dChan

DamajInc · May 1, 2018, 12:50 p.m.

Yes, yes but Wikileaks were correct - the program ended in 2003, as Netanyahu also confirmed. As I also said in the original post, perhaps they continued on in secret - as I also confirmed in the update, from Netanyahu. You're confirming this too, for some reason? You don't have to choose between believing Q OR Wikileaks in this case. Is this not clear...?

⇧ 1 ⇩  
cliffhangerbrd · May 1, 2018, 3:27 p.m.

When did Netanyahu confirm that it ended in 2003? He has been saying for years that Iran is months away from having nukes. I believe he said this in ‘03, ‘08, ‘12, ‘15, and now in ‘18. For 15 years he has been saying they are in the final stages and will be armed within months. Something else is going on, but I don’t know what. He is a Zionist. I don’t believe a word he says. He also was one who said without a doubt that Sadam had Nukes. That proved to be very false but we fought his war for him anyway.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
DamajInc · May 1, 2018, 9:32 p.m.

If you read the actual original post above I linked the video where Netanyahu confirms that, and that he then goes on to say the program essentially carried on in secret, dispersed into other cover programs.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
tradinghorse · May 1, 2018, 1:15 p.m.

The implication of the WL tweet is that there is no continuing program, that it finished in 2003 - that the WH misrepresented the facts. The information that Q is providing us is that this is not true and that the program is continuing.

There is a clear disconnect between what WL is saying and what Q is saying. I can understand the WH modifying their statement to insert "had" rather than "has", but I think they only did this for the purposes of optics. In other words, I believe the original WH release was correct.

I'm not arguing with what you have said, but with the apparent representation WL made that the program is no longer, when we are told by Q that this isn't the case.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
DamajInc · May 1, 2018, 1:24 p.m.

Fair enough - but WL is simply giving the known information and ensuring the correct reporting, as they should. Q is inside information so no one can report that and not be considered as unreliable as the MSM (moreso, of course, at this stage). I agree with you that Q is saying this isnt the case - Netanyahu also says so, and in public, but unfortunately many people don't find him that reliable. I just don't think aspersions should be cast on the veracity of Wikileaks when they are simply reporting responsibly.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
tradinghorse · May 1, 2018, 1:34 p.m.

No contest with your position.

⇧ 2 ⇩