Wikipedia is either infected with pedophiles, or progressive apologists, or CIA operatives, or maybe all three... (pizzagate)

submitted ago by FuriousYT

Here is Wikipedia's entry for "Pizzagate": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pizzagate_conspiracy_theory

Note that they immediately claim with confidence that it has been "debunked".

And here is Wikipedia's entry for "Day Care Sex Abuse Hysteria": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Day-care_sex-abuse_hysteria

Note that they also claim these events were no more than hysteria ("satanic panic"), and that the lack of convictions and/or reversals are evidence of no crimes.

But you can take a look into the "Talk" tab of the Wiki page to see that not all Wiki contributors agree with the conclusions. And then there is the fact that the Country Walk Babysitter case actually ended in a conviction that did not get overturned- hardly a case of "hysteria".

It is obvious that Wikipedia's editors are enforcing a narrative, since it does not take much research to find the thorough investigation into pedophilia networks done by David McGowan in 2001: E:\HOME documents\Writing\CURRENT\The Pedophocracy by David McGowan.htm

He address nearly all of the events cited in Wikipedia's page on "Day Care Sex Abuse Hysteria", showing they were not incidents of hysteria but very real and deeply disturbing crimes.

And then there is also the work of Ted Gunderson, former head of the FBI's Los Angeles unit, and who looked specifically at the McMartin Daycare scandal, demonstrating is was not at all a hysterical delusion but yet another sickening crime (and also proving the tunnels under the daycare did in fact exist): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ju_jWWIS_hE

So we have to ask. Wikipedia, or Pedopedia, or Evilpedia? Who are you covering for?

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

Arrvee ago

Theoretically, Wikipedia is not going to publish anything without strong sources. Pizzagate is a no-go for that reason alone.

Realistically, Wikipedia is controlled by the Communist wing of the Democratic Party and its leaders are paid to insert the Party's message into the encyclopedia. If you have strong sources that go against the Party line, you are not allowed to use them or even mention them on the talk page and you will be banned for trying to resist their paid censorship. This is all justified as necessary to reduce the gender gap.

There have been rumors of Wikipedia being controlled by an organized pedophile gang since the early 2000s. Look up "Wikipedos". Erik Moller, Wikipedia's deputy director at one time, was favorable to pedophilia. A few years ago they quietly got rid of three people, one for grooming an underage user and two for protecting the first.

Wikipedia critics:

Wikipedia alternatives:

FuriousYT ago

Wow, very enlightening. So it's and old issue and common knowledge. Thank you.