Is Wikipedia Controlled by the Scum/Filth “Skeptics?” Or is Something Else Going On Here?

Wiki

Opinion by Consumer Advocate Tim Bolen

 There is no question that Wikipedia is not our friend.  It is obviously “SkepticGrand Dragon Home Base.  Sifting though Wikipedia articles on health care is like being forced to listen to convicted pedophiles talk about their “conquests.”

Wikipedia Health articles are THAT horrible.

And, of course,  when we study the “skeptic” leadership,  and management picture, how that horror happens, becomes obvious.

I am a well known Crisis Management Consultant in health care.  One of the tactics I use on behalf of clients is to set up campaigns that include, among other things, litigation.  So, of course, it should be no surprise I am looking at what litigation, and PR campaign, would be necessary to bring Wikipedia down – just simply destroy it.  Get it off the internet.  Why destroy it?  Because they have been asked nicely, time and time again to fix problems – and they answer with nastiness.

Frankly, I think it is time to just shut it down.  Wikipedia has failed.  It is simply a propaganda tool for the unwashed.

Can We Actually Destroy Wikipedia?

Of course we can.  The whole Wikipedia thing is a sleight-of-hand trick, with Jimmy Wales pretending he has done something wonderful with five and ten dollar “contributions” from millions of people.  That’s bullshit…

The real money behind Wikipedia, I think, is the HUGE anonymous “contributions” that Jimmy never mentions.  And, I think, Jimmy is completely controlled by those contributors.

That’s why, I think, the scum/filth “skeptics” have free rein.  Jimmy has been told.  Jimmy obeys.

Who are those “contributors?”  Jimmy is NOT saying.  He simply hides them behind his US Non-Profit (501) tax filing (Form 990) Schedule B.

But, as I just found, I think the New York Times newspaper inadvertently revealed that income source.  Because of that, I think, a lawsuit against Wikipedia, that forced open that Schedule B file, would make it very clear that Wikipedia is NOT what it says it is.

A Non-profit, by US law, is NOT supposed to benefit any one individual.  It is required to be “A corporation or an association that conducts business for the benefit of the general public without shareholders and without a profit motive.

More, “If the income of a corporation inures to the personal benefit of any individual, the corporation is considered to be profit driven.“

So, for instance, if we find that that vast amounts of money are being “contributed?” by Merck, Sanofi-Aventis, Gloxo-Smith-Kline, the US Center for Disease Control (CDC), etc. couldn’t we assume, quite correctly, that Wikipedia was NOT being operated “for the benefit of the public?”  But, was being operated as a “fee for service” company for those that write checks to them?

Yup…

In other words, to me, if we discover what I think we will find in the “contributors” list, we will find that Wikipedia is strictly a PR firm, operating a PsyOps black operation against those that economically compete against Wikipedia’s “contributor’s” interests.  And THAT would change Wikipedia’s TAX STATUS, from Non-Profit, back to FOR PROFIT.  Wikipedia would be forced to pay full income taxes ALL THE WAY BACK  to its start-up.  And, THAT would destroy it.

More, those revelations would, I think, gut the majority  of the “volunteer” base, most of which haven’t, yet, figured out how they are being used.

The “skeptics” of course, would be willing to stay…  Where else would they find a willing platform allowing them to project their personal self-loathing outward?

What Did the New York Times Reveal?

I was sifting through the internet trying to find relationships between Jimmy Wales  and the “skeptics.”  Like maybe they party together, or something?  I DID NOT expect to find what I am about to show you.

Wait until you read this below.  Wow!…

In the New York Times article, titled “Jimmy Wales Is Not an Internet Billionaire” , published June 27, 2013, written by AMY CHOZICK, something VERY IMPORTANT popped up.

It started in paragraph number six.  When I read it, I sat there stunned.

I am going to show you those paragraphs right now.  See if YOU pick it up.  I’ll give you some hints. I bolded the important parts.   Just below, whether you picked up on it or not, I’ll explain.

“London is often described as Britain’s New York, L.A. and Washington all in one — the center for finance, entertainment and politics. But there are conspicuously few traces of Silicon Valley. Wales gladly fills the void. Before he showed me his wedding photos, he talked about his new friend, the British model Lily Cole, who rented office space across the hall. Then he took a call from the Boston Consulting Group, the business-advisory firm, to discuss a speech he would be giving at the World Economic Forum. Wales uses a cheap smartphone made by the Chinese company Huawei that a friend bought him for $85 in Nairobi. The phone, which he often shows to reporters, is the perfect prop to segue to his current obsession of expanding Wikipedia onto mobile devices in the developing world. It is not, however, the perfect phone for participating in an international conference call with the Boston Consulting Group. Several calls were dropped. Wales suggested conducting the meeting over instant messenger, an idea that was rejected.

The Boston Consulting Group?

Now things are getting interesting..

Remember Jake Crosby?  Jake has blog called Autism Investigated.  Jake has written some interesting things about “The Boston Consulting Group (BCG).”

Probably the MOST IMPORTANT  thing, for this reference, is that BCG’s client base is BIG PHARMA.   We’ll come back to that in a second.

But let’s put paragraph six, of the New York Times article, quoted above, into perspective.  Jimmy Wales INTERRUPTED AN INTERVIEW, by the New York Times, probably one of the MOST influential media sources on Planet Earth, to take orders(?) from the Boston Consulting Group on what he, Jimmy Wales, was to say in a speech at the upcoming World Economic Forum…

Did you need me to repeat that, or would you like to just read it once again?

The Real Jimmy Wales Appears…

According to that same New York Times article, Wales started out internet life as a nerd with an interest in internet porn.  She says:

“In 1996, when Wales still wore a shaggy beard, listened to Insane Clown Posse and quoted “This is Spinal Tap” in meetings, he co-founded Bomis, a search engine that came with a “Bomis Babe Report,” a blog with photos of scantily clad celebrities and porn stars. He and Rohan moved to San Diego to get in on the Internet boom. (In 2005, Wales objected on his Wikipedia page to an entry that said Bomis peddled porn. “The mature audience [NOT pornography] portion of the business is significantly less than 10 percent of total revenues,” he told the community.) Porn or not, Bomis’s profits financed Wales’s side project, Nupedia, an online encyclopedia with peer-reviewed entries written by experts and academics that served as the predecessor to Wikipedia.”

It gets better.

“Powerful people like to be around Wales. A common criticism is that Wales likes to be around them, too — and perhaps a little too much. During a visit to Los Angeles in February, Wales tweeted: “Lunch with Felicia. Dinner with Charlize. L.A. is . . . wow,” referring to the actresses Felicia Day and Charlize Theron. He also recently tweeted: “Just got measured for my clothes for Sean Parker’s wedding. This oughta be innerstin’. :-)” But, as I learned at the Clinton Global Initiative, some famous people treat Wales a little bit like their own personal editor.

So, Let’s Look at That Picture…

Here we have a guy who clearly wants to hang out with movie stars and musicians.  How do we know that?  Just look at the number of times Jimmy brought them up in this one NYT interview.  It looks pretty obvious that Jimmy knows that when he doesn’t go along with the establishment he’s going to be back in an IT room, with no windows, staring at porn…

There’s ONE MORE interesting Thing About Jimmy’s Relationship With Boston Consulting Group…

Let’s return to Jake Crosby’s “Autism Investigated” series exposing BCG’s activities.  Jake, in his BCG series, was not talking about Jimmy Wales.  He was talking about Mark Blaxill, the head of the bird-brained Canary Party/Health Choice apparatus.

As many of my readers are aware, I have done my own series on the bird-brains.  They NEVER win any campaigns.   But they have their photos taken a lot.

Jake’s article, titled, “Mark Blaxill Remains Connected To BCG – A Pharma-Tied Consulting Firm,”  explains why, when I first read about BCG’s involvement in Jimmy Wales life, I was stunned.

It was, after all, the Canary Party/Health Choice people that ran the original UNSUCCESSFUL  “No on SB277” campaign at the California legislature.  Blaxill, I am told, funded that effort.  Their mantra was “We know that vaccines are safe and effective (sniff, sniff), but we just want personal choice. (whimper, whimper).”

As Andy Wakefield said about that legislative campaign recently:

So, why, I have to ask, is Mark Blaxill traveling around the country as part of the “Vaxxed” Question and Answer team?

Hmmmmmmmm?

Wikipedia Wants Everyone to Think They are Immune to Lawsuits…

They are not.  On Wikipedia’s page about potential lawsuits it says:

“Wikimedia argues overall, though, that it is protected from liability by the Communications Decency Act (CDA), whose section 230 protects a publisher from liability for things said by other people on its electronic services until it is made aware of the comments. At that point it must take action or risk becoming liable.”

It is time, I think, to push them to the wall and find out.

Stay Tuned…

 Consumer Advocate Tim Bolen

http://bolenreport.com/wikipedia-controlled-scumfilth-skeptics-something-else-going/#more-3409

EXCLUSIVE: Hijacked by pro-vaccine troll Dr. David Gorski, Wikipedia circulates deceitful entry on VAXXED documentary

o-WIKIPEDIA-facebook

Wikipedia seems like a good place to get fast information that’s at least somewhat reliable, right? Wrong. The truth is that Wikipedia is nothing more than a trove of disinformation and propaganda peddled by industry gatekeepers, intent on maintaining their ominous facades while upholding the lucrative empires that largely enslave us all, i.e. the pharmaceutical industry and its costly vaccine market.

Most of you have probably heard about the firestorm caused by Andrew Wakefield’s explosive documentaryVAXXED, which details decades of scientific fraud covering-up the link between vaccines and the injuries they routinely cause.

Well, Natural News has now learned from trusted sources that Wikipedia’s incredibly biased entry on VAXXED was written by none other than pro-vaccine shill, Dr. David Gorski, notorious for his relentless and callous attacks on vaccine skeptics, alternative medicine, and its supporters.

‘Birds of a feather flock together’

Gorski is a surgical oncologist at the Karmanos Cancer Institute, the same facility where cancer fraudster Dr. Farid Fata leased office space to maim and kill cancer-free peoplethrough aggressive chemotherapy and radiation treatments.

Fata, who received a 45 year prison sentence, also undertreated cancer patients, laundered money, and defrauded the government out of $23 million in a scheme labeled the biggest case of health fraud ever to be observed in the U.S.

We suspect Gorski and Fata may have ties that have not yet been uncovered. But we do know that Gorski and his team of skeptics have administrative privileges on Wikipedia and have utilized those controls to attack the natural health field and its supporters.

Our sources say Gorski is using the name “MastCell” to write entries on Wikipedia.

Wikipedia’s health topics have long been hijacked by vaccine sociopaths and paid pharmaceutical shills. Dr. David Gorski is the top disinfo coordinator for Wikipedia, giving him a platform to reflect his internal psychopathy and pathological hatred for all things holistic and natural,” said Natural News’ Adams, author ofFood Forensics, science lab director of CWClabs.com, and creator of Medicine.news.

Wikipedia’s entry on VAXXED preferentially gives the floor to the documentary’s attackers, listing five nasty and discrediting reviews calling the film a “hoax,” while accusing it of relying “on tons of random factoids positioned out of context to drive home his [Wakefield] agenda.”

‘Casual readers’ code for industry henchman

Another VAXXED “review” featured by Wikipedia, Gorski and his team of skeptics, accuses the documentary of putting “the viewer through a well-trod gauntlet of emotional pleas, context-free statistics … and shadowy conspiracies.”

Clearly, Wikipedia’s entry was not written by “tens of thousands of regular editors,” including “casual readers,” as so it claims under its “Overview of editorial structure,” which dishonestly insists it has “mechanisms” for weeding out “bad edits” and “problematic editors.”

If it were truly written by ordinary citizens, we would be willing to bet that a few not-so-biased (and not-so- hateful) reviews would have made their way onto Wikipedia’s VAXXED entry, especially considering the film sold-out 10 shows before theater doors even opened in California.

Los Angeles alone sold out five shows in about 48 hours. The film is so successful that it’s moving on to several other cities including San Diego and Phoenix; it’s also scheduled to air in Louisiana – with more cities and states to be added soon.

Wikipedia’s bashing of VAXXED is yet another attempt by the vaccine industry to censor truthful information it’s so deathly afraid of.

“That Wikipedia still allows deranged people like this to vandalize its web page to destroy independent films only speaks to the total lack of credibility Wikipedia has earned for itself. On topics of health and medicine,Wikipedia isn’t run by volunteers but by angry, anti-science fanatics who are ultimately funded by Big Pharma,” said Adams.

Gorski and his band of internet trolls have clearly taken over Wikipedia and are using it as a weapon to defame anyone and anything that opposes vaccines or calls for safer vaccines.

The most sadistic part about Gorski using Wikipedia to deter people from seeing VAXXED is that he uses the entries to quote himself in a bizarre third party manner. He writes:

“The filmmaker claims that it is a documentary ‘that explores the journeys of parents whose autistic children were plausibly affected by a vaccine,’ however critics consider it propaganda with surgical oncologist David Gorski labeling it a ‘propaganda film by a known scientific fraud.’”

Wakefield is NO fraud by the way. Soon, Natural News will publish a report clarifying in detail how he was framed by the vaccine industry.

So, what is exactly does Gorski have to gain from discrediting the anti-vaxxer movement? Well, we have a few ideas. As Natural News reported Monday, Gorski’s employer, Wayne State University, has a lot to gain from an ALS drug called riluzole that could be used to treat autism, according to Epidemiologist Jake Crosby, adding that Gorski is experimenting with that same drug to treat breast cancer.

In his Wayne State laboratory, Gorski focuses on the research and development of prescription drugs. However, he’s working not to create new medications, but rather new uses for existing drugs, a process far more lucrative than creating new drugs from scratch.

“The potentially profitable drug Gorski is in the process of conducting a clinical trial for is the ALS drug Riluzole…. Amplifying the conflict further is that the same drug is also being studied for the treatment of autism,” wrote Crosby.

http://www.newstarget.com/2016-04-21-exclusive-hijacked-by-pro-vaccine-troll-dr-david-gorski-wikipedia-circulates-deceitful-entry-on-vaxxed-documentary.html

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *