Wikipedia, an Islamist Hornet’s Nest

Pages: 1 2

There is a place where the State of Israel is incessantly vilified, its leaders maligned, and its policies continuously criticized by Arabs and their third world and Western cohorts. Any attempt to defend Israel is immediately quashed by hordes of Jihadists and like-minded anti-Semites.  Israel’s defenders are subjected to censorship while its most virulent detractors are afforded the podium to blather about this or that “atrocity” committed by Israel in defense of its citizenry. It’s a place where truth gives way to vitriolic, blood curdling Israel bashing.

If you think I’m talking about the United Nations Human Rights Counsel or the General Assembly, you’re wrong. If you think I’m talking about Human Rights Watch or any one of the hundreds of anti-Israel NGOs, wrong again. If you think I’m talking about the back office editorial rooms of the New York Times, CNN or Al Jazeera, try again. The place I’m talking about is Wikipedia, an online, supposedly impartial encyclopedia open to editing from anyone who bothers.

Wikipedia describes itself as a “multilingual, Web-based, free-content encyclopedia project based mostly on anonymous contributions.” It is “written collaboratively by an international (and mostly anonymous) group of volunteers.” Anyone with internet access can write and make changes to Wikipedia articles.

Wikipedia claims 65,000,000 monthly visitors as of 2010 and is rapidly gaining acceptance by university students and media alike.

On its homepage, Wikipedia adds the following: “Anyone is welcome to add information, cross-references, or citations, as long as they do so within Wikipedia’s editing policies and to an appropriate standard. Substandard or disputed information is subject to removal. Users need not worry about accidentally damaging Wikipedia when adding or improving information, as other editors are always around to advise or correct obvious errors, and Wikipedia’s software is carefully designed to allow easy reversal of editorial mistakes.”

This description seemed harmless enough. After all, editing is open to everybody and anybody. If you see something that’s wrong or untrue, make an edit and fix it. If you see something that’s taken out of context, add the necessary content to place it into proper context. So, I taught myself the Wikipedia basics and gave it a go.  Thus began my adventure into Wikipedia and I soon became well acquainted with its Islamofascist dark side.

My edits were tepid at first and naturally centered on Israeli-Arab issues. Nonetheless, they were immediately reverted without explanation. Being new to Wikipedia, I thought I had made a mistake in the uploading process and uploaded the edits once more. Again, the edits were reverted but this time, accompanied by an almost comical explanation – the edits sounded, “too much like an IDF press release.”

Pages: 1 2

  • Foolster41

    This why I avoid wikipedia in most cases. There are a few non-political pages I read, but most of it's so full of blather.

  • Anonymous

    Sounds like someone is biased in the other direction…

    • Hate zionists

      Hey Ari, ever heard of an insane jewish group called JIDF? :D

      You zionist troll.

      • Dan

        You need to adjust your skirt. Your RPG is showing.

  • Torben Snarup Hansen

    This is a challenge. Why not build an alternative? Thousands of concerned citizens all over the world will join in, if people like David Horowitz takes the initiative. Please go ahead!

    • teq

      There already is an pro-Westertern alternative. It's called Conservapedia and it's very fair and balanced with zero jihadi content. But even though it's been around for a few years, not many people even know it exists. We have to advertise it so that more people will consult it and contribute to it. Then it will grow and become competitive with Wiki. And the first step is to inform conservatives of its existence. When looking something up online, don't go to Wiki, go to Conservapedia and then link to the url whenever quoting it. The left has always been much better at self-promotion than the right but we have to catch up.

      • GeorgeRL

        Fair and balanced? Really? It doesn't even maintain that it is, it has a HEAVY Conservative bias.

        I will agree that Wikipedia has some left-leaning bias, but not to any huge extent. Conservapedia is so biased that its a joke resource, and the admins there only care about around 10 articles that they keep locked at all times, and the news page.

        Maybe I would take it more seriously if its most popular articles weren't all locked, written by one person (check out the edit history of, say, evolution), and filled with crap.

        Stick with wikipedia.

        • Funkmaster Chris

          George RL- did you read the article? Go ahead, stick with Wikipedia, and stick to being stuoid.

          • GeorgeRL

            My point is there is nothing correct about the wiki. Wikipedia has its problems, yeah, but Conservapedia just amplifies them in the other direction. All the major articles are written by the admins and are locked under cover, the admin "conservative" has been the sole editor for at least 3 or 4 of their biggest articles.

            Its not even a wiki. Only the select few can edit it.

      • aspacia

        Teq, the conservapedia is as crappy as Wiki.. It reads like an Islam foreknowledge of science before the scientists knew.

      • lovezion

        Thanks so much for the alternative to filthy muslim wikipedia! I'll see to it that all my friends know this. I had never heard about it. Thanks again!

  • tfeeney

    thank you for this article! the islamists have also taken over the Twilight articles. Its insane!!

  • Judy

    I only became aware of this trend over the last few weeks, hate mongers are certainly enjoying the chance to participate with zeal in anti semitism cloaked in anti zionism.

  • Christopher Herman

    Wikipedia is good for some things, or a quick overview. You would want to use it as a starting point, never an ending one. The fact that it is freely edited is both its strength and weakness. If there is a particular subject that one feels Wikipedia has systematic bias about, one can start one's own Wiki about that subject.

  • andres de alamaya

    You hit the nail on the head. But I see a day coming when the meek will become outraged tigers and there will be a huge bloodbath in the free world.

  • sflbib

    Anyone [even a Martian] with a map of the world can look at it and immediately see that such a tiny country as Israel [with no oil], surrounded by large countries comprising a landmass from the Atlantic to the South Pacific [with lots of oil] couldn't possibly be guilty of all the crimes against humanity it is accused of. It's sorta like a neighborhood gang complaining about honest people.

  • GOP_Sucks

    The "REAL PROBLEM" is is that the likes of FPM or any of the nazi- media can't manipulate or intimidate the everyday contributer to Wikipedia like they did to Helen Thomas.
    That makes Wikipedia one of the most trustful and popular sources of information. On a global level, most people that know how to use a computer, log-on, surf the internet, and able to decipher right from wrong understand this. It is the fanatical right wing Jews that are cozying up to the GOP slime dog greedy ones that are a threat to the rest of the Jewish community just as they were pre WW2 in Nazi Germany. They cause a dangerous consensus against everyday Jews by spewing hatred and distrust with their outright lies and distortions. Someday they will tilt the hatred just enough for a future Hitler to come in and to wipe hundreds or millions of innocent Jews for the sake of making a few more powerful and rich!!!

    • aspacia

      So much for objective facts. Ever tried making a valid claim instead fallacious ad hominem attacks.

      Fact is you suck.

    • Grantman

      The meds must be out of date, eh? Better get a refill before you hurt yourself. Oh, and better not drive, either.

    • ajnn

      Classic jew-hatred – "It is the fault of the Jews that Hitler killed so many".

      This person writes, "They cause a dangerous consensus against everyday Jews" and "they will tilt the hatred just enough for a future Hitler to come in and to wipe hundreds or millions of innocent Jews for the sake of making a few more powerful and rich!!! "

  • Lets be honest

    Wikipedia does have a political left wing bias that is not limited to Arab-Israeli issues. Whats worse, and no surprise, is that google and bing promote this garbage. Liberals like to lie (mainly speak in half truths for better deception) and revise history, but that will never change the truth or the facts! 2 + 2 will always = 4. Homosexuality is a sexual perversion not a civil right. Abortion is killing a baby, not a "reproductive health issue"! Etc…

    Liberals and left wing organizations never say what they mean or mean what they say. They are always trying to redefine their poison into something that is palatable.

    • aspacia

      The ancients often were bisexual and men usually preferred emotional relationships with other men because women were seen as inferior. Julius Caesar was known as every man's wife, and every woman's husband. Brilliant military mind. Abortion is a woman's right to control her body.

      BTW: the liberals are trying to rewrite history. There is a Texas lawsuit regarding this issue.

      You language is ammunition for the left to use against conservatives.

      A Deist, Feminist, Goy, Zionist.
      Just so you do not mislabel me as you mislabel others.

      • William_Z

        And Rome and the ancients are gone.

  • Sammy Finkelman

    What happens in Wikipedia is that articles get Articles get "owned" or perhaps "captured" by people. What you can do is write totally new articles about somewhat related subjects and get a number of people involved early so it doesn't get captured by islamists but you own it.

    You might start with some really neutral subjects to build experience. I would start articles that did not mention any keywords likely to attract attention. Once the article was well established then you could mention some other things in it that might turn up in searches.

    So you can't do an article about Deir Yassin. Do an arrticle about the Irgun, about Menachem Begin. the Irgun article may also be somewhat captured. Do an article about the fight between the Irgun and Ben gurion and get it established then link to it from another article

  • Sammy Finkelman

    The problems with the Goldstone report don't stem from anything wrong with the background of Richard Goldstone. It may be somewhat irrelevant. It has been made an issue. Goldstone says he did what was required under the law and admits under a more just system a lot of these people would not have been sentenced to death. that, but mostly from ignoring some questions, such as who started the war, or Hamas war crimes, which were almost ignored – and to the UN, but nobody else – Hamas claimed they were aiming at military targets- , which is not irrelevant, treating some things said to them credibly that shouldn't be, setting up standards of law that are debatable, and non-co-operation. Also the worst adverse inferences (from a not so much moral as legal standpoint) were drawn as to the reasons some places were targeted. Goldstone actually though probably stopped worse things from being said.

    • Sammy Finkelman

      I meant to say, but [the problems with the Goldstone report come from] mostly from ignoring some questions, such as who started the war, or Hamas war crimes, which were almost ignored…etc

  • Sammy Finkelman

    What you said about Deir Yassin isn't quite right. The Arab propaganda isn't right either.

    The village was occupied by Iraqi troops. Arab propaganda tends to ignore and hide who was fighting. People got killed because the Irgun fighters thought every ordinary person had left and they threw grenades into places where they thought soldiers and others were hiding. Charges of a massacre began early and they tended to be echoed by the Israeli government. Menachem Begin once wrote that they first denied it, but when they saw the Arabs were afraid of them, because of this propaganda, and people began fleeing, they started saying it themselves. (It was a military tactic during that war to try to empty villages of their population prior to any assault. )

    The story of a massacre wasn't true. They had not deliberately killed noncombatants. This has little to do with people wearing women's clothing. They threw grenades into places where they didn't see people.

  • shlomo

    Gee I've unwittingly stumbled into a charnel house full of psychopathic supremacist judaics that have lost all touch with the nightmare that they have spawned in apartheid amerika. Let's hope the Goyim sheeple and tax cattle wake up soon and lock these loonies up in an asylum where they belong.

    • JoaoAlfaiate

      I once thought that Holocaust deniers were the only real nut cases when it came to absurd historical revisionism. As you observe many posters here are just as whacky!

    • kafir4life

      And a hearty allahu snackbar to you too!! Where this weekend only, pork rinds are buy one, get one half off. Are you one o' them mad mo the pedophile rapist following cultists? The ones who read the terror guide the koran that was shat from the anal glands of said mad mo? That you, pal(i)?

      • buffman

        Eat pig shyte and die Mohammedan.

  • Auggie

    Wikipedia is pretty much the only show in town, but it doesn't have to be that way. Encyc is an alternative online encyclopedia that is friendly towards Israel.

    Conservapedia is another good choice but I can see how some people might be put off by its stand on various social and scientific issues.

  • rturpin

    As a test of whether Wikipedia is Islamist or Ari Lieberman perhaps is biased with respect to Israel, I decided to take Israel out of the equation, and see what Wikipedia says about Saudi Arabia. Here is its article on human rights there:

    • A visitor

      This what many good falks have erroneously done long before you. Did it occur to you that, once you take out the fact that Hitler and Japan started WWII, the Holoacust of Jews and Roma, the opression of the Church, a very pretty picture emerges: Hitler had full employmentt, build the famous autobans, elimination the recession (which was Great Depression in the U.S.) and inflation…
      By the same logic, if you eliminated the fact that a serial killer murdered people, you also get a pretty picture: he was a devoted son, a respected engineer, etc.
      In your pursuit of logic you make a serious, but coommon, error: one is judged not only by his achievements but also how low he fals. We disregard Hitler's achievements precisely because they are made irrelevant by how low he fell. Of what relevance, then, is the fact that SOME pages on Wikipedia are unbiased?

      Now, go ask your college professors why they never told you about the criteria one applies in pursuit of truth? It's because of good but unaware people like you — people who do nothing — that Islamofascists take over — the Unated Nations, Europe, Wikipedia, and everything else. But don't let it disturb your good night sleep.

  • Rasmus

    Great article!
    I went and read about Goldstone in wikipedia – it is such fun…like reading about Marx in Pravda! Do it for the laugh!
    The skills it must take to get that many compliments and excuses into virtually every sentence! This is moral philosophy at it's very lowest..

  • lovezion

    Enoughh of words!!! Let's DO something for a change? See this:


  • Sadie


    Try to do an independent search of wiki, owner and independent information about same.

  • auntieizlam

    Thanks to the author for verifying something I've known for a long time but no one believed.

    After accessing a few of the contentious articles last year it became very apparent to me that there was a concerted effort by islamists to taint the information.

    The islamists also have well formed groups who monitor and participate in the comment sections of the news sites and target anyone who might be too well informed and a threat to their cause. I experienced them first hand.

    Make no mistake, there are groups of well paid islamists whose job it is to further the cause of the ummah EVERYWHERE on the net and in public.

    Their lies have tainted everything and most people are too naive , gullible or stupid to realize it.

  • Sadie

    "….most people are too naive , gullible or stupid to realize it.".

    You are certainly spot on and a good deal of them are working in Congress, the Senate and national newsprint and media.

  • alexander

    I have found the same thing. Wikipedia talks about the Ottoman "devshirme" (kidnapping of every fifth Christian boy to be raised as a Muslim slave army). Wiki makes it sound as though it were a good thing. Nothing about how Christian families ran for the hills, converted to Islam, or circumcized their boys and gave them muslim names so they could "pass" as muslims and avoid this fate. Only the smartest and strongest boys were taken, parents killed if they resisted.
    The word devshirme, by the way, means "harvest." Shudder…

  • TWalker

    I can appreciate what is happening concerning this issue on Wikipedia. The same thing applies on the issue of creation/evolution. It is another huge battlefield where problems with evolution are suppressed and evidence for creation is censored out.

  • Sammy Finkelman

    There is a Wikipedia WikiProject Israel at

    It is called "a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Israel on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks."

  • auntieizlam

    All the posts that support the author have gone from a few thumbs up a day or so ago to thumbs down or zero now.

    It proves the point about organized groups of islamists roaming the news boards and the net.

    They've succeeded in making the author's point. Thank you.

  • Zvi

    Wonderful. He is right on the Money.
    The new war is the Tech War. Where every thing can go Viral. Where,especially, the younger Generations (and pretty much anyone who uses the internet) considers Wikipedia as the Bible for finding out every thing about anything. It is considered by so many as the last word and "gospel" truth. The fact, as so ably illustrated by the author, that Wikipedia, as useful tool as it is, can be manipulated to destructive ends.

  • W.B.


    There's usually a 2 to 1 (or wider) ratio, when trying to defend the non-Palestinian version.

    The anti-Israel wikipedians act 24 hrs non-stop, well organized and work in team (though one or two are using "sock puppets" when needed), tag-teams, suggesting organizations and financial backing.
    This lobby works mainly in: Edit wars, relentless reverting edits they dislike, pushing to delete any article that is not in their line. Lobbying administrators to back them up. Harassing users "not in line."

  • W.B.

    (Part 3 of Wikipedia bias vis-a-vis Israel)

    The terrorizing mentality by some Islamists in real life does not escape Wikipedia, once an editor makes edit/s "not in line" they are after him/her, harassing, keeping reverting his edits, even when unrelated to Israel.

    Double standard!
    Anti-Israel editors are allowed to edit war as much as they wish, the other side is being harassed under banner of "disruption."
    "Accusation" of someone as a sockpuppet if it's by anti-Israel Islamists its considered in a serious manner, carefully investigated and blocking occurs even without definite evidence, when such an accuation is being presented by the other side it's rejected as an outright "bad faith," and never investigated.

  • http://%URL% Trick Photography Book Review

    Howdy! This blog post couldn’t be written much better! Looking through this article reminds me of my previous roommate! He always kept preaching about this. I most certainly will forward this post to him. Pretty sure he will have a great read. Many thanks for sharing!

  • Margaret thompson

    Revolting It will come to pass where the world will suffer under this form of hatret!

  • Tom

    Kill yourself loser