CIA, FBI traced editing Wikipedia entries.

nemesis would you stfu up about islam, muslims, and the poor jews presecuted by them ..that's ALL you ever talk about. Every single post you make you insert something about that topic ..it's really annoying after awhile ..**** try to talk about something else for change SURELY you have other interests besides pushing zionist ideology


thread title: Bioshock is teh awesome

"Nemesis: Bioshock is much more awesome than what the islamo fascists do to the poor downtrodden jews, especially CAIR they just hate the jewbs as do the pinko commie BBC"


I'm at the point where beating you to a pulp with a menorah would be extremely satisfying
 
EA are nazis, i will never forgive them for the liquidation of Westwood Studios and Bullfrog.
 
No surprises here. Hasn't ever occured to anybody that the CIA or FBI might edit popular websites to suit their needs?
 
Stern, be quiet. It's related to the topic and it was found the same way.
 
Nemesis6 said:
Stern, be quiet. It's related to the topic and it was found the same way.
Click to expand...

you mean the racist whore comment? that was made by someone with a UN email address ..so you're either talking about something else or you're completely wrong about the edit in question ..seems you'd be happy with the moniker of "racist whore" not angered by it ...so please exlain how that is worse than the CIA/FBI edits? they edited fact the UN editied someone's personal opinion
 
Apparently Creative Assambly has edited the Rome: Total War article to be less negative once or twice. :O
 
lol,this is kinda funny yet scary




"agent 01 look they wrote the truth about the war"
"agent 02 you are right quick thank god we can just edit the entry,no one will notice Im sure!"
 
and? why do so many of you think the UN is this separate entity that works outside of global influences ...must I remind you that UN stands for United nations ..as in the UN is made up of delegates from all over the world pushing their nation's agenda? for all you know it could have been conservative moron and former US ambassador to the UN John Bolton or a disgruntled former lover or the person who empties the trash bins at night ..I dont see how anyone can like this incident to the UN as a whole ..but regardless once again you got it all wrong about fallaci
 
The same goes for the CIA and the FBI. In all cases, it just indicates that the user has edited the wikipedia with a machine from within the United Nations headquarters in New York, wherever the CIA building is, or wherever FBI building is.

By the way, what did I get wrong about Fallaci?
 
CptStern said:
stern would you stfu up about stories that originate from america ..that's ALL you ever talk about. Every single post you make you insert something about that topic ..it's really annoying after awhile ..**** try to talk about something else for change SURELY you have other interests besides stupid medical, social, and political stories that come from somewhere in the usa


thread title: Bioshock is teh awesome

"Stern: Bioshock is much more awesome than that one thing that happened in america [witty "land of the free" comment here]"


I'm at the point where choking you with an american flag would be extremely satisfying
Click to expand...

.
 
Nemesis6 said:
The same goes for the CIA and the FBI. In all cases, it just indicates that the user has edited the wikipedia with a machine from within the United Nations headquarters in New York, wherever the CIA building is, or wherever FBI building is.
Click to expand...

except you need security clearence to walk into cia/fbi headquarters ..the person who edited didnt edit in "racist whore" they edited out passages from the war in iraq, gitmo and other things ..things that directly affected the institution ..in other words it HAD to be someone higher up ..the guy who empties the garbage cans at night wouldnt care either way about these articles

Nemesis6 said:
By the way, what did I get wrong about Fallaci?
Click to expand...

you posted this:

Possible breach of neutrality, but it certainly beats what the U.N wanted to add about Oriana Fallaci:
Click to expand...

how is calling someone a "racist whore" a "breach of neutrality" ..you said it was worse than the fbi/cia editing passages critical of their respectives institutions ..please explain how "racist whore" is somehow worse



omg Qonfused trolling the politics forum and adding nothing to the discussion as per usual? say it isnt so


I have thousands of posts/threads outside of the politics forum ..does Nemesis? no, apples to oranges my slack jawed friend ..oh and you're welcome to try to choke me, dont blame me if old faithfull finds its way up your arse
 
Which is exactly why I think Wikipedia is a noble, but inherently flawed project.
 
I'm pretty sure there aren't just computers for casual use by anyone within the UN building in New York, so by that standard, the same holds true about the UN; that it had to be someone "higher up".

The breach of neutrality thing was referring to the CIA and FBI editing articles. But what did the FBI edit and what did they remove/add. For example: The IP at the U.N edited the U.N page heavily as you can see for yourself. But I'd like to see exactly what changes the CIA and FBI made for myself. I guess I'll try using this thing for myself, shouldn't be too difficult.
 
Mikael Grizzly said:
Which is exactly why I think Wikipedia is a noble, but inherently flawed project.
Click to expand...

It does have it's flaws, but I believe it's advantages far outweigh the flaws.

wikipedia is my first line of consultation whenever I have a question about anything.

It rarely disappoints.
 
kirovman said:
It rarely disappoints.
Click to expand...

Except when you look up "mating rituals" and the entire page is replaced with

BUTTSECKS!!!111111BUTTSECKS!!!111111BUTTSECKS!!!111111BUTTSECKS!!!111111BUTTSECKS!!!111111BUTTSECKS!!!111111BUTTSECKS!!!111111

Anyway, I could show you a death threat sent from someone at Reuters. I think that would outweigh this in severity, but I think it would be redundant.
 
Nemesis6 said:
Except when you look up "mating rituals" and the entire page is replaced with

BUTTSECKS!!!111111BUTTSECKS!!!111111BUTTSECKS!!!111111BUTTSECKS!!!111111BUTTSECKS!!!111111BUTTSECKS!!!111111BUTTSECKS!!!111111.
Click to expand...
Which is why there is a history feature.
 
The only time I recall seeing something out of place was on the World Cup 2006 entry, it said "JOSH IS GAY LOL" or something.
 
How can anyone use this to attack wikipedia? If anything it only proves that this open project actually works.

Sure, some dumb shit went in there and made bad edits. But what's amazing is those edits were removed or corrected probably within mintues in most cases.
 
Yep. Problem is just that besides just common vandals or people want to screw with a friend or something, there are also people who are committed to the wikipedia, but in a negative way. Check the talk page on the "Muhammed" article. Search for "pictures" or "images". Beside the IPs originating in Pakistan, Malaysia, etc, there are quite a few registered wikipedia users who do the same.
 
Nemesis6 said:
Yep. Problem is just that besides just common vandals or people want to screw with a friend or something, there are also people who are committed to the wikipedia, but in a negative way. Check the talk page on the "Muhammed" article. Search for "pictures" or "images". Beside the IPs originating in Pakistan, Malaysia, etc, there are quite a few registered wikipedia users who do the same.
Click to expand...

The talk page has nothing to do with the actual content. So what's your reason for bringing more zionist bullshit in to this thread?
 
Islam is Zionist now? The talk page was merely indicative of a larger problem: Ever since the Danish cartoons came up, people have been blanking the images on the Muhammed article. A large portion were the common politically motivated vandals -- Non-registered users, but amongst them were regular wikipedia users who engaged in the same thing. The problem got so big that the editors of the article had to lock it, and then appease the extremists by deleting the painting of Muhammed, and replace it with one where he was veiled, and even today this continues. It is indeed an open project, but when it touches on controversial subjects, it's very vulnurable.
 
Nemesis6 said:
Islam is Zionist now? The talk page was merely indicative of a larger problem: Ever since the Danish cartoons came up, people have been blanking the images on the Muhammed article. Those were the common politically motivated vandals, but amongst them were regular wikipedia users who engaged in the same thing. The problem got so big that the editors of the article had to lock it, and then appease the extremists by deleting the painting of Muhammed, and replace it with one where he was veiled, and even today this continues. It is indeed an open project, but when it touches on controversial subjects, it's very vulnurable.
Click to expand...

The page has 2 pictures of him. So I ask again, what the hell was the point of bringing this up? If those pictures are deleted they are added back within minutes. Which is the exact point I made before you brought this in here.
 
I brought this up because we're talking about wikipedia, and as we have found out - How even big, reputable organizations like the U.N and the CIA edit it, as such, when someone mentions that this is the point of it; that everyone can edit it, I felt it was a good idea to point out that there are also regular users who have ulterior motives for doing so. A tiny example to point out what I mean: Having two guys talking on Wikipedia about creating two new catagories - "Articles infiltrated by Zionists" and "Articles infiltrated by Hindutva" is a bit unnerving. Just an observation. I do a lot of observing on Wikipedia articles.
 
I was going to say something in this thread, but to be honest, I have forgotten what it was. No loss, really, nothing is going to change anyone's mind about anything.


also: qonfused'd
 
one day people will not trust information
 
I don't get it. It's the ****ing encyclopedia that anyone can edit. Anyone includes the CIA and the FBI and EA and whatever. It also means you can edit it back.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

CptStern
US Senators caught editing their wikipedia entries
Replies
19
Views
825
baxter
baxter
Back
Top