Google Blackballs URL At A Whim?

"I did it because I could." former President Bill Clinton



From The Company With The Mission Statement, Do No Harm.

"Mr Walker also defended Google's decision to allow the Chinese government to restrict content on the Google search engine in China, saying there was a balance to strike between such control and the spur to free speech and reform offered by the availability of the content that remained." . . . read more

Yet six years later, (surprise, surprise), nothing had changed with Google shutting down this other Conservative Domain without warning. - Breitbart, May 2012

Google tosses Democracy out the Window; sees small sites as "rubbish!" Yet it says, Don't worry. Google will determine which small sites are valuable! - Hosted News (link no longer available.)



Author of Google Series

"Oh, I didn't mean to blaspheme Jesus." - YouTube

Click Here if video has been taken down by YouTube's "community standards."

Compliments, if you want to call it that, of Google Author's series.

Google Author Series - The "Do No Harm" company

Author says to Google employees when showing the above video, "People are a little sensitive but I can't understand why," while Google employees laughed.



Suddenly FIK was invited back on Google's search engine in August of 2005, and we thank the billion-dollar company.

But why was FIK's URL removed for six months after my only writing a letter of complaint to Google's PR manager, along with my URL registration being deleted soon after I had lodged the complaint on the domain?

You decide.

I wrote an e-mail to the PR manager of Google, David Krane, during the first week of May 2005, complaining that Google had allowed an ad to be run by the DNC against a leading Republican Senator accused of possible misuse of lobby funds.

Yet Google would not allow a counter conservative ad to be run with identical copy paid for by Only the name of the candidate was changed in the ad, yet Google would still refused to run it.

Rightmarch then asked people on its e-mail list to write to Google about this obvious bias and provided an e-mail contact list to a few of Google's key managers.

I saw the act by the DNC as the pot calling the kettle black. But I was more disturbed to read in earlier news reports that Google's employees were donating political funds only to the DNC.

To prove that the media itself is biased like Google, many outlets refused to print stories that offended their left agenda to sway and taint opinions. You probably were never allowed to read about this story on Google's bias unless you caught it on an independent news site such as the Drudge Report.

In this same e-mail, I also complained that my URL would never come up when the words "freedom is knowledge" were typed into the Google search engine for a test. Yet other URLs, such as "freedomofknowledge" would quickly come up in that Google search. I also checked beyond 25 pages.

While Mr. Krane did not respond to my e-mail in writing, he did respond behind closed doors. A few days after I sent an e-mail, suddenly I saw that search words, which used to bring up my URL in Google, no longer worked.

I checked other search engines that did not use Google's service, and my URL still came up in their searches with words we knew would be unique to our URL. In fact, our URL came up within the first two pages on these searches.

I had followed the suggested guidelines of Google for Webmasters, such as proper meta tag copy, no frames on the homepage, search text copy on the homepage page, along with proof that my URL was in fact registered with Google using their own test.

Knowing freedom really is knowledge, I was very disturbed to see one of the world's top search engines biased in their searches . . . a very dangerous event to a free society and for an Internet that was supposed to be free from control by arrogant corporate suits.

And that was in 2005!

You think you're getting all the information gleaned from the Web, only to discover your search for information is being censored by "watching eyes" at Google for political gain. I had no idea Google was filled with this much abuse of power until it happened to my small domain.

If Google can stop a specific URL from appearing in a search, it is in effect saying in search results that a URL does not exist on the Web. Think of it as if a publisher had removed words from a dictionary that offended its political agenda.

With American citizens running around today with too few patriots among them, they have become like cattle, too easy to move around the ranch while never challenging what they are being fed. Google has obviously learned that Americans who are fat, rich, and lazy can be easy targets for abuse as they graze.

One of our professional contacts has told me they have heard complaints from other Webmasters concerning Google's bias. However since Google is a private company, not much can be done.

I wrote a second e-mail to Krane a month later, asking why Google was scrubbing my URL from its searches. Again I received no reply.

So I put up a simple page when surfers came to my URL from other sources, informing them that Google had blackballed my URL.

Within a week a test for my site registered on Google also failed. If you thought the Web was free from censorship, you were wrong. If you thought control of public relations and manipulation of ideas, such as those mastered by the Third Reich was a thing of the past, you were wrong.

They've just gotten better at it over the years.

You would think freedom-of-speech media-types would be concerned that the largest search engine in the "free world" would be blackballing small sites behind closed doors. I e-mailed my complaint, with a test to prove my point, to a local radio station that promotes citizens to "Stand Up." But they didn't reply.

And I e-mailed the same to the O'Reilly Factor on FOX, to the Scarborough Country on MSNBC, to the Republican Lawyer's Group at Harvard, to our state's congressional Senator, the Honorable Elizabeth Dole, and a second complaint to Google, asking the basis for their blackballing my URL. I even sent a registered letter to RightMarch's CEO,William Greene, concerning my support for his organization, which had gotten my URL blackballed by Google.

Not one responded to any of my correspondences, proving no one gave a damn about Google's growing power to control what people were allowed to see on the Internet around the world.

Finally, I see I'm not the only ones having a problem with Google's ethics. Microsoft in, July 2005, felt their arrogant bite, too.

And in May of 2004, the New York Times was already getting on top of this asking in a headline that read, "Is a Do-Gooder Company a Good Thing." Their article asked the question . . .

"But will Google be able to adhere to its famous corporate ethos, "don't do evil," with its role as the Internet's chief gatekeeper bolstered by the several billion dollars a stock sale is expected to raise? Supporters and critics alike agree that the public would do well to scrutinize the effects of Google's outsize influence, whether or not it adheres to its promises of trustworthiness?"

Obviously the public isn't, and the media won't. My experience shows that everyone seems to have been "Googlized," as if deaf and dumb through an alien abduction. Hopefully, the concern for Google weaponizing searches will finally be addressed by Congress.

One professional, who knows the truth, said it this way:

I’m sorry to burst the bubble about Google and its “Don’t Do Evil” motto. Google has the power to block certain websites at its whim and does.

If a Web site is on the wrong side politically or in some other way (at Google’s discretion), the Webmaster may wake up one morning and find all references to the URL and key words to that site on Google wiped away like magic. Suddenly the site no longer exists in cyberspace unless someone searches through another engine.

It’s a well kept secret and especially unfortunate since Google made this statement in the NY Times, 5/2/04: “Searching and organizing all the world’s information is an unusually important task that should be carried out by a company that is trustworthy and interested in the public good.”

That company that should be… is not.






"Freedom is Knowledge"