If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my free Email alerts. Thanks for visiting!

DESTROYS CREDIBILITY OF MULTI-MILLION DOLLAR INVESTMENT OUT OF FANATICISM FOR BARACK

by John Charlton

(Oct. 20, 2009) — The Post & Email reported 5 days ago, how Google has scrubbed it’s Newspaper Archive to cover for Obama’s diverse claims of origin: Google’s Archive shows that Obama’s birth story has changed.

Today, the corporation is reinventing and rearranging History for Obama.

http://news.google.com/archivesearch?q=obama

This time the search is not as simple.  You start first with an Obama search, and Google News Archive only gives results from 2007-2009; as if Obama never existed before.  Strange indeed.

However, if you select other dates, let us say 1900-2009, you get some previous results, not found before in the search 5 days ago.

The Post & Email will detail the new Obama “history” that Google wants you to know about, as of Oct. 20, 2009.  The following descriptions of the links are returned by a search executed through this URL:

The first result is a CNN report form June 6, 1944. That’s right, 1944.  Perhaps you didn’t know that they had cable TV news stations back in the Second World War?  According to Google News Archive’s search engine they did.  Imagine that!  Why the link appears under a search for Obama is anyone’s guess.

The second is allegedly a Magnum Photo from Chicago, Illinois on Jan. 1, 1947, which results for a search for “Obama”, who wasn’t born for another 14 years!

The third is another Magnum Photo of the Victory Column in Berlin, on the same day, even though the text indicates President-elect Obama walking in a park, some 62 years later.

And on and on it goes, for another 60 years.

It seems that Google has intentionally sabotaged their Archive, and given results to any archived page on which a Google-Ad mentioned Obama’s name.

What kind of search algorithm is that?

One to hide history, evidently.

Hundreds of articles from 1940 to 2009 which have nothing to do with Obama; indexed under the name “Obama”.

It appears that instead of using the text in the historical articles, Google has changed the algorithm to look INSTEAD at the text in the pages which contain the specific description of the archived pages.

The evident effect is to make historical research into Obama’s past nearly impossible, since the search engine no longer returns specific results.  Only results with Google ads promoting Obama propaganda.

That’s not a news archive.  That’s a propaganda archive.

The Question of the Day

The question of the day is this:  why spend ostensibly millions of dollars putting together a database for newspapers round the world, and destroy its credibility in 5 days just to protect Obama?

Is Google willing to destroy itself to cover for Obama’s lies? What kind of unhealthy fanaticism is that?


Join the Conversation

No comments

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

  1. I have avoided using google for the last year specifically because of their playing with their search results to hide truthful articles that would have hurt obama during the election campaign.. (Especially the OBAMA NBC issue – I have proof of this.) They are international communist dirtbags, run by George Soros’ son.

    I HIGHLY RECOMMEND USING http://WWW.IXQUICK.COM FOR ALL INTERNET SEARCHES. THEY DO NOT KEEP A RECORD OF YOUR SEARCHES FOR MORE THAN 48 HOURS AND USE I THINK 6 DIFFERENT COMBINED SEARCH ENGINES.

    IXQUICK.COM also doesn’t store your IP address like google, yahoo, etc.

    Don’t trust Google or Yahoo. Both have turned over customers in China that the communist government had arrested as political dissidents and put in jail.

  2. I will not believe anything that is written on Google. It seems that the president has FINALLY gotten around to stop EVEN Google from giving us the true stories! How much do you think that Google made off his payoff? This is MY opinion and as of this date Oct.20, 2009 I do believe I have a right to speak it, but for how long, who knows?