[Quix]

Pontificating silliness when the facts are available is . . . uhhhh . . . silly.

Of course there have been sharp photos of UFO’s taken . . . depending on the definition of sharpness . . .

Our folks have undoubtedly taken many sharp photos of craft under production in factories.

And, there have been sharp photos of crashed “ET” UFO’s.

Some of the whistleblowers have commented on some of those sharp photos.

Now . . . how many have been allowed into the public domain?

That’s a different issue entirely.

Of course.

[JoJo Gunn]

Pontificating silliness when the facts are available is . . . uhhhh . . . silly.

Of course there have been sharp photos of UFO’s taken . . . depending on the definition of sharpness . . .

Our folks have undoubtedly taken many sharp photos of craft under production in factories.

And, there have been sharp photos of crashed “ET” UFO’s.

Some of the whistleblowers have commented on some of those sharp photos.

Now . . . how many have been allowed into the public domain?

That’s a different issue entirely.

Of course.

You sound like Clinton and his "that depends on what the meaning of is is". 

Quix, you're not doing the Movement any favors.

 

*snort*

[yazoo]

“And, there have been sharp photos of crashed “ET” UFO’s.

Some of the whistleblowers have commented on some of those sharp photos.”

Of course, we never get to see them. We just have to accept the statements of the whistleblowers.