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.
Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
...omg...
Have you been living under a rock for the past 400+ years?
Hold up before I go any further, what do you mean by this? Maybe I'm not reading it right...
(and btw, what does that have to do with Titor's definition of war?)
I quoted Titor buddy, not myself.
That's TITOR'S definition. He's the one who said that not me. Are you calling him a liar?
Does he not know what he's talking about?
Originally posted by syrinx high priest
You have voted ThatsJustWeird for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have two more votes this month.
way to keep the thread on topic ! clear and concise. nice post !!
Originally posted by Long Lance
no i don't live under a rock, i simply read the entire thread and remember how the 2004/5 issue was played nicely vs Roth Joint , who overlooked the Snelgrove incident late 2004. so, based on that, more than 50% is based on false premises, interesting, ain't it?
let me give you an example you cannot possibly ignore: the Boston Tea Party, do you believe this incident was widely regarded as a precursor to revolution at the time? or that it was the only action taken against the Brits? i think not. significance is arbitrary, you see?
so, if people are shooting one another dead in the streets (less lethal or not), could this be considered a low intensity war by future generations, IF it later escalates to become the Real Deal, (tm)? i think yes.
trying to 'nail' the theory by using a deadline won't work, can't you see that? we have our documented cases, we chose to disagree in terms of their significance, that's it.
so, to you, all of this is BS anyway, to Yarcofin the tazerings don't count as 'war' and he's waiting for 2006 to call it all BS, which is not consistent with JT's claims, as you rightly pointed out! to me and a few others, the whole thing might have 'started' in 2004, read: first widely publicised unprovoked death by 'less lethal' weaponry, so, to me, this talk about 2004 or 5 is completely moot and i'm looking for different ways to disprove the story...
umm, k, you sure you 2 aren't the same person?
I have absolutely no idea what you're talking about here.
The Snelgrove incident?
50% is based on false premises?
50% of what?
I asked have you been living under a rock based on your ridiculous statement that the first non lethal death came in 2004.
I asked you to define a non lethal death, because deaths from non lethal weapons have occured since the begining of time....
your response
let me give you an example you cannot possibly ignore: the Boston Tea Party, do you believe this incident was widely regarded as a precursor to revolution at the time? or that it was the only action taken against the Brits? i think not. significance is arbitrary, you see?
Again, what are you talking about?
Like I'm doing here, you can break up quotes so people can see what you're specifically addressing.
You have to take this up with Titor. He said specifically groups will be manuvering and engaging in armed conflict. Again, these are his words not mine.
If you know the mind of Titor then....congrats....
I'm not trying to nail anything. It's you all who are doing that.
But Titor said specifically how things were going to happen and when. Are you now saying we should ignore him and go on what you think is happening?
Anyway, if you can show me the 23 events of equal or greater intensity as Waco that were supposed to have happened by now, then you'd (not necessarilyyou specifically, but those who believe like W2H) have a better argument.
Get real. Anyone with any sense can see this is a fictional story. It's just those who want this to happen who believe it's factual. Wishful thinking
Originally posted by Long Lance
there was some dispute about JT's prediction that it all starts 2004, while apparently noone could show a single case of violence late 2004, even though there was one. i posted the story before but that link is now dead, so, next one:
www.cnn.com...
i know you don't count this type of thing as a waco style event, but some do and more than 50% of this thread (lost in my last post due to my stupidity) was written without this little tidbit in mind, which would have changed the nature of this discussion from approx page 30 and on, i'd wager. this thread is now larger than 70+ pages...>50% was written later -
that's true, but this case is a bit different, because the victim's only crime was being in the wrong spot at the wrong time and there was considerable media coverage. similar incidents may have happened before, but this time the story was told.
no, because there aren't any. the problem is that you insist on using intensity as an indicator, what if only 1 or 2 people were gassed @ home then burned? would you consider that waco-like albeit on a smaller scale? what about the tools, does it have to be tear gas and fire? if not, does it have to happen at home to count as such an event?
as for wishful thinking, who in his right mind would want THAT to come true?
You are wrong TJW, I do NOT want this to happen!
The thing is ... ITS HAPPENING RIGHT NOW!!!
You are clearly not ready! What will you say to your family on that day?
What will the people who believed your false science and bought into your bully approach to arguing, say to their families.
You are the center of the destruction of everything you love, because you fail to see.
Not only that... you argue against in desperation trying to hold onto that last drop ofthe materialistic era ends.
Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
...
Did anything come of that? No.
You see no one rioting in the streets now because of that. It was an unfortunate event that unfortunately happens from time to time. People understand this.
If you go around and ask people about that incident, I can guarentee you that most won't remember it.
...
Originally posted by Where2Hide2006
I wonder why TJW, has chosen to use this one line of JT as his evidence against JT. JTW does agree with anything about JT... except this one line. I find that rather amuzing. TJW doesn't even have foresight, how could he possible have hindsight. Haha
which analogy would you use (instead of waco-type event) if you referred to an infringement of individual rights with possibly lethal consequences? i can't think of many which are available in late 2000, ruby ridge?
Originally posted by Where2Hide2006
TJW, you know what? YOU are doing it again!
You are attacking me, calling my statement wrong ... while not backing up anything you said. Just Insults...thats all you have.
Your dirty politics is getting you nowhere on this thread because we can see your petty tactics, becaue we have an open mind.
So why don't you try to explain your statement? You can't because I would pick it apart and make you look like a fool.
Originally posted by grimreaper797
idk maybe TJW did prove something interesting, but his attitude sucked when he went about it forcing me to not take him serious. saying statements are rediculous and laughable isnt exactly called for. its one thing to disprove some one but theres a thin line that you can cross into attacking them. most the time your playing on it.
Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
I really don't appreciate you making false statements...
I went back to try and see what you're talking about. No big surprise I couldn't find anything. So unless you can quote me, do not make false statements like that.
Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
...omg...
Have you been living under a rock for the past 400+ years?
Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
I'll go over how ignoran- no...stupid that paragraph is if you are indeed saying what I think you're saying.
Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
Wow man. I'm not trying to be a grammar nazi or anything but...this is just bad...
Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
Unbelievable man....
This is truely amazing. Your level of commitment to some random geek with access to the internet claiming he's a time traveler is truely....well....disturbing. Your utter disregard of facts and your insistence to ignore and not even consider the truth is equally disturbing.
Anyway, I've already said what I have to say. Your lack of comprehension of the most simplest things makes it hard to carry on with a decent debate.
A perfect example is your trying to show Bush holding the country together. That's just funny. Everything your quoted, linked, and highlighted shows the EXACT OPPOSITE! (or was completely irrelevent)
Which makes me think you're doing all this on purpose.
Do you honestly think Bush's record low approval rating is due to him trying to hold the country together?
Do you honestly think Bush trying to do what's best for his politcal party even if it means screwing the American people is trying to hold the country together?
The quote you highlighted shows just that!
"Instead of uniting the country through his choice, the president has chosen to reward one faction of his party at the risk of dividing the country," Leahy said."
You highlighted this and yet you're trying to prove the opposite.
This is why I believe you aren't serious.
there is truth to what Grimreaper is talking about, I feel that I have been attacked by you several times, which I am not going to waste my time going through 75 pages to find. You attack with insults, but do not prove your point...sometimes not even having a point except to insult.
I had just mentioned that George Bush Jr. has put our country into more debt than ALL previous presidents COMBINED, and he'd still rather have all the attention focused upon his witless 2 cents, instead of going back to intelligent analysis of the state of our country and where its leading us (the topic remember?) How do you treat petulance anyways? Can't just send an adult off to day care.
I don't know about the rest of you, but to me its plain to see that western stability is indeed collapsing... slowly but surely. How anyone can fail to see that astounds me. Ok, let me correct that - how any ADULT can fail to see that astounds me. Well actually, at least children can learn to see better, to open their eyes, to see old things with new eyes... Some people on this forum are blind and don't even know it. There is no way you can open their eyes for them, so don't waste your energy on them... they should be thankful to even have our attention for the infintesimal time we give it to them.
Need I say more?
When JT said that no one would realize until 2008 when it will be at our doorstep, it means just that:
yeah, too bad some people cannot discuss a subject without becoming some kind of zealot that tries to enforce his point of views using lame intimidation tactics and insults. jesus christ were speculating of the possible probability that maybe some guy from some future maybe possibly came here with some time machine (maybe). not debating politics or football here.