Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
acidhead

Biographies Missing on WIKIPEDIA Why?

29 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

acidhead

Here's one example.. Lawrence E. "Larry" King Jr, Alisha Owen or Paul A. Bonacci

Lawrence king's entry on Wiki directs you to Franklin Child Abuse Allegations http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_King yet no Biography! WHAT!!!!

I think it's important to note that allegations of a child sex ring made national news on June 29, 1989 when the front page of the Washington Times bore the headline Homosexual Prostitution Inquiry ensnares VIPs with Reagan, Bush. http://www.wanttoknow.info/890629washingtontimesfranklin

Here's a scanned image of the article:(BEWARE it's very Disturbing) http://www.voxfux.com/features/bush_child_...ingtonTimes.htm

NY TIMES July 29 1990

The rumors about child sex abuse, drug trafficking and other offenses began to circulate in late 1988 shortly after the failure of the Franklin Community Federal Credit Union, which was headed by Lawrence E. King Jr., a former vice chairman of the National Black Republican Council, an affiliate of the Republican Party, who has entertained generously at Republican national conventions. He has been indicted on charges of embezzling money from the credit union, which closed in November 1988, but a Federal magistrate has ruled that he is not mentally competent to stand trial at this time. http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html...754C0A966958260

This is all very, very strange.

Can you list more Biographies Missing from Wikipedia?

Edited by acidhead43
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
War Eagle

wtf happened there, i posted earlier then it all dissapeared?...

anyway as i posted before

I thought Wiki relied on the public for most of the information/facts etc that they have about everything & anything.

Maybe with most peoples personal biographies there maybe some kind of copy right & privacy laws set in place?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
acidhead

Research the names I mentioned then ask yourself why? ..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
War Eagle

Haven't time to go thru it all but hear ya acidhead, ''It goes right to the very top''.

I'll bet my next months pay, the higher you go the deeper & slimier the scum becomes and i'm sure theres more to it all on a scandal/s of this magnitude if ya know wot i mean. lol

Cool topic anyway :tu:

Later.

Edited by REBEL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
*Quinn*

That really is something that it just so happens to be those names. They've gone to great lengths to keep that story a secret. It's unfortunate that most people have absolutely no idea what its about. Learn what it is and you'll quickly realize why the government shouldn't be trusted...and least not blindly.

If you want to know what the Franklin Case is about here is a thread on it: Conspiracy of Silence

It's not some made-up thing like most conspiracies get looked upon as. All you need to do is simply read about the case and how it was handled to realize something very wrong was going on and that people and/or organizations with power have done everything they can to silence this story.

Just as amazing in my opinion is the media's refusal to even cover the story - what a coincidence.

The "Conspiracy of Silence" video is well worth watching if your willing to face the truth about what was going on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
War Eagle
That really is something that it just so happens to be those names. They've gone to great lengths to keep that story a secret. It's unfortunate that most people have absolutely no idea what its about. Learn what it is and you'll quickly realize why the government shouldn't be trusted...and least not blindly.

If you want to know what the Franklin Case is about here is a thread on it: Conspiracy of Silence

It's not some made-up thing like most conspiracies get looked upon as. All you need to do is simply read about the case and how it was handled to realize something very wrong was going on and that people and/or organizations with power have done everything they can to silence this story.

Just as amazing in my opinion is the media's refusal to even cover the story - what a coincidence.

The "Conspiracy of Silence" video is well worth watching if your willing to face the truth about what was going on.

Seen the vid before a few times, i agree it's recommended viewing, still only the tip of a very large iceberg icecap.

As for why the *cough cough* the mainstream ''corporate'' media refused to air it, well it kinda speaks for itself don't it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Montmorency the Dog

Conspiracy of silence?

Results 1 - 10 of about 1,870 for "lawrence e. king". (0.11 seconds)

Is the question why isn't there an entry on the Wiki for Lawrence E. King, apart from this scandal thing? the question there, then, is has someone written an article but it's been removed? Now that would be a conspiracy... but is that what's happened?

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jaylemurph

Because to the bulk of normal people, these folks aren't important enough to warrant a lengthy article, and to the differently sane CTers to whom they are important couldn't write a coherent article that adheres even to Wikipedia's standards of neutrality?

--Jaylemurph

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
*Quinn*
Because to the bulk of normal people, these folks aren't important enough to warrant a lengthy article, and to the differently sane CTers to whom they are important couldn't write a coherent article that adheres even to Wikipedia's standards of neutrality?

--Jaylemurph

What exactly makes someone a "normal" person? Fact is, everybody in America should know the truth about this story. It isn't a conspiracy theory, it's an actual event that took place and has been covered up by the government.

As for why, what you describe as "sane CTers", aren't capable of writing articles I'm equally as lost.

I think the point is that there use to be individual results for the names he listed, and they have apparently been removed. If that's the case, then what you wrote in your response doesn't apply at all.

It amazes me how someone could read/hear about the government covering up their own pedophilia sex ring, and their first response is how most people don't care about these people. They don't care because they don't know about it. They don't know about it because the government has gone to great lengths to keep the story quiet.

Edited by Left Field
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jaylemurph
What exactly makes someone a "normal" person? Fact is, everybody in America should know the truth about this story. It isn't a conspiracy theory, it's an actual event that took place and has been covered up by the government.

As for why, what you describe as "sane CTers", aren't capable of writing articles I'm equally as lost.

I think the point is that there use to be individual results for the names he listed, and they have apparently been removed. If that's the case, then what you wrote in your response doesn't apply at all.

It amazes me how someone could read/hear about the government covering up their own pedophilia sex ring, and their first response is how most people don't care about these people. They don't care because they don't know about it. They don't know about it because the government has gone to great lengths to keep the story quiet.

Do you read many posts in the section? Clearly, I can't point to individuals, but the more vehement the CTer, the less able he often is to express himself cogently.

And it was "/differently/ sane"

--Jaylemurph

Edited by jaylemurph
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
*Quinn*
Do you read many posts in the section? Clearly, I can't point to individuals, but the more vehement the CTer, the less able he often is to express himself cogently.

And it was "/differently/ sane"

--Jaylemurph

I read more in this section than any other most likely. I don't see any difference in the ability of posters in this section to spell or use proper grammar than I do in any other section of the site.

What does "/differently/ sane" mean exactly?

Have you looked much into the Franklin Case? Regardless of how you feel, and what you assume about the poster, it doesn't change the facts that abound regarding the Franklin Case. I would like to think the case itself interest people more than attempting to discredit where the info comes from.

The Franklin Case is about as plain and simple as it gets when it comes to looking at how corrupt the government is. Now that I think about it, I kind of notice it is a "Conspiracy" that not many people are willing to debate the other side of - that it was in actuality a "carefully crafted hoax" as the courts ruled.

People come here wanting to discredit any conspiracy theory that comes along, but once one is thrown in their face that there is no denying it seems they choose to keep their mouth shut rather than confront the issue.

Edited by Left Field
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fluffybunny
What does "/differently/ sane" mean exactly?

I cant speak about this case in particular, but I have seen other articles removed from wiki removed before in other areas. I think it is usually well justified.

How can I put this...in my opinion when the article is written is should be factual and read like an encyclopedia entry with speculations clearly pointed out as speculations and wild accusations that are not even backed up with factual evidence not even making it into the entry; it is an encyclopedia, not the weekly world news. There were a few entries in regards to specific UFO sightings that I read where when I finished them, I thought to myself that it felt like whoever was adding to the entry was less than unbiased and closing in on tabloid reporting; not exactly appropriate for something that is supposed to be an encyclopedia. I think enough people agreed and the entries were changed.

You can argue the point(and it will be argued, trust me) that it is some kind of conspiracy to hide the truth. I guess, but when you read the entries and see the extreme wording and the way it comes across, well, it is something you can make your own decision on...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
*Quinn*

Well, to be honest, my beef isn't so much about whether Wiki is doing something wrong, it has more to do with the Franklin Case being mentioned that drew me to this.

I understand and agree with your comments regarding some of the things on Wiki - I guess its just that I take it for what it is and don't really consider Wiki a reliable source since I know how most of the information comes about getting posted on there.

It just grabbed my attention when I saw that the names he was referring to were all from people involved in the Franklin Case.

If it's really just a matter of writing something coherently and without a bias then I'm almost tempted to write it myself just to see if it stays up there or gets removed for some reason.

Edited by Left Field

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jaylemurph
Well, to be honest, my beef isn't so much about whether Wiki is doing something wrong, it has more to do with the Franklin Case being mentioned that drew me to this.

I understand and agree with your comments regarding some of the things on Wiki - I guess its just that I take it for what it is and don't really consider Wiki a reliable source since I know how most of the information comes about getting posted on there.

It just grabbed my attention when I saw that the names he was referring to were all from people involved in the Franklin Case.

If it's really just a matter of writing something coherently and without a bias then I'm almost tempted to write it myself just to see if it stays up there or gets removed for some reason.

Hey Left --

For what it's worth, I think you should. You strike me as someone who deeply believes what went on but could still write a fairly cogent article on it. And I do think that people should know about it.

--Jaylemurph

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
*Quinn*
Hey Left --

For what it's worth, I think you should. You strike me as someone who deeply believes what went on but could still write a fairly cogent article on it. And I do think that people should know about it.

--Jaylemurph

Thank you. I apprecciate that. I don't have a writing degree or anything, but I've written some articles for websites before and like to think I could do a decent job if I put the time into it.

As for the case, it is something that I unfortunately believe did happen and is/was very real. There are way too any things about the way it was handled that don't make sense and the more you dig, the more you find out about what went on and just how far the government went to cover it up.

It drives me nuts that something as plain as day as what took place in the Franklin Case can get swept under the rug the way it has and people have no response to it, no backlash, nothing. The people who are suppossed to protect and look out for us allow it to happen. Above anything else, the Franklin Case alone is enough to make you start questioning the world around you. It doesn't need to be tied into any Illuminati stuff, or secret society type of thing either. It's right there in the open simply by reading what happened and by watching the Conspiracy of Silence video.

You can't turn on the TV without hearing about Britney Spears or all this other garbage, yet somehow callboys spending nights in the White House isn't worthy of being talked about on the news? Come on, give me a break. Same with Bush having that Jeff Gannon guy at the White House as a reporter - I'd love to know what the truth behind that story is. Once again though, it's a story that gets buried with very little publicity.

It's our own government and most people have no clue about this stuff going on - it just doesn't make sense. It should be one of the most, if not the most, important story that has taken place in America over the last quarter century or so. I just don't get it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
acidhead

here's another name to add to the list: cut and pasted from Wiki - yet no actual name entry. Another redirect.

Craig J Spence

Here is what I know, please feel free to choose however you would like to write about him. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:LoganCale

Craig J. Spence was a former ABC news correspondent who, after becoming a Republican lobbyist, was implicated in the White House ‘Call boys’ scandal. On June 29th 1989, The Washington Times published an article with the heading, "Homosexual prostitution inquiry ensnares VIPs with Reagan, Bush". The article showed three credit card payment receipts made out to Professional Services, Inc. The amount shown were ninety five, one hundred-fifty and six hundred dollars. (The Times obtained Hundreds more of such receipts.)

The Washington Times article said, "The Professional Services, Inc. was reported to be one of the several umbrella companies used by operators supplying male prostitutes as escorts, as is advertised in Washington tabloid newspaper and the telephone Yellow Pages." The article also named many high profile clients as well as several low-level government employees, Craig J. Spence. He was said to be a Washington lobbyist and party-giver who, took friends and prostitutes on late-night tours of the White House. In the midst of the scandal however, Spence was found dead in a Boston Hotel room, authorities ruled his death a suicide . To date, investigators have not disclosed evidence linking any high-level government official to the escort service.

Many of the young prostitutes were said to have been minors from foster homes (Boys Town) in the controversial book "The Franklin Coverup", a book written by former senator John DeCamp.

His investigation into Omaha Franklin Credit-Union lead him to the discovery of an organized pedophile ring in the government that was alledgedly run by Lawrence King and Craig J. Spence. Paul A. Bonacci was one of the abused boys who won his case against Lawrence King. Lawrence King served time in jail but, has since been released.

This gets creepier by the minute!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Montmorency the Dog

How many ABC News correspondents have there been, and how many Republican lobbyists have there been> Do they all have their own pages?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
acidhead

Does anyone know if the public has access to Court Documents?

Can this trial(s) against all the names be reviewed by the general public?

Are all affidavits available for the general public to read? I know the answer is yes, but where to find them?

I read the whole Michael Jackson Case online (exhausting) in 2005. Everything! And Mr. Jackson was acquitted on ALL 10 charges.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_trial_of_Michael_Jackson

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/michaeljackso...605jackson.html

Transcripts:(Warning! Long Read) http://www.thesmokinggun.com/michaeljackso...jgrandjury.html

So, again I ask you, with the Michael Jackson Case set as an example, can the Franklin Case documents be obtained?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
acidhead

Also, where can the general public obtain court documents(affidavits) pertaining to the civil case involving Paul Bonacci vs. Lawrence E. King Jr.?

Bonacci case

Paul A. Bonacci won a default judgment of $800,000 in compensatory damages and $200,000 in punitive damages in a civil action against Lawrence King in which the petition alleged kidnapping, mind control, satanic ritual abuse, and sexual abuse, and alleged various personal injuries, both physical and psychological. The Judge did not rule on these allegations, but merely ruled on the motion for default judgment.

The judgment in U.S. District Court in Omaha, Nebraska, on February 27, 1999 was a default judgment following defendant King's failure to appear to respond to the charges. At the time, King was in prison having been sentenced in June, 1991 to 15 years (3 consecutive 5-year sentences) after conviction in the Franklin Community Federal Credit Union criminal case on charges including conspiracy, embezzlement, and falsifying book entries [8]. Before his release, an appeal of the $1 million judgment against him was filed. In January of 2000, Lawrence King dropped the appeal to the $1 million judgment against him. He was released from prison on April 10, 2001.

In simple English Mr. Bonacci sued Lawrence King for kidnapping, mind control, satanic ritual abuse, and sexual abuse, and alleged various personal injuries, both physical and psychological.

Mr. King did not(repeat) DID NOT show up in court to dispute the allegations so in turn was found guilty.

Yet, Lawrence King jr. never spent one day in jail for these crimes. He went to jail for crimes relating to his business instead.

How fortunate and lucky for Washington.

Again, I'll repeat, where can the AFFIDAVITS from Paul Bonacci be obtained or read?

Edited by acidhead43

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
truthist

What is this thread about, Wikipedia or the Franklin case? The reason why those people's biographies are "missing" from Wikipedia is probably because the only interesting information in the entries would most likely be the same information that is already covered on the Franklin child abuse allegations page. In other words, the people in question are not notable except for their roles in that particular incident. If you think they do warrant their own Wikipedia entries, you can always write them yourself.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
acidhead
What is this thread about, Wikipedia or the Franklin case? The reason why those people's biographies are "missing" from Wikipedia is probably because the only interesting information in the entries would most likely be the same information that is already covered on the Franklin child abuse allegations page. In other words, the people in question are not notable except for their roles in that particular incident. If you think they do warrant their own Wikipedia entries, you can always write them yourself.

Google Lawrence E. King Jr. and then ask yourself why he doesn't have a wikipedia entry?

Does this answer your first question?

Try thinking..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
frenat

Wikipedia is known to sometimes have wrong information simply because anybody can edit articles. And yet somehow you find it odd that some articles are missing and that somehow means the site owners are hiding it? Try thinking a bit yourself. There are many millions of people in the world that could have removed something on Wikipedia. As someone else mentioned, if you think there should be something there, why don't you write it yourself?

Edited by frenat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Montmorency the Dog
Google Lawrence E. King Jr. and then ask yourself why he doesn't have a wikipedia entry?

Does this answer your first question?

Try thinking..

Well, the only references I can find on the Google for Mr. King seem to be in connection with this sex scandal thing... so is Google also trying to suppress information about him? Or perhaps no one had heard of him apart from in connection with this?

jumping to conspiratorial conclusions?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
*Quinn*
Well, the only references I can find on the Google for Mr. King seem to be in connection with this sex scandal thing... so is Google also trying to suppress information about him? Or perhaps no one had heard of him apart from in connection with this?

jumping to conspiratorial conclusions?

Do a video Google search on "Conspiracy of Silence". Watch it and you'll know a good deal about Lawrence King.

He was very well known within the Republican community. I'm sure I could find more info on him if you're really looking for it. If all you want to know though is whether more is known about him other then his involvement in the Franklin Case the answer is yes.

If you read enough about it, you'll learn how it leads all the way up to George Bush Sr. People in political postitions today were involved in this sex ring. Read about George Jr. and Jeff Gannon and ask yourself why a male escort with three gay themed porn sites was allowed to pose as a reporter for 2 years at the White House.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.