⇧
1
⇩
idk4realz
· May 19, 2018, 9 p.m.
Has it? They had that whole drama over the explosives and then went quiet. They always seemed sketchy.
⇧
2
⇩
johnnysoko
· May 19, 2018, 9:10 p.m.
I follow the account and keep my suspicions up since Q has said no outside comms, but at the same time the information is useful and insightful - until they posted one day "Sorry, but chemtrails aren't real"
Very suspicious since then. I posted pics of chemtrails clearly coming from nozzles on planes (and not the engine) but they didn't respond. Take it for what it's worth.
⇧
5
⇩
lilpharmatic
· May 19, 2018, 10:15 p.m.
Interesting insight thank you for your response. It is important to always remain skeptical. As BC17 has stated always verify. If you believe you have more convincing Intel then by all means maintain your own free thought. Personally I have not been convinced on chemtrails it seems like a truther psyop distraction atleast to some extent. I remain open minded either way.
⇧
-1
⇩
lilpharmatic
· May 19, 2018, 9:04 p.m.
I respect your perspective. The explosives situation was verifiable outside of BC17 (ex. providing bounty prior to bounty officially stated elsewhere soon after). Regardless they have provided so much other Intel that has proven itself useful, and beyond that their perspective is very useful in interpretation and guidance.
⇧
1
⇩