So where’s the proof that guy was state sponsored?
So where’s the proof that guy was state sponsored?
That the poster knew about the FBI video weeks before it was shown.
That the poster knew about the FBI video weeks before it was shown.
Because the FBI was spying from the air, that makes us automatically assume that guy was a state sponsored asset?
What does one necessarily have to do with the other?
Because the FBI was spying from the air, that makes us automatically assume that guy was a state sponsored asset?
What does one necessarily have to do with the other?
Read it again. The poster knew the fbi was spying. That's impossible unless he is at least legit. Whether he is telling the truth is another matter. Hence "good reason to believe..."
Read it again. The poster knew the fbi was spying. That's impossible unless he is at least legit. Whether he is telling the truth is another matter. Hence "good reason to believe..."
Source: Dude, trust me.
Source: Dude, trust me.
Take it for what it's worth, but he knew about the FBI aerial footage before it was released as public knowledge.
It adds a bit more credibility to a source that would otherwise be pretty dubious.
Take it for what it's worth, but he knew about the FBI aerial footage before it was released as public knowledge.
It adds a bit more credibility to a source that would otherwise be pretty dubious.
(post is archived)