Spartacus Blog

Google, Bing and Operation Mockingbird. The CIA and Search-Engines (Part 2)

Saturday, 14th June, 2014

Four days ago I wrote about my Operation Mockingbird page being removed from Google's first page in the search-rankings. (It remained 2nd to Wikipedia's page at Bing). This was taken-up by my followers on Twitter and Facebook and became the subject of a national newspaper investigation. It seems that the powers that be monitor these discussions because the page has returned to Google's database. The Wikipedia page on Operation Mockingbird has also reinstated the link to my website. (However, it still does not include details of the role played by Philip Graham, the publisher of the Washington Post, and other journalists at the paper such as Ben Bradlee, in the project.)

Several people have sent me accounts of their experiences trying to edit pages at Wikipedia. This one by Pat Speer is especially interesting.

Some months back, I was contacted by a scientist who wanted to build upon my research regarding the NAA tests on the paraffin casts. A few months later, he sent me a link to a Wikipedia discussion regarding a page he'd submitted on the paraffin casts. It was mind-boggling. He'd gone to the trouble of writing a page on the NAA tests, only to have it picked apart by anonymous Wikipedia gatekeepers who knew NOTHING about what he was talking about.

As I recall, one gatekeeper kept repeating that the page was unworthy because the only published sources were Harold Weisberg and Gerry McKnight, known conspiracy theorists. Another gatekeeper kept saying that EVERYTHING in the article was proved false by Vincent Bugliosi in his book Reclaiming History, and that Wikipedia shouldn't post articles on long-debunked conspiracy theories. I posted a comment saying that I saw some problems with the article, and would be willing to help edit it to make it as fair and accurate as possible, if they allowed the page to be published. I then received three or four comments and emails from these gatekeepers telling me that as I was one of the few people to have ever researched this area of inquiry, I was obviously BIASED and therefore PROHIBITED from commenting or editing the article.

So, yes, the world is UPSIDE down on this matter.

In the eyes of Wikipedia, ANYTHING written in Bugliosi's under-researched prosecutor's brief can be quoted, no matter how cow-brained or ill-informed, but nothing written by myself, or anyone who's actually studied this area of inquiry, including published authors Weisberg and McKnight, is up to Wikipedia's "standards" (sic).

So, the sad fact is that Mockingbird no longer needs to exist, as the young protectors of "mainsteam-thought" are every bit as blind and zealous as the most loyal of BIG BROTHER'S little brothers.

Google, Bing and Operation Mockingbird: Part 2 (14th June, 2014)

Google, Bing and Operation Mockingbird: The CIA and Search-Engine Results (10th June, 2014)

The Student as Teacher (7th June, 2014)

Is Wikipedia under the control of political extremists? (23rd May, 2014)

Why MI5 did not want you to know about Ernest Holloway Oldham (6th May, 2014)

The Strange Death of Lev Sedov (16th April, 2014)

Why we will never discover who killed John F. Kennedy (27th March, 2014)

The KGB planned to groom Michael Straight to become President of the United States (20th March, 2014)

The Allied Plot to Kill Lenin (7th March, 2014)

Was Rasputin murdered by MI6? (24th February 2014)

Winston Churchill and Chemical Weapons (11th February, 2014)

Pete Seeger and the Media (1st February 2014)