Anonymous ID: baa165 May 1, 2018, 5:01 p.m. No.1266125   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>6217

Anons, a lot of shills have come here and claimed to have insight as to who our real allies and enemies are. Many of you are relatively young and have little sense of history. Rather than try to convince you that another anon knows better, I'm going to share some resources:

 

This is a list of the four countries that the US has designated as sponsors of terrorism:

https://www.state.gov/j/ct/list/c14151.htm

 

This is a direct list to the reports linked off of that page, that go into detail why the designations have been made:

https://www.state.gov/j/ct/rls/crt/2016/index.htm

 

Bear in mind that the report comes from 2016; a lot has changed since then. We also know that the State department was compromised somewhat through HRC; but a lot of these occurrences are common knowledge, and many have been corroborated by Q.

 

I would suggest that the only insider worth listening to is Q. Beyond that, educate yourself with reliable sources, and don't take anyone's word for anything that sounds contrary to what you've heard. We all know this website is being viewed internationally, and that the shills have been here since day one. Follow the evidence and the crumbs, not people trying to hijack the movement to save themselves.

 

There are a number of other resources that link from https://www.state.gov/ as well. My guess is that the good people there will be eager to regain their reputation after the stain of HRC.

Anonymous ID: baa165 May 1, 2018, 5:10 p.m. No.1266217   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>1266125

In that vein, here's a 2015 entry from Kevin McCarthy's (Majority Leader for the House) page:

 

The more we find out about the Iran nuclear deal, the worse it looks. Each new day Congress reviews this deal, we discover more information and more reasons why this deal is simply unacceptable:

 

Though the deal was originally being negotiated to keep Iran from getting a nuclear weapon, in its final form the agreement would allow just that when it sunsets in 10-15 years.

This deal will accelerate regional nuclear proliferation. Saudi leaders for instance have said that this deal is worse than the nuclear pact former President Bill Clinton made with North Korea.

Israeli Prime Minster Benjamin Netanyahu said this deal will give Iran “hundreds of billions of dollars to fuel their terror and military regime.”

Sanctions relief isn’t tied to Iran complying with the deal, meaning Iran gets massive amounts of relief before they’ve demonstrated strict adherence.

And the money can’t be taken back once Iran gets it.

That relief can be used to expand Iran’s malign and destabilizing influence in the region that has exacerbated sectarian conflict.

The money can also be used to further fund Iran’s terrorist proxies like Hamas, Hezbollah, Assad, and Houthis in Yemen.

In fact, Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, said that Iran will not change its anti-American policy.

To enforce the deal, world powers must first know if Iran violated the deal but that is an unclear process that can be delayed for weeks while Iran would be able to hide and obfuscate banned activities.

Iran doesn’t have to come clean on its past nuclear activity, leaving world powers little ability to verify future illegal advances.

Iran’s foreign minister interprets the deal very differently than the Obama Administration does.

For example, he believes that the scale of foreign investments would effectively prevent the world from re-imposing sanctions on Iran, making the “snapback” provision of the deal effectively meaningless.

He also said that Iran could deny inspectors access to nuclear and military sites under the deal.

He also said that Iran would not be violating the deal if it broke the UN resolution prohibiting the purchase of conventional arms and missiles because the arms embargo is implicitly out of the scope of the nuclear agreement.

Even if Iran adheres to the arms embargo, the embargo is lifted in 5 years, giving Iran access not only to conventional arms to further fuel terrorism and their drive for regional dominancy.

In 8 years, the missile ban will be removed, allowing Iran to acquire missiles that could carry nuclear payloads.

The Obama Administration pushed for the UN to vote on the deal in an attempt to jam Americans and their elected representatives before they’ve even had a chance to review the deal.

Iran will be allowed to conduct advanced research and development that will pave the way for centrifuges that are modern and efficient. They will be able to enrich huge amounts of Uranium that will shorten their breakout time for a bomb.

The deal also provides sanctions relief to Iranian military leader Qasem Soleimani, leader of the elite Quds force of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, who is a designated terrorist who is responsible for the deaths of at least 500 U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan.

On top of that, the deal lifts sanctions on two Iranian atomic scientists who worked on Iran’s illegal nuclear program and a nuclear proliferator who has previously helped smuggle nuclear components.

The murderous Syrian President Bashar al-Assad called this deal a “great victory” and congratulated Iran on their achievement.

 

Congress will continue its work reviewing this deal over the coming months. The people have a right to know exactly what the Obama Administration negotiated, and Congress won’t accept a deal that isn’t in our national security interest.

 

https://www.majorityleader.gov/2015/07/22/21-reasons-iran-deal-bad-deal/

Personally, I'm surprised he isn't one of the ones retiring…so maybe he's not as bad as I thought. Or maybe he's agreed to work with POTUS. Either way, the list is a good way to get a sense of how bad the deal was.

Anonymous ID: baa165 May 1, 2018, 5:12 p.m. No.1266241   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>1266218

Save them as .png, they keep clarity when you zoom in. If there isn't a lot of detail, .jpg is best…but anything with small writing should be .png.

Anonymous ID: baa165 May 1, 2018, 5:14 p.m. No.1266264   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>6307

>>1266218

Sorry, didn't see that you were making them in Word. The answer to that is "no," I'd say almost everyone making graphics is using Photoshop. You can manually set the size when you start.

Anonymous ID: baa165 May 1, 2018, 5:22 p.m. No.1266344   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>6361 >>6379

>>1266307

Adobe Photoshop is the standard. Adobe Illustrator is actually the better one for crisp, detailed graphics. You can find alternatives, but I think most graphics anons will agree that Photoshop is the way to go. You can pay for a monthly subscription or find a cracked copy & risk a virus…it depends on your personal circumstances.