>>2564439

>>2564504

Lurking Baker

I can fill in after short-term baker… in about 3 hours or so. That sorta fills any

gaps. I will "sign in" when I have my permanent (for now) station activated.

>>2564722

>>2564504 It will have to be this baker.

>>2564705 (Me) I can take the following one, in about three hours or so. I can do an eBake in the

meantime if required.

>>2564746

You got it P&L (Not a handoff; I'm LurkingBaker). I can relieve you in a few hours. You probably know

who I am, but if not, we've passed the baton before.

>>2564584 Anon points out many coincidences that Q400 hijack was attack on Qanon

Baker Notable

>>2564835

My wording leaves it to anons to decide for themselves if coincidence, intentional, or idiotic.

>>2564838 See >>2564817 (being discussed in previous paragraph)

>>2564871

I also lean to "idiotic," but that's many coincidences to just write off, in my opinion…

but baker's choice. It's not like I'm going to cry and post it every fuqqing bread like some butt-hurt

anons do when their suggestions aren't taken.

>>2564930 see >>2564900

Anons have already shot it down. Notable suggestions are just that: "Suggestions."

>>2564952

Most anons have come out against my suggested (not my original) Q400 coincidence notable suggestion. I can post links, but not really relevant to the discussion.

>>2565018

Taking that as a given (not that it is), then why make it national headlines while still in progress?

What would be the purpose of the real op? To put F15s in the air? You can do that at any time, and

fly just about anywhere you would like to go. It would be just as easy to play a live-fire exercise

off the coast of Washington and use that as the premise to get planes in the air.

My gestalt? Crazy guy finally acts on plan he's been considering for a couple of years.

>>2565076

I'm just curious what positive intent you have by continually pointing out Jew involvement and calling

anyone who disagrees a "Kike" or "Rabbi." Do you think you are contributing positively?

You look like (((KingShill))) to me, trying to slide the bread. This will be the only (ewe)

you get from me, so please make your answer complete.

>>2565087

The name of the hijacker and the sub? Yes. Coincidence. Richard Russell is not an extremely unusual name. He may even be related to the submarine's namesake.

>>2565102

(((KingShill))) did not answer my questions. No need to answer or respond to him anons. He's

just trying to slide the bread. Ignore or filter at your discretion.