Wikipedia, Ziopedia or Judeopedia? - Page 4 - Ajarn Forum

esoteric1 · 19th April 2008, 05:33

^ beats the hell out of me.

I want to know where the ACLU is on this? Must be too busy making sure there's no Nativity scenes in schools or other govt property, eh?

Why is the Executive and Legislative branches of my govt spending their time and most likely tax dollars on helping a small extremist sub-set of Judaism propagate their version of that religion?? "Education and Sharing Day" my ass!

I have zero interest in being educated on the 7 Noachide Laws or this odd looking "Rebbe" fellow's (who these Lubavitchers think is/was 'The Messiah') thoughts on 'education and sharing.'

What happened to 'separation of Church and State' in this case?

The double standards that exist here in the US on anything relating to Judaism are amazing!

btw, I probably should have started my own thread I guess.

Guy Mandude · 19th April 2008, 05:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by Larkinny

That's their plan.

though the declaration of independence of Israel claimed that the state was founded as a result of the Holocaust, the formation of the state was in fact the fulfillment of an ancient religious Messianic plan of the Jews to rule the world

I remember an American cartoon called Tiny Toons where two funny characters, Pinky and the Brain, were determined to take over the world. Actually, it was the Brain's plan and Pinky was the stupid sidekick. It was so silly, two mice fumbling around and never succeeding. Wait a sec...! Tiny Toons was a Steven Spielberg production, and we all know what Spielberg is. Oh my stars and whiskers! Larkinny must be right!! Steven Spielberg tipped his (Jewish) hand when he created Pinky and the Brain, alerting Larkinny and others in the know that Jewish people (metaphorically realized by Pinky and the Brain) were setting out to rule the world. I wonder what Wikipedia has to say about "Pinky and the Brain..."

keeshou · 19th April 2008, 07:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by Guy Mandude

I wonder what Wikipedia has to say about "Pinky and the Brain..."

So that must mean that since "Zionism has declared all Jews a distinct ethnicity", that mice are now part of that ethnicity.

Was Mickey a Jew too?

robitusson · 19th April 2008, 10:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by Guy Mandude

Tiny Toons was a Steven Spielberg production, and we all know what Spielberg is. Oh my stars and whiskers! Larkinny must be right!! Steven Spielberg tipped his (Jewish) hand when he created Pinky and the Brain, alerting Larkinny and others in the know that Jewish people (metaphorically realized by Pinky and the Brain) were setting out to rule the world. I wonder what Wikipedia has to say about "Pinky and the Brain..."

Speilberg's movies are Biblical stories too. ET = story of Jesus, Indiana Jones = story of Moses, Private Ryan = shepherd & the lost sheep, etc.

Guy Mandude · 19th April 2008, 14:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by keeshou

So that must mean that since "Zionism has declared all Jews a distinct ethnicity", that mice are now part of that ethnicity.

Was Mickey a Jew too?

You know, Judaism is a religion, not an ethnicity. Therefore, Mickey could be a Jew. Sammy Davis was Jewish. There are Ethiopian Jews. I suppose mice could be Jews. Wasn't there a "Mickey Gets Bar Mitzvahed" cartoon once? I'm sure Bullwinkle was Jewish.

Larkinny · 23rd April 2008, 02:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by keeshou

The point is that they reported the information in a manner that wasn't pro Israeli and you are still accusing Wikipedia of being pro Jewish

1. "Several official US and Israeli investigations maintained the initially published conclusion that the event was a tragic mistake through misidentification."

2. "Both the Israeli and American governments conducted multiple inquiries into the incident, and issued reports concluding that the attack was a tragic mistake, caused by confusion about the identity of the USS Liberty"

Both those statements are blatant lies. Face up to it.

Quote:

You are going to accuse them of something despite the facts that don't bear out your accusation.

The facts are that the above statements are lies.

Quote:

What is your obsession with Jewish people anyway

I have no "obsession with Jewish people". I am opposed to Zionism, because it constitutes a serious threat to everybody in the world, whether through wars or the destruction of civil rights. The single main threat to free speech in the West concerns efforts by Zionists to stop discussion of the many wrongs committed by Israel.

LDMA · 23rd April 2008, 02:34

Well, since Ajarn Forum is run by a jew (me), albeit a scornful bacon scoffing atheist variety, I'm almost starting to believe this crap.

sampdoria · 23rd April 2008, 02:48

Here's an interesting blog written by a (Jewish?) fellow reporting from the middle east.

He used the program I mentioned in another thread to track what entries had been modified on Wikipedia using Israeli government computers.

Quite a few comments, too.

Boonmee · 23rd April 2008, 03:38

Look, Larkinny, I can see I'm going to have to post this again! This came from the same Wikipedia page, and shows no bias; it points out in a very balanced way what the situation was. It even cites the names of prominent people in the US Government who believe that the Israelis deliberately attacked the Liberty.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Boonmee

Quote:
Others claim that the attack was premeditated and deliberate. They note that the Liberty was more than twice as large as the El Quseir, and was clearly designated with Latin rather than Arabic letters. Proponents include the surviving Liberty crewmen, [1] and some former U.S. government officials, including then-CIA director Richard Helms and then-Secretary of State Dean Rusk as well as Admiral Thomas Hinman Moorer, former Chief of Naval Operations and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

It comes from the same page as that which you've cited as being Zionist and biased.

Farangrakthai · 23rd April 2008, 03:52

certainly there are attempts by the "soldiers" of the Zionists to alter Wikipedia in their favor, as Sampdoria pointed out, but in general I'd say that Wikipedia ends up being quite fair, quite amazing really how citizens around the world edit it and the results are certainly a million times bigger and better than those dusty encyclopedias in my parents' basement. Usually there are alot of good facts on any topic thinkable.

and if there is an "official coincidence theory" stated as the generally accepted truth, then a dissenting view is also given.

esoteric1 · 28th April 2008, 23:23

ei: EI exclusive: a pro-Israel group's plan to rewrite history on Wikipedia

Larkinny · 29th April 2008, 00:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by Boonmee

Look, Larkinny, I can see I'm going to have to post this again! This came from the same Wikipedia page, and shows no bias; it points out in a very balanced way what the situation was. It even cites the names of prominent people in the US Government who believe that the Israelis deliberately attacked the Liberty.

It comes from the same page as that which you've cited as being Zionist and biased.

It does show bias, by saying those people claim the attack was premeditated and deliberate. The connotation being like in, well, some claim the moon landing was a hoax.

Further on they use it again, "Critics -- including an active group of survivors from the ship -- assert that five U.S. congressional investigations and four other U.S. investigations were not investigations into the attack at all, but rather reports using evidence only from the U.S. Navy Court of Inquiry, or investigations unrelated to the culpability of the attack but rather discussing issues such as communications. In their view, the U.S. Navy Court of Inquiry is the only investigation on the incident to date. They claim it was hastily conducted ..."

And again: "Some of the survivors claim that this incident stands as the only peacetime attack on a U.S. naval vessel not investigated by Congress, and want a full Congressional hearing. They claim that a proper investigation has never taken place... "

A truly unbiased report would show how Joe Meadors, a survivor, proved this claim is TRUE:

Quote:

The Question:

Patron: General Inquiry:

I was aboard the USS Liberty (AGTR-5) when the ship was attacked on June 8, 1967.

In searching through the Library of Congress website I could find references to Congressional investigations of the attacks on the USS Pueblo, the USS Cole and the USS Stark but none for the Congressional investigation of the attack on the USS Liberty.

Could you tell me why there is no copy of any Congressional investigation of the attack on the USS Liberty in the Library of Congress?

If it has not yet been provided to you, could you contact the appropriate Congressional personnel to ensure the Congressional investigation of the attack on the USS Liberty is provided to the Library of Congress?

Thanks in advance.

Joe Meadors

The full reply:

From: hssref@loc.gov
Date: Jul 25, 2006 12:06 PM
Subject: Library Question - Answer [Question #1727003]
To: joe@ussliberty.com

Dear Patron:

Thank you for your query.

After checking numerous resources, including the "CIS (Congressional Information Service) Indexes to Congressional Hearings (both published and unpublished), and the Public Documents Masterfile, I could find no evidence that the Congress ever held hearings or launched an investigation into the June 8, 1967 incident with the USS Liberty.

...

I hope that this information is helpful.

ECH
Reference Librarian
Main Reading Room
Humanities & Social Sciences Division
Library of Congress
101 Independence Ave., S.E.
Washington, D.C. 20540-4660
(202) 707-3399

This is the crux of the issue, that there has NEVER BEEN a Congressional investigation of the attack.

How the hell can Wikipedia promote itself as an encyclopedia while they make no mention of this fact?

robitusson · 29th April 2008, 11:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by esoteric1

ei: EI exclusive: a pro-Israel group's plan to rewrite history on Wikipedia

Quote:

Originally Posted by electronicintafada

the pro-Israel group CAMERA (Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America)

Ironic name for their group. They remind me of the recent Chinese hissy-fit at the exposure of their violent excesses. "The West is biased, unfair" boo-hoo!! ...and the Israelis deserve no less than the Chinese in these matters, a big, fat

Farangrakthai · 2nd May 2008, 07:19

Quote:

"sockpuppets" and "meatpuppets" - "A meat puppet is described as 'one who edits on behalf of or as proxy for another editor,'"

gotta love the terminology.

Quote: