>I could type up anything and upload it somewhere and ascribe it to someone/some group, that doesn't mean it's real.
>Finding the source is one part of verifying/saucing the statements.
>It's just a text document on someone's website. It's contains no claims of authorship, it's just a text document
TEACHING POINT FOR ANONS
LEARN to see patterns and expand your THINKING
The three points raised above are irrelevant in determining whether the doc in question contains useful information.
These anons sound like normies playing 2D checkers, when most of us in here are awake and playing multidimensional chess.
After all, we are here lurking, researching, and posting information ANONYMOUSLY. I suspect that many of us do this precisely because we prefer to use our powers of individual discernment to locate and verify the TRUTH as opposed to blindly believing or rejecting certain information because so and so "authority" figure said so.
Here is an example to illustrate my point.
I came upon the following interview today with a documentary film maker who became a victim of police brutality because he called 911 to report witnessing police brutality of someone else. This is a very common and important reality within many corrupt institutions (Not just the CLOWNS & FBI) whose members weld their power and hide their abuse behind a badge of law enforcement or other supposed authority.
https:// youtu.be/lkxCNrlHRjU?t=29m35s
Then, I remember coming across this guy's documentary a month ago and decided to dismiss it because I read a significant number of negative comments posted on YT channel hosting the trailer. Now having see this interview and after watching a few clips from the movie, I realize that this documentary may have important value in our mission to red people the normies about one of the country's most corrupt police departments and one that up until now has successfully kept the country in the dark about what really happened at Route 91 in Vegas last Oct.
We have to remember that just because alleged or known "dis-info agent XX" was interviewed in the documentary doesn't mean that the information covered is not truthful or useful. Remember, many dis-info agents attach themselves to TRUTHFUL information in order to taint it (known in court trials as 'poisoning the well') and thus discouraging the public from considering it.