I don't think anyone here would disagree with you that we shouldn't solely trust one source, but that's nothing to build an intelligent discussion around.
"I don't believe the story this reporter wrote because I don't trust the source(s)" is a totally valid opinion, but anything further than that is just a "What-if" fest unless someone wants to put forth a specific alternate hypothesis, or question specific facts from the article.
"You shouldn't believe in this story because I don't trust the source(s)" adds a little info (especially with a "here's why"), but in the case of something as complicated as a government is probably just going to cause a flame war, _even if you're right_.
"I don't believe the story this reporter wrote because I don't trust the source(s)" is a totally valid opinion, but anything further than that is just a "What-if" fest unless someone wants to put forth a specific alternate hypothesis, or question specific facts from the article.
"You shouldn't believe in this story because I don't trust the source(s)" adds a little info (especially with a "here's why"), but in the case of something as complicated as a government is probably just going to cause a flame war, _even if you're right_.