Anonymous ID: 82d73d June 16, 2018, 9:38 p.m. No.1780715   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun   >>0727 >>0730 >>0734 >>0736 >>0738 >>0742 >>0745 >>0751 >>0757 >>0759 >>0789 >>0790 >>0792 >>0794 >>0797 >>0816 >>0861 >>0866 >>0987 >>1009 >>1152 >>1189 >>1232 >>1234 >>1255 >>1355 >>1358 >>1369 >>1404

BIASED BAKER IS COMPROMISED

BIASED BAKER IS COMPROMISED

 

Notables have been cucked all day. Now I think this confirms it. Baker totally ignored the digs on Vali Nasr last thread, despite a ton of info and a ton of recognition from anons.

 

Here's what was written:

 

>>1780325

 

While Sohale Hal Saddiqi was probably one of Obama's butt-buddies - there's one big problem with this guess.

 

>No facial hair.

 

We can't just ignore that because we want something to fit. Q was very specific.

 

So, looking elsewhere - I have to say, this is the closest match I've seen to date:

 

>Vali Nasr

 

>Nasr is a member of the State Department's Foreign Affairs Policy Board and served as senior advisor to the U.S. special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan, Ambassador Richard Holbrooke, between 2009 and 2011. He is a Life Member of the Council on Foreign Relations.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vali_Nasr

 

Ears, hairline, chin, and even eyebrows match!

 

No doubt about it in my mind now: this is our mystery mustache man!

Anonymous ID: 82d73d June 16, 2018, 9:54 p.m. No.1780858   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun

>>1780792

 

>You forgot to compare height

 

No, I didn't, faggot.

 

>>1780473

 

And your picture, where you're expecting someone who is 6'4" is wrong. It's not correctly accounting for the perspective of the room, or the shortness of the friend's shins.

 

The dude in the pic is 6' at most. He is NOT taller than Barack.

 

You're no sniper. You don't even have a pea shooter.

Anonymous ID: 82d73d June 16, 2018, 10 p.m. No.1780913   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun   >>0942 >>1031 >>1089

>>1780866

 

No faggot, just because you're faceblind, doesn't mean I have to be, too. Their eyes are EXACTLY the same. You have no idea what you're talking about.

 

And who do you think you are, exactly? You don't get to order other anons around and shut down research threads.

 

So how about this:

 

I'm going to keep on posting this for as long as I have to, BECAUSE I'M RIGHT.

 

Neck yourself.

Anonymous ID: 82d73d June 16, 2018, 10:13 p.m. No.1781050   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun   >>1386

>>1780987

 

Yeah, and that research is WRONG.

 

You're trying to force it in with a crowbar to make it fit Q's instructions, when it just doesn't fit.

 

Q explicitly said that our target worked for the foreign arm of the STATE DEPARTMENT.

 

You can't just go and find someone who works at OPPENHEIMER, and go "ยฏ_(ใƒ„)_/ยฏ OOPS OH WELL, CLOSE ENOUGH!" That's pants-on-head retarded.

 

VALI NASR FITS EVERY SINGLE CRITERIA Q LISTED

 

(Without any crowbarring. Without any blatantly ignoring Q's instructions).

 

SADIK AND CHANDOO DO NOT.

Anonymous ID: 82d73d June 16, 2018, 10:33 p.m. No.1781297   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun   >>1327

>>1781250

 

LOTS of anons already thought it was worthy, when it was ignored by sleepy baker last bread.

 

LOTS MORE anons thinks it's a worthy theory in this bread.

 

It's not about me. It's about the research, and the research is good - an no amount of faceblind sperging is going to change that.

Anonymous ID: 82d73d June 16, 2018, 10:40 p.m. No.1781355   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun

>>1780715

 

Vali Nasr on Jon Stewart in 2013.

 

You can clearly see he dyes his hair, but also, he was advocating for all sorts of action in Syria at the time.

 

This guy was working at the State Department, and helping to manufacture the Syrian Refugee Crisis under the guise of peace and diplomacy!

 

http://www.cc.com/video-playlists/kw3fj0/the-opposition-with-jordan-klepper-welcome-to-the-opposition-wโ€“jordan-klepper/gz1g6d

Anonymous ID: 82d73d June 16, 2018, 10:51 p.m. No.1781463   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun   >>1473

>>1781365

 

>Q never says a word about the person being in the State Dept.

 

Here, I linked and screenshot it for you:

 

>>1764930

 

Your theory is wrong. It's not just one point of failure. It's MULTIPLE points of failure. You can't expand on anything if your foundations are crumbling.