Category Archives: I_

“Google Is Not What It Seems” says Wikileaks

Photo Combo: “Google’s Chairman, Eric Schmidt, photographed in a New York elevator, carrying Henry Kissinger’s new book, ‘World Order’, 25 Sep 2014″ + “Google’s Chairman Eric Schmidt and Henry Kissinger, Secretary of State and National Security Council head under President Richard Nixon, during a ‘fireside chat’ with Google staff at the company’s headquarters in Mountain View, California, on 30 Sep 2013. In the talk, Kissinger says National Security Agency whistleblower Edward Snowden is ‘despicible’.”

Read this heavily referenced & long excerpt from Julian Assange’s book, “When Google Met Wikileaks”:

I’m not sure if that would be a case of the “pot calling the kettle black,” but here’s a truthful short snip from it, just the same:

There was nothing politically hapless about Eric Schmidt. I had been too eager to see a politically unambitious Silicon Valley engineer, a relic of the good old days of computer science graduate culture on the West Coast. But that is not the sort of person
who attends the Bilderberg conference four years running, who pays regular visits to the White House, or who delivers “fireside chats” at the World Economic Forum in Davos.43

Schmidt’s emergence as Google’s “foreign minister”—making pomp and ceremony state visits across geopolitical fault lines —had not come out of nowhere; it had been presaged by years of assimilation within US establishment networks of reputation and influence.

On a personal level, Schmidt and Cohen [both Jews, btw, as is Kissinger] are perfectly likable people. But Google’s chairman is a classic “head of industry” player, with all of the ideological baggage that comes with that role.44 Schmidt fits exactly where he is: the point where the centrist, liberal, and imperialist tendencies meet in American political life.

By all appearances, Google’s bosses genuinely believe in the civilizing power of enlightened multinational corporations, and they see this mission as continuous with the shaping of the world according to the better judgment of the “benevolent superpower.”

They will tell you that open-mindedness is a virtue, but all perspectives that challenge the exceptionalist drive at the heart of American foreign policy will remain invisible to them.

This is the impenetrable banality of “don’t be evil.” They believe that they are doing good. And that is a problem.

They indeed are “dancing with the Devil,” their disguised & deceiving “benevolent superpower.”

But we all knew it already, didn’t we?!

“They believe that they are doing good. And that is a problem.”

The True God agrees that is a problem! >

“There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death.”
–Proverbs 14:12

Read the intricate spider-web of relationships with which this behemoth known as Google is deeply entangled:

“A ‘don’t be evil’ empire is still an empire”:




Leave it to insurance companies to “CYA” themselves in advance, lol. At least in this case of cellphones & health issues they can’t cry, “It was an Act of God!” (At age 17 right out of high school, 1970, I was the dictaphone typist for the Claims Manager of a conglomerate of insurance companies. That’s where I first learned that insurance companies try to blame everything on God so they won’t have to pay up! I must have typed that phrase hundreds of times. Did it rain too hard today & your roof caved in? Too bad for you because it was “An Act of God!” Too funny!)

But seriously, hurray for the lawyers who sue insurance companies & industry corporate wolves. In the below news, it is a class action re cellphones & brain tumors & the fact the cell industry has tried to hide what it knew was dangerous, & the insurance companies are jumping ship! (Will ObamaScare step in to cover the health of all the owners of the freebie cells he gave out? Somebody should sue Obama, period, for just being alive, but that’s another story).


​’Casualty catastrophe’: cell phones and child brains (E26)

October 20, 2013 08:45

Watch Video

Download video (70.25 MB)

Insurers stop covering for cell phone use, called the next ‘casualty catastrophe’ after tobacco and asbestos; phone manufacturers hit with a class action and personal lawsuits; and the warning deep inside your mobile.
Seek truth from facts with Ellie Marks, whose husband Alan is suing the industry for his brain tumor, ‘cell phone survivor’ Bret Bocook, leading radiation biologist Prof. Dariusz Leszczynski, Microwave News editor Dr. Louis Slesin, Storyleak editor Anthony Gucciardi, and former senior White House adviser Dr. Devra Davis.
Full long story & text interview at above link.
Posted at:


From 2011: “Does home-WiFi expose you to less radiation than using the 3G on your cell-phone?” – Skeptics Stack Exchange:

No definitive answer was given, Yes or No, but there were interesting bits & pieces:

Any radiation below ultraviolet (radio, microwave, infrared, and visible light) is non-ionizing and won’t penetrate bone, meaning it can’t break down atoms (and consequently DNA, leading to cancer) and it can’t get to your sweet, delicious brain. […]
The radiation strength is determined by the frequency that the devices operate at, i.e., the frequency of the radiation they emit. 3G devices (in the U.S.A.) don’t really have a set frequency, but rather will operate at various levels ranging from ~800 MHz to just shy of 2.4 GHz (more if you’re using Bluetooth or 4G phones).

WiFi signals, on the other hand, share the same general frequency as microwave ovens at right around 2.4 GHz. […]
I appreciate the info on radiation being non-ionizing, which is often left out of the debate, and so, for both Wifi (hi-freq, low power) and cellular (lo-freq, hi-power) the equation might even out. […]


So what do you think?

Is non-ionizing radiation really safe?

Is either wifi or 3G really safe? (4G & LTE are even stronger.)

From all I’ve read this year, nothing electric is really safe, wall wiring, dirty electricity, etc., plus cellular, wifi, microwaves, etc.

For info re the negatives, see:

I was thinking of switching to an iPod Touch (wifi-only) vs. an iPhone (3G/4G/LTE) for internet reading/writing/blogging, thinking the iPod Touch/wifi would be less harmful. That first link at the top didn’t really help much for finding an answer to that. :-/


%d bloggers like this: