Opinion by Consumer Advocate
September 24th, 2009
19th, 2009 the American
Association of Anti-Aging Medicine (A4M) filed suit in a New York State
Supreme Court against the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., (solely as a nominal
Defendant) and John or Jane Does 1-10. The Complaint Number is
This is a
very important case to the anyone involved in health care anywhere in the
world.. Why? Because Wikipedia articles about health care have
turned Wikipedia into a
propaganda machine -
with the full knowledge, and cooperation, of the management of both the
Wikipedia Project, and the Wikimedia Foundation. Wikipedia is the
fourth ranked website on Planet Earth.
abuse is so obvious, and so extensive, I strongly suspect that the Wikimedia
Foundation's claims of "funding by donations" is an outright lie.
I believe that a good case can be made that some, if not all, of Wikimedia's
so-called "Anonymous Contributions" (the majority of
contributions) are, in fact, "Fee for Service Contracts" in disguise,
initiated by those controlling and paying for the writing of the articles.
In short, I
believe that Wikipedia is a fraud. Because Wikipedia ranks so high in
"hits," links from Wikipedia to a scurrilous website give that site first
page positioning on search engines. So, the "Fee for Service"
people get a double benefit: (a) They control health care
articles on the fourth ranked website in the world, and (b) they get
top search engine positioning for the rest of their propaganda.
"Propagandists use a variety of propaganda
techniques to influence opinions
and to avoid the truth. Often these techniques rely on some element of
censorship or manipulation, either omitting significant information or
favorite tactic used by the Wikipedia conspirators is
"Name Calling".. SourceWatch.org
defines it as:
"Name-calling is a form of ad
hominem attack that draws a
vague equivalence between a concept and a person, group or idea. By linking
the person or idea being attacked to a negative symbol, the propagandist
hopes that the audience will reject the person or the idea on the basis of
the symbol, instead of looking at the available evidence." It is
similar to "Demonizing the Opposition."
Floyd J. McKay of CommonDreams.org
says in his article
America's Psychological Warriors:"
"At its root, propaganda plays on emotions, often defying reason and facts
in order to reach into the psyche of the audience. Propaganda is a mind game
— the skillful propagandist plays with your deepest emotions, exploiting
your greatest fears and prejudices."
"Successful propaganda uses elementary tools such as labeling and
fear-mongering and repeats a simple message over and over, until it is
drilled into the heads of the audience. Once embedded, it often remains long
after evidence has discredited it — witness the fact that millions of
Americans still believe that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, that
Saddam Hussein and al-Qaida were connected, and an Iraqi was among the 9/11
A good write-up on the subject can be found at
The A4M v
Wikimedia complaint says...
defamation action rises out of an ongoing campaign by anonymous editors on
the website (http://www.en.wikipedia.org),
a free encyclopedia on the internet available to the public, to disparage
A4M and its two founders, Dr. Goldman and Dr. Klatz, by posting false and
defamatory information about the medical credentials of Dr. Goldman and Dr.
Klatz, A4M's scientific qualifications, and the research findings in the
field of anti-aging medicine by A4m's founders and members."
A4M v Wikimedia
complaint also says...
"Upon information and belief, Defendants John or Jane Does 1 through 10
("Defendants)" are anonymous editors of the A4M website entry on Wikipedia,
located at (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Academy_of_Anti-Aging_Medicine),
attached to in its entirety as Exhibit A, who have posted false and damaging
information, as alleged herein, about Plaintiffs on the web page cited
above. The true identities of the Defendants are currently unknown to
Plaintiffs, but plaintiffs believe that information obtained in discovery
will lead to the identification of each anonymous Defendants' true name and
So, what happened
to A4M on Wikipedia...
21st, 2006 a Wikipedia Editor named
Benbest created the first article about A4M. It was warm,
friendly, and accurate. The article stayed that way until late 2007.
You can read the original article by clicking
On October 17th, 2008 the assault
on A4M began with an edit by an unknown person using the hidden ID
126.96.36.199 adding a misrepresentative sentence
A4M is not recognized by the American Board of Medical Specialties, which
currently recognizes 130 medical specialties in the US, but has tried to
there the editing war began between those wanting an honest article and
those who wanted A4M presented in the worst possible light.
For the most
part, those that sought to deride A4M did so from a hidden identity.
And, when supporters of A4M went into the article to set the record straight
one of the A4M detractors (Keepcalmandcarryon)
called on the usual trick of
getting those people that disagreed with him/her banned permanently from
Wikipedia. At that point the article became a simple "hit piece"
against A4M, reading like something on the crackpot quackwatch website.
After the lawsuit was filed,
suddenly, a new editor appeared named
TimVickers. Vickers is actually not an editor, but a Wikipedia
administrator with direct ties to Wikimedia management.. I suspect he
was brought in to solidify Wikipedia's legal position. He has kept the
"hit piece" article the same.
If you want to see a history of
the Wikipedia A4M article editing wars click
here. If you know what to look for you'll find some of the
regulars sliming through the pages...
This is the case to watch.
Tim Bolen -