Wikipedia serves as a propaganda tool for the American deep state and other destructive forces, all while receiving millions of dollars from entities such as Mark Zuckerberg and George Soros. Nupur J. Sharma, the courageous Indian journalist and editor-in-chief of OpIndia, has exposed the dangerous agenda of Wikipedia and how it caters to the political left worldwide. Unsurprisingly, within minutes of its publication, this bombshell report was banned by Zuckerberg’s Meta (formerly Facebook). This aligns with Zuckerberg’s well-documented bias during the 2020 US presidential election and the COVID-19 pandemic, where he openly supported Joe Biden, the Democratic Party, and Western pharmaceutical giants.
According to OpIndia, when its readers attempted to share the link to the report on Facebook, the platform promptly removed the link and warned users against sharing it. This proves that Zuckerberg’s Facebook has effectively banned OpIndia’s investigation into Wikipedia.
Following this unacceptable action by Facebook, one user wrote on the platform: “I posted the link to OpIndia’s investigation of Wikipedia, and immediately got a notification from Facebook saying my post was removed because it broke Facebook guidelines! Big Brother is both sick and dangerous”.
Similarly, reporters from Blitz tried to share OpIndia’s report, but each time they received warnings from Facebook, stating that sharing the report violated the platform’s “community standards”.
Facebook’s “Community Standards” regarding spam read:
“We don’t allow people to use misleading links or content to trick people into visiting or staying on a website. Examples include telling people they must like a page to access content or using irrelevant pop-ups to prevent easy navigation”.
However, OpIndia’s report exposing Wikipedia does not violate any of these “community standards”. Facebook’s actions appear to be unjust and likely motivated by the fact that Mark Zuckerberg is one of Wikipedia’s key patrons and donors. Moreover, Facebook does not apply similar standards when it comes to defamatory content targeting the Republican Party, Donald Trump, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, or other right-leaning individuals and organizations. It also bans posts that support Russia, President Vladimir Putin, or criticize Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and his neo-Nazi allies.
Meta, the parent company of Facebook, also owns WhatsApp, Instagram, and Threads.
OpIndia’s dossier on Wikipedia reveals how the platform is not a free and neutral encyclopedia as claimed. It highlights how Wikipedia’s content is influenced by political agendas, particularly in relation to India. The dossier argues for treating Wikipedia as a publisher, directly liable for the content published on its platform. It also explores the grants Wikimedia Foundation receives, the sources of these grants, and the entities it funds, raising questions about Wikipedia’s operations in India and its funding of various entities to advance its business goals.
A report from April 2023 by the Institute for New Economic Thinking sheds further light on Wikipedia’s operations, challenging its image as a transparent, underfunded public service. The report reveals that Wikipedia is a wealthy NGO with significant financial reserves and strong ties to major tech companies.
The report stated:
There are no polls, but it is a safe guess that the general public thinks of Wikipedia, the ubiquitous online encyclopedia, as one more plucky non-governmental organization in which poorly remunerated, public-spirited scholars and savants struggle to bring enlightenment to an extensively unappreciative world. Feeding this soothing impression are Wikipedia’s online fundraising efforts that highlight its dependence on donations for its continued functioning, its assurance that it is “super transparent with the public”, and occasional threats to run ads to assure Wikipedia’s financial stability. Most users probably also assume that Wikipedia’s content, even if sometimes mistaken or incomplete, is basically harmless, with occasional errors the price of straitened production conditions and limited staff.
The truth, though, is rather more complex. Wikipedia’s use of an objective and authoritative writing style, without commensurate safeguards for quality or disclosure of conflicts, creates an ethical conundrum for both Wikipedia and parent Wikimedia.
Despite frequent protestations to the contrary, Wikimedia – the San Francisco-based parent non-profit of Wikipedia – has enormous financial reserves. There is no immediate need for more funds and its long-term strategy plan, Wikimedia 2030, lacks specificity about how additional money might be spent.
According to its latest financial disclosures, the Wikimedia Foundation has net assets adequate to run its servers for 75 years if it receives no further funds nor interest on its savings. Beyond that, the servers can hum along an additional 63 years from funds in a Wikimedia Endowment held by a partner charity, the Tides Foundation. Put into perspective, Wikimedia servers can function just under nine years from a one-time donation Wikimedia sent to Tides Advocacy in their last financial statement. They have about $1 million in reserves for every employee. Wikipedia is in no danger of going dark in our lifetime.
Despite these massive financial resources, Wikipedia continues to solicit donations, all while allegedly working against individuals, organizations, and nations that oppose the agenda of the American deep state.
Following a series of reports exposing the secrets of Antonio Albina Maino and her son Raul Vinci in Blitz, my profile on Wikipedia was suddenly altered by cyberterrorists, likely working for Maino and Vinci, with the aim of tarnishing my image.
After over two decades, on September 7, 2024, my Wikipedia page was edited to state: “Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury is a Bangladeshi journalist and a convicted felon. He is the editor of the Bangladeshi tabloid Blitz, and has posted disinformation on various occasions”.
This is entirely false. Neither I nor Blitz have ever been accused of spreading disinformation. In 2004, I was falsely charged with sedition, treason, and blasphemy by Bangladesh’s ultra-Islamist coalition government for confronting radical Islam, opposing anti-Semitism, and promoting interfaith harmony. The Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) and Jamaat-e-Islami (JeI) even branded me a “Mossad agent”.
In 2014, the Awami League government, which claims to be secular, forced the Dhaka Metropolitan Session Judge’s Court to wrongly convict me with seven years of rigorous imprisonment. During my imprisonment, I was kept in the Condemned Cell with death-row inmates, a gross violation of human rights.
Wikipedia’s page also falsely claims I faced charges of “smuggling information out of the country”. However, this case, filed in 1999, was dismissed by the court in 2001, which instructed authorities to take action against the officials responsible for filing this baseless case.
Unfortunately, Wikipedia omits any mention of this court ruling. It also removed details of an editorial titled The Risks of Journalism in Bangladesh, published in The New York Times in 2003.
This behavior by Wikipedia and its so-called administrators proves that the platform is an epicenter of lies, disinformation, and fake news, serving the interests of the American deep state and enemies of democracy. Wikipedia is a dangerous entity that should be banned in every country.
Commenting on notorious role of Wikipedia, MA Hossain, a Research Fellow at the Center for Strategic Studies and Research (CSSR) said, “As Wikipedia is one of the most visited websites in the world, its influence on public perception is immense. Instances of bias, misinformation, or manipulation of content for political purposes could have significant impacts. In this case, bringing this platform under regulation is essential and it can help ensure that Wikipedia maintains neutrality and factual accuracy”.
Describing modus-operandi of Wikipedia, Hossain stated, “Currently, Wikipedia operates as a volunteer-driven platform where administrators have significant control over content. However, these administrators are not always accountable, and errors, defamation, or biased content can go unaddressed”.
He added, “Wikipedia pages about individuals can be manipulated, leading to personal or professional harm. Regulations could offer legal remedies for people who are misrepresented, ensuring fair and accurate portrayals, especially in cases where false information can damage reputations”.
Wikipedia, once seen as a open source of free knowledge, has now become a weapon wielded by powerful interests to manipulate public opinion, silence dissent, and distort facts. Its selective censorship, financial ties to tech giants, and blatant political bias make it a dangerous tool in the hands of those who wish to reshape narratives in their favor. In the face of such deception, it is crucial for governments and individuals to recognize the peril Wikipedia poses to truth and democracy. The time has come to hold this platform accountable for its actions and, if necessary, demand its removal from our digital spaces to protect the integrity of information and the rights of individuals worldwide.
*Mama Cara Anotonio*: *I am reading this fellow Shoaib’s Blitz every day to read if has printed anything bad about You & Me. Hail Mary! Looks like Shoaib has exhausted will not print more. Pl pray the Rosary in our Chapel in 10JP every night, Amen!