Serious discussion on John Titor quotes that have been haunting me lately...

This is my first topic Ive ever started on ATS so I am a bit nervous. But as of late, well more like the last 2 1/2 years, there have been a few *puts flame suit on* John Titor quotes/predictions that have REALLY been eating at me (more so in the recent future). I found out about JT's posts in 2002 and have been hooked ever since. Oddly enough, there have been a few peices of information from his posts that have "gone missing" over the years which greatly concerns me as to if theyre being edited out on purpose or by force. But that aside, the real reason I wanted to start this thread was because of the below quotes....

QUOTE #1 from JohnTitor.com

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

QUOTE #1 from JohnTitor.com

By 2008, I would say the civil conflict is pretty much at everyone’s doorstep.

QUOTE #1 from JohnTitor.com

The President or "leader" in 2005 I believe tried desperately to be the next Lincoln and hold the country together but many of their policies drove a larger wedge into the Bill of Rights. The President in 2009 was interested only in keeping his/her power base

Now before this thread turns into a "he was a hoax" discussion because some of us heavily disagree with that notion as time is a fickle thing (as some of us aware of just by normal observations in life), I really want you guys to think about those three quotes and the events that have happend in this country (even the world as a whole) over the last 2 1/2 years since 2008 and the election. There is not a day that goes by where I dont wake up in the morning waiting to see an actual PHYSICAL "Civil War" out break in the news/newspapers/blog sites/ATS where people have begun taking to the streets demanding the over throw of our socialist/communist state (that is so blindly ignored by the masses). As of late it honestly feels like that may be a possible happening in the near future. Our country has been divided literally right down the middle with name calling, mud slinging and political/civil unrest for those of us who have almost had it. Republican vs Democrat vs Tea Party.

This thread is meant to be a discussion about the above quotes that were eerily made almost 10 years ago, but are strangely happening before our eyes today. Every news report about the government, political rallies and political parties just reeks of a can of gasoline representing civil unrest that almost seems like someone is sparking a match a LITTLE too close.

What do you think???

EDIT: What tipped me off to write up this thread was this topic I noticed on the front page... www.abovetopsecret.com...

I'd like to shake the hand of the person/persons who came up with this whole John Titor bit. They certainly got alot of mileage out of it.

Originally posted by Electric Crown
I'd like to shake the hand of the person/persons who came up with this whole John Titor bit. They certainly got alot of mileage out of it.

That really has nothing to do with the topic I am trying to get across. You cant deny that he hit the nail on the head pretty good with those 2008 quotes above.

Ive read A LOT of predictions over the last 4-5 years (most of which are on these forums), yet almost 99% of them NEVER even begin to come true (the recent UFO over major cities prediction was kinda cool due to people actually filming UFOs over New York, Detroit and LA that day). But for some odd reason, the more people try to debunk Titors predictions or information, the more fact disproves the debunking. The presented scientific theory on black holes, Stephen Hawking and the CERN Collider held water exactly as he said they would.

But enough about that, give some thought to the above quotes and let me know what you come up with.

i really hope that it this doesn't lead to civil war I mean a war would be bloodshed and I cannot stand killing fellow Americans

When saying things that vague and generic, it's nearly impossible to be incorrect. I believe he just said some things that could happen in a way that seemed applicable to many future scenarios.

If I said "In January, 2011, England will experience weather that will frighten many." Then when you recieve a snow storm that has you stuck home from work, or if a tornado is in your vicinity, you'll be saying "By George, he was right!" Just say a line or two that is vague, and the rest will fall into place.

If you think hitting the nail on the head is comparing George Bush(Who ended the Posse Comitatus Act, Habeous Corpus, and basically wiped his rear with the Consitution of the United States and who is generally known to have been an empty suit monkey) to Abraham Lincoln, I'd have to respectfully disagree. I would agree that Obama sucks, too, though.
BTW, it is pretty well established that John Titor is a hoax.

Originally posted by starwarsisreal
i really hope that it this doesn't lead to civil war I mean a war would be bloodshed and I cannot stand killing fellow Americans

That's very thoughtful, and rest assured they can't stand it either.

OP, I too, am haunted by some of his quotes. Even to the point that It doesn't bother me that many (if not the majority) either:

A) Feel it was a faking hoaxer

or

B) He was on a similar, but different, timeline than us...

On a related note, it is thought that time travel will almost certainly place on you said similar, but different, timeline.

Originally posted by dorkidori_s13

What do you think???

I'd say don't sweat the details.

Violence is coming.

You just gotta be patient with these things.

reply to post by dorkidori_s13


What is the value of these statements?

Certainly they do not illuminate the situation. You can learn much more about what has happened and what is happening by living in the time that he is talking about, which we do.

I'm not sure what the point would be of further speculation based on his statements. We can discuss the reality in a much more productive way if we only consider the actual reality. We gain nothing by including his statements, which - even if they are absolutely true - offer so little information that there is really nothing to be done with them.

I'd be happy to have the discussion you're talking about if I thought there was anything to discuss. I'm don't think there is though. As I said, the statements offer nothing new about what is going on today, and they are not specific enough to be the basis of a serious debate about whether or not he was a real time traveller with real information about the future.

What is there to have a serious discussion about?

I may not have the input you are looking for but will support your vision and perspective on J.T.

The legend has also affected me personally and I am a much better and prepared person for it.

What gets me is the war which begins in about a year and a half to two years from now according to him remembering back to having to do battle on American soil at the tender age of 14.

One thing that intrigues me is that he says the State Capitol moves to Omaha Nebraska and recently there have been threads here on the board asking whats going on in Nebraska and I thought of J.T.

Also that he said he and his father sold what they caught along the Florida coast but what about the BP contamination?

OK my kids are all arguing and not going to bed and I lost my main train of thought, so this will have to do, oh yeah now I remember another point he made about 100,000 people dying suddenly, now I wonder if that would be DC and part of the reason they move the Capital to Omaha?

And seems every time I hear of human tragedy and massive deaths if that was what he meant by all the lives left at once, but do you suppose he would only be discussing America?

I believe TT already exists, so this was not such a stretch for me, he may have thrown in just enough bs to keep the types of people who the future does not want any part of at bay.

I never got the impression that Titor was that politically astute. And in an odd way, I can imagine a politically uneducated future person having that impression of their history.

I dunno.

I remember when ATS compiled Titor's post, I will like to see more comparisons as the years goes buy to see how spot on or far off this person was.

what will be the effect of a civil war in in the US? A Chinese Invasion of Australia,2nd Israeli-Arab War etc

reply to post by marg6043


The thing is, from the beginning I remember thinking that timelines can change and that what happens on one parallel strand may be slightly different or go in a totally different direction. It is difficult to be precise in these matters but yes I agree we do need a comparison to date, I think the JT site has that but I quit going there a while back it just got too busy looking and hard to follow or find stuff, plus it seemed to be growing somehow from the original content from JTs web days.

Im going to deviate for a moment for people claiming Titor was/is a hoax...

If you feel like you have it, please U2U me the so called proof that titor was a hoax and keep it out of this thread. Ive read numerous articles that include tons of detail as well as quite a few videos on youtube debunking Titor. Im sorry, none of them make me disblieve that he was real at all. None of them have address the scientific theory he presented that oddly enoug has become FACT over the last 10 years since his posts. I know some of you dont like him and believe he was a hoax. Thats great, keep it to yourself, I dont care.

I am asking for people to discuss the 3 predictions I presented in my original post that hit the nail on the head pretty darn well.

Someone above said something about making a weather prediction in 2011. Im sorry, thats reaching. Do you honestly not believe that the world we knew pretty much disintegrated in 2008? I sure as hell believe it did and so do millions of other Americans living in poverty who are losing or lost their homes because they are not able to find work and basically giving up the American dream altogether just to put food on whatever table they can. And not only did it disintegrate, it was systematically brought down. In its place, we now have the beginning of a socialist/communist society in which we have a socialist leader in power. We have socialized medicine in place that was forced upon us even after we said no (being a small business owner, I sure as hell didnt want Obamacare thank you and neither did the other hundreds of thousands of small business owners out there who are going to be financially raped because of it), and were now facing the legalization of millions of illegal immigrants in this country (Im very touchy about this as my girl is a 1st generation Russian immigrant to the good ol US of Obama who went thru hell to get here) along with loads of other wonderful solcialist ideals and policies that our current administration is bringing to the table. Im sorry, but civil war is NEEDED as far as myself and a good chunk of this country is concerned.

I will agree with the above statement that killing fellow human beings is wrong, I wouldnt be comfortable with the idea of it. But are you comfortable with the idea that your rights as an American citizen are being taken away from you day after day after day by people in power?

Sorry but Titor explained his entire premise of time travel. Titor also explained the reason he was sent on the dangerous and expensive journey. Unfortunately, his explanation of time travel renders his story of why he was sent completely null. He is a hoax and apparently a good hoax since it is still being talked about even though the bottom falls out of his logic right away.
I hope that is not bursting any bubbles but I have learned that people that believe in Titor, usually do so no matter reality passes by them anyway.

I am personally not sure what to make of Titor - But - I like you have noticed that there have been a few things that have stood out.
One of the other issues that I thought I may bring up regarding Titor is that he mentions Tasers and the affects that it has when used. This is also now becoming an issue as well.

reply to post by dorkidori_s13


but look I'm sure we can have peaceful resolution I mean war is not the answer we should try diplomacy. Just look if there's a civil war in the US. It will be like Iraq,Afghanistan,and Columbia mixed together. Drones attacking American villages, mass slaugther, depleted uranium, all kinds of horrible things.

Originally posted by louieprima
If you think hitting the nail on the head is comparing George Bush(Who ended the Posse Comitatus Act, Habeous Corpus, and basically wiped his rear with the Consitution of the United States and who is generally known to have been an empty suit monkey) to Abraham Lincoln, I'd have to respectfully disagree.

. . .

Hey. Do some research bud.

Although the Posse Comitatus Act was not in place at the time, Lincoln did it:

--The U.S. military is currently banned from taking part in arrests, searches, evidence seizure and other police-type activities, within the U.S. The June 18, 1878 law that bans it is the Posse Comitatus Act. (The U.S. Coast Guard and National Guard personnel, when controlled by state governors, are not included in the act.) The law was championed by southern legislators that had experienced, until 1876, occupation and law enforcement by the U.S. military.

In 1876, southern legislators, all Democrats, had allowed congressional Republicans to disqualify some Democratic electors to the Electoral College, so the Republican candidate would be elected the next U.S. president. In return, Republicans, who controlled the Congress, ended the military occupation of former Confederate states. Once that happened, elected representatives of all former Confederate states again sat in the U.S. Congress and were a force strong enough to help to enact the law.

The act reflects the bitter experience and feelings engendered in much of the U.S. because of the U.S. military’s role during Lincoln’s War and the years after it. One reason for the bitter feelings was the U.S. military’s arrest, during that war, in states that remained within the U.S., of 36,000 U.S. citizens, and the imprisonment of them without trials, or after military trials. The imprisoned persons were men that opposed Lincoln’s War, or did not speak in favor of it.

A second reason was the U.S. military’s deliberate and eager destruction, during Lincolns War, of non-combatant, civilian Confederate society, as a way to defeat Confederate armies it could not defeat in battle.

A third reason was the occupation, by the U.S. military, of the former Confederate states, after Lincoln’s War. During that time, (referred to in U.S. school and reference works as “The Reconstruction Period”) the U.S. military protected and enabled unscrupulous Republicans from the northern U.S. states and some native southerners to rule the former Confederacy and steal through taxation, what the U.S. military had not deliberately destroyed during the war.--

Source--



Lincoln suspended Habeas Corpus:

--In 1862, when copperhead democrats began criticizing Lincoln's violation of the Constitution, Lincoln suspended habeas corpus throughout the nation and had many copperhead democrats arrested under military authority because he felt that the State Courts in the north west would not convict war protesters such as the copperheads. He proclaimed that all persons who discouraged enlistments or engaged in disloyal practices would come under Martial Law. --

Source


Now read this dandy. Bush and Lincoln can be quite interchangeable. Try it!

I want to give them to you and then I want to give you some quotes from the friends, from the Cabinet and from the Party of Abraham Lincoln, to show you that people who were alive back then knew exactly that Abraham Lincoln was violating the Constitution on every hand. Here are the ten that Mildred Rutherford lists:

1. First of all coercion in 1861, which was a violation of Article 4. And of course that's where Lincoln tried to coerce the South into fighting and of course into surrendering to him basically.
2. Lincoln violated the Constitution when he violated the Laws of Neutrality, which was the Trent Affair, Article 6, Clause 2, which was a violation of international law. Now if you don't know what the Trent Affair was, it is very interesting because the Confederate Government had sent some representatives to England to present our cause there before the English Parliament and our Confederate men were on an English ship named the Trent. And the United States government came and took the Confederate men off a British ship and imprisoned them. You say, well, what's so bad about that, because of the laws of Neutrality, and remember the War of 1812 was fought over the same issue because the English was doing that to our citizens. And what happened, the North was humiliated in this. Those men had to be released and William Seward had to write an apology to the English government because the English government would not even negotiate. They said you will either release those men or there is going to be war between you and England as well as the South and England. So, Lincoln when he violated the Constitution in this area, by the way, do you know what he did for the Captain who arrested those men and took them off of the English Ship? He gave him a gold medal. Didn't matter to him that he violated the Constitution.
3. He suspended the Writ of Habeas Corpus, Article 1, Section 9, Clause 2.
4. He declared war without the consent of Congress in 1861, which is a violation of Article 1, Section 8, Clause 11 and 12.
5. He made West Virginia a State in violation of Article 4, Section 3, Clause 1. He just separated Virginia and made West Virginia a State all by himself.
6. He denied the freedom of speech in the Valandeham Imprisonment, which was a violation of the first Amendment.
7. He blockaded Ports of the States that were held by the Federal government to still be in the Union. You don't block your own Ports.
8. The Liberty of the Press was taken away - that is a violation of the First Amendment.
9. Violation of the Fugitive slave law, which was violation of Article 4, Section 2, Clause 3.

Now, may I remind you last week that Lincoln confessed to six of these Constitutional violations in his joint resolution to Congress, trying to get Congress to validate everything that he had done illegally and unlawfully. So he himself acknowledged six of them. Now the amazing truth is this: there were many people who were friends of Lincoln in his Cabinet and in Congress who recognized that what Lincoln was doing was unconstitutional and wrong. For instance, Godwin in The Nation says this, "The first real breech in the Constitution was President Lincoln using his war power to abolish slavery." He said Lincoln had no authority to do that. Thaddeus Stevens who was of Lincoln's own party and was a radical Republican and here is what he said, "I will not stultify myself by supposing that Mr. Lincoln has any warrant in the Constitution for dismembering Virginia." Thaddeus Stevens says Lincoln had no Constitutional Warrant to divide Virginia, yet he did. McClure, who was a friend of Lincoln's said "Mr. Lincoln swore to obey the Constitution, but in 18 months violated it by his Emancipation Proclamation." They knew. Mr. Rhodes said "There was no authority for the Proclamation by the Constitutional Laws, nor was there any statute that warranted it". So they realized Lincoln had absolutely no grounds for doing what he did. Wendell Phillips, of the Cooper Institute, said in 1864 "I judge Mr. Lincoln by his acts, his violations of the Law, his overthrow of Liberty in the Northern States. I judge Mr. Lincoln by his words, his deeds, and so judging him, I am unwilling to trust Abraham Lincoln with the future of this country." So here was a leading man of the Cooper Institute saying Lincoln cannot be trusted. Percy Gregg said, "Listen, Lincoln never hesitated to violate the Constitution when he so desired. The Chief Justice testified to this. Lincoln suspended with Writ of Habeas Corpus in 1861. He allowed West Virginia to be formed from Virginia, contrary to the Constitution. He issued his Emancipation Proclamation without consulting his Cabinet and in violation of the Constitution." Isn't it amazing how everyone of these men are acknowledging, not necessarily all at once, but at least several of his unconstitutional acts. Charles Sumner, who was another radical republican and a member of his own party said this: "When Lincoln reinforced Fort Sumter and called for 75,000 men without the consent of Congress, it was the greatest breach ever made in the Constitution and would hereafter give the President the Liberty to declare war whenever he wished without the consent of Congress." Now that was Charles Sumner. Charles Frances Adams was a historian of Massachusetts. Listen to what he said. "How can we justify the acts of Mr. Lincoln's administration? An unconstitutional policy called for unconstitutional coercion. An unconstitutional coercion called for an unconstitutional war. An unconstitutional war called for an unconstitutional despotism. Authority uncontrolled and unlimited by men, by constitution, by the Supreme Court or by Law was Lincoln's war policy." Let me paraphrase that. Lincoln did whatever he wanted to do. He was not constrained by the Constitution. He was not constrained by Law. He was not constrained by the Supreme Court. So when the Supreme Court ruled against him, he just kept going and did whatever he was going to do anyhow - totally irresponsible. Now, may I remind you that these men were not Lincoln's enemies. They were his friends. They were in his Cabinet. They were in his party. So Lincoln did not hesitate to violate the Constitution whenever he chose to do so, nor would he abide by the decisions of the Supreme Court. Let me put it to you like this: Lincoln was a tyrant in the strictest sense of the term. Why? Because Lincoln used lawful power unlawfully.

Everyone in here has heard of J.P. Morgan, the great financier. Listen to what J.P. Morgan said, "I supported President Lincoln. I believed his war policy would be the only way to save the country, but I see my mistake. I visited Washington a few weeks ago and I saw the corruption of the present Administration and so long as Abraham Lincoln and his Cabinet are in power, so long will the war continue, and for what? For the preservation of the Constitution of the Union? No! But for the sake of politicians and governmental contractors." That was J. P. Morgan. He said, I understand what is going on. There is no fight to preserve the Union. There is no fight to preserve the Constitution. There is only a fight to reward the benefactors of Abraham Lincoln. That's it! Horace Greeley said this: "I cannot trust honest old Abe. He's too smart for me." The word is really not smart. The word is cunning, deceitful. Layman said, who was one of Lincoln's partners, "Mr. Lincoln did not possess a single quality for his office as president. People said he was good and honest and well meaning, but he never pretended that he was great. He was only nominated by means of a corrupt bargain, entered into by Simon Cameron of Pennsylvania and Caleb Smith of Indiana, provided Lincoln would pledge them Cabinet positions. These pledges Lincoln fulfilled, and thus made himself a party to corrupt bargains." That was his own law partner that said that.

Now, I want to read something to you just for a moment that is rather lengthy but I want you to listen. I want to tell you why. You have never heard, probably, of a Judge by the name of Judge Henry Clay Dean. I have a book at home that has just been reprinted and the book is by Judge Henry Clay Dean and the title of the book is Crimes Of The Civil War. But it is not crimes of the South, it is crimes of the North and crimes of Abraham Lincoln. You know, I told you in time past, that Lincoln arrested 38,000 Northerners and had them imprisoned without a trial. Never pressed a charge against them. Well, Judge Henry Clay Dean was one of those that Lincoln arrested and put in prison without a trial. I want you to listen to first of all, his indictment of Lincoln and his government and then secondly, he is going to tell you why he was arrested. Now this is very informative. Remember this comes from a Judge who was alive, who suffered under Abraham Lincoln, who knew firsthand what was going on. Here is what Judge Henry Clay Dean writes:

"Our government is in nothing uniform except its' contempt of law and powerful only for the oppression of the people. Every officer seems to contemplate his office as an engine of destruction in which he is engaged to work the ruin of the particular department of government entrusted to his care. The Postmaster General has for the last five years been violating the mails. The Secretary of the Treasury has been squandering the public wealth. The Secretary of the Navy has been enfeebling our naval power. The Secretary of War all crimsoned with innocent blood is employing the army for the destruction of the Country. The Secretary of State has been subverting Constitutional law and disgracing our form of government at home and abroad. The Secretary of the Interior has been conniving with public jobbers to defraud the government of its' most valuable lands. The Attorney General is gravely burlesquing nonsense itself by defining Constitutional construction of unconstitutional laws and is in conspiracy with military commissions to murder innocent women. The President is administering the government through military satraps in a manner unknown to Republican systems and disgraceful to despotism's, which regard the character of those entrusted to power. We now witness among our kindred the debasement of a civilized people who are forced to submit to the insult and domination of barbarian negroes and foreign vagabonds. The courts of the Country are infamously corrupt. The state Legislatures and Congress are flagrantly accessible to bribes, which has become the only tangible basis of' special, and an essential necessity in general legislation. The people of the late Confederate States after encountering the terrible vicissitudes of war were overtaken by famine, which inflicted frightful forms of starvation and are now overrun and robbed by predatory invasions and endangered by the insurrection of domestic savages incited by foreign incendiaries."

Now this is just an overall view of the government in Lincoln's day by a Judge and here is why the Judge said that he was arrested. He says "I have a personal reason for the publication of this book. I suffered under the reign of Mr. Lincoln, (by the way I like that word, I suffered under the reign of Mr. Lincoln), which was a vibration between Anarchy and Despotism. Why was I arrested? I cannot tell! I have never seen anything like charges, and suppose there were none in such forms as would be recognized at any court of justice under the sun. And yet I am quite sure there was a cause for it which is this: I am a Democrat, a devoted friend of the Constitution of the United States, a sincere lover of the government and the Union of the States, am anxious for a reunion, and believe that the right and duty of a free man in a calm candid manner to discuss in a temperate spirit the best modes of effecting this purpose. I have dared to participate in these discussions freely, which I have done from convictions of duty. This was the cause of my arrest! This is my only offense clearly and elaborately stated. But all this availed me nothing so long as I was a Democrat. A faithful supporter of the Constitution, an ardent lover of the Union and believed and thought then that the integrity of the one was the only conservative power of the other."

So why was the Judge arrested? Well, Lincoln knew the influence and the power that Judge Henry Clay Dean had and he tried to bribe Judge Henry Clay Dean and get him on his side and the Judge refused. And of course he continued to speak out against Lincoln and the next thing he knew, he was arrested and thrown in prison and did not get out until after the war was over and Lincoln was dead. The only reason he was arrested was he disagreed with Lincoln.

Now, in Mildred Rutherford's book, A True Estimate Of Abraham Lincoln, she gives a number of newspaper quotes and articles written in Lincoln's day before his inauguration and after his inauguration and I want to read some of these to you. Some of them are so sorrowful, they ought to make you weep. Others are downright humorous, but yet they show the situation that we were in at that period in our history. The New York Herald, on May 22, 1860, said this concerning Lincoln: "The candidate for President, Abraham Lincoln, is an uneducated man, a vulgar village politician, without any experience worth mentioning in the practical duties of statesmanship and only noted for some very unpopular votes, which he gave while a member of Congress." An uneducated, vulgar village politician! The New York Express in February of 1861, said this: "The tone of levity and frivolity which characterizes the speeches of Mr. Lincoln causes the hearts of our citizens to sink within them. They perceive already that he is not the man for the crisis and begin to despond of any extrication from the impending difficulties." What are they saying? Everybody realized that he is not going to get us out, he is going to get us in deeper. The Philadelphia Argus said, "The humiliating spectacle is thus presented by the President-elect indulging in the merest clap trap of a politician, thanking the people for voting for him, flattering their political pride and appealing to their sectional animosities." So he is trying to set one section against the other. Now I like this one: This was in The New York Tribune, June 4, 1863. They were quoting Alfred R. Wooten, who was the Attorney General of Delaware, now not a Southern State by any stretch of the imagination, and here is what the Attorney General said concerning Lincoln and his administration: "The administration is an insult to the flag and a traitor to their God. Russia never dared exercise the privileges, which Mr. Lincoln did, without reading a newspaper to see what the people thought. A hound might find Mr. Lincoln, but never will find him by an honest scent." That was the Attorney General of Delaware. A dog might find Lincoln but not by an honest scent. He didn't think too much of Mr. Lincoln. Wendell Phillips of the Cooper Institute, once again on August 22, 1862, said this: "The Union belongs to me as much as to Abraham Lincoln. What right has he or any official, our servants to claim that I shall cease criticizing his mistakes when they are dragging the Union to ruin? I find grave faults with Abraham Lincoln!" The New York World on April 13, 1864, "Mr. Lincoln is wholly unqualified for his position. The personal presence, the dignity nor the knowledge demanded in the magistrate of a great people. No branch of the Administration has been well and efficiently administered under him. His soul seems to be made of leather and incapable of any grand or noble emotion. You leave his presence with your enthusiasm dampened, your better feelings crushed, and your hopes cast to the wind. Even wisdom from him seems but folly." The New York World, June 2, 1864, says this: "That there is in the Republican Party a widely diffused impressions of the feebleness, faithlessness and incapacity of Mr. Lincoln's Administration is notorious." What are they saying? Everybody in the Republican Party knew that Lincoln was wrong! The New York Herald, June 2, 1864 said "Anything for a change in this imbecile and torpid administration! Let us have a shaking up of its dry bones anything for a change!" I hope you know what an imbecile is? The New York World, June 4, 1864 said "The age of rail splitters and tailors of buffoons, bores and fanatics has succeeded." Translated, Lincoln is a bore, a buffoon, and a fanatic, he continues, "Mr. Lincoln and Mr. Johnson are both men of mediocre talent, neglected education, narrow views, deficient information and of course vulgar manners. A statesman is supposed to be a man of some depth of thought and extent of knowledge. Has this country with so proud a record been reduced to such intellectual poverty as to be forced to present two such names as Abraham Lincoln and Andrew Johnson for the highest stations in this most trying crisis of its history. It is a cruel mockery and bitter humiliation. Such nominations at this juncture are an insult to the common sense of the people. Has this country with so proud a record been reduced to such intellectual poverty as to be forced to present two such names as Abraham Lincoln and Andrew Johnson for the highest stations in this most trying crisis of its history?" And that came from New York. In other words, they realized these guys are buffoons. Now, this may surprise you when I say this, but I had to be selective of my quotes that I just used, not because I was trying to pick out the worst ones, but because there were a multiplicity of such quotes. I could have sat here for another hour reading to you things that Northerners said about Abraham Lincoln. When Abraham Lincoln was alive he was mocked and ridiculed and hated and despised. Even his infamous Gettysburg Address was viewed and pronounced as a failure by himself, by Secretary of State William Seward, by Edward Everett, who also spoke on that occasion and by W.H. Cunningham, who was a reporter for the Montgomery Missouri Star, who was there when he gave the address. But after his death, everything changed.

Source

Lincoln was one of the worst Presidents that the US has ever had, and Bush followed quite close in his footsteps.

reply to post by Anita


Yes, you are right, things can change as a matter of fact we are making our future every second of everyday of our reality.

So while many of what this man said was considered a "hoax" we have to also understand that he could have been a visionary, to what extend . . . well. . . we have seen Nostradamus predictions and we have seen that they have variations on perceptions.

Who know Titor could have been a "charlatan" but he could have been telling the true for what we know also.