The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewC.J. Hopkins Archive
The Ministry of Wiki-Truth
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

OK, here’s a silly one for you.

Have you ever wondered how all those Wikipedia articles get produced … you know, the ones you pull up on your phone to look up an actor, an author, or a recipe, or a historical or scientific fact? Unfortunately, one of the Consent Factory staff had an opportunity to find out recently.

Apparently, what happened was, someone (presumably one of my readers) tried to add a reference to one of my essays to Wikipedia’s Identity Politics page. The Ministry of Wiki-Truth objected, adamantly. A low-level edit war ensued. Once the Ministers had quashed the rebellion, one of them, “Grayfell,” immediately went to the CJ Hopkins Wikipedia article and started punitively “editing” its contents for “neutrality.”

Other Ministers soon joined in the fun. The list of my awards was summarily deleted. My debut novel, Zone 23, which I published under the Consent Factory’s literary imprint, Snoggsworthy, Swaine & Cormorant Paperbacks, was “edited” into a vanity publication that I “self-published,” probably in my mother’s basement. The “Snoggsworthy, Swaine & Cormorant” imprint (which every bookseller, library, and professional catalog recognizes) was disappeared so that my potential readers will be warned that I’m trying to trick them into buying a book that wasn’t published by a “real” (i.e., corporate) publisher, like the Penguin Group, or one of its … uh, imprints. References to my “political satire and commentary,” and to many of the alternative outlets that regularly repost my essays (like the outlet you’re probably reading this in) were also zapped, because they’re all “fake news” sites operated by Putin-Nazi agents.

Also, given my attempted book fraud, the Wikipedia Ministers immediately launched an investigation into whether I had possibly made up my entire career. Perhaps I had invented all the productions of my plays, and my awards, and even my existence itself. I assume they have contacted my “legitimate” publishers, Bloomsbury Publishing and Broadway Play Publishing, to verify that I haven’t somehow hacked their websites and faked my other books. If they haven’t … well, they should probably get on that.

This “editing” and pursuant investigation was overseen and approved by a senior member of the Ministry’s Arbitration Committee, Doug Weller, who is apparently a “Grandmaster Editor” or a “Lord High Togneme Vicarus” in Wiki-speak. (I kid you not … click the link.) Given Lord Weller’s supervision of the process, I think it’s probably safe to say that this was not just the work of a bunch of kids attempting to negatively impact my book sales because someone on the Internet pissed them off.

This brouhaha was brought to my attention by the Consent Factory’s in-house Wikipedia Liaison, King Ubu (or König Ubu in German). As his job title suggests, King Ubu’s duty is to periodically check my Wikipedia article and make sure that no one has posted anything false, defamatory, or just plain weird. Naturally, when he saw how the Ministers of Wiki-Truth were punitively “editing” my page for “neutrality,” he attempted to engage them. This did not go well. I won’t go through all the gory details, but, if you’re curious, they’re here on the CJ Hopkins “talk” page (which King Ubu reports that he has copied and archived, which I find a bit paranoid, but then, I’m not an IT guy).

Look, normally, I wouldn’t bore you with my personal affairs, but my case is just another example of how “reality” is manufactured these days. In the anti-establishment circles I move in, Wikipedia is notorious for this kind of stuff, which is unsurprising when you think about it. It’s a perfect platform for manufacturing reality, disseminating pro-establishment propaganda, and damaging people’s reputations, which is a rather popular tactic these days. The simple fact is, when you google anything, Wikipedia is usually the first link that comes up. Most people assume that what they read on the platform is basically factual and at least trying to be “objective” … which a lot of it is, but a lot of it isn’t.

If the name Philip Cross doesn’t ring any bells, you might want to have a look into his story before you go back to uncritically surfing Wikipedia. As of May 14, 2018 (when Five Filters published this article about him and his service at the Ministry of Wiki-Truth), he had been editing Wikipedia for five years straight, every day of the week, including Christmas. He (if Cross is an actual person, and not an intelligence agency PSYOP) specializes in maliciously “editing” articles regarding anti-war activists and other anti-establishment persons. The story is too long to recount here, but have a look at this other Five Filters article. If you’re interested, that’s a good place to start.

Or, if you don’t have time to do that, go ahead and use my case as an example. See, according to Ubu, the Ministry’s punitive “editing” of my article to make it more “neutral” began when this specific Minister (“Grayfell”) discovered (a) that I existed, and (b) that I am a leftist heretic. “Grayfell,” as it turns out, is extremely invested in maintaining a positive image of Antifa, whose Wikipedia article he actively edits, and whose honor and integrity he valiantly defends, not only from conservatives and neo-fascist bozos, but apparently also from nefarious leftist authors and political satirists like myself.

Which … OK, I probably deserve it, right? I have satirized identity politics. I have satirized Antifa. I have satirized liberals. I don’t forbid controversial outlets (or any other outlets for that matter) from republishing my political satire and commentary, even after I was instructed to do so by the Leftism Police at CounterPunch. Jesus, I even included a link to a Breitbart article in the preceding paragraph … don’t read it, of course, it’s all a bunch of lies, notwithstanding all the supporting evidence.

Chief among my leftist heresies, I haven’t insulted Trump nearly enough. I don’t believe he’s a “Russian asset” or the resurrection of Adolf Hitler. I believe he is the same narcissistic ass clown and self-absorbed con man he has always been. Much as I dislike the man, I’m not on board with the deep-state coup the Intelligence Community, the Democrats, and the rest of the neoliberal Resistance have been trying to stage since he won the election.

I’m not a big fan of Intelligence agencies, generally. I don’t care much for imperialism, not even when it’s global capitalist imperialism. I do not support the global capitalist ruling classes’ War on Populism, or believe in the official Putin-Nazi narrative that they and their servants in the corporate media have been disseminating for the last three years. I do not sing hymns to former FBI directors. I don’t believe that all conservatives are fascists, or that the working classes are all a bunch of racists, or that “America is under attack.

Let’s face it, I’m a terrible leftist.

So it’s probably good that “Grayfell” and his pals discovered me and are feverishly “correcting” my article, and God knows how many other articles that don’t conform to Wikipedia “policy,” or Philip Cross’ political preferences, or Antifa’s theory of “preemptive self-defense,” or whatever other non-ideological, totally objective editorial standards the “volunteer editors” at the Ministry of Wiki-Truth (who have nothing to do with the Intelligence Community, or Antifa, or any other entities like that) consensually decide to robotically adhere to.

How else are they going to keep their content “neutral,” “unbiased,” and “reliably sourced,” so that people can pull up Wikipedia on their phones and verify historical events (which really happened, exactly as they say they did), or scientific “facts” (which are indisputable) … or whether Oceania is at War with EastAsia, or Eurasia, or the Terrorists, or Russia?

Oh, and please don’t worry about my Wikipedia article. König Ubu assures me he has done all he could to restore it some semblance of accuracy, and that the Ministers have moved on to bigger fish. Of course, who knows what additional “edits” might suddenly become a top priority once “Grayfell” or Antifa gets wind of this piece.

C. J. Hopkins is an award-winning American playwright, novelist and political satirist based in Berlin. His plays are published by Bloomsbury Publishing (UK) and Broadway Play Publishing (USA). His debut novel, ZONE 23, is published by Snoggsworthy, Swaine & Cormorant Paperbacks. He can be reached at cjhopkins.com or consentfactory.org.

 
• Category: Ideology • Tags: American Media, Ministr, Wikipedia 
Hide 116 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Wikipedia is always right. And Jeffrey Epstein did not commit suicide.

    • Agree: Houston 1992
    • Replies: @Richard B
  2. anonymous[128] • Disclaimer says:

    Thank you for sharing these details about how self-anointed Progressives(tm) all too often deal with real people in the real world. (The email exchange with CounterPunch was worth reading again, too.) The yellow, authoritarian streak running up many of their backs is a mile wide.

    Your principled efforts to secure the widest dissemination of your work and shrug off guilt-by-association is the best defense of free speech. Perhaps Caitlin Johnstone will be inspired to (re)join you here.

    • Replies: @Digital Samizdat
  3. Tusk says:

    I love this from the wiki editing discussion:

    For reference, Unz Review lacks a positive reputation for editorial oversight or fact-checking, so it is not a reliable, independent source

    I wonder whether anyone ever fact checks the MSM? I really doubt that, so whatever is spewed by the NYT et al is true by definition of their reputation, whereas anyone outside this sphere cannot be verified, well they cannot unless we ensure their Truth Ministers are onboard and editing the truth into the works.

    • Agree: Biff, Flint Clint
    • Replies: @Hail
    , @Justvisiting
    , @sally
  4. Huskynut says:

    +1, CJ.
    FWIW, Jimmy fucking Wales was in my Inbox just this past week, soliciting donations for the glorious Wiki-reich..
    Nyet! I said. Which probably alerted him to my commie-tolerating proclivities..

  5. Truth3 says:

    Jewish scumbags of the day…

    The Jewish Wikipedia editors.

    Self appointed gatekeepers and sophistic elite of the synogogue of Satan.

    May they all get their own Wikipedia bio pages, with their personal details displayed, and edited in indelible ink, by agents of the Holy Spirit, so that their crimes will be known well on Judgment Day.

    No faking their way out of Hell!

  6. Just avail yourself of the handy dandy moral tyrant deflectorator that is the “Infogalactic Transporter” extension, that can be found here….. https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/infogalactic-transporter/majmoinlepbjapaaljlhlfhlmbblaeip …..and enjoy the bright eyed beaming grins that are generated when sidestepping entirely the moral mazes and self righteous obstacle courses constructed by eternally insufferable arseholes, that demand they be navigated. A beautifully serene “Fuck You” is launched at the bastards of the west every time the Infogalactic page hoves in to view.

    • Replies: @Gandydancer
  7. Wikipedia is certainly biased and their influence is frightening. However, as far as I can tell, you did essentially self-publish Zone 23. Published by Consent Factory, which is run by… you? I could be wrong as I’m not willing to put more than a minute into this investigation.

  8. Utchka says:

    Wikipedia has always been screwy. Back in 2002 or 2003, when they were pretty new and didn’t have a lot of articles, I started (ignorant and in good faith) several scorpion and tarantula articles, with plans to do later do millipedes, centipedes, and so forth. My old user names are still there on those articles, ‘Sindrii’ being the first. And yes I’m knowledgeable about the subject, and included numerous quality links and textbook references. Anyway they ultimately kept banning me. Over bugs! I mean, FFS. After my third account was banned I gave up. Now, a great deal of my original content (which they deleted back then) is back on the pages. I still don’t get why they hated me so much.

    Some years later, 2010-ish, I watched in disgust as that guy… Connelly? quietly went through all of wikipedia and rewrote the temperature history of earth to make ‘warming’ appear. Of course many people noticed and raised a big stink but wikipedia kept it all. So many other little things too. I’ve heard some extreme examples of their liberal bias and don’t doubt it for a second.

    Sorry for rambling on, I’ve just come to hate wikipedia. And sorry this happened to you, though I can’t say I’m the slightest bit surprised.

    • Replies: @Che Guava
  9. Dan Hayes says:

    Freeman Dyson: “Wikipedia – nobody trusts it, everybody uses it!”

    • Agree: PetrOldSack
    • Replies: @Patricus
  10. Gall says:

    I can’t believe that anyone still takes Jimbo Whales and his cult of Wikipedia seriously.

    Here is one of the few articles where the Onion wasn’t being satirical as usual:

    https://www.theonion.com/wikipedia-celebrates-750-years-of-american-independence-1819568571

  11. The ‘founder’ of Wikipedia is the arch-Zionist Jimmy ‘Jimbo’ Wales, who attends intimiate birthday parties of Presidents of Israel, and has received a million-dollar ‘prize’ from Tel Aviv University

    Wales was ‘selected’ for this role after being in the pornography-selling business … where the CIA sometimes recruits its propagandists

    Wired magazine proved years ago that thousands of ‘edits’ in Wikipedia are made from gov intel at known CIA – intel IP addresses

    EU police agencies and the European Commission, have a detailed report on how Wikipedia is a criminally-involved tool for foreign intelligence agencies, thus engaged in criminal fundraising fraud of European citizens, using ‘Twenty major techniques of CIA – Wikipedia deception’

    EU Police Agency and Prosecutor Report on Wikipedia, an Intel Agency Fraud
    http://pastebin.com/BeppgiMJ

    Since Jimmy Wales took on his leading ‘non-profit’ role for the CIA-Mossad US-Israeli ‘Wiki World’, as it was labelled by his fellow Jew, Obama ‘Information Czar’, gov-intel propaganda apologist, & Harvard Law Professor Cass Sunstein, the spooky Wales has become mysteriously wealthy, allegedly as a result of ‘clever foreign currency speculation’

    Jeffrey Epstein made this same claim … it seems this is a cover story for getting political money from Jewish sources

    Wikipedia has at times edited Epstein’s biography to delete the USA Democrats connected with Epstein … and also to delete any references that Epstein is Jewish
    https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-07-09/jeffrey-epsteins-wikipedia-page-stealth-edited-remove-ties-democrats

    Israelis and Jewish figures often boast of how Wikipedia is one of their major ‘assets’ in the world.

    Wikipedia, a fabrication of Israel’s intelligence services. They control Wikipedia and use it to provide cover for war crimes, smear campaigns and as cover for espionage operations … Many Wikipedia “editors” are, in fact, terrorists, spies or highly disturbed persons.

    Wikipedia is hailed by Zionist Israel as “…the major source of information in the world.” They even advertise, with standard Zionist chutzpah, that Wikipedia is “…under constant, paid review of Zionist assets.”

    The above quote from Gordon Duff and Veterans Today, also citing
    http://www.ascertainthetruth.com/att/index.php/the-media/who-controls-the-media/429-zionist-control-of-wikipedia

    • Replies: @Stephen Paul Foster
  12. Use infogalactic.

    There is no end to the degree to which Wikipedia is pozzed and converged and compromised.

    • Agree: Change that Matters
    • Replies: @Hail
  13. Look, normally, I wouldn’t bore you with my personal affairs, …

    These notes sound like denouncing serious acts of violence. Then politics is violence, the justice system uses violence (Assange, Epstein, the list is endless), the establishment uses violence, militarism, policing. Turning the other cheek, makes you complicit. Call it the extra-definition of Stevie Pinker violence. The chance your head is bashed in is definitely smaller today then a century ago, but a thousand strings and e-collar(your dogtra smart phone, and other consumer devices), a fair length of duct-tape when timely, tie the individual and the collective to the ground. The difference is in the tools, they are better and finer grained, the establishment base psychology has not progressed, one could say that ethics and rational behavior on the contrary took the back stage.

    Anti-establishment a la Hopkins and “his circles´´ uses whining, their stars reference themselves to conventional anchors, universities, editors, the New York Times(Ron Unz is it´s champion), career politicians, collegues, priding in being a US citizen when their establishment abuses them, careers in academia. They market their no consequence opinions in the cloud, alas centrally searched and manipulated servers and routers of digital content, the list of setting up for in-consequence is endless.

    “When everything is said and done´´, …well everything is said and nothing is done. Eking out a niche living is about the farthest these “alternative´´ leaders go. Hedges(minister of church), Chomsky(referencing to academia, colleagues, then denouncing some minutiae), Peterson(clean your room, goddammit), on all sides, at all levels of society all have a dongle of trying to belong, the secret wish to somehow, somewhere build a niche that privileges prestige, and financial gain within the same societal context they denounce.

    In history, and today, your “message´´ is worthless, when the establishment knows you are not willing and able to organize and act upon establishment polities, policies, public figures and their tromping. That one single step further, would mean your Assange-ing, Kashoggi-ing, Epstein-ing. That dear Hopkins, is not the price you want to pay, that is not what you scheme for. You then have but to eat your own pride and spend the rest of your “career´´ whining. Being abused, and proud of it.

    As said before, the hardware – software digital blob leaves alternative journalism no venue way but to operate out and beyond the zone where the monopoly of convention rules. The content of your message does not matter, data mining, influencing the public in violent ways, chemically, hypnotically(spending the day in the glow of their i-phone), geographically(migration, ghettos of consumerism) rules. You are, Hopkins, obsolete, a coat hanger. Saw it coming?

    Howling wolves impress but when the pack consequently is known for howling being a signal of imminent attack. You, are not a wolf, you are not part of a pack, you are a bourgeois set up for insignificance.

    • Replies: @bike-anarkist
  14. eah says:

    “LOL” — Wikipedia cucks; there’s not much more to say

    Whenever you can, make a reasonable edit to add additional factually correct info, correct obviously biased wording, or an obviously biased presentation, etc — some change you think will/should stick — leave an insulting but trenchant remark (if you think it’s appropriate) about your edit and the reason for it in the edit comment.

    I remember once editing the Wikipedia page about the murder of Kitty Genovese to add the simple fact her murderer was black, with a non-insulting comment about it (eg race is generally relevant today, ala ‘white privilege’, so why not say her killer was black?); this edit was removed — today the page has a foto of the killer (Winston Moseley), so the point is moot now — but you get the idea.

  15. Jayzerbee says:

    Trust me, you are not the most important person in the universe.

  16. @anonymous

    Perhaps Caitlin Johnstone will be inspired to (re)join you here.

    When did Caitlin Johnstone ever publish here? Are you sure you don’t mean Diana Johnstone?

    • Replies: @anonymous
  17. Biff says:
    @Jayzerbee

    Trust me, you are not the most important person in the universe.

    That’s what she said.

  18. (((Wikipedia))) is only good for pop culture.

    If there’s a list of “anti-semitic” canards there be sure to add, “Controls Wikipedia” to the list.

    • Replies: @gregor
  19. Hail says: • Website

    Wikipedia is…a perfect platform for manufacturing reality, disseminating pro-establishment propaganda, and damaging people’s reputations, which is a rather popular tactic these days.

    The simple fact is, when you google anything, Wikipedia is usually the first link that comes up. Most people assume that what they read on the platform is basically factual and at least trying to be “objective” … which a lot of it is, but a lot of it isn’t.

    Excellent characterization.

    Many speak of the liberating features of the Internet, how the old MSM stranglehold has been whipped. The way the Internet is being used, that is just not true today. It was true for early adopters (1990s?) and early-mid adopters (late 1990s and early 2000s?).

    The 2010s has given us a pendulum swing back in the other direction. By circa 2020, information is, effectively, funneled through a few chokepoints — Wikipedia, Youtube, Twitter, Facebook, the Google quasi-Monopoly… And the limits of acceptable discourse are policed using various tactics. This is a great example.

    In this sense, Unz Review is a throwback to an earlier era of the Internet, in the best way.

    • Agree: Kiel, Gall
  20. @Jayzerbee

    That just adds to the case against Semitepedia, that not even small fry escape the petty Wrath of the Righteous Chosen.

  21. In the anti-establishment circles I move in, Wikipedia is notorious for this kind of stuff, which is unsurprising when you think about it. It’s a perfect platform for manufacturing reality, disseminating pro-establishment propaganda, and damaging people’s reputations, which is a rather popular tactic these days.

    Normiepedia sucks.

  22. Hail says: • Website
    @Tusk

    For reference, Mr. Greyfell, the wiki commissar who wrote the text you quote, does not cite any source for this assertion that the “Unz Review lacks a positive reputation for editorial oversight or fact-checking.” Isn’t “lacks a positive reputation,” without attribution, nothing but weasel-argumentation?

    I hear the Unz Review as of 2019 has been getting 1.7 million unique visitors per month, and (re)publishes some big-name authors and is published by a minor political-celebrity in his own right back to the 1990s, Ron Unz. So these insinuations that UR is on par with some unknown blog ring hollow.

    A Swedish wiki editor, Gråbergs Gråa Sång, piles on:

    Per [1] and Ron_Unz#The_Unz_Review_and_other_activities, I don’t think citing Unz is a good idea. Got any Publishers Weekly?

    Mr Sång cites the wiki page for Ron Unz to say that citing UR is not “a good idea.”

    The link to the Ron Unz wiki entry, as of this writing, includes this:

    According to the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) in 2014, the [Unz Review] webzine is an “outlet for certain writers to attack Israel and Jews.”[20] It has also been described as “an alternative conservative website,”[29] and “a mix of far-right and far-left anti-Semitic crackpottery.”[28]

    Back to CJ Hopkins. Writing of wikipedia:

    It’s a perfect platform for manufacturing reality, disseminating pro-establishment propaganda, and damaging people’s reputations,

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
  23. @Brabantian

    “Israelis and Jewish figures often boast of how Wikipedia is one of their major ‘assets’ in the world.”

    After reading this I pulled up the Wiki entry on “Holocaust Denial,” an enormously long piece, which provides confirmation. Run Unz is listed at the end as a notable “Holocaust Denier.” “Holocaust Denial” has turned out to be a brilliant propaganda creation that eventually will completely shut down free speech.

    • Replies: @Sick of Orcs
    , @Anonymous
  24. GMC says:

    Good article Mr Hopkins and glad to hear the truth of the matter with the so called internet POlice. But WE are under attack from the “Deep Space State” and its more serious than ever before. The more problems they have with the “Eastern NWO”, the harder they are coming down on the citizens in the West because they don’t want anyone to see that there is a more humane, sovereign choice to be made. The soulless people that are trying to put us all in their ” prisons ” are ramping it up.

  25. @Stephen Paul Foster

    Remember also, at Chosenpedia, White Genocide and The Great Replacement are mere “conspiracy theories.”

  26. @Jayzerbee

    And you are the least important person in the known world, trust me. Once again, the universe is in balance!

  27. anonymous[128] • Disclaimer says:
    @Digital Samizdat

    Once, but the article was pulled within 48 hours, and even scrubbed from the searchable archives.

  28. More troubling is Wikipedia comes up first in any search with the exception for gardening and recipe ones.

  29. Hail says: • Website
    @Flint Clint

    What is infogalactic?

    • Replies: @Flint Clint
  30. I have been in the same fight with Wikipedia for 18 months. So far, I have lost, although a couple of Wiki editors tried mightily to salvage things. What remains now is a factually inaccurate hatchet job that resists even my request to delete the damn thing until after I am dead (probably won’t have long to wait, I am 78 but sadly for the Wikis of the world disgustingly healthy), at which point the likes of AIPAC, ADL & SPLC probably won’t care what is written about me – unless I start writing from beyond the grave.

  31. Wow, I’m glad I read this, because up until now I’ve considered Wikipedia to be an unbiased reliable source of facts I can use to shape my worldview. I guess I’ll just have to stick to the MSM and Twitter.

    • LOL: awry
  32. Unfortunately Wikipedia doesn’t describe CJ Hopkins and outlets like Counterpunch as actors who manufacture reality, disseminate pro-establishment propaganda, and damage people’s reputations.

    Hopkins coded snark simply pushes the opinions of the MSM – a type of nihilist propaganda that leads by the nose to the truth because it’s “so funny you have to believe it”. Media that never strays from poking fun at all the official Government approved news – but don’t get any unapproved ideas.

    The “problem” with Wikipedia might be the that it comes dangerously close to journalism which is forbidden by the deep state in all of its social media weapons including Wikipedia. Here’s an entry on flag burning in the USA which is far more interesting than anything from CIA CJ :

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_desecration#United_States

    • Replies: @anonymous
  33. Sparkon says:

    I‘m more concerned about people having their world view programmed by the ancient superstitions and other mumbo jumbo than I am about people picking up disinformation from Wikipedia. The latter is much more easily corrected than the former. If you get something from Wikipedia that is bogus, and cite it, people may rightly question the information, but wrongly attack the source.

    Put another way, there is a lot of bogus information in circulation that didn’t come from Wikipedia.

    Recall that it was the New York Times and the rest of the MSM that led the parade banging the drums of war with one breathless but bogus BS story after another about Saddam’s WMD, the Yellowcake, Mobile Weapons Labs, Aluminum Tubes, Centrifuges, Intercontinental Drones, all of it frightening to the easily spooked, and all of it clumsy fabrications made up entirely from whole cloth in the Lie Factories of D.C, Tel Aviv, and London.

    Unfortunately, all the world’s BS does not come neatly bound together in one easily accessed source like Wikipedia.

  34. anonymous[128] • Disclaimer says:
    @Jeff Cornball

    Ding!

    I recognize about 95% of the time these one-and-done commenters.

  35. realornot says:

    Wiki:
    CaveGuy buys plane, ..and now you know the ‘rest of the story’

  36. Wally says:

    said:
    “Unfortunately, all the world’s BS does not come neatly bound together in one easily accessed source like Wikipedia.”

    – No one said it did. No strawmen, please.
    But it sure is making a run at it.

    – It’s amazing why anyone would cite Wikipedia as a reference for anything which Jews have a special interest in promoting. As the Unz Review has shown, Jews have entire groups dedicated to editing and controlling Wikipedia. See my comment #6.
    That fact is easily demonstrated by looking up in Wikipedia anything related to WWII and the fake “holocaust” narrative. It’s under complete Zionist control. Of course their citations, references, & quotes have been easily discredited by Revisionist scholars in books, articles, & various publications.

    – And as was mentioned, Wikipedia almost always comes up first when doing searches on just about anything of special interest to Jews and their leftists.

    • Replies: @Sparkon
  37. Of course, the Ministry of Wiki-Truth keeps its content “neutral,” “unbiased,” and “reliably sourced,” such as Brian Stelter’s sudser “Reliable Sources” at CNN. Except for the scientific articles, all the rest are ideological Soviet-style trash. The more fool you, using this phony “Encyclopedia,” which has been hijacked by the thought policy long ago.

    • Replies: @Mike P
  38. Mike P says:
    @Ludwig Watzal

    Except for the scientific articles

    Even those are often ideologically skewed. Look at anything pertaining to “climate change” for example.

    which has been hijacked by the thought policy long ago

    I have been wondering lately whether it has been hijacked, or whether it was planned that way all along.

    • Replies: @smaragdus
  39. Everybody and his brother knows that Wiki is full of lies. Their censorship is heavier than that in the Soviet Union after 1960s. It is about as bad as the censorship in the USSR under Stalin and in Germany under Hitler. What else is new?

    • Replies: @Hail
    , @Rabbitnexus
  40. @Tusk

    For reference, Unz Review lacks a positive reputation for editorial oversight or fact-checking, so it is not a reliable, independent source

    Glad to see this. If Unz had a “positive reputation” for editorial oversight or fact-checking I would be outta here!

  41. Sparkon says:
    @Wally

    Mislabeling my concluding remark as a strawman does not refute the truth of it. CJ’s entire article was about Wikipedia. I merely point out that BS is everywhere, especially the MSM, and not just in Wikipedia, and the most dangerous BS is the ancient mumbo jumbo.

    All facts must be checked, irrespective of where they appear.

    • Replies: @Wally
  42. Completely insane and totally inappropriate use of the words “canard” and “trope” throughout Wikipedia reveal everyone’s favorite ethnic group play an active role in corrupting the search of truth for the purposes of promotion of their ethnic self-interest, as per usual.

    • Agree: awry
  43. Arnieus says:

    The Wikipedia page covering the Russian Revolution does not contain the word Jew or Zionist. Since as Vladimir Putin has said the revolutionary government was 80% Jewish you would think it would be mentioned.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_Revolution

    • Agree: Hail
    • Replies: @eah
  44. PeterMX says:

    You sound like a decent guy. They must hate you. I can imagine the edit war that ensued over you. I got into one over a WW II item years ago. The people in charge of Wikipedia history are amateur idiots. There knowedge appears to come from two sources – Hollywood films and high school history class.

  45. Considering how many people have their own websites, why doesn’t everyone have a “Wikipedia CORRECTED” version (dated of course) under their own control. Then anyone can look at the OFFICIAL Wiki version and compare it to the person-in-question’s version as a cross reference.

    That way, everyone is happy. Wiki has their “Truth,” the author has their “Truth.”

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
    , @Nehlen
  46. Patricus says:
    @Dan Hayes

    Wikipedia has some practical usefulness. If one wants to know the population of, or the main employment in Salt Lake City the web site is probably accurate enough. Avoid it if researching anything controversial because it is straight social justice warrior drivel. Because it is always the first entry on a google search it is hard to ignore it altogether.

    • Agree: eah
  47. @Patricus

    Wiki is going the way of the MSM. It might be accurate in some cases, but it has zero credibility.

    So, when NYT, WaPo, CNN, or Wiki says that 2×2=4, I begin doubting even that.
    BTW, Google is in the same team as Wiki, that’s why Wiki always appears in every Google search. Personally, I prefer other search engines, like Yandex. It is not exactly unbiased, but compared to Google and other libtard servants it looks like a paragon of honesty.

    • Agree: Gall
    • Replies: @Anonymous
  48. PeterMX says:
    @Patricus

    That’s true. If the subject is science, something technical or biographical information on someone that isn’t controversial, and things that are completely unrelated to politics, it can be a good source of information.

    • Replies: @Patricus
    , @dickr
  49. Anonymous[388] • Disclaimer says:
    @Stephen Paul Foster

    That Wikipedia list also lists Pat Buchanan as a Holocaust denier. And on PJB’s page this is the only part that could be considered Holocaust denial:

    Buchanan wrote that it was impossible for 850,000 Jews to be killed by diesel exhaust fed into the gas chamber at Treblinka in a column for the New York Post in 1990.[25] Buchanan once argued Treblinka “was not a death camp but a transit camp used as a ‘pass-through point’ for prisoners”. In fact, some 900,000 Jews had died at Treblinka.[26] When George Will challenged him about it on TV, Buchanan did not reply.

    So, if you dispute even one part of the official narrative, well, you’re a Holocaust denier.

    “How do we know the number of Jews killed isn’t 5,999,999?”

    “Holocaust denier!!!”

    • Replies: @Tusk
  50. @Patricus

    So far Wikipedia will also give you the black and hispanic demographics for every city.

    You have to wonder how long it will take them before they censor out that data since it so useful for White Nationalists and haters and such (to figure out which cities to avoid…..) 😉

  51. eah says:
    @Arnieus

    The Wikipedia page on the Trial of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev (remember him?) does not contain the word “motive”.

  52. @PetrOldSack

    Resistance is futile!

    All you needed to say… other than this is an unconscious missive reflecting your insignificance as you look in the mirror and deflect to CJ.

    Cj is just telling “us” that what happened to him WILL happen to anybody… and be prepared.

  53. Anon[176] • Disclaimer says:

    It has long been obvious that Wikipedia is self-parody for anything that has the remotest of modern political implications. There is a wide range of presentations on Wikipedia that speaks to this fact. Wikipedia’s ownership is content to allow pro-communist, Jewish propaganda editor mafias control its content until credibility is stretched to its absolute limit and often beyond.

    As stated, Wikipedia’s self parody is evident across a wide range of topics. However, the most immediately revealing always will be Wikipedia’s presentation on any topic that the (((Chosen))) have a political interest in. Never has there been a group whose institutionally (re)stated perspectives, in regard to themselves, others, and politics in general, are so uniformly mainstream according to Wikipedia’s presentation of their views as such.

    When Wikipedia can’t credibly get away with eliminating criticism of (((them))), they will tend to get a paragraph buried in an otherwise favorable article when other groups will get entire articles dedicated to what amounts to the same criticism.

    Its akin to when you see a picture of a cheap, superficially attractive model with zero flaws; due to photoshop editing to the point that she looks plastic. Which makes it immediately obvious that that you can’t trust the picture that you are seeing. That’s Wikipedia and its presentation of World Jewry and Jewry’s enemies in a nutshell.

  54. Jake says:

    Wikipedia begs for money to update and create more. You might was well send your money to some encyclopedia owned jointly by Commentary magazine, the SPLC, and George Soros. Endless propaganda for globalist, imperialist, liberal democracy and corporate-crony-capitalism.

  55. Anonymous[285] • Disclaimer says:
    @AnonFromTN

    So, when NYT, WaPo, CNN, or Wiki says that 2×2=4, I begin doubting even that.
    BTW, Google is in the same team as Wiki, that’s why Wiki always appears in every Google search. Personally, I prefer other search engines, like Yandex. It is not exactly unbiased, but compared to Google and other libtard servants it looks like a paragon of honesty.

    Yeah, my movement to total distrust of major media was quick and life-altering. I grew up on the WaPo. Delivered it as a kid and devoured it as an adult. It was as much a part of my mornings as breakfast. Then again, 10 years ago I would always start my day with Morning Joe. Boy have I changed in the Trump era. The other day I realized just how jaded I’ve become when I stopped by a thrift store to look at books and had zero interest. I figured that most of the books making it to publication, especially major book publishers, had even more tightly controlled vetting than Wikipedia articles. I did find and buy a recently published fun math book called Two Trains Leave Paris only to get home and find it contained some smug lib comments. [chuck].

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
  56. @Hail

    It’s Wikipedia without the pozz.

  57. @Anonymous

    See, that’s where the people who grew up in the USSR or PRC have an advantage. We were immunized by propaganda, we know that any ideology that claims to know the Truth with a capital T is a lie. Besides, we were trained to extract useful info even from lying media. Just discard what serves the interests of the publishers, and what remains is part of the truth. Although I must say that it is harder now in the US and Europe than it used to be in the USSR: compared to direct lies in Western MSM, Soviet propaganda looks almost honest. It used not to report certain things and spin what it reported, but it never stooped to “comrade Ogilvy”-style direct lies, which became normal fare of the libtard-globohomo media (like WaPo, NYT, CNN, and their ilk). There is a joke in today’s Russia that what they told us about socialism were lies, but what they told us about capitalism turned out to be perfectly true.

  58. HEREDOT says:

    Wikipedia is the sewage pit of Zionists. Nothing but the manipulation of a group of zionist fags.

    • Replies: @Nehlen
  59. Ashenazic-Khazarian vermin have to censure and censor everything and everyone.
    Why? Because they are cockroaches. They cannot stand the light of day.
    I mean, just look at Greenblatt (ADL [email protected]) would you trust that [email protected] with protecting the truth? Or baby sitting Children?
    Exactly.
    Hey look! ABC News, the so-called verified Media, just failed to print the truth about Epstein 3YEARS AGO because they were afraid to loose access to Kate And Will Windsor.
    Hahahahah!!! The MSM the truth-tellers!
    Yeah right.
    Ashcan Jew-Khazar’s own the ‘Media’. Problem is they only want to report THEIR version of the World.
    Time to deport these useless scum.

  60. Tusk says:
    @Anonymous

    Funnily enough Pat is correct! Since all the pro-Holocaust institutions agree it wasn’t diesel exhaust that killed them, nor was diesel exhaust even used! So for Pat to say that is impossible, he is really confirming what Holocaust Theologians have already settled.

    From the testimony of eyewitnesses, such as the SS men who operated the engines and a Jewish survivor who had access to them, we may conclude that gasoline engines were probably used as the means of murder in Treblinka, Sobibor, and Belzec. Holocaust scholars do not evade, distort, or juggle the evidence.

    Pat was simply telling it like it is, no diesel was used to murder Jews, if you say otherwise you are denying the gasolinocaust.

    https://www.hdot.org/debunking-denial/ds6-engines-used/

    • Troll: Saggy
    • Replies: @NobodyKnowsImADog
  61. @Joe Stalin

    ‘That way, everyone is happy. Wiki has their “Truth,” the author has their “Truth.’

    I doubt Wikipedia would think much of that idea. Wikipedia will decide what the truth is, thank you very much.

  62. @Hail

    ‘…According to the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) in 2014, the [Unz Review] webzine is an “outlet for certain writers to attack Israel and Jews.”[20] It has also been described as “an alternative conservative website,”[29] and “a mix of far-right and far-left anti-Semitic crackpottery.”[28]…’

    That too. But I’ll look it over and decide what to buy on my own, thank you very much.

    I’m a great big boy. You can count on me to go to the grocery store and not come back with the pickled gophers that were on sale.

  63. gregor says:
    @Sick of Orcs

    There is a series on Judaism with all the articles written from a Jewish perspective.

    Then there is a series on Antisemitism with all the articles written from a Jewish perspective.

    Shouldn’t anti-Semites get to write the anti-Semitism articles?

    • Replies: @Anon
    , @Sick of Orcs
  64. You can count on me to go to the grocery store and not come back with the pickled gophers that were on sale.

    Not so I. My mom sent my out to get a jar of pickled gophers once, but I got so distracted by MSM telling me what to believe, what to say and what to think, that I came home with a pair of leather loafers…

    Why?

    Because I was told I needed them.

    The truth doesn’t need a single law to be true.

    Lies on the other hand…

  65. Hail says: • Website
    @AnonFromTN

    Everybody and his brother knows that Wiki is full of lies.

    Sadly, I’m not so sure that is a common view.

  66. @Wikipedia was already showing its spots in 2002 when I was most actively researching and debating (sic) 9/11. The bias was obvious the more one delved into certain topics and even the left wing direction was clear and the more one uses it the more kosher it becomes too. The familiar stench to every other organ of influence dominated and directed by they who must not be named is distinctive.

  67. @AnonFromTN

    Unfortunately this is not the case. Wikipedia for one thing is seen as gospel and never questioned by educational establishments or the denizens who administer the learning to the young minds. Developing minds. It is also one more hurdle in the way of anyone who might be genuinely seeking answers to questions which may arise still from time to time in the minds of some of the remaining sheeple.

    It is not as if the realisation comes all at once that more or less everything you once took for granted or ‘common knowledge’ is a deliberately constructed and carefully implanted lie from on high. (Yet not too high, their feet still walk on solid ground.) It takes a series of new discoveries, revelations which each of themselves will change your life paradigm. It takes a while for the accumulation of more and more of these huge examples which we see as aberrations in the original tapestry to form a coherent picture which one day you suddenly recognise for what it is. You finally see the true picture which has been there all along and the dream finally fades.

    Once you awaken from the hypnosis it all seems so obvious that it can be hard to remember the resistance we ourselves will have put up as each of the illusions we had been mesmerised with dissipates.

    • Replies: @Rabbitnexus
    , @AnonFromTN
  68. @Rabbitnexus

    Dammit was making some much needed editing to that and it escaped me. Redundancies and silly grammar. Never mind it is what I meant to say within a Tomahawk missile’s accuracy range.

  69. Miggle says:

    This shocks me. I have always thought Jimmy Wales was not the guilty one, that the problem was that anyone including spammers and lobbyists could sign up to edit Wikipedia articles. Of course you couldn’t expose the truth of Jewish misdeeds because there would be an organized onslaught, with your edits erased in a few seconds by one of a swarm of paid lobbyists doing it as a full-time job.

    I was wrong, and I’m shocked.

  70. Nehlen says:
    @Joe Stalin

    Who do you think Googleberg is going to prioritize in the search results?

  71. Wally says:
    @Sparkon

    You said: “Unfortunately, all the world’s BS does not come neatly bound together in one easily accessed source like Wikipedia.

    I repeat, you said “in one easily accessed source like Wikipedia”.

    Be more clear next time.

    My point stands.

  72. @Rabbitnexus

    Yes, the realization comes in a few steps, but here people born in the USSR or PRC have an advantage: we don’t naively expect the media to tell you the truth. Basically, we come with an attitude “it’s not true, unless the government denies it”. Turns out that this attitude is even more justified in the West with ‘free’ press than it was in the USSR with government-controlled media.

    • Replies: @awry
  73. sally says:
    @Tusk

    Wikipedia is often edited by those who want to change the narrative.. A while back there were some really useful pages about GWB but just as the prosecutors were perusing the site, most of the useful stuff disappeared into the USA maintained “black hole”.

    i checked, the right of Americans to expect the truth from those who govern does not appear in either the constitution or its amendments. in fact, Assange has made it clear, tell the truth and you will be executed.

  74. SafeNow says:

    I have heard that the online Encyclopedia Britannica is written by scholars and is very objective. And that the cost is only two dollars per month. Maybe I should subscribe. I am going to read the Wikipedia article about it right now to learn about it.

  75. Patricus says:
    @PeterMX

    One aspect of science is the global warming narrative. Wikipedia gives one side of the story.

  76. Smith says:

    Yes, yes, it’s all cool and all.

    But what’s the alternative? There’s none.

    Wikipedia remains the biggest source and most updated information on the internet, in order to debunk them, there needs to be another wikipedia of equal magnitude to sway the mass, but currently there’s none right now.

    One more solution is to change all the admin and moderators of the current Wikipedia, how do you suggest we do that?

    • Replies: @Commentator Mike
  77. awry says:
    @AnonFromTN

    It is still true in Russia too.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
  78. Support Infogalactic. Get involved and start editing.

    You can also get an extension for Brave and Chrome called Infogalactic Transporter, which allows the user to move between Wiki and IG.

  79. @Smith

    Putin has criticised the reliability of wikipedia and demanded that Russia sets up its own rival online Great Russian Encyclopedia.

    • Replies: @Justvisiting
    , @Kapyong
    , @Smith
  80. @Commentator Mike

    Lies and propaganda are crimes against humanity–and it should be a new international human right to have access to information not slanted by a million hidden agendas. Likewise censorship (including shadow banning and other search engine bias) should be declared to be a crime against humanity–perhaps with a _very_ few exceptions agreed to by international treaty (that involve bomb-making and the like, not what somebody deems to be “hate speech”).

    What that means in practice is not that information be objective, but that the bias of the authors be openly identified.

    (I sound like a college sophomore….well, you might as well set the bar high…someday we may get there…)

    What is so sad about Wikipedia is the wonderful premise that has been quickly twisted into an Orwellian nightmare.

    • Replies: @Commentator Mike
  81. Yury says:

    Spot on.
    It’s completely in line with my own experience trying to edit Wikipedia.
    My edit was deleted three times.
    Twice I provided additional information to support my interpretation (to address specific feedback by a moderator).
    Then I realised that they did not like my interpretation and that those official explanations were just lame excuses to delete my version.
    I gave up and at the same time lost any respect for Wikipedia with its MLM.
    The essense of wikipedia is MLM (Multi Level Moderation) where each moderator should follow ideological guidance of his/her supervisor.
    Thus Wikipedia is an ideological mirror of Jimmy Wales, its owner.
    If you do not like the term “owner”, feel free to substitute it with “controlling shareholder/stakeholder”.
    Once I even attended his lecture where he described how they “care” about the world and use regular and “dark” deletes where even a trace of an original edit is not preserved.

    Nothing personal – strictily business of a well oiled SJW war machine fighting for a “better” word as they understand it.

  82. Richard B says:
    @Buck Ransom

    “Grayfell,” as it turns out, is extremely invested in maintaining a positive image of Antifa, whose Wikipedia article he actively edits, and whose honor and integrity he valiantly defends, not only from conservatives and neo-fascist bozos, but apparently also from nefarious leftist authors and political satirists like myself.

    Who are these “neo-fascist bozos”? That’s a sincere question.

    Because the only ones I see, the ones who could really qualify as such, are so obviously ADL/$PLC manufactured that they don’t count.

    So, exactly who are the bozos?

    The reason I ask is because by now those defending Antifa, those who pitch their tent on “The Left Pole” now see all of us of, including the author of this article, as “neo-fascist bozos.”

    This seems like parody. But that’s only because in an age of absurdities it’s sometimes hard to tell the difference between parody and reality.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
  83. @Truth3

    Wikipedia is similar to …..Nigerian scam.
    They call you from Israel to commit a fraud but the relays are showing the phone call came from Nigeria.

    They do it with electrical companies too.
    Calling you that they are about to disconnect the power to your house or business pretending THEY ARE the actual companies, but when you tell them you called the police they hung-up on you.

    They are the root of ALL evil.

    PS
    I heard that ABC and this prick Stepfanopoulos, suppress the story for years of jew pedophile Epstein and his friends like “slick Willie” Clinton, israel firster Dershowitz and the pedophiles of the Buckingham Palace?

    I bet Katie Hill’s “vagi”, if Hillary was elected president, Jeffrey Epstein now will be alive and well flying new underage girls in his island paradise with the “Lolita Express” and Harvey Weinstein making another movie about those criminal Nazis and the wholecost.

  84. @awry

    See, good skills remain useful. Living in the US for 28 years I don’t get much of Russian propaganda. From what I see, nowadays it does not need to lie as much as the imperial one to serve its masters. So, it’s more truthful not because the masters are nicer, but simply because there is less need to lie. Libtard-globohomo ideology is so bankrupt that it cannot be maintained without massive blatant lies.

  85. @Richard B

    it’s sometimes hard to tell the difference between parody and reality

    Yea, many actors look like self-parody that even stand-up comedy cannot make any funnier. The whole state of Ukraine behaves like a worn-out clown in a provincial circus. Or, closer to home, Dem party “logic” looks like an angry parody: Biden is corrupt, therefore let’s impeach Trump.

  86. Sparkon says:

    If you don’t like Wikipedia, don’t use it, but attacking a source as part of an argument is always fallacious.

    Here’s my challenge: Find one modern Western encyclopedia — online, offline, or bound — that does not repeat the Jewish version of the Holocaust in much the same terms as Wikipedia.

    For example, the article on the Holocaust in my CD-ROM version of Britannica 2000 says that it was “…the attempted extermination of European Jewry.” The article goes on to claim that “The total number of Jews exterminated by the Nazis during the war is estimated to be approximately 5,700,000.”

    Encyclopedia Britannica on the Internet:

    Holocaust…the systematic state-sponsored killing of six million Jewish men, women, and children and millions of others by Nazi Germany and its collaborators during World War II.

    https://www.britannica.com/event/Holocaust

    Does that mean one should stop using or citing all encyclopedias? Of course not, as long as one recognizes their potential shortcomings on certain topics.

    Almost any tool is dangerous if not handled properly, or especially, if wielded by unskilled hands. A craftsman does not stop using a hammer simply because he might smash his thumb, but rather learns to use the tool with care and precision. Similarly, he does not use the hammer to extract a screw

    The modern Luddites would have us believe that all the Big Lies are confined to Wikipedia. In fact, the Jewish claim about the magical 6 million victims had surfaced after WWI, but got no traction with the victorious Allies. The myth of the 6 million dead Jews was simply recycled for WWII, propelled by Bolshevik propagandists this time, and of course the Jews have a list of names to prove it. No bones, just a list.

    All that BS and propaganda was created long before there was any Wikipedia. Jews and their Rabbis have some mystical fetish about the 6 million number that derives from their ancient mumbo jumbo.

    Attacking a source, shooting the messenger, and ad hominem are all part of the genetic logical fallacy.

    And beating up only on Wikipedia while overlooking all the other organs of propaganda is the Internet version of Rope-A-Dope.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
  87. Kapyong says:
    @Commentator Mike

    Putin has criticised the reliability of wikipedia and demanded that Russia sets up its own rival online Great Russian Encyclopedia.

    Is it the view here that Putin is a Good Guy, independent of the (((parasite))) ?

    That seems very doubtful to me – his childhood Jewish friends, his obscure origins (possibly even a Jewish mother), rapid rise during terror attacks, close connection with Chabad now. Putin has criticised the admittedly mostly Jewish Bolsheviks for ‘ideological errors’, but then defended the Jews against anti-semitism, as un-deserved.

    And it’s only a century since the Bolshevik take-over, why would we think the parasite has lost power in Russia ?

    • Agree: Commentator Mike
    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
  88. @Sparkon

    You are right that Wiki does not have a monopoly on lies. You are also right that holohoax lie was around long before Wiki appeared. But Wiki lies not only about the holocaust. Look at any Wiki entry that is politically relevant: they are all 90-100% lies. A few examples: Wiki entries on Lugansk and Donetsk People’s Republics are 100% lies, regurgitating the official lies of the State Department and US client Kiev regime. Yes, you might find something true on Wiki regarding an enzyme or a protein family, but anything with social meaning there is a lie, often a pretty blatant one. That was the point made by many commenters here.

  89. Anon[122] • Disclaimer says:
    @gregor

    Shouldn’t anti-Semites get to write the anti-Semitism articles?

    That’s silly.

    Why should anything in the mainstream be written other than from the perspective of an insular, superstitious, neurotic, apocalyptic, supremacist religious group who has thousands of years of documented history of everyone hating them, has their own foreign nation that their diaspora is extremely loyal to and is theologically mandated by their religion to come to rule the world within the next 300 years, and makes up no more than 5% of the population outside of their home nation?

    Get realistic. The Jews get to define their own history, everyone else’s history, their own politics, and everyone else’s politics.

    Any other situation is very likely to be counter to Jewish interests, therefore to be anti-Semitic, and thus representative of the highest immorality. According to the Jews and our leaders. Even those that the Jews do not vote for, when they are even a citizen and are able to vote at all.

  90. I rarely use wikipedia as a source for the reasons noted. What it is very useful in is providing original or other sources.

  91. @Kapyong

    The policies of Jewish-directed US and its vassals suggests that Jews do not think that they have sufficient influence on Putin and in Russia in general (as well as in China, Venezuela, Iran, Syria, etc.). When Jews hate someone or something so hysterically, there must be some good in this person or country.

    • Replies: @Smith
  92. This policy is used to pass off Bible Stories as actual history (those fabulous Jewish kingdoms):

    “Wikipedia articles on history and religion draw from a religion’s sacred texts as well as from modern archaeological, historical, and scientific sources.”

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view#Religion

  93. dickr says:
    @PeterMX

    Even their science stuff is dodgy and usually confusing. Luckily wikipedia is frowned upon at serious engineering faculties here in germany

  94. Smith says:
    @Commentator Mike

    Cool, when will that be online?

    • Replies: @Commentator Mike
  95. Smith says:
    @AnonFromTN

    Jews do not hate any of these countries, and jews do business in them regularly, especially China and Russia.

    Also, the idea that your enemy hates someone/something, thus that someone/something is good is flawed logic.

    Evidently, if jews hate poison, is poison good?

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
  96. @gregor

    Agreed.

    Occasionally a Jewish writer puts out an article titled, “Why do people hate Jews?”

    Finally, some introspection!

    Nope, just another listing of “anti-semitic canards” without any evidence-based refutation.

  97. Saggy says: • Website

    I have a suggested edit for the wiki article on Auschwtitz… https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Auschwitz_concentration_camp which reads ….

    The SS destroyed written records, and in the final week before the camp’s liberation, burned or demolished many of its buildings.[239]

    To be replaced with …
    The Soviets captured the Nazi camp records, including doctor signed death certificates for every registered prisoner that died, and summary books now known as ‘death books’. The Soviets hid these records and they were not revealed to the world until 1989 following glasnost. While the records are missing for 1944 and a few months in other years, presumably because the Soviets lost them in the 50 years they were kept hidden, the records document 60,000 deaths, 48% Roman Catholic, 42% Jews – http://auschwitz.org/en/museum/about-the-available-data/death-records/sterbebucher . The Auschwtiz death books are now available, https://www.amazon.com/Death-books-from-Auschwitz-Remnants/dp/3598112629.

    • Replies: @Gandydancer
  98. @Smith

    Sorry, but you appear to have issues with logic. Jews might hate poisons, but that hatred is conditional: they hate poisons administered to them, but not to their enemies. So, poisons administered to them are good for the rest of mankind.

  99. @Beau Nydle

    Thanks for the info on the add-in to substitute InfoGalactic for Wikipedia links. I’ve installed it on Chrome.

    I noticed that both versions of the articles on this article’s author include red links, possibly or even presumably to articles that no longer exist. Perhaps there are ways to locate them in Wikipedia’s archives, but I don’t know how.

    Someone above mentions “dark” edits that are disappeared from public view. I have never heard that term, but I can confirm from personal experience that they exist. I once made a passing comment on a talk page that Neil deGrasse Tyson was almost certainly the recipient of affirmative action when he was rapidly admitted to the Cornell U astrophysics PhD program after washing out of the astronomy PhD program at the University of Texas at Austin, and an apparent affirmative action baby with an admin bit with whom I was contesting, among other things, he deletion of the Wikipedia article on The Federalist website (The Federalist had run a number of articles on Tyson’s difficulties in telling the truth) not only blocked me temporarily from editing but removed my comment from the talk page’s editing history. I appealed the block to the Arbs (the top committee), hoping that the editors of less politically involved areas of Wikipedia might be more reasonable, but was instead given a lifetime “BLP ban”. (That’s “Biography of Living Persons”, btw — I’m banned from editing any article or subject involving living persons. Details linked to at User talk:Andyvphil https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Andyvphil.) Well, that has save me a lot of time trying to get inconvenient facts into wikipedia. LOL!

    Responding to the bozos on this page, it’s not that Wikipedia is run by a cabal of Jews. It’s that each article has or draws the attention of a group of like-minded editors who impose a particular point of view by virtue of their numbers, which also discourages minority views and perpetuates the dominance of the cabal. Leftists are anyway the dominant demographic, but this also works between leftist factions, not merely against right-minded “editors”.

  100. @Saggy

    Thinking the number of death certificates is significant requires that you think the Nazi’s bothered making out death certificates. This is lunacy.

    • Replies: @Saggy
  101. @Justvisiting

    Putin’s Russian version of wikipedia actually is tied up with censorship of the Internet in Russia, or as they say to make Russia independent of the globalists’s Internet, the so-called “Law on Sovereign Internet”:

    https://www.euronews.com/2019/11/08/putin-wants-to-replace-wikiedia-with-reliable-russian-equivalent

    There’s good and bad in this, for Russians and for the rest of us. At least it will give us others more choices when searching for information, if we will have access to it, or will the West ban our own link to it as part of some future sanctions?

    • Replies: @Justvisiting
  102. @Commentator Mike

    It probably is not polite to talk about it, but I think everyone here knows that we are one major false flag terrorist incident from overt Internet censorship in the name of “Homeland Security”.

    I fear for our children and grand-children–they (like most humans throughout history) may never get to experience what a free society was or could be.

  103. Saggy says: • Website
    @Gandydancer

    Thinking the number of death certificates is significant requires that you think the Nazi’s bothered making out death certificates. This is lunacy.

    Click on the link imbecile … http://auschwitz.org/en/museum/about-the-available-data/death-records/sterbebucher

    Ignoring the fact the the Soviets hid the data for 50 years while publishing absurd numbers, 4 million murdered at Auschwitz, simply confirms that you are a complete imbecile.

    • Replies: @Gandydancer
  104. @Tusk

    Notes change but the song remains the same. The Holocaust industry doesn’t care much about the content of your speech, but more the general thrust of your sentiment.

    If you mention soap and lampshades, the tribe won’t attack you for it even though the official narrative has discarded those whoppers. Never mind that those were used in the Nuremberg Trials as legal evidence, nor that all the earliest propaganda relied heavily on it, official Holocaust scholars abandoned it as indefensible. However, mention soap and lampshades in a critical manner, and you’ll be mercilessly attacked as anti-semitic even though it’s currently considered a myth.

    Same with stating that 4 million didn’t die at Auschwitz. Of course that’s true, both in accordance with dogma (1+ million) and in reality (<270k mostly gentiles for all camps), but state it too forcefully, or make the obvious conclusions from it, and you'll get officially branded an anti-semite.

    It's practically a universal rule. Brag about or celebrate Jewish control of Hollywood = truth. Raise awareness of Jewish control of Hollywood = dangerous conspiracy theory. Speak in favor of white replacement = stunning, brave & empowered. Speak against white replacement = hateful paranoid loser.

    • Replies: @Gandydancer
  105. @Saggy

    I did click on the link, bozo, and there is nothing there to answer my point. The dead bodies were burned in the open when their number exceeded the capacity of the crematoria. Women, children, the unfit, or simply those for whom there was no room in the camp were stripped of their belongings and herded into the gas chambers. Their identities were never known to anyone in the camp, still less were death certificates filled out for them. As I said, “Thinking the number of death certificates is significant requires that you think the Nazi’s bothered making out death certificates. This is lunacy.” And, in your case, stupid and dishonest beyond the power of words to express.

  106. @NobodyKnowsImADog

    “From among 1.3 million Auschwitz deportees, at least 1.1 million were murdered:
    900 thousand Jews murdered in the gas chambers immediately on arrival at the camp;
    Of the 400 thousand prisoners registered in the camp, 200 thousand people died there. They included almost 100 thousand Jews, 64 thousand Poles, 21 thousand Roma, 14 thousand Soviet prisoners of war and more than 10 thousand prisoners of other nationalities.” ( Państwowe Muzeum Auschwitz-Birkenau w Oświęcimiu.)
    https://web.archive.org/web/20190202034044/http://70.auschwitz.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=89&lang=en

    Who, exactly, are the “official Holocaust scholars” who have “abandoned [this] as indefensible”?

    • Replies: @NobodyKnowsImADog
  107. @Gandydancer

    Nice reading comprehension. I thought you were the “People of the Book”.

    I said they’ve abandoned the stories about soap and lampshades as indefensible. I also stated that they abandoned the original claim of 4 million deaths at Auschwitz and revised it down to 1.1 mil. 4 million is the number they used repeatedly at Nuremberg and had it on a metal plaque there until ~1990.

  108. Anonymous[191] • Disclaimer says:

    I haven’t noticed anyone putting forward alternatives like Metapedia or Conservapedia, although one person mentioned Infogalactic.
    I suppose it is possible to do an Erdoğan and simply ban Wikipedia.

  109. Sorry this happened to you my friend. I have a bit of the bitter experience myself of the Woke Wiki tyrants’ methods.

  110. Che Guava says:
    @Utchka

    Well said. I was under the delusion that it was some kind of idealistic project,

    I never trolled Japanese Wiki, but it also has numerous amusing scandals, the funniest, I think, being that many (over 100) Finance Ministry bureaucrats were spending most of their time at work amplifyhng the articles on Gundam, for those that may not know, a set of animated series about spaceships and giant robots with very young human pilots.

    I doubt that any of the bureaucrats involve were pumishedd, as a result. It should have happened but did nou.

    OTOH, Japanese Wiki has excellent info on train lines and stations, and while not as fanatical as the compilers of it, I am a rail fan,

    English wiki, OTOH, is just junk, except on some articles on science, maths, geography, sure, a few other areas.

    The only time I posted in working hours, it was a correction to an error in a technical article, which was correct and remains on the site.

    Any other types of articles there are suspect, often blatant lies.

    I managed to eliminate three of there worst admins by writing articles on a different site. A small thing, but I have a little pride in it. I kept trolling as much as I could (and before), when New York Brad, himself a Noo Yawk Jewish liar, asked other admins to keep track of my IP address (not actually mine) in response to my posting that Ray Cohn was a criminal, liar, and the child of a corrupt Jetwish family (clear to anyone reading the history.)

    I would encourage any younger people to troll wiki articles or penple of their choice.

    The equation for judgement is simple,

    Will the hysterical reaction take more tiime than my action?

    The answer is also simple.

    Almost certainly.you take care, think, and preferably post from more than one address, preferably not tied to you.

  111. smaragdus says:
    @Mike P

    No doubt Wikipedia was planned and established as main disinformation hub to instill political correctness and to manufacture consent.

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All C.J. Hopkins Comments via RSS