zlacker

>>nickru+(OP)
This all seems so weird, and the list of Board members doesn't make this any easier to understand. Apart from the 3 insiders, there are 3 other board members. 2 of them seem complete no names and might not qualify for any important corporate board. In a for profit shareholders in theory control the board, in a non profit I am not even sure of who really has control over things.

>>crop_r+k2
Maybe non-profits are just frontends of some three letter agencies :)

>>hnthro+75
Are we going to start speculating about insane conspiracy theories now?

>>__loam+U5
CIA has been destabilizing and puppeteering governments around the world. Why are you so steadfastly assured that they wouldn't meddle in the US?

Not saying there is proof, but we just found out Ukraine blew up the Russian pipeline so it seems weird to just squash debate at the 'that's too crazy to ever happen'. Way crazier things have happened/are constantly happening.

>>zapata+q7
Is the thing with the pipeline actually confirmed?

Anyway if I was in business of destabilizing governments around the world I would not bother dealing with board meetings. But maybe that's just me.