>>16195378 (PB)
First & 3rd are more or less the same.
For the Keks.
Sauce for Kennedy Kruschev:
https://www.jfklibrary.org/asset-viewer/archives/JFKNSF/342/JFKNSF-342-015
http://www.exopoliticsjournal.com/vol-3/vol-3-3-Salla.htm
>Deniability.
"plausible"
yea…i know and understand the detract from drops component, but if true….
and do you classify something that doesn't exist like unicorn rainbow farts…? probably not… :-)
o7
asked about underwater sensors to detect underwater UAPs.
dude says, let's talk in closed door session.
really….Q playing with a trip code…making it flash…. ?
I'm hard pressed to imagine that he she it they them whatever would be wreckless, both with the text of that and the tripcode shenanigans.
Board is always observed. If they can do it, they are trying…anything to make the tip of the spear look cray.
>So why have hearings if the good stuff stays secret?
a few reasons:
1) keep people concentrating on shit other than Durham
2) slow roll….priming of the public. People like us pick up on the negative space. So normie says, "They said nothing" We say, "what closed door meeting?" our questioning attitude slowly trickles into the conciousness of the unquestioning normie.
3) See #1.
4) Uncontrolled disclosure = Panic.