(0232) Actually been up gathering and collating for an hour, here goes for Tuesday. (0348) Last shot at shut eye, folks, see you the other side (hopefully). (0351)

 

3. Tide is turning on these “vaxxes”

So much coming out now. Digressing … the pain for me in that item, as redactor/admin, was that I could not show the self-scrolling list as it would not embed in the blog with that topic (imho), thus the screenshot route at least gave the general idea.

2. Steve at 903

Four: Obama corruption, Colorado corruption on Tina Peters … also be careful on the Orange Country claim. More.

Three: Cabinet pics, Hegseth, Mayor Adams, Lara Trump, more.

Two: The Ukraine, Syria, Russia from Syria, much more.

One: Turning on vaxxes, ICC, AI, surveillance lists, more.

1. Information exchange

Last evening, I saw an item on X where some big MSM funder was apoplectic over Elon’s comment about us now being “the media” … at least the MSM being untrusted legacy media … useful for snippets but ignore their analysis like the plague.

In lieu of the MSM’s now rejected view on almost anything, what we’re left with is diffuse … there are some very good amateur pundits and then a continuum down to trash&troll. Trouble is … who’s whom … which is which?

Going back to first principles, we might start with a catalyst, a clip or snippet one of us saw:

It certainly did … they lost control of many of our minds … an increasing number of such minds, though we’re still a minority, the anti-globo-psycho, anti-Wokerati, anti-Karen, which underpins our politics.

My suggestion is that, when you meet any news snippet at all, immediately ask yourself:

• Who is this person, who funds this person, cui bono, whom is he/she part of, what are the hidden connections etc. etc.?

And to answer that, you need to delve … yes, ggl and bing are highly biased left, they almost all are … it’s today’s paradigm, zeitgeist, default position … and yet they can be “got around” by technique:

• Always seek the dirt first … enter some outrageous slur in search, see what comes up … you’re not going to take it onboard but it gives you other lines of enquiry.
• Always go to their About section, where they operate from, to whom they answer, with whom affiliated, how long they’ve been operating, who funds them?

Remember, chaps and chapesses … we’re only as good as our sources. I’m about to quote two iffy ones … one is The Slog where I’m still not sure where he’s at, politically … plus Atlas Obscura, quite Woke left, so beware of that. But as Andy pointed out, there are still stories there, pointers to explore.

Our model as an information exchange is the old journo one of always seeking the truth, the nitty gritty, what the bottom line is:

• Knowing it’s always constrained by Them’s interference and censorship ruses, plus our own safety … there are things we’re simply not going to put into the public domain about ourselves, unless it impinges on or colours our comment … we need to disclose that, e.g. who funds us?
• We’re not godlike … beware the narcissistic pundit who speaks of his/her “followers” … your reputation is only as good as the quality of your input today, measured against your previous.
• We go the way of all things, eventually, we’re a candle or beam from a lighthouse for now … for now, folks … then you must look elsewhere … same painstaking evaluation.
• Don’t rely on one source, e.g. us … have a range, a bloground or soc-med round … hut every single one needs delving into … what is his bias? Why? What’s his “thang”? Never take information exchange at face value.

I’m going to run this at OoL as well.