Thank you reader Al who writes;

Similar sentiments I suppose...

I have exhausted every avenue available to me in attempts to verify RRN feeds. I have only gotten two responses. One reminded me of "Entertainment value only" disclaimers and the the other was a writer that vouched for the poster of much of RRN info but not the info itself.

I wrote it off as some secret squirrel psyops or what ever but I cannot forward to my network of other critical thinkers any of their literary work containing this often fantastic sounding "intel" they sprinkle among their other often unnamed "intel" sources.

I have been reading RMN since the late 1990's after retiring from the military since I already knew the topical news of the day was hogwash.

I can offer an analogy after observing my barnyard chickens (one can learn much watching animals) they similar to true info seekers, approach a pile of dung with the thought in mind.

They know once they attack that dung pile with effort and persistence from whatever source, whether its new or old, likely they will find the nuggets they are after that will satiate the chickens gizzard, and similarly satisfy the researcher to help make sense of things in an age of intense and intentional deception.

Long ago military training learning patience while removing fly specks out of black pepper while wearing boxing gloves will produce results but unfortunately so far not with the RNN "Baxter" stuff. Perhaps that will change but for now I largely ignore it and do not pass it on.

----------
Tis sad, that with so much going on that absolute trash is being posted muddying the minds of those without any critical thinking.

I remember a time when even if rumours were posted they were still worth reading, only now there's simply too many agents that I simply ignore.

No white gloves needed as any real nuggets that are posted are from those I read.

White hats and Gitmo are not among those.

Each to his own though I guess.

------------

Fox.