Give it a rest Baz
Ha Ha, put it in the Baz is always right thread,
Itâll speed things up.
2 Likes
Nestled between Alan Pardew and Ricky Van Wolfswinkel?
Pardew isnât here but Iâd take him, wouldnât you over Hughes?
RVW has done well really since leaving. (the Country)
This is where Goatboy realises this and goes quietâŚ
Both are shite. Itâs ok, you can admit you were wrong.
All the evidence* points to Ukraine and it wouldnât be the first time either. You do know about both, i presume, or has the msm not reported it?
*Real evidence, not the shit propaganda. Elliott(photoshop) Higgins and the Atlantic Council bellendcats have been proven as liars, not that youâll find that in British media, which tells you how stupid youâd be to trust their bullshit.
Do you still believe the lies about Novichok and who administered what to whom?
Why do you believe the things you do?
No all the evidence doesnât point to Ukraine, quite the opposite.
Because i read a lot more than the msm propaganda mouth pieces. Try it.
No. Only photo shopped pics, conjecture and lots & lots of media propaganda makes you think that.
The most important and reliable evidence points at Ukraine and they have previous history.
Did you know they have done it before?
Itâs the same routine every time. Yes, every single time and there have been a fair few. How people continue to fall for it, without noticing is scary. Itâs like a soap opera. Same script, different actors and location, but the storyline is always ridiculous ,if you just scratch below the surface(or have a memory that lasts more than 3 months).
You use all the bullshit techniques yourself, so are you gullible, or do you work for NATO? 
Projection. A wonderful tool. But itâs all gone a bit mental(farcical really).
âDonât look here, look there: our fakery is real, their reality is fake.â
How many times do people need to see the lies exposed, before they start questioning. Hereâs a nice example, that people in the west donât even consider, because the msm never deviate from the lies. No questions, no criticism and defiantly no logic.
"In 2014 NATO worried about âhybrid warâ, apparently something Russia practised. This writer tells us it is sometimes called the âGerasimov doctrineâ after an article written in 2013 (note the date) by the Chief of the Russian General Staff.
According to Gerasimov, the lessons of the Arab Spring are that if the ârules of warâ have changed, the consequences have not â the results of the âcolored revolutionsâ are that a âthriving state can, in a matter of months and even days, be transformed into an arena of fierce armed conflict, become a victim of foreign intervention and sink into a web of chaos, humanitarian catastrophe and civil war.â
In short the theoretical foundation of this supposedly amazing, tricky, sinister and almost invisible Russian way of waging war originates in a paper written about Western-inspired âcolour revolutionsâ. Like the 2003 Rose Revolution in Georgia (ten years before Gerasimovâs paper), the 2004 Orange Revolution in Ukraine (nine), the 2005 Tulip Revolution in Kyrgyzstan (eight)."
Then the believers jump on board and you see lots of this(but they never get embarrassed, just ignore when the truth comes out).
" And, speaking of proven, long term, repeating liars: remember when accusing the British government of complicity in torture renditions was a conspiracy theory? Well, it turns out the conspiracy was by the other side. âConspiracy Theoristâ is the perfect gaslighting accusation, by the way: youâre the crazy one."
This one should be your favourite(but it couldâve been yourself you were describing).
" Once we have formed a view, we embrace information that confirms that view while ignoring, or rejecting, information that casts doubt on it. Confirmation bias suggests that we donât perceive circumstances objectively. We pick out those bits of data that make us feel good because they confirm our prejudices. Thus, we may become prisoners of our assumptions."
Please read these and have think about why you are so willing to believe stories that morph so much, they defy all logic. All from repeat liars,again and again.
Patrick Armstrong sounds like a Russian mouthpiece, anything with a bit more validation?
Did Russia invade Crimea?
Thank you for confirming that you adhere to the doctrine. Now show me a msm journalist with better valuation?
Patrick Armstrong was an analyst in the Canadian Department of National Defence specialising in the USSR/Russia from 1984 and a Counsellor in the Canadian Embassy in Moscow in 1993-1996. He retired in 2008 and has been writing on Russia and related subjects on the Net ever since.
Now, unless you are as described above, address the essays and what they tell us(look at the links, as well). Or just show me where itâs disinformation(i can do that with any of the msm, on any given day).
Which category do you fit in with that?
Never quote any mainstream again, just some wacko with an axe to grind, fucking hell SOS youâll be moving to the mountains next and putting tin foil on your head.
All very nice propaganda, but lacking evidence.
Which category?
Show me where his rants are more valid than mainstream media or the ones I have posted?
Youâll be saying the Russians are innocent of doping athletes nextâŚ
Which category?
Always answer a question with a question when you canât address the issues. Itâs bliss, i hear.
And again.
Do you even know which category?