or joogle LIES?






While 18,600 web sites address the FACT that Dylan Klebold, the mass killer in Columbine, Colorado, was a jew, not a SINGLE “news media” article ever even mentions that FACT.  When searching Google for “who’s a jew” to determine if any “news” source even KNOWS how to discover whether or not a person is a jew, the following RACIST HATE SCREED popped up from Google:


An explanation of our search results.

If you recently used Google to search for the word "Jew," you may have seen results that were very disturbing. We assure you that the views expressed by the sites in your results are not in any way endorsed by Google. We'd like to explain why you're seeing these results when you conduct this search.

A site's ranking in Google's search results relies heavily on computer algorithms using thousands of factors to calculate a page's relevance to a given query. Sometimes subtleties of language cause anomalies to appear that cannot be predicted. A search for "Jew" brings up one such unexpected result.

If you use Google to search for "Judaism," "Jewish" or "Jewish people," the results are informative and relevant. So why is a search for "Jew" different? One reason is that the word "Jew" is often used in an anti-Semitic context. Jewish organizations are more likely to use the word "Jewish" when talking about members of their faith. The word has become somewhat charged linguistically, as noted on websites devoted to Jewish topics such as these:

·         http://shakti.trincoll.edu/~mendele/vol01/vol01.174

·         http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/jonah081500.asp

Someone searching for information on Jewish people would be more likely to enter terms like "Judaism," "Jewish people," or "Jews" than the single word "Jew." In fact, prior to this incident, the word "Jew" only appeared about once in every 10 million search queries. Now it's likely that the great majority of searches on Google for "Jew" are by people who have heard about this issue and want to see the results for themselves.

The beliefs and preferences of those who work at Google, as well as the opinions of the general public, do not determine or impact our search results. Individual citizens and public interest groups do periodically urge us to remove particular links or otherwise adjust search results. Although Google reserves the right to address such requests individually, Google views the comprehensiveness of our search results as an extremely important priority. Accordingly, we do not remove a page from our search results simply because its content is unpopular or because we receive complaints concerning it. We will, however, remove pages from our results if we believe the page (or its site) violates our Webmaster Guidelines, if we believe we are required to do so by law, or at the request of the webmaster who is responsible for the page.

We apologize for the upsetting nature of the experience you had using Google and appreciate your taking the time to inform us about it.

The Google Team

p.s. You may be interested in some additional information the Anti-Defamation League has posted about this issue at http://www.adl.org/rumors/google_search_rumors.asp. In addition, we call your attention to Google's search results on this topic.


If you’re as offended as you SHOULD be by this RACIST HATE SCREED, read on.  The fact that the ADL, the most RACIST, certifiably terroristic, ANTI-Christ organization in this nation *endorses* Google for this RACIST HATE SCREED by itself should make any normal person suspicion.  But there’s more, MUCH more.  One of the web sites included in the above condemnation of our FOUNDING FATHERS’S BASIC PRINCIPLES, free speech, is the following ACCURATE list of famous [or infamous as the case may be] jews, simply a LIST with no commentary whatsoever:




Why should posting the SIMPLE PLAIN TRUTH about jewish influence in OUR putative Christian nation with no commentary at ALL strike a nerve at Google?


Google LIED when they wrote “we do not remove a page from our search results simply because its content is unpopular or because we receive complaints concerning it” because they HAVE censored that entire site in one form or another BASED ON ONE COMPLAINT FROM ONE JEW.  THEY openly ADMIT that this CHRISTIAN web site has been BANNED by Google, and that entire web sites have been SHUT DOWN by Google simply for providing a Google search link to this site.  They went so far as to THREATEN one of the developers of one of the SOFTWARE PROGRAMS used on this site with removal of their Google Ads JUST because we used that program [and STILL do, though in a modified form].


Keep that in mind if you’re ever inclined to believe that Google search results are NOT biased in favor of jews.


The statement <<<If you use Google to search for "Judaism," "Jewish" or "Jewish people," the results are informative and relevant. So why is a search for "Jew" different? One reason is that the word "Jew" is often used in an anti-Semitic context>>>   is provably FALSE, and ironically is PROVEN TO BE FALSE by Google’s very own software. On the following graph produced by Google Trends, the blue lines represent “jew” while the red lines represent “jewish people”, and the top box is how people search the internet while the bottom box is news media coverage:



Even this news media which has NO coverage of “jewish crime” or “jewish murder” [but DOES talk about “black crime”] uses the word “jew” two to ten times more frequently than it uses the phrase “jewish people”, JUST as people who search the internet do.  If you do this comparison yourself, you will find pertinent news articles containing the word “jew” on the right hand side of that graph AND YOU WILL PROVE TO YOURSELF THAT NOT A SINGLE ONE OF THOSE NEWS ARTICLES “used in an anti-Semitic context” THE WORD “JEW”.


We’re not speaking of a “difference of opinion” here.  We’re talking about GOOGLE, while pretending to be unbiased, claims that using the word “jew” is disparaging to jews—WHEN YOU SIMPLY CANNOT PRODUCE EVEN ONE “MAINSTREAM NEWS” ARTICLE WHICH DOES THAT.


This is not OUR word.  This is THEIR word.  WE do not claim to be jews—THE EDOMITES WHO RUN OUR “NEWS” MEDIA CLAIM TO BE JEWS.  If this is a disparaging phrase to jews—BLAME IT ON JEWS, NOT AMERICANS.


For your own edification, use Google Trends to compare “jews” to jewish people” and see for yourself what THAT produces.


What can we say?  GOOGLE IS A PACK OF LIARS, and nothing less!!!




Path:  <fluidikons@yahoo.com>

Received:  from web40514.mail.yahoo.com ([]) by lakemtai10.cox.net (InterMail vM. 201-253-122-130-105-20030824) with SMTP id <20031013204944.UVZP16416.lakemtai10.cox.net@web40514.mail.yahoo.com> for <christianparty@cox.net>; Mon, 13 Oct 2003 16:49:44 -0400

Message-ID:  <20031013204943.57704.qmail@web40514.mail.yahoo.com>

Received:  from [] by web40514.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 13 Oct 2003 13:49:43 PDT

Date:  Mon, 13 Oct 2003 13:49:43 -0700 (PDT)

From:  Kelly Courtney <fluidikons@yahoo.com> 

Subject:  Google is NOT your friend

To:  raylarsen@aol.com

MIME-Version:  1.0

Content-Type:  text/plain; charset=us-ascii


From IndyMedia
Google-Watch.org - a site looking into the worry
implications of 
Google's near monopoly of web search engines. 
Take a look at this... 
1. Google's immortal cookie: 
Google was the first search engine to use a cookie
that expires in 2038. This was at a time when federal
websites were prohibited from using persistent cookies
altogether. Now it's years later, and immortal cookies
are commonplace among search engines; Google set the
standard because no one bothered to challenge them.
This cookie places a unique ID number on your hard
disk. Anytime you land on a Google page, you get a
Google cookie if you don't already have one. If you
have one, they read and record your unique ID number. 
2. Google records everything they can: 
For all searches they record the cookie ID, your
Internet IP address, the time and date, your search
terms, and your browser configuration. Increasingly,
Google is customizing results based on your IP number.
This is referred to in the industry as "IP delivery
based on geolocation." 
3. Google retains all data indefinitely: 
Google has no data retention policies. There is
evidence that they are able to easily access all the
user information they collect and save. 
4. Google won't say why they need this data: 
Inquiries to Google about their privacy policies are
ignored. When the New York Times (2002-11-28) asked
Sergey Brin about whether Google ever gets subpoenaed
for this information, he had no comment. 
5. Google hires spooks: 
Matt Cutts, a key Google engineer, used to work for
the National Security Agency. Google wants to hire
more people with security clearances, so that they can
peddle their corporate assets to the spooks in
6. Google's toolbar is spyware: 
With the advanced features enabled, Google's free
toolbar for Explorer phones home with every page you
surf, and yes, it reads your cookie too. Their privacy
policy confesses this, but that's only because Alexa
lost a class-action lawsuit when their toolbar did the
same thing, and their privacy policy failed to explain
this. Worse yet, Google's toolbar updates to new
versions quietly, and without asking. This means that
if you have the toolbar installed, Google essentially
has complete access to your hard disk every time you
connect to Google (which is many times a day). Most
software vendors, and even Microsoft, ask if you'd
like an updated version. But not Google. Any software
that updates automatically presents a massive security
7. Google's cache copy is illegal: 
Judging from Ninth Circuit precedent on the
application of U.S. copyright laws to the Internet,
Google's cache copy appears to be illegal. The only
way a webmaster can avoid having his site cached on
Google is to put a "noarchive" meta in the header of
every page on his site. Surfers like the cache, but
webmasters don't. Many webmasters have deleted
questionable material from their sites, only to
discover later that the problem pages live merrily on
in Google's cache. The cache copy should be "opt-in"
for webmasters, not "opt-out." 
8. Google is not your friend: 
Young, stupid script kiddies and many bloggers still
think Google is "way kool," so by now Google enjoys a
75 percent monopoly for all external referrals to most
websites. No webmaster can avoid seeking Google's
approval these days, assuming he wants to increase
traffic to his site. If he tries to take advantage of
some of the known weaknesses in Google's semi-secret
algorithms, he may find himself penalized by Google,
and his traffic disappears. There are no detailed,
published standards issued by Google, and there is no
appeal process for penalized sites. Google is
completely unaccountable. Most of the time they don't
even answer email from webmasters. 
9. Google is a privacy time bomb: 
With 200 million searches per day, most from outside
the U.S., Google amounts to a privacy disaster waiting
to happen. Those newly-commissioned data-mining
bureaucrats in Washington can only dream about the
sort of slick efficiency that Google has already
From Rense.com:  
From Anonymous 
Hi Jeff, 
Thought you should know about another important reason
why Google is not your friend. This darkly subversive
aspect of Google was pointed out to me by someone at
work, and it sounded so outlandish that I just didn't
believe it at first. But he insisted, and so I decided
to see for myself. I was shocked to see that it was
As you know, Google categorizes websites that it has
archived. Site owners do not pick the category, but it
is placed there according to rules that Google has in
place. For example, RENSE.COM is categorized as "Arts
> Radio > Formats > Talk Radio > Programs >
Well they have a strong Zionist bias in the way they
categorize and present any site dealing with race and
ethnicity. Namely, any pro-Western Civilization group,
or any pro-white (Caucasian) group is labeled as "hate
speech," while groups pro- any other race or ethnicity
are considered noble and respectable, and gain their
own category. 
In their special category for ethnicity, whites are
not allowed: 
However, all other races and groups are happily
represented there: 
The largest is for the Jewish race, which is a link to
I say "race" because this link is listed in the
Ethnicity category. The sites it links to include many
on Jewish pride, voting pro-Jewish, political
activism, criticism of outside groups, etc. Even a
special category on Science and Judaism, with special
directories, ethics codes, etc. 
Radical "black power" groups get links on this page
under "Nationalism": 
"Pro-Asian" organizations that only hire
"Asian-Americans," and whose sole purpose is to
advance this particular racial group, also get their
own respectable "Ethnicity" page: 
Even all other "nationalist" groups get respectable
pages under "Politics": 
But of course "white" nationalism goes in the special
racist category for hate speech: 
Who controls Google, and who makes these policies? 
Who says what is hate speech, and what is not? 
Who owns your culture? 
What are YOU going to do about it?  


Close Ranks Spiritually - Spread Out Tactically

           ~ Find the Enemie's Agents ~

bits of wisdom from:

Stepping through the Minefields:

notes from: Wisdom of the Armchair General

                        ~ by cyber Tacticus



CIA and Google Team Up Again For More Spying


Search engine company has long been in bed

with intelligence network 

Steve Watson, March 31, 2008


 Google is supplying the software, hardware and tech support

to US intelligence agencies who are in the process

of creating a vast closed source database

for global spy networks to share information.


Google is selling storage and data searching equipment

to the CIA, the FBI, the National Security Agency,

and other intelligence agencies, who have come together

to build a huge internal government intranet.


Google is also providing the search features

for a private Wikipedia-style site, called Intellipedia.


"We are a very small group, and even a lot of people

in the federal government don't know that we exist,"

said Mike Bradshaw, who leads Google's federal government

sales team and its 18 employees,

yesterday to the San Francisco Chronicle.

The government supply arm of Google has also reportedly

entered into a number of other contracts,

details of which it says it cannot share.

Google's partnership with the

intelligence network is not new.


As we reported in late 2006,

An ex-CIA agent Robert David Steele has claimed sources told him

that CIA seed money helped get the company off the ground


Speaking to the Alex Jones Show,

Steele elaborated on previous revelations

by making it known that the CIA

helped bankroll Google at its very inception.


Steele named Google's CIA point man as Dr. Rick Steinheiser,

of the Office of Research and Development.

"I think Google took money from the CIA when it was poor

and it was starting up and unfortunately

our system right now floods money into spying

and other illegal and largely unethical activities,

and it doesn't fund what I call the open source world," said Steele,

citing "trusted individuals" as his sources for the claim.

"They've been together for quite a while," added Steele.


Late last year, new programs of internet monitoring

were announced by a freshly created department branch

of Homeland Security called the National Applications Office


"Mr. Chertoff also plans soon to unveil a cyber-security strategy,

part of an estimated $15 billion, multiyear program

designed to protect the nation's Internet infrastructure.

The program has been shrouded in secrecy for months and has

also prompted privacy concerns on Capitol Hill because it

involves government protection of domestic computer networks."


The Wall Street Journal wrote.

Essentially the program allows the DHS to regulate and control

access to the internet in the name of "protecting" national security.


The news came on the back of separate revelations

that another military spy agency, the NSA has increasing

control over SSL, now called Transport Layer Security,

the cryptographic protocol that provides secure

communications on the internet for web browsing, e-mail,

instant messaging, and other data transfers.


In other words the agency is capable of intercepting a

nd reading your emails and instant messages in real time.


Earlier this year came the announcement that

US National Intelligence Director Mike McConnell is

drawing up plans for cyberspace spying

that would make the current debate on warrantless wiretaps

look like a "walk in the park".


The plan would mean giving the government the authority

to examine the content of any e-mail, file transfer or Web search.


Recently, the lawyer for an AT&T engineer has alleged that

"within two weeks of taking office, the Bush administration

was planning a comprehensive effort of spying on Americans”


That is BEFORE 9/11, before the nation was embroiled

in the freedom stripping exercise commonly known as the

"war on terror" had even begun.


Earlier this year, CNET reported that both Google and Microsoft

refused to say if they have provided users private data to the

feral govt. under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act -

- the warrantless wiretapping program.


We have also previously reported on a vast intelligence program,

being overseen by the FBI, which is to establish

a global biometric database known as "Server in the Sky"

that will collate and provide an "International Information Consortium"

with access to the biometric measurements

and personal information of citizens of the US, UK, Australia,

Canada and New Zealand in the name of fighting the "war on terror".


After 9/11 the work of 16 different intelligence agencies,

including the CIA and the giant National Security Agency,

which eavesdrops on international communications,

as well as the Energy Department and the Drug Enforcement

Administration was centralized under the office of the

Director of National Intelligence.


Over decades we have witnessed the evolution of

Government surveillance programs and information databases

targeting citizens.


We are now witnessing the centralization of this

Vast Control Grid Panopticon

beyond our own borders.