Armstrong vs Sinclair
I have been debating this to myself for long enough now that I seek to get others perspective.
The Armstrong vs Sinclair argument on where gold is heading is common knowledge in the community.
It is an important one because among all commentators I have been following in the past 12 years these 2 are the best as far as helping make sense of current controlled reality.
On where gold is headed... for the most part they agree but some months ago they begun flaming each other (without naming) and a lot myself included wondered why.
I believe personally that the answer to this simple question is ego but there might be more there than meet the eye.
Sinclair is my partner of heart because his message has always been simple, STOP TRADING AND PROTECT YOURSELF & YOUR FAMILY BY BUYING FIZZ GOLD IS GOING HIGHER NOW OR IN THE COMING YEARS
Armstrong message is different in that his credo is NOT NOW. TIME WILL COME WHEN IT WILL BE THE RIGHT TIME TO OWN GOLD BUT IT WILL GET HIGHER WHEN ITS TIME AND ONLY THEN
Me being part of the lower deck crew with no "connections" and a very limited capital believe Sinclair message is good enough because I will never know when IT IS TIME, or only after the fact and as the old adage is saying better be 5 years too early than one day late...
Armstrong for me has provided us with very few contradiction in all he has written (in jail or outside) except one.
He usually point fingers on politicians as being the main culprit of the current conditions.
However nobody with a brain&enough curiosity anywhere on earth today believes that politicians speak their own words. He never mention the people behind the politicians and that raise doubt for me on the rest of his analysis as far as responsibility & end game is concerned.
Now both of them have vested interest into getting public, in fact every writer talks his book one way or another I think.
Sinclair because he owns a Gold company, Armstong because he want to get that mainframe with the $100m price tag.
Not the same customer target but both have one...
This is my take on this and this thread is to account for TFMR members opinions on this question. For curiosity sake but as well because sometimes 1+1 really equals 3...
vvvvv
