Google partnering with the Left

[vector7]

Related thread: 'Google News' or 'Obama News'? (updated)

Group files request for details on Google, NSA

partnership ByJohn Letzing, MarketWatch

SAN FRANCISCO (MarketWatch) -- The Washington, D.C.-based Electronic Privacy Information Center has filed a legal request for information on Google Inc.'s reported plans to team with the National Security Agency in analyzing a recent cyber-attack originating in China.

On Thursday, the Washington Post, citing unnamed sources, reported that Google /quotes/comstock/15*!goog/quotes/nls/goog (GOOG 612.53, +0.54, +0.09%) plans to partner with the NSA - the U.S. government's largest intelligence agency, with a specialty in electronic surveillance - to analyze the cyber-attack.

Google said last month that as a result of the attack, it's reconsidering its commitment to operating directly in China. In addition, several other U.S. companies are thought to have suffered a similar attack. However, the reported partnership between Google and the NSA has raised concerns among privacy advocates wary of government intrusion in private communications networks in the interest of national security.

In its Freedom of Information Act request, EPIC says that it's seeking records "in the possession of the National Security Agency regarding the agency's arrangements with Google on cyber security, as well as records regarding the agency's role in setting security standards for Gmail and other Web-based applications."

Google said in January that one element of the cyber-attack was an effort to discover the identities of Gmail users advocating for human rights in China.

A Google spokesman declined to comment, other than to refer to the company's original statement on the attack - when it said that it was "working with the relevant U.S. authorities" as part of its investigation into the matter.

The NSA has drawn widespread criticism in the recent past for its warrantless monitoring of private phone calls and emails in the U.S.

"There is particular urgency for the public to obtain information about the relationship between the NSA and Google," EPIC wrote in its FOIA request. "As of 2009, Gmail had roughly 146 million monthly users, all of whom would be affected by any relationship between the NSA and Google."

According to the Washington Post report, Google's effort with the NSA would not enable the NSA to view Google users' search data or email accounts.

John Letzing is a MarketWatch reporter based in San Francisco.

[vector7]

When the ‘Future’ Invades Our Lives. The CIA Funds ‘Predictive Behavior’ Start-Ups

October 11, 2010

in Analysis,Intelligence

By Tom Burghardt

As they walked along the busy, yellow-lit tiers of offices, Anderton said: “You’re acquainted with the theory of precrime, of course. I presume we can take that for granted.” — Philip K. Dick, The Minority Report

What do Google, the CIA and a host of so-called “predictive behavior” start-ups have in common?

They’re interested in you, or more specifically, whether your online interests–from Facebook to Twitter posts, and from Flickr photos to YouTube and blog entries–can be exploited by powerful computer algorithms and subsequently transformed into “actionable intelligence.”

And whether the knowledge gleaned from an IP address is geared towards selling useless junk or entering a name into a law enforcement database matters not a whit. It’s all “just data” and “buzz” goes the mantra, along what little is left of our privacy and our rights.

Increasingly, secret state agencies ranging from the CIA to the National Security Agency are pouring millions of dollars into data-mining firms which claim they have a handle on who you are or what you might do in the future.

And to top it off, the latest trend in weeding-out dissenters and nonconformists from the social landscape will soon be invading a workplace near you; in fact, it already has.

Welcome to the sinister world of “Precrime” where capitalist grifters, drug- and torture-tainted spy shops are all laboring mightily to stamp out every last vestige of free thought here in the heimat.

The CIA Enters the Frame

In July, security journalist Noah Shachtman revealed in Wired that “the investment arms of the CIA and Google are both backing a company that monitors the web in real time–and says it uses that information to predict the future.”

Shachtman reported that the CIA’s semi-private investment company, In-Q-Tel, and Google Ventures, the search giant’s business division had partnered-up with a dodgy outfit called Recorded Future pouring, according to some estimates, $20 million dollars into the fledgling firm.

A blurb on In-Q-Tel’s web site informs us that “Recorded Future extracts time and event information from the web. The company offers users new ways to analyze the past, present, and the predicted future.”

Who those ubiquitous though nameless “users” are or what they might do with that information once they “extract” it from the web is left unsaid. However, judging from the interest that a CIA-connected entity has expressed in funding the company, privacy will not figure prominently in the “new ways” such tools will be used.

Wired reported that the company, founded by former Swedish Army Ranger Christopher Ahlberg, “scours tens of thousands of websites, blogs and Twitter accounts to find the relationships between people, organizations, actions and incidents–both present and still-to-come.”
“The cool thing is” Ahlberg said, “you can actually predict the curve, in many cases.”

And as for the search giant’s interest in “predicting the future” for the secret state, it wouldn’t be the first time that Google Ventures sold equipment and expertise to America’s shadow warriors.

While the firm may pride itself on the corporate slogan, “don’t be evil,” data is a valuable commodity. And where’s there value, there’s money to be made. Whether it comes in the form of “increasing share value” through the sale of private information to marketeers or state intelligence agencies eager to increase “situational awareness” of the “battlespace” is a matter of complete indifference to corporate bean counters.

After all, as Google CEO Eric Schmidt told CNBC last year, “if you have something that you don’t want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn’t be doing it in the first place.”

But that standard, “only bad people have something to hide,” is infinitely mutable and can be stretched–or manipulated as has so often been the case in the United States–to encompass everything from “Papist” conspiracies, “illegal” migrants, homosexuality, communism, drug use, or America’s latest bête noire: the “Muslim threat.”

Schmidt went on to say that “the reality is that search engines, including Google, do retain this information for some time. And we’re all subject, in the U.S., to the Patriot Act, and it is possible that that information could be made available to the authorities.”

In February, The Washington Post reported that “the world’s largest Internet search company and the world’s most powerful electronic surveillance organization are teaming up in the name of cybersecurity.”

“The alliance” between Google and NSA “is being designed to allow the two organizations to share critical information without violating Google’s policies or laws that protect the privacy of Americans’ online communications,” the Post alleged.

An anonymous source told the Post that “the deal does not mean the NSA will be viewing users’ searches or e-mail accounts or that Google will be sharing proprietary data.”

Really?

Last spring it was revealed that Google’s Street View cars had been secretly vacuuming up terabytes of private wi-fi data for more than three years across Europe and the United States.

The Sunday Times reported that the firm had “been scooping up snippets of people’s online activities broadcast over unprotected home and business wi-fi networks.”

In July, The Washington Post’s “Top Secret America” investigation disclosed that Google supplies mapping and search products to the U.S. secret state and that their employees, outsourced intelligence contractors for the Defense Department, may have filched their customers’ wi-fi data as part of an NSA surveillance project.

And what about email and web searches?

Last year, The New York Times revealed that NSA intercepts of “private telephone calls and e-mail messages of Americans are broader than previously acknowledged.” In fact, a former NSA analyst described how he was trained-up fierce in 2005 “for a program in which the agency routinely examined large volumes of Americans’ e-mail messages without court warrants.”

That program, code-named PINWALE, and the NSA’s meta-data-mining spy op STELLAR WIND, continue under Obama. Indeed, The Atlantic told us at the time that PINWALE “is actually an unclassified proprietary term used to refer to advanced data-mining software that the government uses.”

But the seamless relationships amongst communications’ giants such as Google and the secret state doesn’t stop there.

Even before Google sought an assist from the National Security Agency to secure its networks after an alleged breech by China last year, in 2004 the firm had acquired Keyhole, Inc., an In-Q-Tel funded start-up that developed 3-D-spy-in-the-sky images; Keyhole became the backbone for what later evolved into Google Earth.

At the time of their initial investment, In-Q-Tel said that Keyhole’s “strategic relationship … means that the Intelligence Community can now benefit from the massive scalability and high performance of the Keyhole enterprise solution.”

In-Q-Tel’s then-CEO, Gilman Louie, said that spy shop venture capitalists invested in the firm “because it offers government and commercial users a new capability to radically enhance critical decision making. Through its ability to stream very large geospatial datasets over the Internet and private networks, Keyhole has created an entirely new way to interact with earth imagery and feature data.”

Or, as seen on a daily basis in the AfPak “theatre” deliver exciting new ways to kill people. Now that’s innovation!

That was then, now the search giant and the CIA’s investment arm are banking on products that will take privacy intrusions to a whole new level.

A promotional offering by the up-and-comers in the predictive behavior marketplace, Recorded Future–A White Paper on Temporal Analytics asserts that “unlike traditional search engines which focus on text retrieval and leaves the analysis to the user, we strive to provide tools which assist in identifying and understanding historical developments, and which can also help formulate hypotheses about and give clues to likely future events. We have decided on the term ‘temporal analytics’ to describe the time oriented analysis tasks supported by our systems.”

Big in the hyperbole department, Recorded Future claims to have developed an “analytics engine, which goes beyond search, explicit link analysis and adds implicit link analysis, by looking at the ‘invisible links’ between documents that talk about the same, or related, entities and events. We do this by separating the documents and their content from what they talk about.”

According to the would-be Big Brother enablers, “Recorded Future also analyzes the ‘time and space dimension’ of documents–references to when and where an event has taken place, or even when and where it will take place–since many documents actually refer to events expected to take place in the future.”

Adding to the unadulterated creep factor, the technocratic grifters aver they’re “adding more components, e.g. sentiment analyses, which determine what attitude an author has towards his/her topic, and how strong that attitude is–the affective state of the author.”

Strongly oppose America’s imperial project to steal other people’s resources in Afghanistan and Iraq, or, crime of crimes, have the temerity to write or organize against it? Step right this way, Recorded Future has their eye on you and will sell that information to the highest bidder!

After all, as Mike Van Winkle, a California Anti-Terrorism Information Center shill infamously told the Oakland Tribune back in 2003 after Oakland cops wounded scores of peacenik longshoremen at an antiwar rally at the port: “You can make an easy kind of a link that, if you have a protest group protesting a war where the cause that’s being fought against is international terrorism, you might have terrorism at that (protest). You can almost argue that a protest against that is a terrorist act.”

And with Recorded Future’s “sentiment analyses” such “links” will be even easier to fabricate.

Never mind that the prestigious National Academy of Science’s National Research Council issued a scathing 2008 report, Protecting Individual Privacy in the Struggle Against Terrorists: A Framework for Assessment, that debunked the utility of data-ming and link analysis as effective counterterrorism tools.

“Far more problematic,” the NRC informs us, “are automated data-mining techniques that search databases for unusual patterns of activity not already known to be associated with terrorists.” Since “so little is known about what patterns indicate terrorist activity” the report avers, dodgy techniques such as link analysis “are likely to generate huge numbers of false leads.”

As for Recorded Future’s over-hyped “sentiment analyses,” the NRC debunked, one might even say preemptively, the dodgy claims of our would-be precrime mavens. “The committee also examined behavioral surveillance techniques, which try to identify terrorists by observing behavior or measuring physiological states.”

Their conclusion?

“There is no scientific consensus on whether these techniques are ready for use at all in counterterrorism.” Damningly, the NRC asserted that such techniques “have enormous potential for privacy violations because they will inevitably force targeted individuals to explain and justify their mental and emotional states.”

Not that such inconvenient facts matter to Recorded Future or their paymasters in the so-called intelligence community who after all, are in the driver’s seat when the firm’s knowledge products “make predictions about the future.”

After all, as Ahlberg and his merry band of privacy invaders inform us: “Our mission is not to help our customers find documents, but to enable them to understand what is happening in the world.”

The better to get a leg up on the competition or know who to target.

The “Real You”

Not to be outdone by black world spy agencies, their outsourced corporate partners or the futurist gurus who do their bidding, the high-tech publication Datamation, told us last month that the precrime concept “is coming very soon to the world of Human Resources (HR) and employee management.”

Reporter Mike Elgan revealed that a “Santa Barbara, Calif., startup called Social Intelligence data-mines the social networks to help companies decide if they really want to hire you.”

Elgan averred that while background checks have historically searched for evidence of criminal behavior on the part of prospective employees, “Social Intelligence is the first company that I’m aware of that systematically trolls social networks for evidence of bad character.”

Similar to Recorded Future and dozens of other “predictive behavior” companies such as Attensity and Visible Technologies, Social Intelligence deploys “automation software that slogs through Facebook, Twitter, Flickr, YouTube, LinkedIn, blogs, and ‘thousands of other sources,’ the company develops a report on the ‘real you’–not the carefully crafted you in your resume.”

According to Datamation, “the company also offers a separate Social Intelligence Monitoring service to watch the personal activity of existing employees on an ongoing basis.” Such intrusive monitoring transforms the “workplace” into a 24/7 Orwellian panopticon from which there is no hope of escape.

The service is sold as an exemplary means to “enforce company social media policies.” However, since “criteria are company-defined, it’s not clear whether it’s possible to monitor personal activity.” Fear not, it is.

Social Intelligence, according to Elgan, “provides reporting that deemphasizes specific actions and emphasizes character. It’s less about ‘what did the employee do’ and more about ‘what kind of person is this employee?’”

In other words, it’s all about the future; specifically, the grim world order that fear-mongering corporations are rapidly bringing to fruition.
Datamation reports that “following the current trend lines,” rooted in the flawed logic of information derived from data-mining and link analysis, “social networking spiders and predictive analytics engines will be working night and day scanning the Internet and using that data to predict what every employee is likely to do in the future. This capability will simply be baked right in to HR software suites.”

As with other aspects of daily life in post-constitutional America, executive decisions, ranging from whether or not to hire or fire someone, cast them into a lawless gulag without trial, or even kill them solely on the say-so of our War-Criminal-in-Chief, are the new house rules.

Like our faux progressive president, some HR bureaucrat will act as judge, jury and executioner, making decisions that can–and have–wrecked lives.

Elgan tells us that unlike a criminal proceeding where you stand before the law accused of wrongdoing and get to face your accuser, “you can’t legally be thrown in jail for bad character, poor judgment, or expectations of what you might do in the future. You have to actually break the law, and they have to prove it.”

“Personnel actions aren’t anything like this.” You aren’t afforded the means to “face your accuser.” In fact, based on whether or not you sucked-up to the boss, pissed-off some corporate toady, or moved into the “suspect” category based on an algorithm, you don’t have to actually violate comapny rules in order to be fired “and they don’t have to prove it.”

Datamation tells us, “if the social network scanning, predictive analytics software of the future decides that you are going to do something in future that’s inconsistent with the company’s interests, you’re fired.”

And, Elgan avers, now that “the tools are becoming monstrously sophisticated, efficient, powerful, far-reaching and invasive,” the precrime “concept is coming to HR.”

Big Brother is only a “ping” or mouse click away…

[vector7]

Google says its cars grabbed email and passwords

Google Inc.
GOOG.O
$612.53
+0.54+0.09%
2:00pm CDT


A camera used for Google street view is pictured at the CeBIT computer fair in Hanover March 2, 2010.
Credit: Reuters/Christian Charisius

By Alexei Oreskovic
SAN FRANCISCO | Fri Oct 22, 2010 3:44pm EDT

(Reuters) - Google Inc said its "Street View" cars around the world accidentally collected more personal data than previously disclosed, and that it was changing its privacy practices.

Regulators in some of the more than 30 countries where the cars operated are looking into the issue.

Google's Street View cars, which are well known for crisscrossing the globe and taking panoramic pictures of the city's streets, collected the data. The company displays the pictures in its online street maps.

Google said it wants to delete the data as soon as possible. It disclosed the snafu in May, but said at the time that the information it collected was typically limited to "fragments" of data because the cars were always moving.

"It's clear from those inspections that while most of the data is fragmentary, in some instances entire emails and URLs were captured, as well as passwords," Google Vice President of Engineering and Research Alan Eustace said in a post on Google's blog on Friday.

Google had deleted the data in countries where regulators had given it permission to do so, a Google representative said. The representative said there were investigations in other countries and that Google could not delete the data until the investigations were closed.

Google said it has appointed Alma Whitten as director of privacy for engineering and product management, and that the company was adding new internal procedures requiring engineering product managers to maintain a privacy design document that records how user data is handled.

Google also said it was enhancing its privacy training for engineers and other important groups within the company.

Collecting the WiFi data was unrelated to the Google Maps project, and was done so Google could amass data on WiFi hotspots that could help provide location-based services.

Google said collecting the additional data was a mistake resulting from a piece of computer code from an experimental project that was accidentally included.

(Reporting by Alexei Oreskovic. Editing by Robert MacMillan)

[vector7]

After news of Google tax dodges, Obama raises money with Google execs

By: Byron York
Chief Political Correspondent
10/22/10 6:59 AM EDT

On the day it was reported that Google uses income shifting techniques known by such arcane names as the "Double Irish" and the "Dutch Sandwich" to avoid paying taxes on its foreign profits, President Obama attended an intimate, high-dollar fundraiser at the Palo Alto, California home of a top Google executive. He didn't mention Google's tax tricks, according to a White House transcript of his remarks.

The Democratic fundraiser, which guests each paid $30,400 to attend, was at the home of Marissa Mayer, one of Google's best-known executives. At the lavish home, which was "decked out in Halloween decorations on steroids," according to a White House pool report, Obama spoke briefly and had nothing but praise for Google. He spoke fondly of his first visit to the company when he was an Illinois state senator. And of his work as president dealing with the recession, he said, "My task over the last two years hasn’t just been to stop the bleeding. My task has also been to try to figure out how do we address some of the structural problems in the economy that have prevented more Googles from being created…" (Although founded in the 1990s, Google went public and prospered enormously in the years that Obama and his fellow Democrats characterize as an economic disaster.)

Google, according to a report by Bloomberg News, has used paper transactions to shift $3.1 billion of its income to Bermuda and other low-tax havens in recent years. The company's aggressive use of such tax dodges has reduced its overseas tax rate to just 2.4 percent.

Although the practice is common, Google "has cut its effective tax rate abroad more than its peers in the technology sector," Bloomberg reports. "Such income shifting costs the U.S. government as much as $60 billion in annual revenue."

In the past, Obama has been sharply critical of companies that move their income around the globe to avoid paying taxes. But with Google, whose employees give an estimated 75 percent of their political contributions to Democrats -- well, the president didn't have much to say about taxes.

[vector7]

Google Comes Under Fire for 'Secret' Relationship with NSA

By Grant Gross, IDG News Jan 25, 2011 8:48 am

Consumer Watchdog, an advocacy group largely focused in recent years on Google's privacy practices, has called on a congressional investigation into the Internet giant's "cozy" relationship with U.S. President Barack Obama's administration.

In a letter sent Monday, Consumer Watchdog asked Representative Darrell Issa, the new chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, to investigate the relationship between Google and several government agencies.



The group asked Issa to investigate contracts at several U.S. agencies for Google technology and services, the "secretive" relationship between Google and the U.S. National Security Agency, and the company's use of a U.S. National Aeronautics and Space Administration airfield in California.

Federal agencies have also taken "insufficient" action in response to revelations last year that Google Street View cars were collecting data from open Wi-Fi connections they passed, Consumer Watchdog said in the letter.

"We believe Google has inappropriately benefited from close ties to the administration," the letter said. "Google is most consumers' gateway to the Internet. Nonetheless, it should not get special treatment and access because of a special relationship with the administration."

Consumer Watchdog may have an ally in Issa, a California Republican.

In July, he sent a letter to Google raising concerns that White House Deputy Chief Technology Officer Andrew McLaughlin, the former head of global public policy for Google, had inappropriate e-mail contact with company employees.

A Google spokeswoman questioned Consumer Watchdog's objectivity.

Some groups have questioned the group's relationship with Google rival Microsoft, and Consumer Watchdog's criticisms of online privacy efforts have also exclusively zeroed in on Google, with the group rarely mentioning Microsoft, Facebook and other Web-based companies in the past two years.

"This is just the latest in a long list of press stunts from an organization that admits to working closely with our competitors," said the Google spokeswoman.

But Consumer Watchdog gets no funding from Microsoft or any other Google competitor, said John Simpson, consumer advocate with the group. "We don't have any relationship with Microsoft at all," he said. "We don't take any of their money."

Consumer Watchdog has decided to focus on Google's privacy practices because the company's services serve as a gateway.



Artwork: Chip Taylorto the Internet for many people, Simpson said. If the group can push Google, "without a doubt the dominant Internet company," to change its privacy practices, other companies will follow suit, he said.

"Google's held itself to be the company that says its motto is, 'don't be evil,' and they also advocate openness for everyone else," he said.

"We're trying to hold them to their own word."

Consumer Watchdog, in January 2009, suggested that Google was preparing a lobbying campaign asking Congress to allow the sale of electronic health records. Google called the allegations "100 percent false and unfounded."

In September, Consumer Watchdog bought space on a 540-square-foot video screen in New York's Times Square, with the video criticizing Google's privacy practices.

In April, Consumer Watchdog officials called for the U.S. Department of Justice to break up Google. They appeared at a press conference with a representative of the Microsoft- and Amazon.com-funded Open Book Alliance.

Consumer Watchdog's latest complaints about the relationship of Google and the Obama administration are outlined in a 32-page report.

The paper questions a decision by NASA allowing Google executives to use its Moffett Federal Airfield near Google headquarters. Although H211, a company controlled by Google top executives, pays NASA rent, they enjoy access to the airfield that other companies or groups don't have, Simpson said.

The paper also questions Google contracts with the U.S. Department of Defense and other agencies, suggesting that, in some cases, Google contracts were fast-tracked. The paper also questions Google's relationship with the U.S. National Security Agency and calls for the company to be more open about what consumer information it shares with the spy agency.

When asked if other companies, including broadband providers, should disclose what customer information they share with the NSA, Simpson said they should, too.

"I understand the NSA is a super-secret spook organization," he said.

"But given Google's very special situation where it possesses so much personal data about people, I think that there ought to be a little more openness about what precisely goes on between the two."

Grant Gross covers technology and telecom policy in the U.S. government for The IDG News Service. Follow Grant on Twitter at GrantGross. Grant's e-mail address is grant_gross@idg.com.

[vector7]

Can Google ever be a neutral news provider?

The search engine's foray into the Egypt crisis with SayNow shows how it is becoming an active ingredient in political debate

• Comments (16)

Writing on the wall ... Google's SayNow shows it is becoming more involved in politics. Photograph: Emilio Morenatti/AP

It is hard to think of many American business executives who have been detained for dissent against repressive regimes. It is more usual for them to be actively engaged in reinforcing dodgy dictatorships than tearing them down. But the brief imprisonment of Google's head of marketing for the Middle East and North Africa, Wael Ghonim has heightened the sense that the search company is an active player in the democracy movement.

It is unclear what the view of Ghonim's activities are from the Googleplex.

Ghonim's 12-day detention in Egypt and his subsequent release have not been obviously marked or celebrated on the Google site, nor has its logo been decorated in his honour, as it is for events such as St Patrick's Day. Ghonim was not simply detained for working for Google. His arrest was more likely to be linked to his activism in the region. However, Ghonim's activism is likely to have met with approval from Google's new chief executive and co-founder, Larry Page.

Ghonim's detention was the second time Google had hit the headlines in relation to Egypt. The first time was the company's development of a censor-busting "workaround" in the form of a speak-to-Tweet service SayNow, aimed at Egyptians cut off from the internet.

According to the journalist Ken Auletta, author of Googled, one of the reasons for the recent top management shakeup at the company was differences in how to approach China.

Page's approach was based on vision, Eric Schmidt's was based on corporate pragmatism. Both are focused on a capitalist goal of market domination but both represent very different ways of getting there.

Google's willingness to be actively associated with democracy movements and software developments that support pro-democracy activists feed into the company's philosophy of "don't be evil" and underwrite its mission to organise the world's information. But it also gives Google a corporate voice that takes a position, it makes the company an active ingredient in political debate. It does in fact give Google one of the attributes of being a news organisation, even though it facilitates rather than creates the news.

The idea that Google will ever be a neutral player in a world where information is so highly political has always been nonsensical. Google in truth has as much a claim to being a "stateless news organisation" as WikiLeaks, not through secrecy but through highly distributed regional power and large corporate profits. Viewing Google in this way makes its interest in Twitter even more interesting. Early reports that Twitter was talking to both Facebook and Google about a potential purchase for the small consideration of $10bn (£6.25bn) has sent media and investment communities into a flat spin.

It would be an absolute disaster for Google if Twitter was purchased by Facebook. It would be shut out of the world of "social search", the idea that people increasingly find things out through networks of friends rather than search engines. But Twitter also has something of an authorial voice and personality, which is very much about supporting the open web.

Facebook is already a part of the ecosystem of digital political support although its users are also made uncomfortable by its endless changes to privacy settings and the feeling that they lose control of their personal information the moment it is uploaded. Which, of course, is true of all distribution platforms.

[vector7]

Glenn Beck vs. Google: Pundit doesn't trust search engine, suggests his fans may want to avoid it

BY Adam Caparell
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER
Wednesday, February 16th 2011, 8:47 PM


Caulfield/WireImage

Fox News pundit Glenn Beck took aim at Google on his program Wednesday.

Unlike billions of worldwide users, Glenn Beck doesn't trust Google. And he plans on doing something about it.

The conservative Fox News pundit announced on his show Wednesday that he will avoid using any Google products, and implored his viewers to follow suit.

Beck spent a good portion of his program outlining why Google's business ties should make people think twice about using the world's most popular search engine – and it's many other products.

"I'm just not sure, as I look into Google, that I want to use their products anymore unless I have to," Beck said. "And some of their products I think I have to. I'm not leading any boycott. I hate boycotts. You do with your time, your money, and your information what you want. For me, personally, I'm not feeling real comfortable about the current direction of Google the more I find out."

Beck has been very critical of Google in recent weeks, mostly stemming from the praise company executives have heaped on one of their employees, Wael Ghonim. The head of Middle East marketing for the technology giant, Ghonim played a big role in helping organize the Egyptian Revolution and the eventual ouster of President Hosni Mubarak by setting up protests through social networking sites.

"I'm really not sure that I want my search engine involved in government overthrows, good or bad," Beck said. "What I want from a search engine is good search results. This is not the issue. I'm not afraid that Google is reading my email, or tapping your phone lines, or stealing Grandma's recipes. That kind of paranoia is reserved for the Left during the Bush administration with Microsoft. What I'm starting to look at is Google and Google as a whole."

Beck continued his attack on the search site by outlining the many concerns he has about Google's past instances of privacy breaches, and more importantly its ties to government agencies like the NSA and GSA and liberal organizations like MoveOn.org.

"There is a strange thing going on with this search engine and our government. And we all have to choose who we do business with," Beck said.

Beck promised his viewers that on his Thursday show he would have tips on how they could avoid using Google in their everyday lives.

Glenn Beck Doesn't Trust Google, Do you? - Declares He Won't Use Google Unless He Has To

[American Patriot]

Yeah, I've been wondering about a lot of things with Google.

A lot of times Google works well, and I've found things at times I can't FIND on google.

Bugs me


So, I want to see that show. Post that if you can?

[vector7]

Here is the entire show


Glenn Beck-02/16/11-A


Glenn Beck-02/16/11-B


Glenn Beck-02/16/11-C

[American Patriot]

Thanks Peterle

[vector7]

Companion Posts:

Google engineers hacked through the governments firewalls to help lead the Riots in Egypt

• Obama cuts US space program, orders NASA to work with Muslim countries
• Barack Obama: NASA must try to make Muslims 'feel good'
• Egyptian activist creates image issues for Google
• Google Executive Addresses Hundreds of Thousands at Tahrir Square (video)
• "The Revolution has Just Begun" Google Guru Banned
• Egyptian Revolution Backed By George Soros
• Top 5 Revolutions Backed By George Soros

Watchdog Group Questions Google Use of Moffett Field

Postedby

Doug Messier

on January 24, 2011, at 1:16 pm
in Google, NASA, NASA Ames and News
. Tags: Google, Moffett Field, NASA, NASA Ames.Comments: no responses

0 Comments



A consumer watchdog group called (of all things) Consumer Watchdog has issued a report focusing on Google’s allegedly close relationship with the federal government. One of the issues they have raised involves Google’s $1.3 million per year lease of space at Moffett Field, which is under the control of NASA Ames:

One of the most visible signs of Google’s clout, the report said, is the National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s Moffett Airfield, near Google’s world headquarters. When a deal between NASA and top Google executives to use the base was first disclosed in 2007, it called for only four jets to use the base.

But newly released government records show that the Google executive fleet has now grown to six jets and two helicopters, while at least 40 Google employees hold security badges at the base and all of the planes are supplied with Department of Defense jet fuel.

Key excerpts from the report dealing with Google’s flight operations out of Moffett:

In July 2007, Schmidt persuaded NASA to do a side deal with a company called H211, which is controlled personally by Schmidt along with Sergey Brin and Larry Page. The Google execs promised to allow NASA to outfit H211’s aircraft with scientific equipment to study global warming and greenhouse gases.

H211 now pays $1.3 million annually in return for the right to fly private planes in and out of the base. This spring, the contract was quietly extended by NASA to 2014, documents show.

Google doesn’t get any special bargain on the lease. According to the HangerTrader.com, a classified advertising hangar service, Google is paying as much as one and a half times the average asking price for a hangar rental per month, as the NASA Ames lease with H211 agreement states they paid from August to September $226,731.48 for their hangar rental of 65,513 sq ft. This figure is almost as much as Google would have to pay all year to rent hangar space at two of California’s premier airports, San Jose and San Francisco. NASA notes that rental rates are subject to a variety of factors, including comparable rates at the San Jose and San Francisco airports, gross weight of the aircraft, and other considerations.

Tim Murray of Atlantic Aviation, based out of the San Jose Airport, provided a quote for two Gulfstream Vs at a total average cost per year of $358,440. At the San Francisco Airport, Signature Flight Support’s Jay Singh provided a quote of $2.25 a sq/ft for two G5s – that averages close to $486,840 per year, which is far less than what Google pays currently, even when taking into account their Boeings 767-*?200 and 757.

The extraordinary aspect of the deal isn’t the money, it’s the fact that only certain organizations with a very good reason get access to Moffett.

“Not everyone can nor should use this airfield,” says the NASA policy. “NASA has specific criteria to determine who can partner with us and whether they may use their aircraft at Moffett. All requests by a private entity undergo a rigorous review process and every request must demonstrate a relationship to NASA missions.”

But the claim that NASA obtains substantial hard?to?obtain scientific data in return for hosting Google’s executive jets is hard to sustain. As reported in 2008, NASA engineers discovered they could not easily modify the company’s largest aircraft, a Boeing 757, to hold scientific equipment. So in 2008, H211 arranged to obtain an experiment fighter plane, called the Alpha Jet, that could be rigged to collect data for atmospheric investigation project known as Cal-Nex.

But documents show the project ran into problems last year when H211 was denied Pentagon permission to land its jet at Miramar air base in San Diego. A schedule of six Cal—Nex aerial research programs from April to July 2010 does not include any Google aircraft. In addition, a June 25, 2010 email by NASA scientist Laura T. Iraci discloses that the jet had yet to undergo NASA’s Airworthiness and Flight Safety Review. Iraci also discusses how NASA is “starting small” with the new jet, attaching “very small self contained environmental censors.”

NASA’s public relations office did not respond to questions about Google’s contribution to Cal-Nex but a brief summary of the project by Iraci can be found here:

http://o3.arb.ca.gov/research/calnex...LauraIraci.pdf

Flight data obtained from the Flightaware.com web site and other sources show that the Alpha Jet is not used nearly as often as the company’s three Gulfstream V planes or the Boeing 757 and 762. Some of the Alpha Jet’s flights have been as short as 6 minutes (on April 7, 2010) and 11 minutes (on July 18, 2010). Lately, H211 has been able to block Flightaware from releasing data on the travels of the three Gulfstreams – notwithstanding the oft-repeated commitments of Google leadership to transparency in all things (particularly politics and government). Fortunately, a volunteer army of aviation buffs around the world, known as plane spotters, often manages to catch the Google fleet in action.

The flights tracked by Consumer Watchdog leave little question that Google’s leadership is living out the lifestyles of the rich and famous courtesy of Uncle Sam.

Air Google flights in pursuit of less scientific objectives include:
–On May 13, 2010 an H211 Gulfstream V departed Moffett at 11:30 at night, headed for the Nice-Cote d’Azur airport in southern France. That week, Google held an event for advertisers at the nearby Cannes Film Festival. On the night of May 18, CEO Eric Schmidt attended a party for Mick Jagger in Cannes. On June 26, an H211 Gulfstream V flew from Mountain View to Nice-Cote d’Azur for a second time.

–On July 9, the company’s Boeing 762 took off for Tahiti where a near-total solar eclipse was visible on July 11. Among the sun worshippers were billionaire co-founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin. The 762 and a Gulfstream V returned to Tahiti on July 15, according to flight records, presumably to pick up straggling Googlers.

–Last January 3, an H211 Gulfstream V flew overnight from the Caribbean island of Tortola to Mountain View, according to flight data. In December 2007, an H211 Gulfstream was spotted in Tortola for the wedding of Larry Page at mogul Richard Branson’s privately owned Necker Island.

–On January 7, a Gulfstream V flew from St. Maarten, another resort island, to Mountain View. An H211 Gulfstream also landed in St. Maarten in February 2008. The same Gulfstream was photographed again in St. Maarten on April 27, 2009.

Two years ago, the Mountain View Voice editorialized about “the NASA-Google connection,” saying “If NASA just wants the money, and doesn’t really care about ‘scientific experiments,’ it should dispense with the pretense.” (Mountain View Voice, December 7, 2008). NASA officials say that they are examining whether Moffett Airfield is “an under-utilized asset” that should be sold off. Such a sale could save NASA millions of dollars a year in maintenance costs and open the airfield to other private aircraft.

It turns out the scientific research is basically a fig leaf so that NASA can justify doing deals with private companies. NASA’s Moffett leadership also claims that the agency does research on environmental conditions in San Francisco Bay aboard a 246-foot long zeppelin airship that’s parked at Moffett. But the craft happens to be owned by Airship Ventures Inc., a private company which charges $495 per person for one-hour tours of the Bay aboard their zeppelin. The company’s board includes Silicon Valley investor Esther Dyson, who has various ties to Sergey Brin and his wife Anne Wojcicki. (Both Dyson and Google are investors in Wojcicki’s genetics company 23andMe.)

While these deals are unusual, they’re not totally unprecedented. A firm named Zero Gravity (http://www.gozerog.com) also has a deal with NASA to use Moffett.

However, one NOT for profit outfit, Humanitarian Air Logistics, has so far been unable to obtain access to Moffett even though the group is clearly a charity. Strangely, Documents show that when the group asked NASA to use the field, NASA insisted the group obtain permission from the nearby city of Mountain View even though it did not impose a similar requirement on H211.

The City of Mountain View declined to get involved.

According to a 2007 memo by the chief of NASA’s Ames Research Center at Moffett, Pete Worden, “Not everyone can nor should use this airfield. NASA has specific criteria to determine who can partner with us and whether they may use their aircraft at Moffett. All requests by a private entity undergo a rigorous review process and every request must demonstrate a relationship to NASA missions.”

One person with knowledge of the matter said a complaint regarding alleged favoritism toward Google has been filed against Ames with NASA’s Inspector General based on the different treatment received by H211 And other applicants.

NASA apparently charges the Google executives a better rate for supplies of jet fuel than is available from private suppliers.

While the Defense Department charges H211 market rates for fuel, it does not collect any state or local excise taxes on the sales, according to the fuel contract between H211 and NASA.

That means H211 pays less than full freight–unless H211 voluntarily turns over these tax payments to the state of California.

[American Patriot]

I predict a name change for google in a few years.

LOL

[vector7]

Companion Threads:

• Obama Administration Establishes New Plan for Regulating the Internet
• Obama administration introduced an anti-free speech measure
• Obama’s Growing Snitch Program on Extremism
• Protect IP act...legislation to let business censor the internet
• Obama Making Plans to Use Executive Power

Google gets personal, searches your world, not just the Web

January 10, 2012 | 6:30 am



For Google, it's personal. The Internet search giant is no longer going to roll out the same search results to everyone.

Starting Tuesday, Google will pluck only the results most relevant to you -- and not just from billions of Web pages but from the personal stuff that you and your connections privately share.

The idea, says Google Fellow Amit Singhal, is that Google now searches your world, not just the Web, and serves up results that combine both for your eyes only.

"Your world was missing from search until now," he said. "We are bringing your world into search."

It's not just a radical departure for Google. It's a major salvo in the Internet search giant's rivalry with Facebook for eyeballs and ad dollars.

Google, with founder Larry Page at the helm, has been looking to blunt the growing influence of Facebook, which is on the verge of a $100-billion initial public stock offering.

Google has been adding more personal touches to its search engine as people flock to Facebook, the Web's most popular hangout with more than 800 million users who share personal photos, updates and recommendations. Now it's looking to combine its dominant search engine with its nascent social networking service, Google+.

"It's one of the most significant things Google has ever done in search," said longtime Google observer Danny Sullivan, editor of SearchEngineLand.com.



Singhal explained the new feature called Search plus Your World through a personal anecdote.

As a child, his favorite fruit was the sweet brown chikoo. Singhal was reminded of the fruit a few years ago when his wife held a tiny brown fur ball in the palm of her hand. They decided to name their 4-week-old miniature schnauzer Chikoo and privately shared photos of him as he grew with family members. Now both meanings of Chikoo show up when Singhal is logged into Google and searches the word.

Google, like rival Microsoft's Bing, has been working for years to make search more personal and more social. Google says with this move it's transforming into a search engine that understands not only content but also people and their relationships.

It's doing this in three ways. First, it's expanding search beyond public Web pages to the photos and posts you and others have shared privately.

Second, as you type a person's name into Google, it will automatically suggest people you are close to or may be interested in. Third, Google is guiding users to profiles and Google+ pages related to the topic of interest.
But how will users react?



"Until now we have not had the mixture of our personal information with our Web search results, and that makes even me a bit nervous," Sullivan said.
Some users may not want or understand why their personal information is appearing in its search results. Google said it would explain the change to users at the top of Web pages.

Even though Google is just making information more visible and easier to find, it may encounter the same kind of resistance that Facebook did when it rolled out its new feature Timeline, Sullivan said.

Like Facebook, Google isn't asking users whether they want the new feature, it's just turning it on for all English-speaking users over the next few days. If you don't want the feature, you have to turn it off.

Google may also be seen as favoring its own products in search results, an allegation that already has made Google a target of an antitrust investigation, Sullivan said. For example, instead of sending someone searching for Britney Spears to her website, Facebook page or Twitter account, Google will suggest her Google+ page, giving the service a "huge advantage," he said.

"It makes you question if Google is doing the best thing for the searcher or the best thing for Google," Sullivan said.

Google says it's hamstrung because Facebook fences off its website from Google's search engine.

"We want users to have control over what personal content they can search for at Google. We don't want third parties dictating to users what they can or can't search for in Google," Singhal said. "Based on the current policies at many social networks, users don't have that control."



That could put pressure on Facebook, Sullivan said.

"This is a really big gun pointed back at Facebook," he said. "This may cause Facebook to say that now that Google has merged social and search, that's what it needs to do as well."

Facebook has an alliance with Microsoft's Bing to lure traffic away from Google, which handles about two of every three Internet search requests.

Microsoft owns a 1.6% stake in Facebook. But the partnership has not yielded much, Sullivan said.

Google's new personal approach also raises a broader societal issue, Sullivan said.

"Until now, search has largely been a common experience," Sullivan said. Jon Stewart gets a lot of laughs over Rick Santorum's "Google problem" (a search for his last name brings up a graphically sexual definition of "santorum"). But if search results are tailored to the beliefs we hold and the people we know, chances are "we might not actually see the same thing Jon Stewart sees anymore," Sullivan said.

RELATED:
Heads are turning to Internet's golden child
Google making another attempt at social networking
FTC launches investigation of Google

[vector7]

Google Maps renames Trump Tower as Dump Tower

Posted on November 27, 2016 by Dr. Eowyn | 30 Comments

That’s how petty, childish, and sore losers the Left are.

Katherine Lam and Talia Tirella report for PIX11 that yesterday, Nov. 26, someone at Google Maps renamed President-elect Donald Trump’s building in midtown Manhattan from Trump Tower to “Dump Tower”.



Google Maps users began noticing the Fifth Avenue building’s name on Saturday afternoon. It’s unclear when the switch occurred, but people on Twitter began tweeting about the new “brand identity” around 2 p.m.

Trump International Hotel & Tower in Columbus Circle was also renamed Dump International Hotel & Tower.

A spokesperson from Google Maps told PIX11 the name change from Trump to “Dump” has been fixed:

“Some inappropriate names were surfacing in Google Maps that should not be, and we apologize for any offense this may have caused. Our teams immediately took action and have fixed the issue.”

~Eowyn

Left-Wing Plug-In Blocks Conservative Sites, Crashes Browsers

December 7, 2016
Daniel Greenfield



Many lefties have decided that the solution to Trump's win is to climb even deeper into their bubble. Meanwhile the media has been angrily denouncing what it calls "fake news", which is any news that it disagrees with. So it quickly rushed over to praise a plug-in from left-wing anti-Israel activist Daniel Sieradski. There's just one tiny little problem.

The plug-in, however, has bugs, causing some users’ browsers to crash.

In exchange for having their sites censored, users get to enjoy crashes and a slow browser. But isn't crippling their ability to browse the internet the best way to avoid dissenting opinions?

Here are some review of B.S. Detector, the plugin.

Can't see the extension listed... .... and performance of Chrome has got very erratic since installing BS Detector

​Icon is disabled... And it does not work. Ever....

Scrolling through webpages is really slow after installing this... I've noticed a lot of lag when scrolling websites while this extension is enabled.

Does flag bs news links but the performance hit is rough. I ran it with the extension flatbook and without it was sluggish both ways.

This extension crashed my google docs app and made it impossible to access documents I needed. I spent all day trying to figure out the problem and I later found out it was this extension after tedious work.

Great idea, but it slows my browser down terribly. Extension is updated, no improvement. Makes Facebook and Google Drive especially unusable.

Slowed down Chrome significantly. I had to go through my extensions, disabling each one individually, until I found the culprit. Made /everything/ extremely slow. Updating the extension did not help.

Well Comrade, if you want to enjoy Soviet level political correctness, you must also accept Soviet era performance.


http://www.frontpagemag.com/point/26...iel-greenfield

SEARCH FOR TRUTH Google promotes controversial claim it’s NOT possible for ethnic minorities to be racist against white people

Tech giant foregrounds idea that white people cannot be victims of racism in search results

by JASPER HAMILL
3rd October 2016, 12:50 pm

GOOGLE is promoting the idea that ethnic minorities CANNOT be racist toward white people.

The tech giant’s search results appear to foreground left-leaning answers to this highly controversial question, rather than giving a view which reflects the fact there is debate over this contentious issue.

Reuters 2

It is not clear whether this is conscious decision from Google, or whether it is a result of the algorithms it uses to compile search results

America is currently locked in a passionate argument about whether some supporters of groups like Black Lives Matter are actually racist towards white people, with people from different sides of the political spectrum offering varying views.

However, Google’s search facility offers a rather one-sided solution to this thorny and divisive question.

We searched Google using several terms similar to the phrase: “Can you be racist towards white people?”

Google showed us an explanation which appears to be taken from the Huffington Post.

“Any person can be racist, regardless of their own race,” Google’s search rankings explained.

“WRONG no they can’t racism requires power and prejudice. white people have power to oppress black people because they control the system and ecnomic [sic.] structure in society.”

2

Here’s what happens if you ask Google ‘is it possible to be racist to a white person?’

We also asked if a black person be racist against a white person and were told: “The usage of the word racist relative to a hate speech by blacks on blacks or whites is incorrect. A subjugated group cannot be racist – they can only be prejudicial.”

When we asked Google the question “can you be racist towards a white person?” it showed a comment from a blogger called Slapdash Mom.
She wrote: “Prejudice against white folks is not ‘racism’, it’s ‘prejudice’ or ‘discrimination’.

“Racism is something else entirely…it’s a system that acts against people of colour in this country (established through slavery and colonisation)…so their [sic.] is a difference.”

Companion Threads and Posts:

• The Left's Unholy Alliance with Islam
  
• Google Executive Addresses Hundreds of Thousands at Tahrir Square (video)
  
• "The Revolution has Just Begun" Google Guru Banned
• Egyptian Revolution Backed By George Soros

Google calls staffers back to US after Trump order on immigration, report says

Google's CEO wrote a memo to staffers that it is 'painful' to see the personal cost of President Trump's order on our colleagues. (Reuters)


Google called on its employees who may be affected by President Trump’s immigration order to get back to the U.S. as soon as possible, according to a report published Saturday.

Bloomberg obtained a copy of a memo from the company’s CEO, Sundar Pichai.

"It’s painful to see the personal cost of this executive order on our colleagues," Pichai wrote. "We’ve always made our view on immigration issues known publicly and will continue to do so."

An unidentified source told Bloomberg that the concern is that employees from one of the seven countries that Trump identified may not be allowed back in to the U.S., even if that person has a valid visa.

"We are advising our clients from those seven countries who have green cards or any type of H-1B visa not to travel outside the U.S." Ava Benach, a partner at immigration law firm Benach Collopy LLP, said in the report. “No one is really sure whether a green card holder from these seven countries can return to the U.S. now. It’s fairly clear that an H-1B visa holder can’t," Benach said.

Trump's executive order suspends all immigration from countries with terrorism concerns for 90 days.

The State Department said the three-month ban in the directive applied to Iraq, Syria, Iran, Sudan, Libya, Somalia and Yemen - all Muslim-majority nations.

The order also calls for Homeland Security and State Department officials, along with the director of national intelligence, to review what information the government needs to fully vet would-be visitors and come up with a list of countries that don't provide it.

The order says the government will give countries 60 days to start providing the information or citizens from those countries will be barred from traveling to the United States.

The temporary halt to refugee processing does include exceptions for people claiming religious persecution, so long as their religion is a minority faith in their country. That could apply to Christians from Muslim-majority countries.

The Associated Press contributed to this report

[vector7]

Google Engineer Starts Viral Conspiracy Theory That Trump Is Planning Secret Coup




“The administration is testing the extent to which the DHS (and other executive agencies) can act and ignore orders from the other branches of government,” claims Yonatan Zunger, a “Distinguished Engineer at Google, working on the Privacy team” according to his LinkedIn profile, in a blog post titled “Trial Balloon for a Coup?” published to Medium. “This is as serious as it can possibly get: all of the arguments about whether order X or Y is unconstitutional mean nothing if elements of the government are executing them and the courts are being ignored.”

“Yesterday was the trial balloon for a coup d’état against the United States,” he continued. “It gave them useful information.”
The article was shared by celebrities such as Hollywood star Mark Ruffalo, musician Questlove Gomez, House of Cards creator Beau Willimon, and #BlackLivesMatter activist Shaun King, legitimizing the conspiracy theory while gaining thousands of favorites and retweets.

Absolute must read. “Trial Balloon for a Coup?” by @yonatanzunger https://t.co/My5yHsCPTt
— Mark Ruffalo (@MarkRuffalo) January 30, 2017

dude…. https://t.co/fHxgsi3guX
— Questlove Gomez (@questlove) January 30, 2017

I'm not usually into conspiracy theories but I STRONGLY encourage u to read this & share it. This feels too real. https://t.co/THsawPPkto
— billy eichner (@billyeichner) January 30, 2017

A plausible blueprint for a coup in the USA, and how this weekend's events were a test run for the machinery: https://t.co/u2LSBes2Ew
— Charlie Stross (@cstross) January 30, 2017

If you haven't read this, you should read it. Then you should read the piece he links within it. https://t.co/U3x9WDAviu
— Cassandra (@ChrisWarcraft) January 30, 2017

Take 8 minutes of your day, and read this. #StopTheCoup https://t.co/jMmUOfcJ81
— Michael Skolnik (@MichaelSkolnik) January 30, 2017

I need you to read and share this.
It may be the most thorough, cogent, important analysis of this weekend.https://t.co/cXCqEyZWr0
— Shaun King (@ShaunKing) January 30, 2017

“Eyes open and on the ball. Bannon hates our government,” claimed Mark Ruffalo in one tweet about White House Chief Strategist and former Breitbart News Executive Chairman Stephen K. Bannon.

Eyes open and on the ball. Bannon hates our government. “Trial Balloon for a Coup?” by @yonatanzunger https://t.co/KFLOKkODFk
— Mark Ruffalo (@MarkRuffalo) January 30, 2017

“This may be a coup d’etat. The most valuable lesson I learned working in politics: always be prepared for the worst,” declared Beau Willimon. “I cannot stress enough how important it is to be thinking this way. It may be what saves us. Circulate.”

This may be a coup d'etat. The most valuable lesson I learned working in politics: always be prepared for the worst. https://t.co/xXomL0LqWY
— Beau Willimon (@BeauWillimon) January 30, 2017

I cannot stress enough how important it is to be thinking this way. It may be what saves us. Circulate#StoptheCouphttps://t.co/xXomL0LqWY
— Beau Willimon (@BeauWillimon) January 30, 2017

“Dem consultants are sharing this/going crazy. Apparently Trump is leading a secret coup d’état,” posted one former political consultant. “Lol. Please.”

Dem consultants are sharing this/going crazy.
Apparently Trump is leading a secret coup d'état.
Lol. Please. ��.https://t.co/3QpC2yVIho
— Harlan Z. Hill (@Harlan) January 30, 2017

Though the article was riddled with unfounded implications, it was shared thousands of times on social media, with its popularity fueled largely by the liberal elite celebrities that promoted it.
Charlie Nash is a reporter for Breitbart Tech. You can follow him on Twitter @MrNashington or like his page at Facebook.

http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2017/0...g-secret-coup/

[vector7]

Google Redefines The Word ‘Fascism’ To Smear Conservatives, Protect Liberal Rioters

DEREK HUNTER
Contributor
11:11 AM 02/04/2017
2088
799

Has Google, the world’s most popular search engine, changed the definition of the word “fascism” to protect liberal mobs using violence to silence those who disagree with them politically? The evidence suggest they have.

You see it on signs at every protest or riot — liberals accuse President Donald Trump of being a fascist. The word’s association with Adolf Hitler and its use now is no accident, it’s meant to strike fear in people’s hearts of tyranny.

Merriam-Webster defines the word “fascism” as “a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition.” The secondary definition is “a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control.”

This definition reflects the fact that Nazis were, in fact, both fascists and of the political left. They were the “National Socialist German Workers Party,” which favored a heavy-handed government in business and the personal lives of its citizens.

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2017/02/04/go...#ixzz4XpC8wMp9

[vector7]

Court Documents Reveal Google Believes Free Speech Is “Disastrous” For Society

Tim Brown / November 8, 2018 / 690

Frankly, as soon as Google began engaging in censorship and manipulating search results, they should have been shut down. They received millions of taxpayer dollars illegally and unconstitutionally through a CIA-front group to get started.

As such, they should be held to the same restraints that the federal government is concerning speech and while they are not those who may legislate, they should be those who are not allowed to censor. Recent court documents are now revealing just how Communistic Google actually is as they have now stated that free speech is “disastrous” for a society.

In a statement filed with the Ninth Circuit court of Appeals, Google proclaimed that the government, which gave them money, holding them to the same standard as we hold our government to regarding free speech under the First Amendment “would undermine important content regulation.”

Google also added, “If they are bound by the same First Amendment rules that apply to the government, YouTube and other service providers would lose much of their ability to protect their users against offensive or objectionable content — including pornography, hate speech, personal attacks, and terrorist propaganda.”

That’s nonsense. First, hate speech is defined pretty broad and is often protected speech. Pornography is not “speech.”

Personal attacks are not “free speech” as people can deal with people in civil matters over that or the speech may actually become criminal. Terrorist propaganda is not free speech either. It is threats and incitement to violence.

Google argues that government regulation would have “disastrous practical consequences.”

In other words, if government comes in and makes Google stop censoring those they disagree with, the that free speech would be “disastrous.”

Furthermore, neither Google nor Youtube are responsible for what is on the platform. They are not publishers, but they want it both ways. They want First Amendment protections while violating the free speech rights of their users.
Lance Johnson writes:

Google should still remain in control over its own content regulation, but the United States should appoint a third party commission to review Google’s actions when complaints of political, business, and ideological censorship are brought forth. With so much power over information and with mounting complaints of censorship coming against Google, it is imperative that a judicial review committee hold Google accountable when they are violating the free speech rights of people on the internet.

According to their legal statement, Google still believes their company can discriminate on the basis of political viewpoints, because they “can’t be forced to change.” What Google does not understand is that, with the proper legal oversight, their monopoly can be forced to operate more fairly, without engaging in anti-competitive practices that benefit their own agendas and the goals of their highly influential friends. People and organizations that are censored by Google deserve the right to bring forth their case and have their voice be heard. Google can be forced to respect people’s First Amendment rights and can be legally required to correct their algorithms when they are using their technology to abuse content creators, advertisers, and search engine users. The rule of law should be upheld.

Interestingly enough, this all coincides with a “Google Walkout” in response to Google exec Andy Rubin quietly getting a $90 million payoff despite allegedly forcing an employee to perform oral sex on him.

And this is the guy that wants to “protect” you from all these things. Yeah, right! No, thanks.

Wow. Story to watch today: Google employees all over the world walking out at 11 am local time to protest the company’s handling of sexual misconduct as revealed by @daiwaka and @ktbenner. Pics from #googlewalkout Dublin: https://t.co/dJBmuI4fdz
— jodikantor (@jodikantor) November 1, 2018

Time is up @googlewalkout #GoogleWalkout pic.twitter.com/WHSj6U8NOr
— Briana Wallace (@BrianaWallace) November 1, 2018

I'm not at work for the next while, so I can't walk out of the office. Instead, here's something from me in solidarity, at 11:10am local time in Thailand. #GoogleWalkout #TimesUp #MeToo pic.twitter.com/cZpyXVUl1A
— Liz Fong-Jones (@lizthegrey) November 1, 2018

Google employee Jennifer Brown carries a sign that reads "I Reported And He Got Promoted" while participating in today's #GoogleWalkout in San Francisco @sfchronicle pic.twitter.com/abboeu0RQJ
— Jessica Christian (@jachristian) November 1, 2018

It’s interesting to see Google’s own hypocrisy on display for all to see, isn’t it? Take government money, but won’t be held to government standards. Talk about protecting you while promoting some of the most perverse and disgusting behavior on the planet among their leadership.

It’s time Google got googled.

Article posted with permission from Freedom Outpost

[vector7]

US General: Google Working With China's Military, Puts National Security at Risk

The military general has been vocal on his concerns of US tech firms

By: Pippa Monroe |@NeonNettle on 15th March 2019 @ 2.12pm



Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Marine General Joseph Dunford slammed the search giant during senate armed services committee hearing.

A top United States General has warned that search giant Google is closely working with China and 'indirectly benefiting the Chinese military' as a result.

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Marine General Joseph Dunford, slammed the search giant during Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on Thursday.

"We watch with great concern when industry partners work in China knowing that there is that indirect benefit," he said.

"Frankly, "indirect" maybe not a full characterization of the way it really is, it is more of a direct benefit to the Chinese military."




Google announced last year it had abandoned its bid for $10billion cloud computing contract with the Defense Department.

The military general has been vocal on his concerns of US tech firms working with competitors like China, and failing to help the Department of Defense.

Google announced last year it had abandoned its bid for $10billion cloud computing contract with the Defense Department because the company's 'ethical' guidelines failed to t align with the project. Last June, Google announced it would not renew a contract to assist the US military to analyze aerial drone imagery.

Google also admitted last year in October to working with the Chinese Government on a secret censored search engine project.

The search engine failed to clarify whether it was working on "Project Dragonfly," despite damning leaks making it impossible to continue denying the new censorship operation any longer.

"The way I described it to our industry partners is: Look, we're the good guys," Dunford said at the hearing.

"The values that we represent and the system we represent is the one that will allow and has allowed you to thrive."



Acting Secretary of Defense Patrick Shanahan also slammed Google saying it had a 'lack of willingness to support DoD program.'

"$5 trillion of [China's] economy is state-owned enterprises," he continued.

"So the technology that has developed in the civil world transfers to the military world, it's a direct pipeline." "Not only is there a transfer, but there is also systemic theft of US technology that facilitates even faster development of emerging technology."

"The talent is in this country. We need to use the talent in this country, and the talent in this country needs to support our great power competition."

Republican Sen Josh Hawley referred to the Search Giant as 'a supposedly American company.'

"We are in a struggle with the Chinese government over whether or not they're going to become a regional and maybe global hegemon with values very different from ours, certain values that do not favor freedom in the world," he said.

"We have an American company that does not want to do work with our defense department which is one thing, but they're happy to help the Chinese."

"At least the Chinese government that is, the Chinese military, at least indirectly,' he added. 'I think that's just extraordinary."