posted on Jun, 24 2013 @ 01:14 AM
Originally posted by StrangeTimez
What speaks volumes is the fact that there is no source given in the article. As well as it being only 5 sentences long. None of this seemed
suspicious to you?
There was a car crash a few days ago, I found that suspicious. Now, let's say (hypothetically) this is what that source had, who was credible, and
lets say it came from an NSA insider (recording of the pres.) and since fellow (a) ended up crashing into a tree, fellow (b) who he entrusted with a
copy was to release it in case anything happened to him....
Now granted, this is completely far fetched. But I would not dismiss (this line of thinking) (-it) out of hand. If it's simply a fake recording, many
could have been made with much effort put into period and timing to make it seem more legit. Even releasing it to certain people, or making it seem
like it's more legitimate could have been done.
In any case, not much to go on, but interesting none-the-less.
(Disclaimer) not lending any weight to the validity of the recording, only saying that it shouldn't be dismissed out of hand. The election showed
quite clearly that Romney was heavily favoured by people with power... and past wikileaks show there are accusations (or perhaps worded better,
"admissions") that elections are well wrangled to benefit certain parties.
I should also add however, that there is nearly just as much motivation to fake or hoax a call like this as well
edit on 24-6-2013 by
boncho because: (no reason given)
edit on 24-6-2013 by boncho because: (no reason given)