Monday, December 03, 2007

More Google gaggle

I recently got an email from Google saying that their automatic spam detectors had detected my Marx blog as a spam blog and had blocked it from further postings. They also said that they intended to delete the blog within 20 days if I did not click a certain link. I clicked the link twice and twice I got a "task failure" response. A bit pesky! Anyway, I knew enough about the system to go to the blog itself and attempt to post something. I then got a link which enabled me to request removal of the block and the block was in fact removed a couple of days after that.

The thing that gets me, though, is why their software suddenly detected my blog after it had been up since 2004. And I had posted nothing on it since July so it was not fresh posts that they were monitoring. And it cannot have been the content of the blog that attracted automatic attention. The blog consists almost wholly of quotes from old Karl. Any algorithm that flagged that sort of content would have flagged half the Leftist blogs in the blogosphere!

The quotes from old Karl on the blog are however ones that Leftists would generally hate you to know about (showing what a racist he was, for instance). So I can only conclude that there was no automatic detection at all. It seems to me that the detection was by a Google employee who hoped to close down anything anti-Leftist. That's not at all unexpected from Google. Sites that quote the bad bits in the Koran get a hard time from Google on occasions. Google can be quite evil sometimes.

And another odd thing is that a REAL spam blog -- such as this one -- Google will not touch, despite repeated requests from me to that they delete it. It uses one of my old addresses.


Recently up on ICJS

The fear Factor
Anti-Semitism and the Left that Doesn't Learn
Shame on `Ha-Aretz'
Academia, the Left, and Islamo-Fascism
We came so close to World War Three that day



Did you remain calm too?: "An absurd "news" story in the AP suggests that that organization wants to be numbered among the good dogs, not the bad dogs: "Clinton calm in hostage crisis. When the hostages had been released and their alleged captor arrested, a regal-looking Hillary Rodham Clinton strolled out of her Washington home, the picture of calm in the face of crisis. The image, broadcast just as the network news began, conveyed the message a thousand town hall meetings and campaign commercials strive for - namely, that the Democratic presidential contender can face disorder in a most orderly manner". We don't know about you, but, difficult as it is, we always try to remain calm when drunks tape highway flares to their shirts five hundred miles from our house."

Even the L.A. Times calls CNN "The Corrupt News Network": "The United States is at war in the Middle East and Central Asia, the economy is writhing like a snake with a broken back, oil prices are relentlessly climbing toward $100 a barrel and an increasing number of Americans just can't afford to be sick with anything that won't be treated with aspirin and bed rest. So, when CNN brought the Republican presidential candidates together this week for what is loosely termed a "debate," what did the country get but a discussion of immigration, Biblical inerrancy and the propriety of flying the Confederate flag? In fact, this most recent debacle masquerading as a presidential debate raises serious questions about whether CNN is ethically or professionally suitable to play the political role the Democratic and Republican parties recently have conceded it. When one considers CNN's performance, however, the adjectives that leap to mind are corrupt and incompetent."

What a pathetic admission of fraud: "The New Republic has, at last, retracted the Scott Thomas Beauchamp stories. It takes Franklin Foer fourteen long pages to do so, waffling and tapdancing the whole time: "When I last spoke with Beauchamp in early November, he continued to stand by his stories. Unfortunately, the standards of this magazine require more than that. And, in light of the evidence available to us, after months of intensive re-reporting, we cannot be confident that the events in his pieces occurred in exactly the manner that he described them. Without that essential confidence, we cannot stand by these stories." He blames a lot of people, including Beauchamp's wife (does she still work there, one wonders). But in the end he has tried to shuffle blame away to no avail. How long until Foer "leaves to pursue other opportunities?"

Democrats: New Party of the Rich?: "Democrats like to define themselves as the party of poor and middle-income Americans, but a new study says they now represent the majority of the nation's wealthiest congressional districts. In a state-by-state, district-by-district comparison of wealth concentrations based on Internal Revenue Service income data, Michael Franc, vice president of government relations at the Heritage Foundation, found that the majority of the nation's wealthiest congressional jurisdictions were represented by Democrats. He also found that more than half of the wealthiest households were concentrated in the 18 states where Democrats hold both Senate seats. "If you take the wealthiest one-third of the 435 congressional districts, we found that the Democrats represent about 58 percent of those jurisdictions," Mr. Franc said... Mr. Franc's study also showed that contrary to the Democrats' tendency to define Republicans as the party of the rich, "the vast majoritiy of unabashed conservative House members hail from profoundly middle-class districts."

British navy 'would struggle to fight a war': "BRITAIN'S Royal Navy would struggle to fight a major war because of years of under-funding and cut-backs, according to a defence ministry study leaked to a newspaper. The Sunday Telegraph said the report was ordered by Defence Secretary Des Browne to counter claims from opposition political parties and the media about a lack of resources in Britain's military. But the study concluded: "The current material state of the fleet is not good: the Royal Navy would be challenged to mount a medium-scale operation in accordance with current policy against a technologically capable adversary." A "medium-scale operation" is similar to Britain's naval involvement in the 2003 invasion of Iraq, the newspaper said. The document comes at a time of concern about the capabilities of Britain's armed forces due to a perceived lack of adequate funding for equipment and so-called "overstretch" because of commitments in Iraq and Afghanistan. Five of the country's former top military commanders last month criticised Prime Minister Gordon Brown for failing to fund adequately the armed forces during his 10 years as finance minister under Tony Blair."


List of backup or "mirror" sites here or here -- for readers in China or for everyone when blogspot is "down" or failing to update. Email me here (Hotmail address). My Home Pages are here or here or here


"Why should the German be interested in the liberation of the Jew, if the Jew is not interested in the liberation of the German?... We recognize in Judaism, therefore, a general anti-social element of the present time... In the final analysis, the emancipation of the Jews is the emancipation of mankind from Judaism.... Indeed, in North America, the practical domination of Judaism over the Christian world has achieved as its unambiguous and normal expression that the preaching of the Gospel itself and the Christian ministry have become articles of trade... Money is the jealous god of Israel, in face of which no other god may exist". Who said that? Hitler? No. It was Karl Marx. See also here and here and here.

The Big Lie of the late 20th century was that Nazism was Rightist. It was in fact typical of the Leftism of its day. It was only to the Right of Stalin's Communism. The very word "Nazi" is a German abbreviation for "National Socialist" (Nationalsozialistisch) and the full name of Hitler's political party (translated) was "The National Socialist German Workers' Party".


No comments: