Thursday, February 18

Google Bans DVD Critical Of Obama Administration

Search Engine Giant Censors Alex Jones Material For “Advocating Against a Protected Group”
Google Bans DVD Critical Of Obama Administration 160210top2
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Tuesday, February 16, 2010
Google has sensationally banned all sales through its shopping merchant of a DVD critical of the Obama administration under the terms of its program policy which bars any material deemed to be “advocating against a protected group”. Apparently, Google considers the government to be a “protected group,” and immune from criticism.
Radio talk show host Alex Jones’ Google merchant account has been completely disabled after the search engine giant sent an email claiming the products listed promoted violence, and refused to link to them on the Infowars Yahoo shopping cart.
“I had our new employee Thomas try to get our products from our Yahoo Store get sent to Google shopping so people using google shopping can view our products and purchase them. We went through the steps of signing up for a Google Merchant Account and then submitted our entire product list,” writes Infowars staff member Tim Fruge.
“We were denied. I said OK, we’ll try it again with just a few products. Thinking maybe certain items were possibly flagging it. So we tried it with just a few of Alex’s DVD’s only….nope, still denied. So, I said let’s just try listing Fall Of The Republic. Still denied! We had to contact Google to find out what was going on and that’s when we got the response attached to this email. Just a blanket response, basically calling us a hate group or something to that effect.”
When Fruge questioned Google as to why the account had been disabled, he received the following response.
Hello,
Thank you for your email. Your data feed contains listings for items that don’t comply with our Program Policies.
Anti and Violence: products and associated websites may not promote violence or advocate against a protected group. This standard applies to everyone who wants to post on Google, whether we agree with their viewpoint or not. A protected group is distinguished by their race or ethnic origin, color, national origin, religion, disability, sex, age, veteran status, or sexual orientation/gender identity.
Visit http://www.google.com/support/merchants/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=160074 to ensure all your items comply with our Program Policies.
Sincerely,
The Google Team
“So basically Google is censoring Fall Of The Republic on Google Shopping for the above stated reason. While The Turner Diaries, and many, many more books that are blatantly racist are allowed,” writes Fruge.
We were eventually able to get our products listed on Google but only through a third party that links to the Google base network.

The fact that Google openly admits to censoring material that is “anti” anything is a startling insight into their distain for free speech. People who consider themselves “anti-homosexuality” or “anti-Christianity” and make films or write books about it would consider their point of view to constitute freedom of speech, but not according to Google, who selectively choose which groups are allowed to be criticized and which are not.

You may have a personal dislike for old people or be not particularly fond of the French – that’s hate speech according to Google’s policies.

However, the fact that Google allows the sale of clearly racist items such as The Turner Diaries, while censoring films critical of the Obama administration, is an obvious double standard.

At no point whatsoever throughout the nearly 2 and a half hour long documentary Fall of the Republic is violence against anyone advocated. What the film does expose is how Obama abandoned his promise of change and is hastily implementing and expanding the same financial and geopolitical policies advanced under Bush. This message has been received by millions of people who have seen different free versions of the film on You Tube.

Maybe the fact that Google Chief Executive Eric Schmidt, a man who recently spelled out pretty clearly the disregard Google has for your privacy, campaigned for Obama and appeared with him at town hall meeting held at Google headquarters in November 2007, has something to do with the anti-Obama film disappearing from Google’s merchant website.

Of course, Google can ultimately refuse to carry any material they like because their servers are their own private property, but when an organization that now plays such a massive role in numerous facets of our life takes on the role of the thought police, we should be drastically concerned, especially considering the fact that Google recently announced its intention to establish a working relationship with the National Security Agency, the government spy force responsible for warrantless monitoring of Americans’ phone calls and e-mails in the wake of 9/11.

Of course, seasoned readers will know that Alex Jones has been a constant target of the Google thought police for years.

Last year, You Tube, which is owned by Google, pulled the Alex Jones Channel on the flimsiest of pretexts and only agreed to restore it after thousands of people complained.

In 2007, Google deleted a short news clip highlighting the BBC Building 7 fiasco, despite the fact that the clip clearly constituted fair use.

Despite the story receiving widespread attention from a myriad of mainstream news outlets, for days Google censored all information relating to Charlie Sheen’s comments about 9/11 first made to The Alex Jones Show in March 2006.

More recently, Google was accused of censoring search results related to the Climategate global warming scandal.

Shortly after Google entered the Chinese search engine market and complied with demands from the Communist Chinese government that its content be censored, the company pulled a statement from its website that assured readers Google didn’t censor search results – now they do.

Google’s foundiing mantra was “don’t be evil,” and yet the company’s actions in censoring DVD’s critical of the U.S. government represents precisely that – an insidious, hypocritical and evil assault on the First Amendment.
Share:

0 Have Your Say!:

Post a Comment