Wikipedia is totally compromised. Check out the Pizzagate article where they call it a "debunked conspiracy theory" and the page is locked from editing by the SJW gatekeepers
Thank you! I hadn't heard of it, but it looks great. I looked up Clinton Body Count and found an extensive list, with valuable references, including alt.current-events.clinton.whitewater, which I didn't realize was still alive. I thought Google had purged the news groups years ago.
wikipedia just needs to be broken up like all the other libshit tech giants. they are irredeemable. Leftists are masters of subverting once-great institutions and turning them into propaganda.
Well I just looked up pizzagate on infogalactic. It states multiple times it has been debunked.
I really want a good place to look up these things, I'm disappointed.
CORRECTION: I just edited this. There are multiple websites for infogalactic, I searched duckduckgo and found the real one. I was not disappointed. But I will leave my comment uncorrected.
How much would it cost to just copy the content from Wikipedia and decuck it?
I'm imagining a git like system where edits from Wikipedia after creation are taken in a stream and approved or denied.
Its probably a monumental undertaking and realistically merging new info in would be impractical. I dont doubt they'd be butthurt and try to attack it too.
I wish ONE SINGLE reporter would corner Podesta and ask him what he meant by "playing dominoes on cheese or pasta." There have been no honest journalists who asked these questions
I was actually there when it happened. I was finishing my degree at Washington University in St. Louis and walking around the campus when all these MSM cocksuckers had their stages set up
I get that... i just mean facts don't change... and what they want to change today, wont necessarily be what they want to change the next generation... some facts should be immune to the test of time. Such as:
America is the greatest country to every declare independence.
Communism has failed every time it was tried.
Democrats are, always have been and always will be the party of slave owners.
Britannica was written by the same institutions who have utterly failed us over the past several decades. Wikipedia is superior, but that's hardly saying much. I'd say use InfoGalactic or some other wiki-style encyclopedia with an active crusade against political punditry in articles.
A few months ago, I used an ancient Wikipedia account to reverse the bias on their laughable "Trump Ukraine Scandal" page. I changed the title to the more accurate Biden Ukraine Scandal, corrected information from disreputable sources that wouldn't even be admissible in an academic paper and added the information they excluded. The changes were reversed within 15 minutes. The "editor" who reversed it then got the old account indefinitely banned, based on accusations that were (of course) exactly what the page was doing before I fixed it. Wikipedia is a pile of schitt.
When they took out their $120,000 in student loans, they should've attended at least one class that covers ethical writing / critical thinking. They've totally thrown it out the window on Wikipedia. Twelve years ago, or so, I appreciated Wikipedia enough to rip a complete copy of the English version to take with me when I deployed. Today, I avoid it in search results. Total junk.
I feel like there's some meme material, or at least a few red pills, in something that valuable. Or, you know, just throw it up on a Google drive or whatever because that sounds awesome.
Sort of. The drives were some weird duel IDE (not SCSI) setup from the time when you had to have two HDDs in an enclosure running as one drive if you wanted a 1TB drive. I have the drives, but they sketched out a bit at some point. I dumped everything I valued at the time. The last time I tried to use it, it wouldn't run, but I didn't try very hard.
Your point might be motivation enough to try again. On the other hand, compressed archives of Wikipedia from various years can probably be found online without doing data recovery on an old hdd. There's also an old 'handheld wikipedia' device called "Wikireader" from about 11 years ago that you could use if you find one that hasn't been manually updated (they don't connect to the internet). That should be easy to get, if you're interested in looking. Wikipedia's downloadable, compressed dumps don't go back very far:
It looks like Wikipedia is pretty complete on Archive.org (for the moment), going back to 2004. Comparing the 2010 Alex Jones' wiki to the 2020 Alex Jones wiki is interesting; the pejorative terms "alt-right", and "far-right" probably didn't even exist in 2010; that's how quickly the notion of slang can be perverted into cult mind control. At some point, they locked that guy out of editing his own damn page! I'm not a Jones fan or anything, but can you imagine Wikipedia putting up a Rachel Maddow wiki describing her as a "far-left conspiracy theorist" and telling her she has no choice about leaving that shit up in public while other people are free to edit their own wikis??? Of course not. Anyway, those pejoratives aren't used on the 2010 page. In the 2010 version, even the old "right wing" remark only occurs in the reference titles and not the text.
Yep, the 2009 "Wikireader" is on ebay, brand new in the box for $60 and $70. Just don't buy the $90 one with the 2020 update and you're good... Or just use archive.org while it's still available.
It’s much sadder than that. Probably someone who actual knows history writes an article, and then some other pathetic cuck alters it with misinformation because they’re on their period that day.
I femember looking up hunter biden on wikipedia right when that ukraine story was really gaining steam and it was whitewashed to a whole different level. Said there was no evidence of a scandal when joe is literally on camera talking about his quid pro quo deal. Not that that would prove guilt but it definitely qualifies as evidence. Theres a reason you cant use wikipedia as a credible source
If you know people who are up for factual documentation of current events we have a project being worked on to build a new Wikipedia specifically focused on current events.
Not associated with this website although the founder encourages the community to participate. He doesn't have time for forums but he is extremely American in his stance on Technology and creating a counter balance to the News Media, Google and Facebook.
They're working around the clock but COVID-19 nearly wiped out the business.
They have a donate page available if you choose to support them that way.
Thedonald.win is homebase for a lot of us.
This platform is geared to hit mainstream and be an organizing place for American Populism (what the founder identifies with).
Their goal is to offer an alternative internet infrastructure to Major Tech companies so that ideas and movements can take form without being suppressed by Facebook and Google.
In January, I was sitting with a group of 25 genealogists, whose average age is 70, and the 96 year old gets up to make a little speech. She says, "now remember ladies, Wikipedia is not a reliable source and is inaccurate". She then went on a rant about WW2 inaccuracies. Evidently they have butchered a lot more of our history than I realized. I hope the teachers in this country have a clue. (not hopeful on that)
Wikipedia the globalist encyclopedia. That’s the problem with having everything digital and on subscription. They can delete or change the content anytime they want
I kind of disagree. I did a VERY politically controversial Wikipedia edit that they fought and fought against but is now standing the test of time. The key was when I finally grabbed several trusted lefty outlets as sources that said the same as me and then they finally left it alone. Might have all to do with whoever is stalking that particular page though.
Wikipedia editors are a bunch of college Communists who have nothing better to do than peruse Wikipedia altering articles. Like this one was altered after 2016 election to downplay the obvious parallels to Communism.
https://archive.is/fENX8
I wish they still did print edition of encyclopedia britannica but yeah any politics related Wikipedia page is astroturfed to hell and back with leftism
There is a project to build an alternative it will take time so if you're looking for something here and now just searching multiple search engines is your best bet.
You don't even need the FBI notes to know that the interview itself with Flynn was not acceptable. The FBI investigators unethically didn't go through the WH counsel, went directly to Flynn and told him he didn't need a lawyer because the interview was "informal". They have never told him he was personally under investigation, which is illegal for the FBI to do. You don't need the notes to understand it was an entrapment. They made him comfortable, didn't tell him what it was about, and the original interview 302s were deleted from the files. You can't charge him with lying under these conditions.
Also, he didn't lie. He said to the FBI (in that informal non interview) that he didn't remember talking about sanctions. We now know that he didn't say to Kislyac that the new Trump admin. would remove sanctions after the inauguration, but instead simply asked the Russians to not overreact. He wanted to avoid a tit-for-tat situation. Flynn didn't undermine Obama's sanctions. He even said he understood the Obama admin. Because he didn't touch the sanctions, Flynn simply had nothing to hide to the FBI and it is plausible he didn't remember specifically objecting or talking about sanctions.
I am not surprised. They, like Reddit are heavily politicized.
By the way, today I was banned from r/Republican for calling the Chicago looters animals. Which shows me that even conservative subs on Reddit have been infiltrated.
Added: After I objected, I was then shocked to get a reply from an anonymous Republican mod who called me racist for calling them animals; proof of liberal viewpoint. Truly Reddit has gone into the shitter.
libpedia is just another lib media site masquerading as an encyclopedia. you can't put current events into an encyclopedia because all the evidence isn't out yet. but do they do it? yup.
do they go back and fix the many many lib "mistakes" (read: intentionally put spin) on said current event articles? HAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAH
do they allow anybody to fix those "mistakes" at all (fuck no) or do they revert any change and ban anybody who tries?
Not sure what is worse, the older model where a select few paid editors and such at Encyclopedias and such sourced materials before printing. Or the current "everyone can edit" setup that is "helped along" by "a select few" people in real time.
Both versions have their down sides but honestly I think this real time BS just shows how easily manipulated information is.
Of course they do. Andrew Weissman must be a contributor of theirs.
Wikipedia is totally compromised. Check out the Pizzagate article where they call it a "debunked conspiracy theory" and the page is locked from editing by the SJW gatekeepers
Use Infogalactic, it's based
Never heard of it, but glad to learn.
Thank you! I hadn't heard of it, but it looks great. I looked up Clinton Body Count and found an extensive list, with valuable references, including alt.current-events.clinton.whitewater, which I didn't realize was still alive. I thought Google had purged the news groups years ago.
Well they’ve been panhandling on that site for like a fucking decade. You’d think they’d run out of money by now.
wikipedia just needs to be broken up like all the other libshit tech giants. they are irredeemable. Leftists are masters of subverting once-great institutions and turning them into propaganda.
Well I just looked up pizzagate on infogalactic. It states multiple times it has been debunked.
I really want a good place to look up these things, I'm disappointed.
CORRECTION: I just edited this. There are multiple websites for infogalactic, I searched duckduckgo and found the real one. I was not disappointed. But I will leave my comment uncorrected.
https://infogalactic.com/info/Pizzagate
How much would it cost to just copy the content from Wikipedia and decuck it?
I'm imagining a git like system where edits from Wikipedia after creation are taken in a stream and approved or denied.
Its probably a monumental undertaking and realistically merging new info in would be impractical. I dont doubt they'd be butthurt and try to attack it too.
I wish ONE SINGLE reporter would corner Podesta and ask him what he meant by "playing dominoes on cheese or pasta." There have been no honest journalists who asked these questions
https://youtu.be/Dgg1MQNK-_I
I was actually there when it happened. I was finishing my degree at Washington University in St. Louis and walking around the campus when all these MSM cocksuckers had their stages set up
Epic.
Really hope Podesta is held to account someday, 'Pede.
Me too. It upsets me that such evil people can walk free
did they just cut out https://youtu.be/Dgg1MQNK-_I?t=82 ??
While you're at it, check out wiki the article on Seth Rich. Also locked from editing and they call his murder a "conspiracy theory"
Fuck wikipedia. They are the Ministry of Truth.
Bulls eye.
Ban Wikipedia until they stop this blatant anti republican censorship bias!
amen Flynn is innocent.
Wikipedia for all things politics is useless.
Yeah... Anything that can be edited at any time is useless....
I had no idea my childhood Britannica would become relevant again.
But please... Continue to pour your heart out for money every year.
I get that... i just mean facts don't change... and what they want to change today, wont necessarily be what they want to change the next generation... some facts should be immune to the test of time. Such as:
The lies become "facts" when their approved sources are used. It truly is evil practice but that's the left for you.
Britannica was written by the same institutions who have utterly failed us over the past several decades. Wikipedia is superior, but that's hardly saying much. I'd say use InfoGalactic or some other wiki-style encyclopedia with an active crusade against political punditry in articles.
There are good leads for quick random info but nothing political.
A few months ago, I used an ancient Wikipedia account to reverse the bias on their laughable "Trump Ukraine Scandal" page. I changed the title to the more accurate Biden Ukraine Scandal, corrected information from disreputable sources that wouldn't even be admissible in an academic paper and added the information they excluded. The changes were reversed within 15 minutes. The "editor" who reversed it then got the old account indefinitely banned, based on accusations that were (of course) exactly what the page was doing before I fixed it. Wikipedia is a pile of schitt.
Wikipedia is a blog for leftist armchair historian neckbeards who think history needs to be interpreted through a woke lens
When they took out their $120,000 in student loans, they should've attended at least one class that covers ethical writing / critical thinking. They've totally thrown it out the window on Wikipedia. Twelve years ago, or so, I appreciated Wikipedia enough to rip a complete copy of the English version to take with me when I deployed. Today, I avoid it in search results. Total junk.
Do you still have that?
I feel like there's some meme material, or at least a few red pills, in something that valuable. Or, you know, just throw it up on a Google drive or whatever because that sounds awesome.
Sort of. The drives were some weird duel IDE (not SCSI) setup from the time when you had to have two HDDs in an enclosure running as one drive if you wanted a 1TB drive. I have the drives, but they sketched out a bit at some point. I dumped everything I valued at the time. The last time I tried to use it, it wouldn't run, but I didn't try very hard.
Your point might be motivation enough to try again. On the other hand, compressed archives of Wikipedia from various years can probably be found online without doing data recovery on an old hdd. There's also an old 'handheld wikipedia' device called "Wikireader" from about 11 years ago that you could use if you find one that hasn't been manually updated (they don't connect to the internet). That should be easy to get, if you're interested in looking. Wikipedia's downloadable, compressed dumps don't go back very far:
https://dumps.wikimedia.org/
In the past, they kept dumps of "removed" wikis, but I see that has been reduced to only the "removed" 9/11 wiki. https://dumps.wikimedia.org/backups-of-old-wikis.html
It looks like Wikipedia is pretty complete on Archive.org (for the moment), going back to 2004. Comparing the 2010 Alex Jones' wiki to the 2020 Alex Jones wiki is interesting; the pejorative terms "alt-right", and "far-right" probably didn't even exist in 2010; that's how quickly the notion of slang can be perverted into cult mind control. At some point, they locked that guy out of editing his own damn page! I'm not a Jones fan or anything, but can you imagine Wikipedia putting up a Rachel Maddow wiki describing her as a "far-left conspiracy theorist" and telling her she has no choice about leaving that shit up in public while other people are free to edit their own wikis??? Of course not. Anyway, those pejoratives aren't used on the 2010 page. In the 2010 version, even the old "right wing" remark only occurs in the reference titles and not the text.
2004: https://web.archive.org/web/20040415043419/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alex_Jones
2010: https://web.archive.org/web/20100222063204/http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alex_Jones_(radio_host)
2020: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alex_Jones
Yep, the 2009 "Wikireader" is on ebay, brand new in the box for $60 and $70. Just don't buy the $90 one with the 2020 update and you're good... Or just use archive.org while it's still available.
It’s much sadder than that. Probably someone who actual knows history writes an article, and then some other pathetic cuck alters it with misinformation because they’re on their period that day.
I femember looking up hunter biden on wikipedia right when that ukraine story was really gaining steam and it was whitewashed to a whole different level. Said there was no evidence of a scandal when joe is literally on camera talking about his quid pro quo deal. Not that that would prove guilt but it definitely qualifies as evidence. Theres a reason you cant use wikipedia as a credible source
"BINGO!" -Filthy Joe Biden
You ain't black!
Yeaaaa, I watched all the color drain out of my arm the moment I filled in the first republican circle on the ballot. xD
Compromised
If you know people who are up for factual documentation of current events we have a project being worked on to build a new Wikipedia specifically focused on current events.
Not associated with this website although the founder encourages the community to participate. He doesn't have time for forums but he is extremely American in his stance on Technology and creating a counter balance to the News Media, Google and Facebook.
You can check out what they've been building here https://forthecollective.com
They're working around the clock but COVID-19 nearly wiped out the business.
They have a donate page available if you choose to support them that way.
Thedonald.win is homebase for a lot of us.
This platform is geared to hit mainstream and be an organizing place for American Populism (what the founder identifies with).
Their goal is to offer an alternative internet infrastructure to Major Tech companies so that ideas and movements can take form without being suppressed by Facebook and Google.
I'd be interested in helping out.
I already keep an archive of videos and documents for the sake of factual documentation.
https://mega.nz/folder/dBpgmCIS#gYmDlBFqu8Qdvtnl53hs0Q
How about shorten it to Kekepedeia
Infogalactic
https://infogalactic.com/info/Main_Page
Michael Flynn must possess some absolute jaw-dropping knowledge/evidence against the deep state. They are working overtime to keep him buried.
He is the keystone or linchpin or whatever else you want to call it for this whole debacle. Everything leads back to him.
Everything leads back to the White Wizard.
He would have been dead long ago if it was that damaging.
They still call Spygate a conspiracy theory and have the page locked.
As for Obamagate, just yesterday, it took you to a section of this page where they "debunk" anything Trump has said.
But just today moved Obamagate to its very own "conspiracy theory" page.
They are running full steam ahead with misinformation and propaganda.
deleted the line claiming it to be a conspiracy theory
Always has been.
"Now"?
In January, I was sitting with a group of 25 genealogists, whose average age is 70, and the 96 year old gets up to make a little speech. She says, "now remember ladies, Wikipedia is not a reliable source and is inaccurate". She then went on a rant about WW2 inaccuracies. Evidently they have butchered a lot more of our history than I realized. I hope the teachers in this country have a clue. (not hopeful on that)
Teachers? No
Wikipedia the globalist encyclopedia. That’s the problem with having everything digital and on subscription. They can delete or change the content anytime they want
1984 with more power than Orwell ever dreamed of.
Watch en banc hearing Tuesday morning, 9:30 Trump Time
https://www.c-span.org/video/?474473-1/michael-flynn-perjury-dismissal-case-rehearing
Lighting a digital candle so Sullivan's gets humiliated
You are living in The Matrix
They are really going to be pissed when Trump wins re-election.
I kind of disagree. I did a VERY politically controversial Wikipedia edit that they fought and fought against but is now standing the test of time. The key was when I finally grabbed several trusted lefty outlets as sources that said the same as me and then they finally left it alone. Might have all to do with whoever is stalking that particular page though.
Ya, I do get the feeling that perhaps they're letting it slide because the lie has already done its damage and is widespread misinfo.
Like this is news? Wikipedia being a leftoid toilet is as sure a thing as the sun rising in the morning.
Everything I need to know about Wikipedia's leftism I read on the "Woman" entry:
TYPICALLY
Do I sense a wikipedia.win coming soon?
The wikipedeia.
Noice!
Wikipedia editors are a bunch of college Communists who have nothing better to do than peruse Wikipedia altering articles. Like this one was altered after 2016 election to downplay the obvious parallels to Communism. https://archive.is/fENX8
I wish they still did print edition of encyclopedia britannica but yeah any politics related Wikipedia page is astroturfed to hell and back with leftism
Is there a way to view a backup of Wikipedia from 2010 I bet it was ok back then.
There is a project to build an alternative it will take time so if you're looking for something here and now just searching multiple search engines is your best bet.
Source?
Boneheaded move. Sydney Powell will have your 230 immunity revoked.
Wikipedia is controlled by leftist pedos (redundant)
War is peace
Freedom is slavery
Ignorance is strength
That's what I think of Wikipedia.
fReE sPeEcH
To anyone who ever wondered "1984 is fiction. How could history be rewritten so easily?"...
...I bring you Wikipedia.
Obama DOJ? Absolute gospel. The word of God.
Trump DOJ? "Fringe Source". One step above Breitbart. Trump's personal Wehrmacht.
Why? Because if they were fair and used the same rules for both sides - it would show how badly they're losing.
Wikipedia should be politically neutral. Our justice system should be politically neutral. Education should be politically neutral.
I stopped supporting wiki years ago because of their obvious political bias.
You don't even need the FBI notes to know that the interview itself with Flynn was not acceptable. The FBI investigators unethically didn't go through the WH counsel, went directly to Flynn and told him he didn't need a lawyer because the interview was "informal". They have never told him he was personally under investigation, which is illegal for the FBI to do. You don't need the notes to understand it was an entrapment. They made him comfortable, didn't tell him what it was about, and the original interview 302s were deleted from the files. You can't charge him with lying under these conditions.
Also, he didn't lie. He said to the FBI (in that informal non interview) that he didn't remember talking about sanctions. We now know that he didn't say to Kislyac that the new Trump admin. would remove sanctions after the inauguration, but instead simply asked the Russians to not overreact. He wanted to avoid a tit-for-tat situation. Flynn didn't undermine Obama's sanctions. He even said he understood the Obama admin. Because he didn't touch the sanctions, Flynn simply had nothing to hide to the FBI and it is plausible he didn't remember specifically objecting or talking about sanctions.
I am not surprised. They, like Reddit are heavily politicized. By the way, today I was banned from r/Republican for calling the Chicago looters animals. Which shows me that even conservative subs on Reddit have been infiltrated. Added: After I objected, I was then shocked to get a reply from an anonymous Republican mod who called me racist for calling them animals; proof of liberal viewpoint. Truly Reddit has gone into the shitter.
Right over the target
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JeMRxXz5SF4& My write up of the entire case since day 1.
Wiki hides power user activity as well. That place is their circle jerk.
They really hate Flynn for some reason. That's totally fucked up.
libpedia is just another lib media site masquerading as an encyclopedia. you can't put current events into an encyclopedia because all the evidence isn't out yet. but do they do it? yup.
do they go back and fix the many many lib "mistakes" (read: intentionally put spin) on said current event articles? HAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAH
do they allow anybody to fix those "mistakes" at all (fuck no) or do they revert any change and ban anybody who tries?
Wiki was compromised long ago. That's why teachers told students not to use them as sources.
Some teachers prefer facts, not feeeeeeeeeelings.
Join https://infogalactic.com/info/Main_Page. It’s not much now, but we can make it greater! Plus the name is way better.
Wikifraudia
Wikipedia sucks moose balls.
Mr. Flynn, please burn it all down.
We need to have a list of sites that are biased and Anti-Truth along with alternatives.
Not sure what is worse, the older model where a select few paid editors and such at Encyclopedias and such sourced materials before printing. Or the current "everyone can edit" setup that is "helped along" by "a select few" people in real time.
Both versions have their down sides but honestly I think this real time BS just shows how easily manipulated information is.
Like Wikipedia is going to decide the fate of human kind. TF’ is wrong with these tech retards and information?
No one should be using Wikipedia for any sort of information.
Classic liberals don't shut down and remove opposing views. This is the mao/soviet mentality.
editing for clarity, spelling, length of paragraph, they have all kinds of tricks and lies
Kamala Harris page is a stark recent example