by Susanne Posel
Google claims that they have been told by authorities from various governments, by way of more than 1,000 requests, to remove content from YouTube in the last 6 months of 2011. Google says this is “an alarming trend”. This is an attempt to subvert responsibility from the mega search engine, who works for the National Security Agency (NSA).
A US Court of Appeals in the District of Columbia, ruled last month that the NSA does not need to confirm nor deny (known as a “Glomar” response) its collaborations with Google; how the two work together to spy on American citizens in the name of protecting the public from false flag “cyber-attacks”.
The court’s ruling states effectively that regardless of a filing by the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) with the Freedom of Information Act to obtain documents as to the relationship, the US government does not have to divulge any arrangement between the NSA and the search engine giant.
Dorothy Chou, Google’s senior policy analyst, states: “Unfortunately, what we’ve seen over the past couple years has been troubling, and today is no different. We hoped this was an aberration. But now we know it’s not.”
Google now admits that these requests targeted political speech, as mentioned in their Transparency Report in 2010. Chou confirms that it is “not only because free expression is at risk, but because some of these requests come from countries you might not suspect — Western democracies not typically associated with censorship.”
Google has simply complied with court orders and informal requested to remove content from the internet.
The search engine, subverting their influential responsibility, blames:
• Spanish regulators request 270 links to blogs, newspaper articles be removed criticizing public figures
• German government demands removal of Nazi references in YouTube videos
• Government officials in Thailand requested videos featuring their monarch be erased
• Canadian government said remove video of citizen urinating on Canadian passport; however in this one instance Google refused
In January of 2012, the European Union, under the guise of creating “a clean and open internet” set guidelines by which under certain circumstances they would have legal recourse to censor content and have it removed from the internet. The EU regulators used the excuse of racial content, child abuse and spam to take down content and curb free speech on the Web.
The EU has modeled their censorship of the internet after the Chinese approach.
In April of 2011, at the European Parliament’s event entitled, Creative Industries: Innovation for Growth, Michael Barnier of the French European Commissioner for the Internal Market stated that they have plans to enforce intellectual property rights onto internet service providers (ISPs) by way of police, called online intermediaries, who will criminalize consumers on the internet.
The EU is collecting user names and IP addresses from file-sharing sites and hosting services. Under the ACTA Treaty , the EU justifies its use of law enforcement against claimed copyright law infringement and uploading unlicensed material.
The EU/China internal policy on censorship of the internet will be based on the European model of censorship by proxy , whereby Internet intermediaries undertake the work. For unwanted traffic from outside the EU, the Chinese model of a “virtual border” is being pushed forward, despite recent protestations of innocence from the EU institutions.
Google, trying to clean up their image as a dominating force on the internet working for governments to subvert the freedom of the internet, is claiming that they are innocent in their removal of content by blaming government agencies and courts who demand corporations censor the internet for various reasons.
This bait and switch may convince the integrated masses who have not come to the realization that this world is controlled by a global Elite who is ushering in by incremental stages a one world government, but many are waking up to this fact.
And because the sheep are waking up, their efforts to purvey propaganda are losing its foothold.