ITNT News – Over at the world’s least trusted yet most popular online encyclopedia things are getting out of hand. None of the editors there are any longer capable of connecting two simple dots.
The topic? ISIS its alleged “new” leader (the same guy who has been dead since 2017).
Currently there are still two different pages at Wikipedia for the exact same person. A page for “Abdullah Qardash” and a page for “Abu Ibrahim al-Hashimi al-Qurashi“. Wikipedia editors are in limbo, while pretending that there is no clear information out there that once and for all untangles the non-mystery.
Last week ITNT News published a report that hardly anyone in the monostream media dares to look at, let alone acknowledge. To prove that “Qardash” and “al-Qurashi” are the exact same person we used alleged “authoritative” sources, also known as “reputable” news agencies.
Arguably, the Dutch newspaper De Telegraaf could be considered the most “reputable” one of all, among International Business Times, CNN and the other establishment press outlets that we cited. De Telegraaf is The Netherlands’ largest newspaper. It was founded in 1893.
We documented how De Telegraaf worked its way to the point where they now claim that the two names are the same person. Just like we have been telling you from the very beginning.
There’s no justifiable reason for Wikipedia editors to make it seem that there’s still confusion about ISIS its latest virtual effigy. Therefore, it can only mean that some people at Wikipedia are frantically trying (trying) to save the fabricated ISIS story line.
It’s completely impossible to not come across ITNT reports, about Qardash/al-Qurashi, when one actually does serious research online.
Instead, Wikipedia editors want you to believe that Qardash and al-Qurashi, who they say are two different persons:
- Were both born in Tal Afar, Iraq
- Both studied in Mosul
- Both were jailed at Camp Bucca by the US military
- Both are Iraqi Turkmen
How more obvious does it has to get, for Wikipedia spin doctors, to finally see that we are talking about one and the same person?
Given that this charade has been going on for so long all the while the details have been staring us all in the face, one can only conclude that Wikipedia is deliberately deceiving the public. No ifs or buts!