0
31

[–] BigMunyBigWomnBigFun 0 points 31 points (+31|-0) ago 

"You're disgusting and horrible if you disagree with the official story."

Thanks Wikipedia. So unbiased.

0
19

[–] 9298706 0 points 19 points (+19|-0) ago 

B-but Snopes said...!!!

0
8

[–] Voatcunt 0 points 8 points (+8|-0) ago  (edited ago)

It's like they enjoy punishing the truth... Wonder if there is a word for that?

Edit: sadognosticism

0
7

[–] PlebeianCuck 0 points 7 points (+7|-0) ago 

When people say snopes I laugh and throw up at the same time.

0
1

[–] RatmanThomas 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

They want to change the name of the article to 'Seth Rich murder conspiracy' is Seths murder a conspiracy? It happened.

0
0

[–] BigMunyBigWomnBigFun 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

It may have been a conspiracy among members of the DNC and a hired assassin. Conspiracy does not equal false.

But yes, the cathedral does use words like conspiracy to discredit people who have veered into wrongthink.

0
20

[–] Goater 0 points 20 points (+20|-0) ago 

Take whatever Wikipedia says about a controversial subject, assume the opposite view and you will generally find yourself a lot closer to the truth than any of the lies they have written.

Same can be said of pretty much all main stream media these days. If they deny it vehemenetly, or actively seek to attack something, rather than just ignoring, it means you are getting closer to the truth.

They can't afford to just ignore it, because they know that without their subtle conditioning of the masses, the truth will break through eventually. So, they are now caught in this downward spiral where they have to perpetuate lies in order to try control the narrative, yet in doing so they only get caught out in more lies and lose more credibility.

I love watching the death throes of this industry, in the hopes that actual journalism will see a revival. If we care enough to pay for free speech platforms, I believe we can convince people to care enough to pay for accurate journalism.

Still gives me a good laugh that I check whats named the Christian Science Monitor (I know it's a offshoot of Christianity) for articles that actually resemble journalism.

Going to have to post to Voatdev to allow copy paste of same comments when original thread has been deleted.

0
1

[–] library_of_stupid 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

about a controversial subject

About any subject really. Wikipedia is a leftist mouthpiece, pure and simple. You will not find anything in there that counters Marxist dogma.

0
1

[–] Goater 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

True, historical subjects re-written without accuracy and subjects which should have no political or social information have started to contain them.

1
1

[–] EloquentOgre 1 points 1 points (+2|-1) ago 

I know - the irony of the Christian Science Monitor being a relatively balanced news source is mildly world shattering.

0
14

[–] LisasDentalPlan 0 points 14 points (+14|-0) ago 

US intelligence concluded...

So they didn't find, they didn't prove, they didn't show, they concluded.

0
2

[–] Nadeshda 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

Yes, We the People would very much appreciate an outline of how they reached their conclusion with sources.

Thanking them in advance.

0
8

[–] SegFault 0 points 8 points (+8|-0) ago 

I see the case is getting the Gamergate treatment on Wikipedia. The discussion page must be brilliant.

0
2

[–] SuperConductiveRabbi 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

No doubt filled with a bunch of self-righteous neckbeards throwing around sentences with 50 esoteric acronyms that somehow mean that what they say stays in the article, and anything they don't like gets removed. It's leftist groupthink meets a bureaucratic system designed to protect the chosen few.

0
2

[–] SegFault 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

It's not designed for that. It just happens that the power users have gotten very good at using it and have established itself as some sort of aristocracy in the community.

Wikipedia used to be far less cancerous

0
6

[–] 1202017 0 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago  (edited ago)

Wikipedia has fallen so far. They've always had a little bit of a leftist slant, but it was also once a place for moderate opinions and lively discussion. It is really sad to see how they have completely embraced the Marxist SJW agenda.

Everywhere one looks in todays modern society, there is rot and decay to be found.

0
1

[–] 9299838 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

It'll be a shame when Wikileaks isnt a typo.

0
1

[–] sbt2160p 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

wiki-what?

0
0

[–] 1202017 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

where did I put my glasses. Oh dear.

0
3

[–] Charlez6 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

That's interesting. I read this last week and was surprised that the family described conspiracies as "disgusting" as quoted in the wiki article, so I checked both of the citations and that word didn't appear in either of them despite being directly quoted. They've since added "sociopaths" and a third citation which does include that word, but still no ""disgusting"".

tldr: Wiki making up direct quotes.

0
2

[–] Mammy 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

One thing I definitely agree with Alex Jones on is there's a war on for your mind.

0
1

[–] justice4kidz 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Wikipedia's pizzagate narrative is equally as nauseating. it is a full out infowar. the deep state is deep and wide, but there are way more of us good people.

load more comments ▼ (3 remaining)