"Regarding Intel" by Mattias - 1.23.17

Entry Submitted by Mattias at 6:25 AM EST on January 23, 2017

There seems to be a lot of different opinions as to whether or not rely on the so called "intel" that are posted on this website, and others.

I myself have many times thought about this "intel". Where does it originate from? (God?, Someones higher self? Some other source?). How does the person/s who gather this "intel" interpret the "intel"? Are there room for misinterpretations? A.s.o.

Some of the persons who used to give us "intel" has come forward and said that they in turn have been manipulated, and therefore also the "intel".

Many times we have heard that; "There was nothing wrong with the "intel", but things changed rapidly, and therefore the "intel" wasn´t valid when it reached you". (In my view, this is bad "intel").

Much of the "intel" we are being fed is hard, or impossible to verify, which leaves us in an awkward position.

I for one have started to doubt all "intel" that can´t be validated or proven right in hindsight. Therefore I don´t listen to Kent Dunn anymore. Some time ago he claimed that the Russians had sunk two British war ships in the Baltic Sea just outside the coast of Latvia.

I commented on this on You Tube, and asked for any evidence, photographs, witnesses, anything. There was no reply from Kent Dunn. And not a word about this has been heard since.

Nowadays I tend only to listen to the kind of information that can be (or already is) verified. I trust Ole Dammegard, David Icke and perhaps one or two others (definitely not Ben Fulford).

What I suggest is a method to actually make out whether "intel" is true or not. One way of doing this is actually to hold the passers of "intel" to their words.

If someone has "intel" that says; "My sources say...", and it proves to be wrong, we should judge this intel as bad intel, without any excuses. We should also ask the passers of this bad "intel" why he/she fed us bad "intel"!

We could also check the validity of the information by actually doing our own research. The internet is a good place to start. As with the example of Kent Dunn and the two British (sunken) war ships, one could perhaps put out a question on facebook? Surely such an incident would have had eye witnesses and/or photos!

We must learn to distinguish between bad info (incorrect info) and good info, otherwise we will be but puppets on a string.

Best regards/
Mattias