Thread by @HNIJohnMiller

1) Alright, buttnugget. Congrats. You're the example for today's bourbon pill on Julian Reject White Walker Assange (seriously, he looks like a fucking albino Saddam getting arrested). It's like a red pill, but soaked in bourbon. I'd call it a brown pill, but that sounds dirty.

https://twitter.com/wearing_fedora/status/1116302126412632064

2) But first, your moment of zen. Because you don't get to drink a chaser with a bourbon pill, so you better cleanse your mental palate now. i.redd.it/csen09cevir21.…

3) July 7th, 2007. Baghdad. Offensive against the Iraqi insurgency, you know, the ex-Iraqi military that 4 years prior were all disarmed and fired, then rearmed and backed by fucking Iran? Yeah, those assholes. Most of the Iraq war has been Iran waging a proxy war against us.

4) Anyways, so, Baghdad is an active warzone at this point. There was absolutely no doubt a conflict was occurring. This being a combat zone, the rules of engagement that our US military operates by were in full effect to prevent civilian casualties in the midst of a dense city.

5) This means positive identification of hostile enemy combatants. This means virtually having to already come under fire and irrefutably identifying the source of the hostility before our soldiers are allowed to strike back.

6) Bravo Company 2-16 infantry had been under fire from small arms and rocket propelled grenades for the entire morning as insurgents were popping out from alleyways, taking potshots, then retreating back into the dense urban landscape. It was guerrilla harassment at its finest.

7) Because they were down in the streets and couldn't track any of the groups engaging them, who kept retreating before our forces could actually strike back under our rules of engagement, Apaches were called in to provide air support, which includes finding the motherfuckers.

8) The insurgents, who were actively exploiting our rules of engagement, were all dressed as civilians. In the time between spotting these insurgents in civilian clothes and being able to identify them as hostile, insurgents would have already taken shots and fled down an alley

9) So, the Apache rolls in, and wouldn't you know it a few intersections down from Bravo Company 2-16 there were 20 insurgents chilling with AK's and RPGs, and with them were two journalists dressed exactly like the insurgents. Because they were all dressed as civilians.

10) So six of these assholes, which includes the two journalists which means they were actively hanging out with these Iranian-backed insurgents, hurry along for their turn to play the world's most one-sided game of tag with the soldiers of Bravo Company.

11) The Apaches have asked for permission repeatedly. Wikileaks will later state that everyone among the insurgents seemed relaxed. Almost like they just spent all morning taking potshots at a hostile military and then running away giggling before we were allowed to shoot back.

12) So these insurgents and the journalists disappear down an alleyway, reappear with MORE men armed with AK's + RPGs. Assange later claims that "based upon visual evidence I suspect there probably were AKs and an RPG, but I'm not sure that means anything" foxnews.com/politics/2010/…

13) Oh yeah I'm sure RPG's are totally something that you just carry around in case some hoodlums come making trouble in your neighborhood. Totally nothing to do with the fact that there's an insurgency having RPG's shipped to them from Iran and has been shooting them all morning

14) Totally meaningless that they were carrying RPG's. We can DEFINITELY trust Assange on that.

15) So then there was the van, a van which (NOT included in the video) HAD ALREADY BEEN SHOT AT EARLIER BY ANOTHER APACHE. Why was a van driving around in an active warzone with kids inside? Who the fuck knows. Why did this dumbass drive into ANOTHER active firefight? YOLO!

16) THEN, the big hellfire missile strike on the building that provided the explosive end to the video! Leaving out the 20 minutes of the troops who secured the first engagement zone getting attacked and shot at by MORE INSURGENTS FROM THE FIRST FUCKING GROUP from that building.

17) So 3 years later Wikileaks gets ahold of the video, cuts out half of it including the pilots asking SEVERAL TIMES for permission to fire and being denied, the insurgents and the journalists hanging out with the larger group and all the radio chatter providing CONTEXT.

18) So what happens then? ASSANGE GETS A FUCKING BOOK TOUR. Oh yeah. See, the media decided that profiting from war coverage had gone stale, so giving our soldiers shit for the war THE MEDIA THEMSELVES HELPED SELL TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE became the new hotness for them.

19) Who took part in the collective circle jerk around the Collateral Murder video? Al Jazeera. RT. Reuters. THE WASHINGTON POST. THE NEW YORK TIMES. CNN. THE BBC. You know, the usual fucking suspects for wanting to sell us a narrative.

20) So while this blow-bang of fawning worship for Julian Assange is happening across the US mainstream media, do you know the ONE PERSON who actually gives Assange flak?

This guy.

21) Yeah, fine. Colbert's part of the Orange Man Bad brigade. The dude's a fucking ACTOR, of course he is. He gets paid to read from a script in a way that makes him sound like a good comedian. Its what he does. His entire public persona is him playing the comedian.

22) I've watched him for a decade now. Not so much any more, but still enough to know he's still the same guy. And I have seen him break character and drop the facade ONCE. ONCE.

And it was during the Assange interview.

vimeo.com/282645548

23) The Assange interview where this pretentious reject white walker Australian shitbag had been getting his dick sucked by every MSM channel over his 'journalistic accomplishment'

24) Said journalistic accomplishment being having a video given to him, chopping out half of it, and then playing the game of 'PAY NO ATTENTION TO THE INSURGENTS WITH AK's AND RPGs! MURDER HAPPENED WHEN PEOPLE WERE KILLED IN A WARZONE!'

25) And the one person who calls him on his bullshit? Stephen fucking Colbert.

Again, watch this interview. vimeo.com/282645548

26) good, the thread wasn't broken.

So, the interview itself. For those of you who won't watch it. I hate all of you who won't watch it. Literally I fucking hate you. The quotes that I make could be complete fucking ass pulls, cherry picked segments, but you'll eat it up anyways

27 Colbert: “Let’s talk about this footage that has gotten you so much attention recently. This is footage of an Apache helicopter attack in 2007. The army described this as a group that gave resistance during the fight, and that doesn’t seem to be happening."

28) (Probably because the video doesn't show that as its not a video of the entire goddamn morning, just when the helicopter arrived after being called in because it was happening all goddamn morning, but I digress)

29) "But there are armed men in the group, they did find a rocket propelled grenade among the group, the Reuters photographers who were regrettably killed were not identified as photographers."

30) "And you have edited this tape, and you have given it a title called Collateral Murder. Thats not leaking, thats a pure editorial"

Assange: “The promise we make to our sources is that....we will attempt to get the maximum political impact for the materials they give to us”

31) So the entire point of Wikileaks is not the free flow of information, it is the weaponization of select bits of information to achieve the maximum political impact. ASSANGE STATES IT CLEAR AS FUCKING DAY. WIKILEAKS IS PROPAGANDA.

32) “So ‘Collateral Murder’ is to get it political impact?”

“Absolutely. Our promise to the public is that we will release the full source material...it’s there for them to analyze and assess.”

Colbert's follow up to this?

33) “Actually I admire that, I admire someone who is willing to put ‘Collateral Murder’ on the first thing people see knowing that they probably won’t look at the rest of it.”

34) Assange: “That’s true, only one in ten people did actually look at the full footage.”

Colbert: “So 90 percent of the people accept the definition of collateral murder?”

“Yes.”

“Congratulations.”

This is why I voted for Giant Meteor of Death in 2016 and will again in 2020.

35) BUT IT GETS WORSE. SO MUCH WORSE. See, Assange goes from shitbag in to full on egregious fucking PRICK MODE.

36) “Do you believe it was collateral murder?”

“Yes.”

“You do? Did you get to make that call?”

“Yes. That was our call.”

Yep. The man so many of you are putting on a goddamn pedestal has taken it upon himself to be the arbiter of truth, what is goodthink and wrongthink.

37) Julian fucking Assange is no different from the propaganda outfits at CNN, MSNBC, WaComPost, the failing NYT, any of them. He's just branded a bit differently.

38) Don't believe me? “You guys don’t fight down there? How can you call it collateral murder? I watched the entire thing, I’m one of that 10 percent. And you did not reveal there was a firefight that had gone on nearby.”

“Because that’s a lie.”

Really now?

39) “That’s a lie?”

“We have records that showed all that there was, 28 minutes before, was a report of small arms fire, the person involved and location not identified.”

THATS CALLED A FUCKING FIREFIGHT YOU FUCKING IDIOT.

40) But please, keep sucking on the white fur-covered nuts of Julian Assange. PLEASE. The motherfucker who admits that he uses the information he's given to douse people with propaganda that he claims the 'responsibility' to use in editorialized attacks. That's who you worship.

41) This motherfucker and his organization weaponizes information. Do you know that CNN, MSNBC, FOX, and other news organizations have fucking TERABYTES of information that they sit on, selectively cherry-picking out the bits and pieces that help them build their narratives?

42) Assange and Wikileaks do the same thing! The difference is, they package it all up unredacted, encrypt it, and use it as insurance material! Why in the absolute fuck do you trust Wikileaks to be giving you a freeflow of information when they very blatantly hold things back?

43) Do you want to know how I know that these people are actually shitbags?

Tell me, where did the Panama Papers get posted to? Sure as fuck wasn't Wikileaks. Almost like the journalist who revealed the Panama Papers didn't trust Wikileaks.

44) You know, the same journalist who was killed by a car bomb when she started investigating one of the banks used by the IRGC as a money laundering front in Europe?

HMMMMMMMM. LETS ACTIVATE SOME FUCKING ALMONDS.

45) Wikileaks doesn't post fuck all about Iran. Go look, don't trust me, just go look; they DONT. In 2010 they were actively creating narratives against the US soldiers in Iraq, which had turned into a proxy war by Iran.

46) They've been boosting narratives in favor of the Iran Deal, such as 'zomg the Israelis made Trump cancel the Iran deal!'

https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/1019577470436208641?lang=en

47) Have any of you Assange worshippers stopped and asked 'What if Wikileaks are the baddies'?

/end