by definition he has also been wrong for those same numbers of years in which a false flag did not occur. dont get me wrong, he's a good dude to have out there talking about government abuse, but this is just circle jerking. He has no date, no methodology describing the supposed attack, no real information other than, Y could happen because X happened, "soon" just isn't very helpful in a situation of this magnitude.
It's the same actuarial scenario as having a tiger loose in a large urban area.
You'd have no date, no methodology describing the impending attack, no real information other than, the tiger is getting hungry, and its going to try to eat something soon.
Statistically, mathematically, you know this is going to happen.
view the rest of the comments →
carlip ago
He's been saying this for years...
TheRealAmalek ago
He has been right for years as well
carlip ago
by definition he has also been wrong for those same numbers of years in which a false flag did not occur. dont get me wrong, he's a good dude to have out there talking about government abuse, but this is just circle jerking. He has no date, no methodology describing the supposed attack, no real information other than, Y could happen because X happened, "soon" just isn't very helpful in a situation of this magnitude.
EarlPoncho ago
they just tried recently with syria
Tor1 ago
It's the same actuarial scenario as having a tiger loose in a large urban area.
You'd have no date, no methodology describing the impending attack, no real information other than, the tiger is getting hungry, and its going to try to eat something soon.
Statistically, mathematically, you know this is going to happen.