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: rickymouse
It could be something, but that would be difficult to determine properly. He could have known this guy was planning to do something from word on the street. But it also could just be a coincidence.
originally posted by: dreamingawake
originally posted by: caterpillage
This. Needs to be investigated to the fullest extent.
Not gonna happen if the politicians and lobbyist at the top are involved.
originally posted by: Justoneman
originally posted by: dreamingawake
originally posted by: caterpillage
This. Needs to be investigated to the fullest extent.
Not gonna happen if the politicians and lobbyist at the top are involved.
Good point, we are going to have to hold our own investigations if they are going to stop.
The pretense of the Rule of Law was affectively ended with Comey's explaining allowing Hillary to walk even though she did commit the crime but didn't intend to, in his estimation.
AND, this decision was acknowledged to be unlike ALL the others before her story with similar cases. Even though we have mounds of proof the information was wiped against the law too.
originally posted by: odzeandennz
if the man was Muslim, would it be terrorism, cut and dry
To be fair, "John" said it might not happen on that very date. What is interesting is that the stock sales correlated to the same time frame that "John" posted the warning to 4chan.
originally posted by: Magnivea
a reply to: intrptr
I've seen it posted as both the 10th and the 11th. Even the snopes link acknowledges that. I did, though, think that it had been settled that the 10th was the original. Either way, I don't trust snopes for much of anything.
Frankly, I could still go either way. It just happens that for right now everything released has come across as there having been far too many coincidences for it to all be coincidences.
Oh and there's also the fact that their rundown willfully ignores that he clearly stated he wasn't necessarily positing about the following day but las Vegas was the intended target.
originally posted by: CIAGypsy
originally posted by: AndyFromMichigan
Definitely reminds me of the 9/11 stock trading. Somebody a made a lot of money off that attack. The Feds claim they investigated the stock trades and found it was just a coincidence, but on the whole I got the distinct impression they were just sweeping it under the rug.
Do you have the data you are referring to from the 9/11 trades? I don't recall seeing that previously....
Eta - this article was about more than just some predictions about an attack on a specific city.
He named the city of the attack specifically. The author of the article is the one who noticed the anomalies in trading in the correlation.
originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: CIAGypsy
He named the city of the attack specifically. The author of the article is the one who noticed the anomalies in trading in the correlation.
He doesn't say "attack", you do. He specifically stated the next day , changing his own prediction later on proves he's a charlatan.
You want to nail me down to specifics, yet you let him skate on the date.
Hold the same yardstick to him. What about Henderson, the three black vans, the specific date in the first entry?
Remember, I'm saying tomorrow too, but you'll overlook that part if its weeks later right? Like you do for him?
originally posted by: Wide-Eyes
a reply to: intrptr
I honestly cannot understand how anyone can't see how contrived this bullsh!t lone gunman story is. It looks like a Blackwater operation to me. Just like Boston.