It would be like trying to hold back the tide. I couldn’t care less about what the liberals have to say about FR. Wikipedia is simply another Marxist attempt to control free speech by not only rewriting history, but by rewriting the present.
Jim, Eschoir is violating the federal injunction. There’s another left-wing editor from Democratic Underground (Ben Burch, who has been ridiculed by PJ-Comix in his “Dummie Funnies” feature) working in concert with him. Burch has been posting personal information of Freepers on Wikipedia where anyone can read it. This is clearly a violation of the federal injunction, but it’s not right there in the Free Republic article, so most Freepers won’t spot it.
For his part, Eschoir has relentlessly removed anything positive about Free Republic from the article, and added anything he can find that’s negative, even if it’s really not relevant.
I think that since Burch is working in concert with him, we could nail Eschoir for violating the injunction. Maybe we could use this as leverage against Wikipedia management to ensure that Freepers can participate in editing the Free Republic article without being banned on flimsy excuses, and get them to ban Eschoir and Ben Burch instead.
"Look me in the eyes," said O'Brien. "What country is Oceania at war with?"
He knew what was meant by Oceania and that he himself was a citizen of Oceania. He also remembered Eurasia and Eastasia; but who was at war with whom he did not know. In fact he had not been aware that there was any war.
"I don't remember."
"Oceania is at war with Eastasia. Do you remember that now?"
"Yes."
"Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia. Since the beginning of your life, since the beginning of the Party, since the beginning of history, the war has continued without a break, always the same war. Do you remember that?"
"Yes."
1984 has long been the first book to which we have turned for a vivid picture of a government that has used war to justify infringement on freedom; that has used speech codes to limit everyone's ability to understand higher concepts or concepts that favour human individuality; that uses powerful media to build unwarranted consensus and rewrite history; and that has used technology to nip political opposition and individualistic or eccentric practices in the bud. Far from being a caricature, it insightfully and skillfully characterizes the tendencies and motivations of unlimited government power, and the horrifying, hopeless result of such government: humanity denied its freedom to think, to be rational, and to dissent...its freedom to be human.
If, after finishing 1984, you find yourself nervous and paranoid, then: good. You have just taken a step closer to respecting the importance of human freedom and dignity, and the dangers in allowing governments to usurp your freedom to dissent or be different. All that remains is to fight to maintain or regain your ownlife (read the book, you'll know what we mean).
http://www.mondopolitico.com/library/1984/1984.htm
Snippets...
One did not know what happened inside the Ministry of Love, but it was possible to guess: tortures, drugs, delicate instruments that registered your nervous reactions, gradual wearing-down by sleeplessness and solitude and persistent questioning. Facts, at any rate, could not be kept hidden. They could be tracked down by enquiry, they could be squeezed out of you by torture. But if the object was not to stay alive but to stay human, what difference did it ultimately make? They could not alter your feelings: for that matter you could not alter them yourself, even if you wanted to. They could lay bare in the utmost detail everything that you had done or said or thought; but the inner heart, whose workings were mysterious even to yourself, remained impregnable.
.
.
.
He thought of the telescreen with its never-sleeping ear. They could spy upon you night and day, but if you kept your head you could still outwit them. With all their cleverness they had never mastered the secret of finding out what another human being was thinking. Perhaps that was less true when you were actually in their hands.
That is too bad. I have contributed to wikipedia on subjects I am familiar with, though I do not want to begin to get into a pissing match with someone on the site.
Perhaps some good, literate FREEPers can go there and adjust the content... :)
I am not so worried about what liberals say about FR, either. But I do think Wikipedia is fast becoming a resource of note for many: a poor man’s Encyclopedia Brittannica, if you will.
I hope responsible people can keep blatant lies out of the hands of those who use it for looking up information.
RD