Patrick Armstrong is one of those old school Canadian intelligence analysts. He was a former with the Canadian Department of National Defence specialising in USSR and later Russia (more on him HERE and well worth reading imo too). The following is his (usually monthly) Sitrep on all things Russian and this s always worth reading (for the independent of mind anyway). He gives permission for any and all of his stuff to be reproduced at will by anyone, anywhere - no limitations: https://patrickarmstrong.ca/
You're thoroughly brainwashed, so of course I don't expect you to understand. The guy reads like you or any other forum poster or blogger, and he is himself a blogger. He's not beholden to any journalistic standards and obviously has no qualms about presenting his personal opinions as reporting, and even uses pretty childish language to do so. He makes no effort to discuss the facts of the Russia investigation, obviously, and is just pontificating about it from the kind of ridiculous perspective that we hear from Russian propaganda and the pro-Russia kooks who eat it up. This guy seems to be one of them, just like you and Striped Horse seem to be.
I wonder if he has a long list of puffed-up exaggerated and fake credentials? Always something to watch for from these kooks who publish books and blogs.
You're very welcome Jeanette. Not all members here will feel that way as you well know. But then this thread is not for them anyway.
Doesn't he? Maybe it's simply your subjective opinion that is wonky? Personally, I think you're conflating understandable cynicism with objectivity. If you read the link about him I posted in the introduction you would likewise conclude this to be the case.
Oh, there it is. Lol. I don't care what is background supposedly is, his actual words here are childish and completely lacking in objectivity. He gushes anti-American and pro-Russian.
Sure it's one man's insights. But he is far from being alone in most of what he says though, and what is also good about his posts are the links he provides that support his analysis. Imo, he beats the sh*t our of the US and Brit main stream media.
It is you who is thoroughly brainwashed. This brainwashing is proven by the content of your post "No effort to discuss the facts of the Russia Investigation". Only someone who is brainwashed does not realize that the Russia investigation is a joke. What makes the mind control spell you are under particularly acute is that despite having being told "the facts" you continue to maintain your absurd position. Your response consists of nothing but demonization with nothing to substantiate your claims = a tactic typical of the brainwashed - "demonization of the other". You completely fail to point out anything from the article - not a single thing - never mind followed by some rational for why you think the comment is flawed. Ad Hom on steroids. When you want to get out from under the brainwashed fallacy blanket that covers you - let me know
I find that when posters maintain their position after being presented with facts, they either have an embedded hatred towards Russia, or an agenda. I'm just guessing here, but I think Durandel's animosity is Vladimir Putin, since he's the main obstacle towards a liberal one world government..
I explained this in previous threads - and I am pretty sure in response to your posts. 1) The whole premise is nonsense - the narrative being bandied about that the electorate knowing "The Truth" about what Hillary and the DNC did to Bernie Sanders "HARMED" our electoral process. Explain this to me por favor - how does the electorate knowing the Truth "Harm" our electoral process ? 2) Things cited as propaganda - Facebook Ads - were not. How does an with a pic of Sanders with the quip "The Clinton foundation is a Problem" constitute propaganda. Once again this is "The Truth" . Not only did Bernie say this - numerous times - I do not see other publications repeating this "Truth" being called out for "Propaganda". Propaganda - by definition contain's untruths or disingenuous proclamations or embelishment and so on. This ad contains none of this ? How then is this ad Propaganda ? It is the claim that such an ad was propaganda - that is propaganda. This is a lie. 3) "Foreign actors meddling in our electoral process" This narrative is nonsense on steroids when viewed in context. Our elections are bought and paid for by foreign interests and our media is controlled by foreign international financiers and national Oligarchs. The fact that our MSM is a propaganda arm of the Establishment (which includes international financiers) - and the above is what "HARMS" our electoral process - is "Meddling" in our electoral process. Comparing any influence Russia might have to this is like comparing a raindrop to a hurricane. "THIS" is what meddling - by foreign actors - in our electoral process looks like. https://alethonews.com/2018/04/23/msnbc-where-journalism-goes-to-die/ Why isn't Phil Griffin and the BOD of MSNBC being investigated ? - and this one of a plethora of examples. 4) We are the KINGS of meddling in the elections of other sovereign nations. Talk about Pot calling Kettle black on steroids. 5) In 2013 it became legal for our intelligence agencies to create and disseminate propaganda on US citizens. How does this not harm our electoral process and not constitute a direct threat to our democratic process ? - a serious one. The main threat to our electoral process comes not from the outside but, from within. That is the "fact".
It is one thing to dislike Russia. I am not a big fan of Russia either and - although there are exceptions - my experience with Russian folk in general contains a whole lot of negative (albeit with some positive). Then there is the history - which is not pretty. That said - just because I am not a big fan of Russia does not mean I have to throw my brain out the window and slup up US Establishment propaganda and throw my brain out the window and engage in nothing but fallacious demonization and ad hom. Then - when called out on such a post which contained nothing but ad hom and no facts - retorts by demanding facts ??