Titors claim of Civil war starting in 2k4

Skep

Temporal Novice
Greetings , I am not sure if this subject has come up alot recently as , I have just spontainiously posted.
My question is this. JT claimed that US civil War would begin in 2k4. And , that we would not recognize Civil war until about 2k8? . So , I ask you peeps this. What event happend in 2k4 that could have possibly predicted or started this event? The only thing I can come up with is the incedent with the union grocers that took 4-5 months to conclude. And it was a " Iffy " conclusion indeed. I think the new contract that was worked out is just a Facade. And we will see a reneg here shortly , that will just anger more individuals even more than the previous episode. Of course all things have a begining and an end. I dunno , Im just speculating of course. Too many smart people have posted on JT's speculation , and this topic I speak of now seems to be his first " Major " prediction ( Allthough I could be wrong and , Most likely am ).So , I thought I would ask you believers out there , What event triggerd this Civil War?
 
imed that US civil War would begin in 2k4. And , that we would not recognize Civil war until about 2k8? . So , I ask you peeps this. What event happend in 2k4 that could have possibly predicted or started this event?

The Death of Arafat. Nov 11th 2004.

The Grocers union? I think you are a little bit confused, its World politics that draws us into a civil war here at home. Thats always how civil wars work, I think thats what John said as well. That even our enemies During WWIII were not targetting everyone, only those who were the problem in our goverment.

If we look back even 1-2 years from now, the Middle East, Israel, Palestine, the Muslim world, are going to be a lot different. Whether you liked the guy or hated him. He had influence.

other than that, nothing really "big" comes to mind,
 
I think that although Titor may be a fraud (and to be honest, it is close to impossible to prove one way or the other) It is not impossible that a civil war will happen regardless of Titor's validity. Recently I have thougt "hmm... it's probably not going to happen", but of course it's not possible for me to know what is going to happen tommorow, next week, next month or whenever, and making assumptions is never a wise thing to do.

The thing that strikes me as wierd about all this is how long the intrest in Titor has lasted, I first heard about it in early to mid 2004, which is fairly recent, but I'm suprised that this hasn't been conclusivly proved to be a hoax (If it is, then it is the best hoax ever in my opinion). As 2005 goes on people will say more and more that it is untrue, because there is no evidence of a civil war, of course for conclusive proof we will probably have to wait until 2008. The one "prediction" of Titir's that doesn't seem to be happening is "A Waco type event every few months". I have heard of nothing similar, in any useful way, to Waco since at least '98. So perhaps Titor is a fraud, and we can all stop going on about it, or perhaps this whole thing is true and we are all screwed. I don't know what to believe, although right now I would say that I'm leaning on the side of "Unlikely". However I do not dismiss any idea, however unliely it may seem until it is impossible.
 
Yeah, what would you describe as a "Waco type event" anyway? To me it would have to bear at least some similarity, and the only recent thing which comes any where close was the Beslan school seige in summer
2004, which was in Russia.
 
Yeah, what would you describe as a "Waco type event" anyway?

No idea. Anything with fire, or guns, or compounds, gas bombs, or women and kids getting caught in the middle. Maybe Iraq city seiges?? This is one of those "misses" the author expects us to start filling in I guess but I got nothing.
 
To be honest none of this whole Titor thing makes no sense any way. It really screws with my head sometimes, because part of me WANTS it to be true, part of me is saying "yeah, but that's a BAD thing" so I really dont know what to believe any more. All I willl say is that America does seem quite "unstable" at the moment. Stuff like: US soldier on leave kills a cop;
Incendiary Devices Found At Auburn Site and Wild fires in New mexico "deliberate" Makes you wonder if things are getting a little "disordered" or am I just reading too much into stuff.
 
Maybe just maybe we are looking for a literal type of event when we should just be looking for something a little less obvious. Instead of a blatant hostile take over by the BIG government on a religous compound, maybe something just dealing with BIG government. I don't know maybe the voter fraud in Ohio, I find it very strange how no one in the press will even touch this subject. Maybe they realize that the FCC is now a BIG propaganda machine for the Bush Administration, think Hitler and Nazi Germany in the late 1930's. Say anything bad about Bushy and his buddies and we'll start makeing your life miserable by fining you to death and withholding your right to broadcast information to the masses. Maybe what we are looking for is the Big Government cover up story that is yet to surface. Big government imposing it's will upon the people. That is what starts revolutions the last time I checked.
How about this one Social Security, this bonehead in office feels that he has a mandate to do whatever he wants. Not once did he say anything about S.S. when he was running around promoting his agenda to the religous right nut jobs that supposedly elected to him to office. If he had mentioned S.S. then he never ever would have been re-elected,the Grayhairs and their strong lobbying power would have spent millions to shut him down, but now they are quite. How come?????
It just doesn't make any sense to me. Once again BIG government enforcing it's will upon the people..
This next one IRAN what are we doing fooling around with them we are already over extended by IRAQ and AFGHANISTAN we certainly don't have enough manpower to start something with them do we?? Well maybe a draft can solve that issue now can't it?? Once again he has his mandate to do what he wants right, all the red states told him so.. He will wage war with whomever he feels like and our peasent blood will be spilled for his supposedly just causes, because God and the red states told him so. Once again BIG government enforcing it's will upon the people, that my friends and fellow nut jobs is what starts revolutions.
I spend many hours a day thinking in my mind linking all this stuff together Titor, Prophecy from the Bible,and other sources and I'll be damned if I can't debunk this stuff. I try really hard to do so, because personally I want them all to be wrong I truly do. That is why i turn to you guys and gals "have to be P.C. these days" to convince me otherwise. I refuse to just bury my head in the sand and act like nothing is wrong when everyday I am reminded of what this one said about the future or this one said that about the future. So in closing my fellow Titorites convince me that the world we live in today isn't as $^%&ED up as I think and feel it is.

The Forever Optimistic TDriver /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif
 
To answer the OP:

I believe it may have been the election of George W. Bush. It seems a little obvious to me. His term is over in 2008, and by that time we will have realized that he is the cause for a Civil War.

Those who support Bush, please do not flame.
What's your opinion?
 
Skep asked, "My question is this. JT claimed that US civil War would begin in 2k4. And , that we would not recognize Civil war until about 2k8? . So , I ask you peeps this. What event happend in 2k4 that could have possibly predicted or started this event?"

THE ANSWER TO YOUR QUESTION:

I have been following this since before the elections. (If you're Republican, please do not take this personal, I won't get into a political debate over this.)

Here is what happened....Many people believe voter fraud was committed during this last presidential election, not just Democrats, but Libertarians and others too. There are many reasons for it. Even some senators and other politicians believe this. I think Kerry does too, but he'll never admit it in public, because it's too big of an issue, and many people wouldn't believe it, even if it was true.

There are masses of people who believe this, and many lawyers and politicians tried to prove it in all sorts of ways...through the court systems, and they tried to get recounts, but all of their efforts failed. Believe me there have been many articles about it on the internet, Yahoo News, AP, etc, but there are not headlining, so most people don't know about it.

There were major protests in big cities all over the US and around the world against Bush the day he was inaugurated, and there were protests against him over the 'voter fraud', prior to that. The country has become greatly divided ever since the elections. This is very serious, but the mainstream news is covering it up, not showing it.

Believe me when I tell you, I have a stack of articles on this very subject...and the concerns are real. Like I said, there is good reason for their suspicions, which I have followed since before the elections. Even the polls the morning of election day showed that Kerry was the projected winner, but that did not happen.

There was all kinds of dishonest things that happened at the polls that day, and even in the weeks prior (articles about Republicans throwing away newly registered Democrats voter cards)...people are outraged. They are protesting everywhere, and it's not going to go away.

Young people are dying in a war that is senseless. IT'S THE VIETNAM WAR ALL OVER AGAIN. Loved ones are being killed in the war and parents/loved ones are feeling the loss. Poor kids are being recruited with promises of college and $$, but they are either killed or maimed before their dreams come true.

This is exactly what happened during the Vietnam war...and as time went on, word spread throughout the country about the atrocities there. Soldiers were killed by the thousands and the ones who returned home were maimed and had Post Traumatic Stress. The war was senseless then and it is now. After that war, my generation was dead set against another war, because 50,000 troops our age who were senslessly slaughtered (and because of what happened to the Vietnamese), and many more lives were ruined. After Vietnam, my generation would never approve a war unless it was absolutely necessary...and of course, young people today do not want a war that they will have to go fight. That's why Bush said there were WMD.

President Bush lied to the American people and said the reason we were going to war was because there were WMD, but there were none...and when that was proved, he admitted he would have gone to war anyway.

The war is going to get worse, and there are not enough troops to win the war. There is a 'back-door draft' going on...and there won't be enough troops unless the open draft is reinstated. Most people do not want this war, now that Bush has been exposed.

Many people have seen or are seeing Michael Moore's "Fahrenheit 911", which happens to be true, and the public is finding out that Bush has his own selfish motives for the war and he is not the good 'Christian' he portrays to be. All of this has sparked 'civil unrest' and it's not going away. You will see this in the future...If you don't believe me, just watch.

If you want to read the news, go to Yahoo and look under 'Politics'...also 'Election'...although most of the articles there are gone now. There were tons of articles and photos taken...headlines "Thousands protest" Bush during his inauguration. Even in one article, it said that no president being sworn in for a second term has been this disliked in 50 years.

If Titor is from the future, I know this is what he's talking about. I'm in my 50's and I know how manipulative those in power can be. I believe this is going to happen, with or without Titor's prediction.

BTW, two months before the elections, I dreamed much of this would happen. I believe there will be a civil war..in fact I dreamed that Bush's actions in his second term would eventually cause the US to be invaded by outside countries, and would cause the collapse of our federal government due to war on the US soil.

If Titor is real, then perhaps the reason it won't become obvious until 2008 will be because the news media will not air what's really happening. (I dreamed about that too.) I have had precognitive and prophetic dreams that come true all of my life. That is why I began following the elections and the aftermath.
 
everaftergirl,

I agree with everything your saying would help spark a civil war. I don't think I place as much blame on Bush though. If every possibly exists, there is a worldine where YOU are George Bush and you rigged the 00 election and started a war in Iraq. There's a scene in Fahrenheit-911 that shows Bush likes to hang out in the country and cut his own lumber for fun. I can totally respect a guy who takes pleasure in that. I don't think he's evil at all and just got the short straw. He gets to be the represent the party that wanted a war this time around.

But I think that Americans, and most other countries, are too smart to let anyone start a civil war. The vast majority of people would prefer to resolve their argument and play cards rather than kill each other. You can't mobilize and army unless the reason threatens their lives or the lives of friends.

If Yellowstone Caldera errupted, in the state that our two countries are in, it's a completely different story. Fighting over food and the hit our economies would take, would make it pretty natural.
 
No Civil War. Its bigger than just the USA

The war is going to get worse, and there are not enough troops to win the war.
Have you considered what this war is really about, and how it relates to wars where we lost many more people for the exact same stakes? Undertand that radical Islam wants to control you, and they would just as soon kill you if you worship a god other than theirs.

Did anyone ever think that the whole John Titor project could, just as easily, be an Op planned and executed by radical Islamists (terrorists) to actually make you BELIEVE the US was so weak as to fall into civil war? Of course, their hopes would be that we would do exactly that...because (as they think of us) we have "weak minds". People, need I point out that 9/11 terrorists operatives worked out of south Florida? And where was Titor from?

Here is a quite sober analysis of what is going on in our world:

>The author is a Northern California Lawyer - his name and e-mail
>address are at the end of the article
>
>Subject: Why are we in Iraq?
>
>Sixty-three years ago, Nazi Germany had overrun almost all of Europe
>and hammered England to the verge of bankruptcy and defeat, and had
>sunk more than four hundred British ships in their convoys between
>England and America for food and war materials.
>
>Bushido Japan had overrun most of Asia, beginning in 1928, killing
>millions of civilians throughout China, and impressing millions more as
>slave labor.
>
>The United States was in an isolationist and pacifist mood, and most
>Americans and Congress wanted nothing to do with the European war, or
>the Asian war.
>
>Then along came Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, and in outrage
>Congress unanimously declared war on Japan, and the following day on
>Germany, which had not attacked us.
>
>It was a dicey thing. We had few allies.
>
>France was not an ally, for the Vichy government of France aligned
>with its German occupiers. Germany was not an ally, for it was an
>enemy, and Hitler intended to set up a Thousand Year Reich in Europe.
>Japan was not an ally, for it was intent on owning and controlling all of Asia.
>Japan and Germany had long-term ideas of invading Canada and Mexico,
>and then the United States over the north and south borders, after they
>had settled control of Asia and Europe.
>
>America's allies then were England, Ireland, Scotland, Canada,
>Australia, and Russia, and that was about it. There were no other
>countries of any size or military significance with the will and
>ability to contribute much of anything to the effort to defeat Hitler's Germany
>and Japan, and prevent the global dominance of Nazism. And we had to
>send millions of tons of arms, munitions, and war supplies to Russia,
>England, and the Canadians, Aussies, Irish, and Scots, because none of
>them could produce all they needed for themselves.
>
>All of Europe, from Norway to Italy, except Russia in the east, was
>already under the Nazi heel.
>
>America was not prepared for war. America had stood down most of its
>military after World War I and throughout the depression. At the
>outbreak of World War II there were army soldiers training with
>broomsticks over their shoulders because they didn't have guns, and
>using cars with ''tank'' painted on the doors because they didn't have
>tanks. And a big chunk of our navy had just been sunk and damaged at
>Pearl Harbor.
>
>Britain had already gone bankrupt, saved only by the donation of $600m
>given by Belgium to England to carry on the war when Belgium was
>overrun by Hitler. Actually, Belgium surrendered one day, because it
>was unable to oppose the German invasion, and the Germans bombed
>Brussels into rubble the next day anyway, just to prove they could.
>Britain had been holding out for two years already in the face of
>staggering shipping loses and the near-decimation of its air force in
>the Battle of Britain, and was saved from being overrun by Germany only
>because Hitler made the mistake of thinking the Brits were a relatively
>minor threat that could be dealt with later and turning his attention
>to Russia, at a time when England was on the verge of collapse in the late summer of 1940.
>
>Russia saved America's rear by putting up a desperate fight for two
>years until the United States got geared up to begin hammering away at
>Germany. Russia lost something like 24 million people in the sieges of
>Stalingrad and Moscow, 90% of them from cold and starvation, mostly
>civilians, but also more than a million soldiers. More than a
>million! Had Russia surrendered, then, Hitler would have been able to
>focus his entire campaign against the Brits, then America, and the
>Nazis would have won that war.
>
>Had Hitler not made that mistake and invaded England in 1940 or 1941,
>instead, there would have been no England for the United States and the
>Brits to use as a staging ground to prepare an assault on Nazi Europe.
>England would not have been able to run its North African campaign to
>help take a little pressure off Russia while America geared up for
>battle, and today Europe would very probably be run by the Nazis, the
>Third Reich, and, isolated and without any allies (not even the Brits).
> The United States would very likely have had to cede Asia to the
>Japanese, who were basically Nazis by another name then, and the world
>we live in today would be very different and much worse.
>
>I say this to illustrate that turning points in history are often dicey
>things. And we are now at another one.
>
>There is a very dangerous minority in Islam that either has or wants to
>have, and may soon have the ability to deliver small nuclear,
>biological, or chemical weapons, almost anywhere in the world, unless
>it is prevented from doing so.
>
>France, Germany, and Russia, have been selling these Islamic nations
>weapons technology at least as recently as 2002, as have North Korea,
>Syria, and Pakistan, paid for with billions of dollars that Saddam
>Hussein skimmed from the "Oil For Food" program administered by the
>United Nations with the complicity of Kofi Annan and his son.
>
>The Jihadis, or the militant Muslims, are basically Nazis in Kaffiyahs.
>They believe that Islam, a radically conservative (definitely not
>liberal) form of Wahhabi Islam, should own and control the Middle East
>first, then Europe and then the world. All who do not bow to Allah
>should be killed, enslaved, or subjugated. They want to finish the
>Holocaust, destroy Israel, and purge the world of Jews. This is what
>they say.
>
>There is also a civil war raging in the Middle East for the most part
>not a hot war, but a war of ideas. Islam is having its Inquisition and
>its Reformation today, but it is not yet known which will win the
>Inquisition, or the Reformation.
>
>If the Inquisition wins, then the Wahhabis, or the Jihadis, will
>control the Middle East, and the OPEC oil, and the United States,
>European, and Asian economies the techno-industrial economies will be
>at the mercy of OPEC. This is not an OPEC dominated by the well
>educated and rational Saudis of today, but an OPEC dominated by the Jihadis.
>
>You want gas in your car? You want heating oil next winter? You want
>jobs? You want the dollar to be worth anything? You better hope the
>Jihad, the Muslim Inquisition, loses, and the Islamic Reformation wins.
>
>If the Reformation movement wins, that is the moderate Muslims who
>believe that Islam can respect and tolerate other religions and live in
>peace with the rest of the world, move out of the 10th Century into the
>21st Century. Then the troubles in the Middle East will eventually fade
>away, and a moderate and prosperous Middle East will emerge.
>
>We have to help the Reformation win, and to do that we have to fight
>the Inquisition, i.e., the Wahhabi movement, the Jihad, Al Qaeda, the
>Islamic terrorist movements.
>
>We have to do it somewhere, we cannot do it just anywhere and we cannot
>do it everywhere at once.
>
>We have created a focal point for the battle now at the time and place
>of our choosing, in Iraq. Not in New York, not in London, or Paris, or
>Berlin, but in Iraq, where we did and are doing two very important things:
>
>(1) We deposed Saddam Hussein and whether Saddam Hussein was directly
>involved in 9/11 or not the issue. It is undisputed that Saddam has
>been actively supporting the terrorist movement for decades, Saddam is
>a terrorist. Saddam is, or was, a weapon of mass destruction, who is
>responsible for the deaths of probably more than a million Iraqis and
>two million Iranians.
>
>(2) We created a battle, a confrontation, a flash point, with Islamic
>terrorism in Iraq and we have focused the battle. We are killing bad
>guys there, and the ones we get there we won't have to get here, or
>anywhere else. We also have a good shot at creating a democratic,
>peaceful Iraq, which will be a catalyst for democratic change in the
>rest of the Middle East, and an outpost for a stabilizing American
>military presence in the Middle East for as long as it is needed.
>
>The Euros could have done this, but they didn't, and they won't. We now
>know that rather than opposing the rise of the Jihad, the French,
>Germans, and Russians were selling them arms. We have found more than
>a million tons of weapons and munitions in Iraq. If Iraq was not a
>threat to anyone, why did Saddam need a million tons of weapons?
>
>Additionally, Iraq was paying for French, German, and Russian arms with
>money skimmed from the United Nations Oil for Food Program (supervised
>by U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan and his son) that was supposed to
>pay for food, medicine, and education, for Iraqi children.
>
>
>World War II, the war with the German and Japanese Nazis, really began
>with a ''whimper'' in 1928. It did not begin with Pearl Harbor. It
>began with the Japanese invasion of China. It was at war for fourteen
>years before America joined in it. It officially ended in 1945 a 17
>year war and was followed by another decade of United States occupation
>in Germany and Japan to get those countries reconstructed and running
>on their own again a 27 year war. World War II cost the United States
>an amount equal to approximately a full year's GNP adjusted for
>inflation, equal to about $12 trillion dollars. World War II cost
>America more than 400,000 killed in action, and nearly 100,000 are still missing in action.
>
>The Iraq war has so far cost the United States about $120 billion, which
>is roughly what 9/11 cost New York. It has also cost about 1,000
>American lives, which is roughly 1/3 of the 3,000 lives that the Jihad
>snuffed on 9/11.
>
>But the cost of not fighting and winning World War II would have been
>unimaginably greater, a world that would now be dominated by German and
>Japanese Nazism.
>
>Americans have a short attention span, now, conditioned I suppose by
>30 minute television shows and 2 hour movies in which everything comes out
>okay. The real world is not like that. It is messy, uncertain, and
>sometimes bloody and ugly. It always has been, and probably always
>will be.
>
>If we do this thing in Iraq successfully, it is probable that the
>Reformation will ultimately prevail. Many Muslims in the Middle East
>hope it will. We will be there to support it. It has begun in some
>countries, Libya, for instance also Dubai and Saudi Arabia. If we
>fail, the Inquisition will probably prevail, and terrorism from Islam
>will be with us for all the foreseeable future, because the people of
>the Inquisition, or Jihad, believe that they are called by Allah to
>kill all the Infidels, and that death in Jihad is glorious.
>
>The bottom line here is that we will have to deal with Islamic terrorism
>until we defeat it, whenever that is. It will not go away on its own.
>It will not go away if we ignore it.
>
>If the United States can create a reasonably democratic and stable
>Iraq, then we have an ''England'' in the Middle East, a platform from
>which we can work to help modernize and moderate the Middle East. The
>history of the world is the clash between the forces of relative
>civility and civilization, and the barbarians clamoring at the gates. The Iraq war is
>merely another battle in this ancient and never-ending war. And now,
>for the first time ever, the barbarians are about to get nuclear weapons
> unless we or somebody does prevent them.
>
>The Iraq war is expensive, and uncertain, yes. But the consequences of
>not fighting it and winning it will be horrifically greater. We have
>four options:
>
>1. We can defeat the Jihad now, before it gets nuclear weapons.
>
>
>2. We can fight the Jihad later, after it gets nuclear weapons
>(which may be as early as next year, if Iran's progress on nuclear
>weapons is what Iran claims it is).
>
>3. We can surrender to the Jihad and accept its dominance in the
>Middle East, now, in Europe in the next few years or decades, and
>ultimately in America.
>
>4. Or we can stand down now, and pick up the fight later when the
>Jihad is more widespread and better armed, perhaps after the Jihad has
>dominated France and Germany and maybe most of the rest of Europe. It
>will be more dangerous, more expensive, and much bloodier then.
>
>Yes, the Jihadis say that they look forward to an Islamic America. If
>you oppose this war, I hope you like the idea that your children, or
>grandchildren, may live in an Islamic merica under the Mullahs and the
>Sharia, an America that resembles Iran today.
>
>We can be defeatist, as many Democrats and liberals, peace activists,
>and anti-war types seem to be, and concede or surrender to the Jihad or
>we can do whatever it takes to win this war against them.
>
>The history of the world is the history of civil clashes, or cultural
>clashes. All wars are about ideas, ideas about what society and
>civilization should be like and the most determined always win. Those
>who are willing to be the most ruthless always win. The pacifists
>always lose, because the anti-pacifists kill them.
>
>In the 20th Century it was western democracy vs. communism, and before
>that western democracy vs. Nazism, and before that Western democracy vs.
>German imperialism. Western democracy won, three times, but it wasn't
>cheap, fun, nice, easy, or quick. Indeed, the wars against German
>Imperialism (World War I), Nazi Imperialism (World War II), and
>communist imperialism (the 40-year Cold War that included the Vietnam
>Battle, commonly called the Vietnam War, but itself a major battle in a
>larger war) covered almost the entire century.
>
>The first major war of the 21st Century is the war between Western
>Judeo/Christian Civilization and Wahhabi Islam. It may last a few more
>years, or most of this century. It will last until the Wahhabi branch
>of Islam fades away, or gives up its ambitions for regional and global
>dominance and Jihad, or until Western Civilization gives in to the Jihad.
>
>Remember, perspective is everything, and America's schools teach too
>little history. The Cold War lasted from about 1947 to 1989 at least
>until the Berlin Wall came down in 1989. Forty-two years. Europe
>spent the first half of the 19th century fighting Napoleon, and from 1870 to
>1945 fighting Germany. World War II began in 1928, lasted 17 years,
>plus a ten year occupation and the United States still has troops in
>Germany and Japan. World War II resulted in the death of more than 50
>million people, maybe more than 100 million people, depending on which
>estimates you accept. The United States has taken a little more than
>1,000 Killed-in-Action (KIA) in Iraq. The United States took more than
>4,000 KIA on the morning of June 6, 1944, the first day of the Normandy
>Invasion to rid Europe of Nazi Imperialism. In World War II the United
>States averaged 2,000 KIA a week for four years. Most of the
>individual battles of World War II lost more Americans than the entire
>Iraq war has done so far.
>
>But the stakes are at least as high: a world dominated by
>representative governments with civil rights, human rights, and
>personal freedoms--or a world dominated by a radical Islamic Wahhabi
>movement, and by the Jihad, under the Mullahs and the Sharia.
>
>I do not understand why many Americans do not grasp this. Too much
>television I guess.
>
>Many Americans profess to be in favor of human rights, civil rights,
>liberty, freedom, and all that. But not for Iraqis, I guess. In
>America, but nowhere else. The 300,000 Iraqi bodies in mass graves in
>Iraq, not our problem. The United States population is about twelve
>times that of Iraq, so let's multiply 300,000 by twelve. What would
>you think if there were 3,600,000 American bodies in mass graves in
>America because of our president? Would you not want another country
>to help liberate America?
>
>''Peace Activists'' always seem to demonstrate where it's safe and
>ineffective to do so: in America. Why don't we see peace activists
>demonstrating in Iran, Syria, Iraq, Sudan, and North Korea; in the
>places in the world that really need peace activism the most?
>
>Are we not supposed to be in favor of human rights, civil rights,
>democracy, multiculturalism, diversity, etc? Well, if the Jihad wins
>and wherever the Jihad wins, it is the end of civil rights, human
>rights, democracy, multiculturalism, diversity, etc. Americans who
>oppose the liberation of Iraq are coming down on the side of their own
>worst enemy. If the Jihad wins, it is the death of ALL OTHER "ISMSâ?!
>Too many Americans JUST DON'T GET IT!
>
>I TRULY BELIEVE THE ABOVE TO BE A MOST REALISTIC THREAT, NOT TO THE
>REPUBLICAN NOR DEMOCRATIC PARTY, BUT, FAR MORE IMPORTANT....TO OUR
>CHILDREN, GRANDCHILDREN, DEAR FRIENDS AND ALL FELLOW AMERICANS!!!
>
>About the Writer: Raymond Kraft is a lawyer and writer living and
>working in Northern California. Raymond receives e-mail at
>[email protected].
 
Re: No Civil War. Its bigger than just the USA

Hi Rainman,

Yes I thought of that too, but that would never be enough to start a civil war in America. People in the US are being pushed, but they will only be pushed so far. I'm sure there are more things ahead with the war and the Patriot Act and related happenings that will cause further discord in the US.

Remember there was a Civil War here once over the issue of slavery, and it was the worst war in our history. It can happen again. History often repeats itself, because people don't pay attention.
 
Re: No Civil War. Its bigger than just the USA

People, need I point out that 9/11 terrorists operatives worked out of south Florida? And where was Titor from?

I really wanted to point out this thought again, because I think it is an important thing for all people who are enamored (or otherwise believe Titor was "real") to consider the timing involved...

When did Titor first arrive on the scene? That's right...PRIOR to 9/11/2001. Even a stupid Islamist with a moderate IQ would figure out that, if you knew you were going to execute an attack on America in Sep of 2001, that you might begin one (several?) big "psy ops" in American culture just prior to and leading up to the planned attack.

Did it ever occur to anyone that the person(s) telling the Titor story had a functional purpose in mind? In other words, to actually try to get America to believe that its demise was at hand, and that a Civil War was around the corner?

As Titors predictions continue to be proven to be "weak guesses", it is my hope we wake up from this stupidity and start crafting the future we wish to see come to pass...not a future that some people (with questionable motives) wanted us to believe will come to pass.

We are all stronger than that...
RMT
 
Re: No Civil War. Its bigger than just the USA

History often repeats itself, because people don't pay attention.

Indeed you are correct, everaftergirl. And the best evidence was how history repeated itself on the European continent when it refused to stand up to tyranny in its back yard. Have we even seen history repeat itself ONCE on US soil since we learned our lessons of our own Civil War? We may have come close at times, but the answer is no.

I'd say Europe has not learned its lesson yet, and that we are still trying to teach them it is better to deal with things when they are small, rather than when they are large and knocking on our door.

Thanks for your reply,
RMT
 
Re: No Civil War. Its bigger than just the USA

everaftergirl,

If every possibly exists, there is a worldine where YOU are George Bush and you rigged the 00 election and started a war in Iraq.


HELLO!! MUCK-FLY!!!
 
Re: No Civil War. Its bigger than just the USA

If every possibly exists, there is a worldine where YOU are George Bush and you rigged the 00 election and started a war in Iraq.

Sorry to jump in, but this idea bothers me. Sure I mentioned it in my first topic, but I thought I would bring it here as well.

As open minded as I can be about time travel and whatnot, this is a direct violation of the principle of non-contradiction. For those who don't know, this principle states that something cannot be A and ~A (not A) at the same time. So, for example, a substance cannot be water and not water at the same time. As such, not every possible situation can exist, for it necessarily follows that if this is true, a possibile situation exists where the everything is impossible (or nothing is possible) - this contradicts itself. (as a side note, the PNC can be destroyed if an all powerful being does in fact exist)

So, not assuming whether JT is right or not, if this is the impression that he has of the world, I think it's flawed, and I also think we should take his ideas (even as a time traveler, assuming he was) as the same types of ideas we have - not necessarily correct. In my opinion, the best thing to focus on with a supposid time traveler is not his ideas of life, death, religion, etc, but if time travel is in fact possible or not. If I discovered time travel tomorrow, went back 30 years and told everyone what I thought of the world, they would be getting a subjective view that really had no definite truth - sure I might be 100% right about everything, but the chances are slim. On that note, I find it odd that people would criticize any supposid time traveler about their knowledge - they would be a regular person, maybe with a bit more information and knowledge than we have today, and maybe not. If a civil war happened, a lot of information was lost, and a lot of what we learn today would not be taught in that world of chaos.

So anyway, unless I find good reason, I can't buy into the idea of "anything is possible" or "every possibility exists" for the reasons above.
 
everaftergirl,

I have been following this since before the elections. (If you're Republican, please do not take this personal, I won't get into a political debate over this.)

I won't debate you but you have to be aware that if you make a post as you've done above (that only takes a partisan point-of-view) you really can't also decline political debate and defense of the points that you've called into issue. That's having your cake and eating it too.

Even in one article, it said that no president being sworn in for a second term has been this disliked in 50 years.

Harry S. Truman (Korea and the firing of MacArthur)
Lyndon B. Johnson (Vietnam - it was his and the Democrats' war)
Richard M. Nixon (Vietnam)

All three of those Presidents were very unpopular with the opposition when elected to their second terms. For Johnson and Nixon there weren't just demonstrations there were riots and assassinations.

Johnson and Truman were eligible for a third term because they were not elected to their first terms. Both decided not to run because of their gross unpopularity with everyone by that time.
 
As Bush wishes to invade Iran now, will the american people back him on this one, or will they choose to protest, possibily starting one of these waco style events. Certainly in England, our Priminister Blair has refused to answer questions as to wether our people are already in Iran gathering intelligence, his problem is that noone supports this action whatsoever. If he tries to drag us into another Bush created war, then there may well be a civil war in England to oust Blair. Would Bush send over troops to help Blair keep control? Bush needs to realise we do not all play to his tune. Although said possible civil war in England would be over pretty quickly because the vast majority here dispise Blair.
 
This has turned into such a heated debate I'll probably stick out on the sidelines for this one.

However I did want to say one and only one thing about "Voter Fraud".

Its actually more like Vote Tampering, as the voters no doubt cast their votes the way they intended. The problem is specifically in the electronic machines that count and record the votes, the system is open to manipulation that cannot be traced as there are no physical traces once your vote has been cast. For many months/years leading up to this election, many others have done stories on diebold and the other equipment manufacturers. It appeared they may be in league specifically with the republican party, please check out www.blackboxvoting.com

I personally think the republicans will win every election here on out until we have a more accurate voting system.
 
Back
Top