CIA moderating Wikipedia – former editor

submitted by [deleted] from (rt.com)

all 11 comments
sorted by:
new (suggested)
topinsightfulfun

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

We already knew that. Wikipedia has been compromised for years now. Reddit got compromised a few years back.

[–]risistill me 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

We make and/or reply to, post after post like this one, showing how pervasive and entrenched the US government is, how corrupt it is, etc. and how much it controls. Then, on the rest of the threads, we talk about electing politicians who will help us. Cognitive dissonance. JMO

[–]EddieC 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You are 100% correct IMO.
They are just mocking us right at our faces at this stage.
 
But let's not stop at the Problem
- let's imagine the Solutions as well:
 
WHAT IF
We gather, weigh & weave all that we know
to arrive at truth that binds & frees us all
at Writings On The Wall @ the community Public Wall
through Accretive Dialogue, instead of ephemeral, idle chatter
arrive at usurpation-free, Direct Change Solutions
 

[–]Death_By_Democracy 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Doesn't surprise me a bit. When it comes to talking about Israel, Wikipedia is off with the fairies - it's hard to find a single true Israel 'fact' anywhere on the website. Although I would think the Israeli state has a huge hand on creating the fairy stories, rather than the CIA.

[–]InumaGaming Socialist 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

And that's why I've never trusted it as a source.

Use it for reference all you want but keep in mind what the information does and does not have on it.

[–]risistill me 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Exactly. It is useful tool for something like finding out where Sanders was born or which year he first became Mayor of Burlington. But nothing more controversial than that. It's also good for getting a quick overview of a topic with which you are unfamiliar, but only as a starting point for additional research.

[–][deleted]  (6 children)

[deleted]

    [–]risistill me 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

    it's a mirror of the viewpoints of the US oligarchy.

    Like almost everything else in this country, including films, plays, TV shows, etc. that are supposedly entertainment.

    [–]ageingrockstar 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

    Yes, for science and technology it's generally fine. However for current events and biographies of living people it's frequently highly biased. The problem is that these articles all are published under the same brand and wikipedia leverages its reputation from its much more objective articles to propagandise people on current affairs.

    [–]weavilsatemyface 6 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

    Yes, for science and technology it's generally fine.

    Aside from medical issues related to some word beginning with V... vacations? vaudeville? ventriloquists? vulcanologists? I forget the word sorry.

    [–]tomatopotato★ Free Assange ★ 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

    <insert Guy Fawkes mask here>

    [–][deleted]  (2 children)

    [deleted]

      [–]risistill me 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

      in the hands of the left-liberal establishment

      Democrats, damn it! And Democrats ain't left, much less "the left." They're barely even "liberals." The Democrat establishment, along with the Republican establishment, are alt neoliberalcons.

      Whoever chose those words instead of simply and truthfully, "in the hands of Democrats," is doing the same thing wikipedia does, helping brainwash Americans.