civil war in the U.S., it won't be because of political parties. Alot of people are passionate. But not that passionate....

Who in pre 9/11 2001 could have seen the erosion of the Constitution that's going on in recent years.

That prediction isn't even close to being new.
Just take a look at all the anti-government groups out there. Even the people who started "cults" (like David Koresh and Jim Jones. Also remember that Titor's pre 2000 posts claimed Y2K would be the catalyse for all that).

How did JT know that Iraq did not have WMD's? The general consensus back then was that they indeed did have them, and were hiding them from inspectors.

Believe or not even back then, mainly in the anti-government crowds, there was skepticism on whether or not Sadam still had WMDs.

(Titor...he also states that the middle eastern countries use WMDs against each other. Which countries are he talking about? Iran and Iraq were/are the only countries with the technology for such weapons. Since Iran is still stable, wouldn't it be likely that they came from Iraq?)


As far as the rest of your post, your right. And didn't Titor say he was an historian or something? Or liked history? Even if he didn't remember everything, he would have studied it.

been doing a bunch of reading into BSE, and was reassured to find that the reason testing 100% of the cattle isnt effective tool against mad cow is because the tests dont work on animals that arent about to show clinical symptoms of the disease. The incubation period in cattle is 2 1/2-6 years, but most cattle are slaughtered at 12-18 months. So to test all those cattle would be worthless because the tests would say negative even if they had the prions.

I dont understand why there is no information about consumption of prions at low levels. Like younger animals have less of these prions (given they are infected with them), so thats why the symptoms dont show yet, because there aren't enough prions in its system yet. What we do is we slaughter them before they have the chance to show symptoms of having BSE.

I guess there mind set is "if we kill them earlier enough they won't have enough prions to be shown infected". Truth is though, this sounds more like a "we cant let them know they have these prions" then for their safety. In fact a Doctor in the field of neuroscience said they have the tests to be able to test all cattle, even the young, for BSE, with more accurate results- but it would raise the price of beef and that it would show just what kind of shape our meat is in.

How would you feel if over half the beef you were eating had prions (which cause Mad Cow Disease) in it? They just slaughtered the cattle so young that they dont show the signs that they have it in them.

While keeping an open mind on all of this for well over a year now, I think I have to hop off the fence and declare that I am on the "JT was a hoax side."

I still think, as I have said in my previous few posts, that whoever was posting as JT was pretty damn insightful about things, but reading through his posts again, the jump in logic that it takes for someone to think that he new future events is just too much for me to take part in.

Theres just too much about it that rings smart guy with incredible imagination about his story.

First off, as a primarily military historian, the idea of an entire unit comprised of soldiers using the shotgun as their weapons platform makes no sense whatsoever, especially in a rural battleground. Sure, it would make incredible sense if they were fighting in an urban enviroment, but I assure you, there are absolutely no areas in the part of FL that Titor claims to be from that would be classified as urban, especially requiring an entire unit of shotgun toting partisans. Personally, I think he was tapping into the southern man in him and expounding reverence for the idea of justice with a shotgun. I'm suprised he didn't say they had axe handles as well

As well, JT expected Y2k to be a major event. In 98 he allegedly sent Art Bell a fax concerning Y2k

Now for the future you might want to know about. Y2K is a disaster. Many people die on the highways when they freeze to death trying to get to warmer weather. The government tries to keep power by instituting marshall law but all of it collapses when their efforts to bring the power back up fail. A few years later communial government system is developed after the constitution takes a few twists. China retakes Taiwan. Israel wins the largest battle for their life and Russia is covered in Nuclear snow from their collapsed reactors

After Y2k was proven to be a non-event, JT claimed to have taken measures to stopping the Y2k "disaster." However, how could his memory change from Y2k being the event that triggers everything, to the 2nd US civil war and subsquent WW3 being what destroys everything? By his own explaination of the multiple universe theory, he has no way to change events in his own world line, so how could the reason for the problems he experienced in this world line change so dramatically?

Another thing, the idea of city dwellers embracing the adminsitration's policies concerning security vs. liberty are the exact opposite of today's political situation. At the time of Titor's posts, the Democratic party was in power, and events like Waco and Ruby Ridge happened during the Clinton administration. Many anti-government groups viewed the Dem. administration as being oppressive to individual rights in exchange for security at the time. Primarily urban areas are bastions of Democratic power in the US, which makes it easy for a person who was so inclined to JT's beliefs to make the determination that city dwellers would indeed, exchange their individual freedoms for security.

However, in today's political climate, it is the Republican party who is concerned more with security, and everyone who makes the argument that the government is indeed engaged in the actions that JT prescribed. I believe this as well, but JT's story doesn't add up as far as the make up of the population.

Republicans primarily reside in non-urban areas, and support for the administration is highly concentrated to these areas. These areas tend to be highly conservative (believe me, I live in a very rural area), and the popluation generally supports the administration in the security vs. liberty debate.

So, the key here is to put JT's claims in the context of a pre 9/11 mindset, something I was not doing before today. Obviously, JT would believe that urban Dems would be the ones cheering on an administration that tramples on freedoms so that they can be secure, but that isn't the case today.

Originally posted by modese7en
First off, as a primarily military historian, the idea of an entire unit comprised of soldiers using the shotgun as their weapons platform makes no sense whatsoever, especially in a rural battleground. Sure, it would make incredible sense if they were fighting in an urban enviroment, but I assure you, there are absolutely no areas in the part of FL that Titor claims to be from that would be classified as urban, especially requiring an entire unit of shotgun toting partisans. Personally, I think he was tapping into the southern man in him and expounding reverence for the idea of justice with a shotgun. I'm suprised he didn't say they had axe handles as well

Apparently Titor is making us clear that close range combat situations would dominate his experience of the second US civil war. Shotguns are indeed highly effective in close areas and trenches ….

John Titor: “In my 2012, I was 14 years old spending most of my time living, running and hiding in the woods and rivers of central Florida.”

Originally posted by modese7en
As well, JT expected Y2k to be a major event. In 98 he allegedly sent Art Bell a fax concerning Y2k

There’s no proof whatsoever if these faxes were actually from Titor.
They are a “mystery” unto themselves. Interestingly, they were found AFTER John Titor had left. So they could easily have been constructed afterwards….

Originally posted by modese7en
So, the key here is to put JT's claims in the context of a pre 9/11 mindset, something I was not doing before today. Obviously, JT would believe that urban Dems would be the ones cheering on an administration that tramples on freedoms so that they can be secure, but that isn't the case today.

John Titor: “I don’t believe I ever said the war was between Democrats and Republicans.”

"Do you think the Electoral College should be continued?"

Question: Are some areas of the United States safer than others?
JT: "Take a close look at the county-by-county voting map from the last
elections (2000)."

"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."

www.snopes.com...
The electorate in 2004 was not nearly so sharply divided along regional lines, however — an electoral map just makes it appear that way because of the "winner take all" nature of the U.S. electoral system.

An election map with finer gradation (i.e., displaying results on a county-by-county basis rather than a state-by-state one, and providing color shading to reflect the closeness of the vote in each area) produces a better picture of how strongly both candidates in the 2004 election ran even in states which they lost:

What we saw in the 2004 election was more of an urban vs. rural division, regardless of state.

[edit on 21-7-2006 by Roth Joint]

"Can anyone tell me how many companies in the United States still manufacture bicycle tires today? Anyone who still has a bike in 2008 will find out."

saw something interesting in this quote. Notice it says the united states, not just "how many companies still manufacture bicycle tires today?". I looked up bike tires manufactures and had a hard time finding them, but no trouble finding bike tires made in china. Interesting.

Originally posted by Roth Joint
Apparently Titor is making us clear that close range combat situations would dominate his experience of the second US civil war. Shotguns are indeed highly effective in close areas and trenches ….

John Titor: “In my 2012, I was 14 years old spending most of my time living, running and hiding in the woods and rivers of central Florida.”

There is absolutely no where in west central florida that you could use a shotgun effectively against soldiers who are trained to hit targets at a distance of up to 300 yeards, 150 if you want to make sure you hit them. Personally, I think that Titor may be a member of a militia group in the Suwannee river area, and that is his actual unit moniker.

Originally posted by modese7en
As well, JT expected Y2k to be a major event. In 98 he allegedly sent Art Bell a fax concerning Y2k

There’s no proof whatsoever if these faxes were actually from Titor.
They are a “mystery” unto themselves. Interestingly, they were found AFTER John Titor had left. So they could easily have been constructed afterwards…

That I would tend to believe, which is why I added the caveat of "allegedly." It's hard to tell though...

Originally posted by modese7en
So, the key here is to put JT's claims in the context of a pre 9/11 mindset, something I was not doing before today. Obviously, JT would believe that urban Dems would be the ones cheering on an administration that tramples on freedoms so that they can be secure, but that isn't the case today.

John Titor: “I don’t believe I ever said the war was between Democrats and Republicans.”

"Do you think the Electoral College should be continued?"

Question: Are some areas of the United States safer than others?
JT: "Take a close look at the county-by-county voting map from the last
elections (2000)."

"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."

www.snopes.com...
The electorate in 2004 was not nearly so sharply divided along regional lines, however — an electoral map just makes it appear that way because of the "winner take all" nature of the U.S. electoral system.

An election map with finer gradation (i.e., displaying results on a county-by-county basis rather than a state-by-state one, and providing color shading to reflect the closeness of the vote in each area) produces a better picture of how strongly both candidates in the 2004 election ran even in states which they lost:

What we saw in the 2004 election was more of an urban vs. rural division, regardless of state.

I know, a lot of what I said in that part of my post was cut off for some reason. My main point is that today, it is the Democrats, who are primarily "city dwellers," that are screaming their heads off about the policies of the administration, especially about the arrests in Gitmo without due process. Look at the people living in the country, how they vote, and listen to them say that the New York Times is "evil because they want to help turrorists." The vast majority of people who feel like their rights are being taken away by the government in exchange for security are living in the cities. This is what bothers me about what Titor said. He makes the supposition that the people in the country, who voted Republican, are the ones that would be upset with the administrations policies. That just isn't the case. The people in the country are doing everything, up to and including cheering the administration on about it.

[edit on 22-7-2006 by modese7en]