I only questioned the new organization for their interesting choice of headline and writing style. Based on what the original goals for the Intercept were, I find it interesting that they are reporting with headlines that could literally be pulled from reddit news. It's not as blatant as buzzfeed, upworthy, etc but it's definitely got some clickbaity, fear mongering in there. This is not to say that it is actually a conspiracy theory or the facts are wrong. It just set off my skepticism sensors. As many others have pointed out in this thread, the facts themselves have more or less been reported by other organizations and there's nothing entirely earth shattering here. I still feel like with the lofty goals of the Intercept, a tiny bit more traditional and objective journalism would be seen. After reading the article, before seeing the domain, I would never have guessed it was them. I guessed it was a conspiracy blog or like news week or some shit. That's my only point.
Yeah, I could see myself having the same reaction if I had read it blind initially, with no reference points as to where it had come from. I've previously read about these in some anarchist blogs and news, and those can be quite pugilistic and fear-mongering, depending, so this is one of the more reasonable accounts I've been exposed to. Plus, with that previous exposure, it didn't quite any alarm cells for me that signify conspiracy-esque thoughts, but more like, "oh great, this again." Sorry for the confusion, I thought you were maybe referencing the parts in the article cited or the underlying story as a whole. Also, the "fucking" in my last sentence was a little much.