I don't know how often I’ve mentioned “Whitey on the Moon,” but they just keep complaining about achievements in spaceflight for not being Gibsmedats, so I’m bringing it up again.From the Colonization of the Moon wikipedia article.
View attachment 3983673Colonization of the Moon - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
I'm pretty sure if we encounter aliens and they have any hostile intentions, dumbfuck talk like this will mark us as easily conquered losers.
What these dumb niggers don't realize is that colonialism/imperialism were only wrong because it involved subjugating another group of humans, the mere act of moving to an empty place, is totally fine.From the Colonization of the Moon wikipedia article.
View attachment 3983673Colonization of the Moon - Wikipedia
See, that's the problem. A lot of “colonization” was settlers taking mostly-barren land and establishing fixed settlements. Sometimes the “natives” were there for less time than Europeans, as is the case in a lot of South Africa. The real contention was whites being able to establish territory and not leaving when someone tried to claim it for themselves.
WIKIPEDIA TRANNIES CAN’T KILL MY INNER FRONTIERSMANFrom the Colonization of the Moon wikipedia article.
View attachment 3983673Colonization of the Moon - Wikipedia
Oh Molly, ever the dutiful Janny.
In the rare W for Wikipedia they don't have an article on Alejandro Caraballo troon not-lawyer extraordinaire, which makes sense given her utter irrelevance:
Alejandra Caraballo - Wikipedia
What jumped out at me was Molly changing the link to an interview video from YouTube to Rumble. I assume this is not justified by any specific WP policy and is simply an act of pettiness because Rumble is a less controlled platform.
As soon as registration is open, I expect she'll create an account so she can read her own thread. I very much doubt we'll see her openly posting here though.
You're assuming she hasn't already had one for some time.
She could be any one of us! She could be you, she could be me, she could even be null!
Not assuming but inferring; see my post in her thread:
Honestly Wikipedia isn't depicted in fiction often but maybe I just don't keep up. Glad to see an accurate depiction of Wikipedos.
And here I was thinking that the people saying, “Sex with black men is bestiality” were joking.
I'd love to see a journalist run an article on shit like this. I imagine most normies have no idea how biased wikipedia really is. I'd also love to see a look into theHoly shit, I just looked at the LoTT article. I had noticed before that it was negative, but now Wikipedia has gone full-on partisan attack.
Here's a snapshot from April:
View attachment 3963852
Libs of TikTok - Wikipedia
Not too bad, actually quite factual. Here's one from August:
View attachment 3963858
Libs of TikTok - Wikipedia
Still relatively factual. The account is conservative, it uses derogatory commentary, all true. Some have accused it of promoting harassment, also true. The final sentence uses Wikipedia's favored "pointed out" phrasing to agree with the misinformation/hateful part, but overall it's not too bad and shows both sides.
Here's what it is now:
View attachment 3963882
Far-right (of course), disinformation, promoting harassment against children's hospitals and so on (no context that it's only certain teachers, etc., who are being criticized, because of their own actions and words). False claims and hateful commentary against marginalized groups. Slurs.
And as noted above there is a section on the Colorado shooting, which LoTT had absolutely nothing to do with. The logic is that you must never criticize any of these groups, because someone somewhere might do something violent in response to your criticism.
Will even a normie read this article and seriously believe that it's a neutral source about this topic?
Didn't know she was taking suggestions- hey Molly, do an article on stunning and brave Trans Woman Christine Chandler next, seems like your kind of gal. Very NOTABLE.
