I value your point of view and consider your articles as sufficiently non partisan to offer intelligent objective analysis in an exceptionally well written format. Kudos to you! As long as you keep posting I will definitely keep reading.
I appreciate open platforms like this that allow writers to blend their expertise with the on the ground news.
Mr. Wark has seen the other side of the intelligence wall and knows of what he speaks. I have found his critiques of the coverage at Global News and the G + M to be a welcomed counterpoint that goes beyond what other news outlets are able to provide. There is nothing partisan about that either.
Taking partisan shots at Mr. Wark ruins a good thing that we have going here. Courtesy never goes out of style.
Wouldn’t it be nice to have a platform where we could have lively respectful debate with people who are capable of looking behind labelling someone as a Liberal or Conservative or Nazi or Socialist the second they detect some aspect of the argument that is aligned with these political parties / ideologies? The trolls really aren’t very good at parsing out the nuance of the complex topics discussed here and it pollutes the experience. I had high hopes for Substack but they are finding their way in here too.
Old fashioned debating seems passé today. Many talk through people instead of listening and responding. Some of that has been stoked by reality TV, where tension and loud disagreement is torqued to keep viewers engaged. Some of it is stoked by rudeness of “activists”, many of whom don’t debate or justify their opinions, but cancel and shut down opposing views. It’s pretty hard to compete with that aggressive attitude.
I think about David Johnstone’s visit to Committee and wonder how much he said was actually heard? How can three or four media outlets provide summaries of his testimony and yet viewers could rightly wonder if the reporters attended the same event? Spinning, skewing, click baiting...
Please keep writing, Wesley, and block comments if necessary. It is a great pity that together with the freedom of the internet has come the freedom to say any unpleasant thing that comes into people’s minds.
I'm not one to write comments, but I just wanted to say how much I enjoy reading your newsletter. It's been absolutely fascinating to learn more about the Canadian National Security and Intelligence Space. I've been encouraging all of my policy wonk friends to checkout your newsletter.
Please don't let the comments get you down, and lock them if need be. Folks are free to go discuss on the many other platforms available. As someone who has spent a large portion of their life in public service, I trust that you well know what it actually means to be non-partisan more then most of these comments.
I appreciate your perspective, insights, drawn from deep experience and study. It is a welcome relief from the slagging and hyperbole that so often clouds public discussion. Let’s all be respectful here- it’s the Canadian way.
Wesley, your writing and analysis is an act of civic minded service. Thanks for doing it. Education of the public on national security will make our society more resilient.
I used to advance a calculation (having done a few public opinion polls) that no matter what you were advancing, 17% of the respondents would disagree with your point of view - no not 'disagree' - totally disregard any evidence you advanced and refuse to consider your points. Another 60% would give you a hearing with varying degrees of open-mindedness (might consider, leaning, strongly leaning), and some 20% were with you pretty much from the start. So my comment was that a reasonable approach was to ignore the 17% and focus on those who would listen to what you had to say. Of course, that doesn't stop the 17%, you just have to accept the noise.
So you have 12 comments and 2 who don't appreciate your analysis - let's see, 2/12 = 16.67% - remarkable.
I do appreciate your analysis, I can see no hint of partisanship. please keep it open, we can all deal with the noise as we see fit.
Wesley, thank you for offering your insight into the world very few of us get to see. I do hope that you will not despair of writing what you have to offer. As for me, I'm also non-partisan in a partisan world. Many people are easily manipulated into fighting for causes that are at cross purposes with their real interests for a variety of reasons. But as Dilbert's Scott Adams says, "Idiots can do wonderful things."
Sadly Canada does have its longstanding rifts which partially, but not really, run along partisan lines. Partisanship is really a symptom than an explanation. Regions and interest groups across the country act out of lazy self-interest. They are often not concerned with how the different parts of the country need each other. Otherwise, why have a Canada at all?
If you can help decontaminate your readers (including me) from disinformation using sound data, you would be providing yet another valuable service, perhaps even greater than what you are doing now. When there are problems that others are bringing up, if they are worthy of rebuttal, have the courage to do so. If they are just silly, you might briefly comment on that even while blocking the offending comment so as to stop the "engagement" piranhas. (That way, you'll be doing your part in fighting the alien reptiles that rule over us :P)
There is no need for any unnecessary and vituperative commentary, but as a taxpayer and Canadian citizen, I have a right to express my opinion, and call "BS" when I think it necessary. "Nuff said!
Your articles are outstanding. You've performed a tremendous service. I don't think it's essential for you to have a comments section if there's an easy way for people to reach you in the rare case of a factual error. Most comments sections add little value. If you think these comments are too partisan, then shut down the feedback, not the content! We'll still read your Substack posts without the comments.
I value your point of view and consider your articles as sufficiently non partisan to offer intelligent objective analysis in an exceptionally well written format. Kudos to you! As long as you keep posting I will definitely keep reading.
I appreciate open platforms like this that allow writers to blend their expertise with the on the ground news.
Mr. Wark has seen the other side of the intelligence wall and knows of what he speaks. I have found his critiques of the coverage at Global News and the G + M to be a welcomed counterpoint that goes beyond what other news outlets are able to provide. There is nothing partisan about that either.
Taking partisan shots at Mr. Wark ruins a good thing that we have going here. Courtesy never goes out of style.
Wouldn’t it be nice to have a platform where we could have lively respectful debate with people who are capable of looking behind labelling someone as a Liberal or Conservative or Nazi or Socialist the second they detect some aspect of the argument that is aligned with these political parties / ideologies? The trolls really aren’t very good at parsing out the nuance of the complex topics discussed here and it pollutes the experience. I had high hopes for Substack but they are finding their way in here too.
Great comments.
Old fashioned debating seems passé today. Many talk through people instead of listening and responding. Some of that has been stoked by reality TV, where tension and loud disagreement is torqued to keep viewers engaged. Some of it is stoked by rudeness of “activists”, many of whom don’t debate or justify their opinions, but cancel and shut down opposing views. It’s pretty hard to compete with that aggressive attitude.
I think about David Johnstone’s visit to Committee and wonder how much he said was actually heard? How can three or four media outlets provide summaries of his testimony and yet viewers could rightly wonder if the reporters attended the same event? Spinning, skewing, click baiting...
Please keep writing, Wesley, and block comments if necessary. It is a great pity that together with the freedom of the internet has come the freedom to say any unpleasant thing that comes into people’s minds.
Wesley,
I'm not one to write comments, but I just wanted to say how much I enjoy reading your newsletter. It's been absolutely fascinating to learn more about the Canadian National Security and Intelligence Space. I've been encouraging all of my policy wonk friends to checkout your newsletter.
Please don't let the comments get you down, and lock them if need be. Folks are free to go discuss on the many other platforms available. As someone who has spent a large portion of their life in public service, I trust that you well know what it actually means to be non-partisan more then most of these comments.
Looking forward to the next issue!
I appreciate your perspective, insights, drawn from deep experience and study. It is a welcome relief from the slagging and hyperbole that so often clouds public discussion. Let’s all be respectful here- it’s the Canadian way.
Lock the comments. Any value won't be worth the noise.
Deleted my comment as he tells you he is non partisan,
Hopefully these posts will be non-partisan but so far they seem like they could be from Liberal party news releases.
Wesley, your writing and analysis is an act of civic minded service. Thanks for doing it. Education of the public on national security will make our society more resilient.
I truly appreciate hearing your take on our Intelligence services, they seem to be frustrated by the politicos.
Thanks for the news.
I used to advance a calculation (having done a few public opinion polls) that no matter what you were advancing, 17% of the respondents would disagree with your point of view - no not 'disagree' - totally disregard any evidence you advanced and refuse to consider your points. Another 60% would give you a hearing with varying degrees of open-mindedness (might consider, leaning, strongly leaning), and some 20% were with you pretty much from the start. So my comment was that a reasonable approach was to ignore the 17% and focus on those who would listen to what you had to say. Of course, that doesn't stop the 17%, you just have to accept the noise.
So you have 12 comments and 2 who don't appreciate your analysis - let's see, 2/12 = 16.67% - remarkable.
I do appreciate your analysis, I can see no hint of partisanship. please keep it open, we can all deal with the noise as we see fit.
There were hints you just overlooked them. If (he) you don’t like comments don’t write on a sub stack looking for feed back. simple.
Because you are non-partisan, your words matter.
If I can paraphrase
I write my thoughts and am grateful you find them interesting.
I believe I am non partisan and unbiased.
If you dont agree with my views I may not allow you to voice your opinion, or I may stop writing all together, because of you.
If you don’t follow my instructions you are not a good Canadian
(Did Trudeau write this?)
Will save you the trouble and cancel my subscription
Guess I’m not a good Canadian
Bingo
Wesley, thank you for offering your insight into the world very few of us get to see. I do hope that you will not despair of writing what you have to offer. As for me, I'm also non-partisan in a partisan world. Many people are easily manipulated into fighting for causes that are at cross purposes with their real interests for a variety of reasons. But as Dilbert's Scott Adams says, "Idiots can do wonderful things."
Sadly Canada does have its longstanding rifts which partially, but not really, run along partisan lines. Partisanship is really a symptom than an explanation. Regions and interest groups across the country act out of lazy self-interest. They are often not concerned with how the different parts of the country need each other. Otherwise, why have a Canada at all?
If you can help decontaminate your readers (including me) from disinformation using sound data, you would be providing yet another valuable service, perhaps even greater than what you are doing now. When there are problems that others are bringing up, if they are worthy of rebuttal, have the courage to do so. If they are just silly, you might briefly comment on that even while blocking the offending comment so as to stop the "engagement" piranhas. (That way, you'll be doing your part in fighting the alien reptiles that rule over us :P)
I always found your writing a bit dry, Wesley, but your sense of humour shines through in these articles. Please keep going!
There is no need for any unnecessary and vituperative commentary, but as a taxpayer and Canadian citizen, I have a right to express my opinion, and call "BS" when I think it necessary. "Nuff said!
Your articles are outstanding. You've performed a tremendous service. I don't think it's essential for you to have a comments section if there's an easy way for people to reach you in the rare case of a factual error. Most comments sections add little value. If you think these comments are too partisan, then shut down the feedback, not the content! We'll still read your Substack posts without the comments.