It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Question regarding a source

page: 1

log in


posted on Jun, 16 2010 @ 06:28 PM
I have noticed Before Its News being listed as a source in a few threads, and would like to know its validity. The reason I ask is that while browsing it today, I noticed an article at Before Its News that listed Sorcha Faal as a contributor and I have been here long enough to know that is an unacceptable author to source. Here is that article Source

Thanks and if I have put this question into the wrong place, I apologize.

posted on Jun, 16 2010 @ 07:32 PM
Look I agree Faal is totally unreliable but that does not mean 100% of what the person says is fake.

You have to be able to distinguish in between totally absurd and totally possible. Although this can be extremely difficult often times, this is true.

But I never automatically dismiss something because it comes from a known hoaxer-liar.

I know to question it deeply though.

We know as a FACT the MSM lies to us purposely, example the lead up to the Iraq war and the lies and propaganda from that.

But people still treat the MSM as a perfect source. Which is ILLOGICAL.

Every source is Questionable. Every source must be investigated further. Claims must be investigated.

Without any investigation, only a FOOL would automatically dismiss something because it comes from a source they don't like.

They are not smart, they are sheep who follow the herd mentality.

People who think for themselves know better, and they will treat every claim individually and seek further verification to determine it's veracity.

To me, Faal is no better than the MSM, and vice versa. They are both known liars.

But I still investigate their claims.

This is because I am a truth seeker. And I know that truth can be found anywhere, even in the most unlikely places of all.

Use Discretion. Question everything.
Follow the trail.

Hope this answers your question loosely.

posted on Jun, 16 2010 @ 07:47 PM
reply to post by muzzleflash

Thanks for your input muzzleflash. I also tend to question everything I come across as a source, especially since it seems about everyone nowadays has their own agenda. I have seen heated debates carried out on here when anyone mentions Faal as a source. I was a little surprised to see him as a contributor on BIN though, which is why I was checking their credibility.

posted on Jun, 17 2010 @ 07:24 AM
As ever, with any source, it's always difficult to sort the wheat from the chaff.

Simple cross referencing is always a good idea, but it can be difficult with some "news" from different sources.

If another reference isn't available, I would question the source myself in the OP and invite members (also in the OP) to discuss the IDEA behind the article rather than concentrating on questioning the validity of the source.

Even if a source is totally off the wall, it often makes for great discussion to discuss the premise of the srticle, and the thinking behind it.

posted on Jun, 17 2010 @ 07:34 AM
I was wondering the same question about 'before it's news'. I think the fact that anybody can really submit anything they want to makes it seem very dodgy, having said that not everything will be made up and speculation, I'm sure some of it is spot on. But hey I'm also sure i could submit something there and then make a thread about here in an effort to gain flags. I would just take each article as it comes.

As budski mentioned cross referencing and a little extra research would go a long way to help identify the claims. I see no problem with the site, just some of the contributors.

posted on Jun, 17 2010 @ 08:39 AM
Let's also not forget that SPIN plays a huge part in how people view news, and how it colours their perception of a given article.

The same information presented in two or more different ways will affect how people percieve the news story, from the news article which uses sensationalist headlines, and bolds the parts they want to focus on, to highbrow discussions of the same topic in periodicals - each will be read and percieved in different ways because the same information is presented differently.

At the end of the day, it's a judgement call, and as far as Sorcha Faal is concerned, well, a stopped clock is right twice a day, so I wouldn't automatically dismiss everything he says, but I WOULD check it carefully, or make it clear that it is the IDEA that is being discussed rather than the veracity of the information presented.

new topics

top topics

log in