Including shots of Nico Haupt, Ryan Rodriguez (in a "Haupt Couture" t-shirt), Marguerite Peggy Carter, the webfairy, etc. with their TV Fakery banners.
TruthMove Forum » TruthMove Main Forum
9/11/2008 Photos up on flickr + Wikipedia Issues (9 posts)
-
Posted 16 years ago #
-
This is what the 9/11 TM is becoming, in my eyes:
The sign at GZ was the first I ever heard of Jeff Boss. He's running for senate and president on the "NSA DID 9/11 AND IS TRYING TO KILL ME" platform.
http://www.jeffbossforpresident.org/
http://think3institute.blogspot.com/2008/07/presid...
THE NSA HAS USED A FRONT COMPANY TO BUY THE PANTRY AT THE GALAXY AT 7000 BLVD EAST IN GUTTENBERG. THE OWNERS AND EMPLOYES ARE ALL EMPLOYED BY THE NSA AND USE THE PANTRY TO POISON CIGARETTES AND FOOD.. THE NSA HAS ALSO PUT NSA EMPLOYEES AT BENITOS ITALIAN RESTAURANT AT THE GALAXY LEONADO THE PERSON WHO MAKES THE PIZZA TOLD ME HE WORKS FOR THE NSA AND THAT THEY POISON THE FOOD FOR CERTAIN CLIENTS INCLUDING ME . THEY HAVE ALSO EMPLOYED THE PHARAMACIST AT GALAXY DRUG STORE I HAVE GPS ON MY COMMERCE DEBIT CARD, MY DRIVERS LICENSE, AND MY CLOTHES.
Posted 16 years ago # -
He now has a page on wikipedia so is listed in the "9/11 conspiracy template" as a 9/11 activist to discredit us. Richard Gage's page was quickly deleted, but Boss will remain untouched.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeff_Boss
He is not a 9/11 activist, just a nutcase.
Posted 15 years ago # -
The creator of that page doesn't have a great history of edits on Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Greenguy89
Why don't you raise these issues on the talk page:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Jeff_Boss
You could even suggest it as a page for deletion...
Posted 15 years ago # -
I could, but I've already lost a portion of my life to wikipedia and it's such a sick environment that I've determined it's bad for your health, mentally and physically. It feels often like the heart of the intelligence world, and the sickness of that is unbelievable. So I put out these links with the hope that someone else will do the dirty work . . .
Every now and then I step in and do something just impulsively, or because I can't stand it anymore. For example, they continuously were deleting any mention of Ed Asner on the list that Boss is on, so finally I had to gather the links and post them to prove it and they could no longer delete him. So every now and then a small amount of effort pays off. The same for getting the basic idea on Shayler's page that he is rejected by the vast majority of researchers. If you flood them with links, they generally turn away and leave it alone. You just have to check again every month or so because they randomly delete it all when they think you aren't around.
Posted 15 years ago # -
NPOV = Neocon Point Of View :-(
Posted 15 years ago # -
http://www.wikipedia-watch.org explains why Wikipedia is only useful for trivia
http://www.oilempire.us/forums.html more on why Wikipedia and other "anyone can post anything" forums don't work for controversial topics
Posted 15 years ago # -
Wikipedia is sometimes useful as an annotated search engine.
Prior to its dominance you'd search a subject and at least a few of the top hits would be articles written by single expert authors with names and usually titles, people who know what they are talking about and have a strong point of view (right or wrong) born of experience.
Now you're stuck with wikipedia at the top of most searches, usually followed by a dozen robot-generated bullshit pages from answers.com or yahoo or the like. As though a consensus of nerds who spend all day engaging in edit combat is superior to the views of an actual scholar on the given subject. The results really aren't bad if you want a readable rendering of basic science and tech, say the laws of thermodynamics or how transistors work. But anyone who cites wikipedia directly on any matter of controversy, rather than using it as a set of notes for further research, is an idiot.
Beyond that, I am fairly disgusted at the way it's become a battleground for publishing pretend-authoritative articles on all current events and personages. Wikipedia has absolutely nothing positive to contribute in this regard, it merely confers false legitimacy on the (usually libertarian/neocon) view of whoever wins the edits combat. I hope enough people will wake up to that. From reports (and from looking at edit logs) I see the infighting and hidden hierarchy is as bad and byzantine as any bureaucracy or church to date, except almost no one does it for pay.
But as Mark points out: it's a fantastic resource for finding out the complete cast and plot of every episode of Gilligan's Island. Far superior to imdb in this regard.
Posted 15 years ago # -
A pro-Israel pressure group is orchestrating a secret, long-term campaign to infiltrate the popular online encyclopedia Wikipedia to rewrite Palestinian history, pass off crude propaganda as fact, and take over Wikipedia administrative structures to ensure these changes go either undetected or unchallenged.
Posted 15 years ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.