Labels

Wikipedia Bias

Wikipedia blatant pro western bias

True 02/04/24

Wikipedia has an INSANE pro western bias especially against China and Russia.

In this we will go over the blatant bias, lies and sometimes just outright government sponsored propaganda, all from Wikipedia.

• says Russia has an endemic corruption problem on russian economy page and it's source is literally the CIA (I'm not joking)

• on S-500 page it says Ukraine destroyed one yet there's no evidence, in fact there is not even any evidence they have even been deployed let alone destroyed, the only sources they were destroyed are Ukrainian state sponsored ones and the only source it's deployed is from a TWZ article where its only source is Ukrainian spy chief and they literally say in the article that it couldn't be verified as true. lmao, yet sources like TASS and RT aren't allowed due to unreliability, and people can't just blame this on random people because its locked to certain editors.

• russian war crimes in Ukraine use various either pro Ukrainian sources or straight up Ukrainian government affiliated sources like Kyiv Independent, yet when using pro Russia or even neutral like middle east eye they're not allowed because "propaganda" and "these sources are not approved list" so apparently only Russia lies.

• on the NATO Ukraine page it says russian military invaded Ukraine in 2014 and their only sources are Ukrainian and British state media. 

• on Russia tank page they are mocked for using "cOpE cAgeS" yet on loitering Munition page it's talking about Ukraine using them to protect artillery and equipment to great success, so ingenious when Ukraine does it pathetic when Russia does it, they're not even trying to hide their agenda 😂

• On T-90 page it says the protection levels are questionable yet it's only source is oryx which just shows number losses for all Equipment and says it has turret problems and uses the one time during the whole war that a T-90 was spinning and implies it was a problem with all of them or crew inexperience when it was probably just a random malfunction.

• On su57 page it uses to have a single source for the tech details and numbers (anti Russia Polish guy) but ever since he started noting that there is more and more getting delivered, it was at nearly 40, they added “unreliable source” next to it so removed it but funny enough his source is still used numerous times for other things just not numbers. The copium is absolutely hilarious.

• on Yak-50 page it says the Soviet pilots in their Yak-50s dominated competition yet apparently their aircraft were inferior as they mention the "wEsTeRn aIrCrAfT hAd bEtTeR tUrNs" like what is this nonsense statement, 1. there's literally numerous different aircraft, and when you read the source WOW, generalizing speculative nonsense is putting it light. 2. Soviet aircraft are literally famous for their ability to manoeuvre in short spaces. 3. They literally then say "the style of the Yak-50 came back in" so i dont even understand what their point was, although it's likely just copium because they can't just lie but they do what they always do, make nonsense speculation from dubios sources, ie. "Let's get the opinions of one or two soviet pilots who complimented their competitors and twist it into them being surprised with their aircraft because as everyone knows soviet aircraft bad"l

• Adolf Tolkachev page, the soviet traitor who worked for CIA, who sold secrets to of top soviet radar technology like those used in S-300, Su-27, MiG-29 and many BVR missiles at a time when USA was creating new stuff (it is strange that not long after this AIM-120 and Patriot came out) and . Their copium is that he was a fake agent and that he was really a Russian spy trying to steal US technology or paint false images of Soviet military might. Honestly the copium is hilarious and their sources are, you guessed it, a single source, which is a CIA person. Imagine this "American spy was just working for us trying to get the USSR to give up its secrets" confirmed by Russian KGB historians. Yeah, exactly, ridiculous.

• their holodomor page is an absolute joke, they claim that the historical consensus leans towards it being a genocide when even their OWN sources say otherwise, and many of them are just anti soviet books or pro Ukrainian ones, I suggest you watch badempanada video on it, he breaks it down perfectly on jow laughably biased it is. 

https://youtu.be/3kaaYvauNho?si=_wZJjQP-vNt2wWG1 

https://youtu.be/vu5-tqHHtaM?si=guHSE_5zhX2dAng3 

• on Russia intervention in Syria, it says it's just propaganda when talking about how the Syrian government says the armed rebels are terrorists yet doesn't say this when Ukraine calls the Ukrainian rebels terrorists, so when Syria calls it's armed rebels terrorists it's just government propaganda yet when Ukraine does it, it's not questioned and again sources are actually Ukrainian government affiliated organisations, like the anti 'corruption' agency 😂

• On the Russian armed forces page almost 3 or 4th paragraph it starts talking about russian military failures in Afghanistan and Chechnya, also mentioning Ukraine, strange for three reasons and hypocrisy for one, it's strange because 1. Afghanistan was a massive victory for USSR 2. Chechnya was defeated in the first war 3. Ukraine war is still ongoing and Russia is doing very well considering how much Military aid Ukraine has received and for hypocrisy it doesn't say any of this on US page in fact the opposite it falsely claims that the USA is one of the most powerful despite massive failures in Vietnam regardless of USA spending 10x more than China or USSR did for PAVN or abysmal performance in Grenada or the fact that it's always had help in most fights. I mean it literally just cherry picked conflicts, could have easily just picked Georgia, Dagestan or the second Chechen war but they don't, they don't even use half and half.

• the Ukraine war is some of the worst propaganda, pro Ukrainian sources are readily accepted, pro russia ones are deemed biassed and "propaganda" or the sources get flagged for being uNreLiAblE yet Kiev post, Kiev independent, god dam twitter and fucking United24 (the propaganda arm of Ukraine governmen) are acceptable sources, I got banned from my 3rd account for bringing this up in talk pages. the russian side for why the war started and even any anti Russia and Ukraine opinions are dismissed as pro Russia, anything other than pro Ukraine is seen as pro Russia even anti war like saying Ukraine should compromise, they say "you can't appease Hitler" the level of brainwashed, that these people are is very scary.

• falsely claims that Iraq, during gulf war had sophisticated air defence capabilities and that Baghdad was one of the most heavily guarded cities on earth when in reality it's air force was mostly 2nd and 3rd gen fighters and it's SAM Launchers were mostly 1st and 2nd Gen very short range with a few hundred medium range, with a few thousand Manpads they didn't even have a long range system at a time when soviet S-200, S-300 and Krug was widely available

• says Donetsk and Luhansk People's Republic is an "internationally unrecognised country" when a few countries recognise them yet doesn't say this about Kosovo or Taiwan.

• comparing Russia Chechnya war to USA in Iraq war and soviet Afghanistan war to USA in Vietnam since they have roughly similar timescales and times, not even of a few paragraphs in the Afghan War it starts talking about how barbaric the Soviets were and how little they cared when on American page about Vietnam they don't even mention such things until way later and that's after the excuses of "how bad the NVA was" or "how the evil Soviets just wanted a satellite state" basically just US state department propaganda, despite the fact that the US killed at low estimates 4x the amount the Soviets did (and people are still dying to THIS DAY in Vietnam and Laos because of unexploded mines) and killed 1.5 the high estimates. Then compare Russia Chechnya page, literally again a few paragraphs in talks about Russia brutality showing countless pictures and goes on for many paragraphs, Iraq war just has paragraph. 

• comparison of Waco to beslan school siege, this is another laughable one, the beslan school siege goes through it's condemnations of Russia with giving numerous paragraphs explaining how Russia just didn't care and was reckless with human life and used excessive force, compare this to the Waco page where it's not until the end where it spends most of the controversy talking about how the FBI and ATF were likely justified because they thought they were all nutcases who were willing to die and of course denying they took the first shot, few paragraphs are given to rebut this nonsense and nothing is said about the excessive use of force like bringing military helicopters, IFVs, tanks and assault squads to what's basically just an armed gang

• China prison organ harvesting of Falun gong, this one is absolutely hilarious, literally all their primary sources are from anti communist groups and pro Falun gong who are an anti China religious fanatic group were they accuse China of harvesting prisoners organs of course no real evidence just dubious sources from said groups and "interviews" with random Chinese people

• claiming China is commiting genocide against Xinjiang, not a single humanitarian agency, UN or the ICJ has found any hard evidence of genocide yet again on Wikipedia they make this nonsense claim again using sources like BBC, Vice and suprise suprise US government,. It's funny how the term "cultural" genocide is now being used, likely a new tactic by the European and American intelligence agencies because they know there's no evidence.

Need to go on a tangent here but Xinjiang is perhaps the most egregious amount of blatant propaganda I've seen in a while. Now let's go back to the 90s, certain groups were beginning to emerge, one being Al-Qaeda, why did they attack America ? Because they despised what they had done to Iraq in gulf war (killing low thousands to most 100-200k) and their ever supporting of Israel and it's systemic oppression and slow genocide of Palestinians, yet when they commited the 9/11 attacks did anybody defend them saying "they just want justice for Palestine and USA to stop killing Muslims" no it was just article after article saying how we must begin the war on terror.

What happens when China wants to deal with its terrorism problems that have killed 500-3,000 people and injured over 1,000-5,000 in the past decades ? Oh that's right let's use Wikipedia terrorism in china article, where they claim that terrorism is greatly exaggerated by CCP as an excuse to attack and imprison minorities (despite the fact you can literally look up the attacks although some are now un-ironically saying video footage is fake) and say that China views Muslims as inferior despite being very close to Pakistan and Syria one of the largest Muslim countries and having plenty of Muslims in China and again look at it the vast majority of the article is just at worst defending the terrorists blaming China and at best saying it's china fault overall, can you imagine that on the 9/11 page ? I can't because I tried to make such an edit but unfortunately for some reason they are all locked to certain editors 🤔

(You notice that A LOT with Wikipedia)

But yeah honestly just read the page "terrorism in china" I'm not joking when I tell you that ¾ of it is just 

• making excuses for terrorism
• saying China is lying
• china is funding such groups as an excuse to purge uyghurs
• using proven anti china sources like new York times and US state department or Falun gong
• saying China is making the problem worse to push oppressive laws

The worst thing as well as ALL the sources are proven anti china sources like CNN, BBC, Falun Gong etc. It wouldn't bother me but it's the hypocrisy, these ramblings would be classified as conspiracy theories on the 9/11 page also When the USA war on terror page just has TWO paragraphs at the end titled criticism 🤣🤣🤣 war on terror killed millions indirectly overall and killed 640,000-1,200,000+ directly and displaced tens of millions as direct result of US actions yet China, when they've only killed around than 20,000-40,000 in a decade AT MOST and this is from death sentences from mostly drug traffickers and traitors and only arrested a few tens of thousands to few hundreds of thousands tops, yet china is the devil incarnate lmao 😂

In simple terms, idea that the USA government had any knowledge of such terrorist attacks against it are called "conspiracy theories" yet on the china page they don't call them this despite the fact that they have same amount of evidence, that being none

Other laughable anti china crap is stuff like saying China is aggressive and too militarstic meanwhile the USA with its near trillion dollar military budget and numerous ships and hundreds of military bases beyond its borders (at a FAR higher ratio of equipment/budget per person) whilst having a proven track record of invading, bombing and killing sovereign countries and innocent people, over 8,000 innocent people this decade alone just by KNOWN drone strikes, including nearly 200 children.

And you know what these opinions would be okay but two problems

1. It's supposed to be an objective unbiased site, clearly it's not.

2. Why are they not saying same things about USA, France or Israel who have all done and continue to do worse, they unironically say that the USA "is concerned about sending captured ugyhur terrorists back to China for humans rights issues" whilst they held him in Guantanamo Bay, literally a camp build specially outside the USA, so the USA could torture prisoners legally lol, it's just sad how many people fall for this rubbish.

If you can't see this BLATANT bias then you are delusional or agree with these biases. I mean I literally got SUSPENDED simply for saying the TRUTH that china had the world's largest fleet of warships and that the USA shouldn't be called largest or most powerful because one is false and the other is just baseless opinion.

Instead they changed it to USA is the largest navy by tonnage (except it's not China has more surface warship tonnage USA just has more overall) and on talking page they used arguments that carriers, tonnage and sOpHisTiCaTeD tEchNolOgy are what matter lmao 🤣 honestly, it's sad the amount of propaganda is ridiculous. Reddit, Wikipedia, Discord are all infested with pro western bots and shills who will say China is oppressing Xinjiang yet openly support Israel whilst they kill more people in a month than China has in a decade. I've been banned from Reddit, Wikipedia and tube just for saying the truth about Iraq, Palestine, Vietnam etc.

• read articles about USA CNN presenters and Russia and China presenters, Russia and Chinese presenters and channels are either outright called Propagandists or have many criticisms whilst pages for CNN and such have very little despite knowingly pushed propaganda such as Iraq war propaganda, anti Gaddafi propaganda and the most recent and the worst offender IMO, pro Israeli propaganda.

• another good one, read articles about T-80 and T-90 Vs Leopard 2 and M1 Abrams, the Russian tanks history mostly talks about them getting destroyed or the issues they've had, the western tanks talk about how great they've performed and the sections where they got destroyed in Ukraine are literally less than a handful of small paragraphs, basically it's just pure cherry picking at its core, and even if you try to add new information about war in Ukraine, like when I tried to add that a T-72 destroyed a Leopard 2A6 and M1A1SA Abrams with evidence, it just gets removed.

• The destroyed Russian tanks in Ukraine have paragraphs of information. The destroyed Abrams, 1 tiny paragraph lol.

• another good one is how they try to dispute every russian claim as though it's fake, example being when Rostec head spoke about T-14s stealth capabilities to reduce heat (a feature common in 4th Gen tanks), they add a whole tangent about how "western expert military analysts think this is false" despite the fact there's videos of thermals of the T-14 clearly showing that it does do this. 

• or another great bit propaganda is how they make the baseless claim that the Strela-2 is a copy of the red eye despite the fact it's made with a completely different system and again it's source is literally the CIA 

• blatantly false information on AMX-30 page like this "This disposition gave the French commander greater autonomy, and also lessened the likelihood of encountering Iraqi T-72s, which were superior both to the AMX-10RCs and the AMX-30B2s" Iraqi T-72M was a downgraded export variant, they had no computer fire control systems, modern reactive armour or composite armour and only Gen 0 night vision whilst AMX-30B2 and 10RC both have such control systems and B2 had some reactive armour with 3rd gen night vision. This is likely a psyop to further the myth that Iraq was a near peer opponent for the USA when in reality Iraqi military was obsolete 

• the 2019 balakot air strike page and 2019 Jammu and Kashmir airstrikes page are locked to mods only, likely because they lie and say "there was no evidence F-16 shot down and has been debunked" lol and their sources are literally the Times, Foreign Policy (if you understand politics you'd know it's like sourcing TASS if Russia said they destroyed an F-22 with a MiG-29, they're just pro USA to the max) and the other is the wire, an anti hindu publication. Likely just copium because they can't handle the fact that their weapons are not magical game changers,

*On 27 February 2019, following six Pakistan Air Force airstrikes in Jammu and Kashmir, India, Pakistani officials said that two of its fighter jets shot down one MiG-21 and one Su-30MKI belonging to the Indian Air Force. Indian officials only confirmed the loss of one MiG-21 but denied losing any Su-30MKI in the clash and claimed the Pakistani claims as dubious. Additionally Indian officials also claimed to have shot down one F-16 belonging to the Pakistan Air Force. This was denied by the Pakistani side, considered dubious by neutral sources, and later backed by a report by Foreign Policy magazine, reporting that the US had completed a physical count of Pakistan's F-16s and found none missing. A report by The Washington Post noted that the Pentagon and State Department refused public comment on the matter but did not deny the earlier report* the fact they say "neutral observers" when it's western magazines and organisations and there so conclusive report is just the USA, imagine this being the opposite. 

India shot down an Su-27, Russian, Chinese, Iranian and Hungarian magazines expressed doubts over this and the Russian political organisation confirms it was false because Russia said so. This would be mocked as pure bullshit. So when Russia and pro Russia sources say it's nonsense the flanker got shot down it's cope but when USA and west does it it's not. How does anyone with an 'IQ' above 30 believe this nonsense? 

the Kulak page and I was stunned by the absolute bias in the sources credited.

There are 29 sources, however a few are credited a few times. This means they are referenced a total of 38 times:

14 are credited to Robert Conquest. A massively anti-communist historian whose work was criticised at the time and whose work continues to be widely criticised even by a number of mainstream, anti-Stalin academics.

2 are credited to the anti-Semitic, fascist sympathiser Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn. His own wife denounced his work and claimed that he never meant for it to be taken seriously either. This is also the man to who the claim " Stalin ordered for kulaks "to be liquidated as a class,"[26] and this was the cause of the Soviet famine of 1932–1933. [27] " is credited to. A clearly blatant lie.

1 is credited to Orlando Figes. Another anticommunist who got sued a few years back as he created fake accounts on Amazon to trash the works of other Russian historians. He also wrote praiseworthy reviews of his own work.

2 are credited to Mikhail Gorbachev. Is he a historian? Why not actually bring in some more respected sources than this man who would clearly have good reasons to lie about a state he helped dissolve.

2 to Robert Service. Another anticommunist historian whose books have been ridiculed for their numerous inaccuracies.

The only good source is a SINGLE one from Krushchev. but again just opinion. 

And as for the the others, though I'm unfamiliar with most of them, a quick google search reveals the sort of sensationalist rubbish the author of a few of the sources has written " The war against the peasantry, 1927-1930 : the tragedy of the Soviet countryside". As well as another historian, Richard Pipes, of which this was written about him "Pipes' critics argued that his historical writings perpetuated the Soviet Union as "evil empire" narrative in an attempt "to put the clock back a few decades to the times when Cold War demonology was the norm. “

In conclusion Wikipedia is an incredibly helpful tool for most things science and stats but is about as reliable as twitter or conservatipedia when about politics, sociology or history, and it's not surprising since it can literally just be edited by anyone and many articles are locked and gatekeeped by a select few who have a very clear and definite liberal bias. I don't mean liberal as in they think trans people are human or being against guns, I mean liberal as in they condem countries like Russia, china, Iran, Syria and north Korea yet support united states, Britain and Israel whilst they have committed and supported genocide all across the world support and continue the neo colonisation of the under developed world. As I like to say these scumbags will say gay rights are human rights yet cheer when countries like Russia, Iran or Syria are bombed, as I say it's not morals with these people, it's politics.



Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular Posts