Trusted and untrustworthy sources

 It's not enough to just quote from a source unless that source can be trusted. We - soc-med journos and readers - have taken a long time to determine trustworthy or not because it takes a long time for it to become apparent.

For example, people no longer trust Fox News but should they ever have done, given the track record of Murdoch Snr and Jnr, of bringing some of the talking heads in they have, of this Wallace character?  And Newsmax, which everyone was clamouring for alongside OANN?  The host recently got up and walked off when the 'pillow guy' made quite straight down the line statements.

One has to be immersed in the whole thing, gathering snippets for years, squirrelling them away, only to bring them out, linked, for an article.  For example, Julia has written so much on the justice system that she's clearly an expert on the matter.  If you want to know about the seamy pizzagaters, then Distant Relative is your man. Readers become ferreters and that's a grand thing.

Into this, let's bring together these snippets:

1. When Biden took control [jury's still out on whether he has or whether it's theatre], who was one of the first to rush to congratulate him, even though DJT was still POTUS?  Effing Johnson, yes.  Someone like Salvini in Italy, had he been PM or the Polish and Hungarian leaders would not have. It's quite easy to determine friends and enemies at times - just see who supports what. In the US, Gaetz has come out and said he'll give up his seat in order to defend Trump's victory, Cruz has been ambivalent, Hawley has been unequivocal, the RINOs are now in the open.  Johnson here was quoted as saying Woke is Ok.  Really?

2. Distant Relative just posted this:

"2008 Nobel Prize winner Luc Montagnier says that COVID-19 coronavirus disease was artificially created in a lab by biologists working on an AIDS vaccine."

Hope your French language is up to scratch for that one.

3. Gatestone, understanding its own bias, has this:

• [The Biden Executive Order] order reverses a previous directive by the Trump administration last May, which found that "foreign adversaries are increasingly creating and exploiting vulnerabilities in the United States bulk-power system, which provides the electricity that supports our national defense, vital emergency services, critical infrastructure, economy, and way of life." [Emphasis added.]

• These systems are, of course, highly computerized and the Trump administration's goal was to prevent the Chinese, America's greatest geo-political and economic rival, from having their hands in it. Biden's order strips that protection with the stroke of a pen.

• So, where was the constituency for allowing the Chinese access to the market for providing critical equipment to run and manage the US power grid? Who was clamoring to undo protections from cyber-warfare directed against America's power system?

• [B]y cancelling the pipeline, Biden is not preventing any energy production of fossil fuels in Canada. He is simply shifting that consumption to China.

• Economically, all Biden's order does is damage America's energy production and give the US less control of energy markets, and give China greater leverage.

• With this one order, on his first day of work, Biden has given the communist government of China... a more favorable market for buying the oil that makes it the top producer of carbon-dioxide in the world. It is difficult to see how such moves, done unilaterally and without negotiating anything at all in return, make sense to the security of the U.S.

• The timing alone raises questions about exactly which supporters Joe Biden was making happy.

• Chasing the Dragon (gatestoneinstitute.org)

From those, also from the cancelling of the pipeline [jobs], also from where the lockdowns are the most vehement and so it goes on - it's not difficult to determine who is anti-American strength and pro-American. Again - who benefits?

Then the virus bilge [copious posts passim] with the flawed testing and mutations rendering vaccines obsolete almost as they're developed - what do we actually have now?  We have a PTB that can and does close down businesses - always small businesses, always middle-class - at will, with zero concern for that happening. Hancock sniggering through his tears on TV is all you need to know there.

So if you put all that together, what do you get?  Well you get a picture entirely different to that of the whole MSM - CNN, MSNBC, ABC, NYT, Guardian, the new management of the Telegraph here and the Express and the Wail and all the provincial rags - all of them bringing out a consistent view they're pushing the exact opposite of what you'd bring out had you viewed the above in this post.

And beyond all the economic warfare here, the societal, all the other things, one more thing stands out like a sore thumb to me:

Those in this worldwide cabal have actually used biological warfare on the west.

They have used biological weapons on the ordinary people in western nations and by definition of viruses, have unleashed something unstoppable.

Now to a fictional representation of what was to come. The James Bond movies have often mooted developments. In DAD, it was Star Wars in Iceland, in DAF, it was the moon landings, in OHMSS, it was biological warfare of the type we actually have right now - in that case, it was blofeld and mass infertility.

And for every such study, there are other 'studies' saying the opposite - they trot them out and google prioritise them at will.  Then we have this:

https://underdogsbiteupwards.wordpress.com/2021/02/01/new-kids-in-the-needle/

Now, even though he is basically 'one of us', he is coming out and saying the opposite in some ways, but not in others.  Read it.

So where does that leave us?  Do we believe Dr. Gold, Dr. Mal and Lockdown Sceptics, plus the panels of doctors or do we believe Fauci, Whitty, Gates, Pence, Brock, Global Task Force or Hancock whose family is connected to the Oxford 'vaccine'?

Facebook just announced it “made a mistake” when it censored studies showing HCQ saves lives. Censorship is never “a mistake.” Tech executives repeatedly made a calculated decision, month after month, silencing physicians worldwide.

Censorship kills.https://t.co/TX0g8lPxUx pic.twitter.com/nh1f9lwDNc

— Dr. Simone Gold (@drsimonegold) January 28, 2021

You do see the issue.  Shall we believe the polls and studies, any of 'em?  If not, then are we also not believing, in there, the good ones?

Again, you do see the issue. Trusted sources and non-trusted, untrustworthy.  Is anything Mad Cow at MSNBC to be trusted or is it better to believe the dissident doctors and nurses on what's going on?  James O'Keefe and other ferreters?

There's our dilemma.