you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 8 points 3 months ago (5 children)

yes, wikipedia is community consensus and community consensus once was that iraq had wmd's -- the foia proved otherwise. consensus isn't truth; it's just the most popular opinion at the time.

the foia gives you what the us government tries to hide. it is literally the us government itself being legally forced to share its secrets to the american public because of a law that was passed decades before the us gov't became fully captured by corporate interests and the epstein class.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] -5 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    community consensus once was that iraq had wmd’s

    It really wasn't.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    here's wikipedia's consensus still framing the government's wmd claims as 'assertions' while uncritically repeating them years after the iraqi invasion: https://wayback.qa-archive-it.org/all/20080911173302/http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction

    The foia showed the government had doubts before the invasion -- wikipedia didn't.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    Okay..?

    Just because wiki says that doesn't mean that was the community consensus, millions of people protested that war. In my country it is still the largest protest in history.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago*

    We're not discussing the general public's consensus.

    We're discussing Wikipedia's consensus driven decision process and why it makes Wikipedia an unreliable source.

    Wikipedia said that there was consensus and anyone w eyes and ears knew that was bullshit -- as you've pointed out -- but people still want to use Wikipedia as a source anyways.

  • source
  • parent