Slashdot Mirror

One should wonder whatever happened to the old Enlightenment idea that having a predictive model should over-ride religious conviction, once you've read this LA Times story:

March 27, 2002

Slatkin Agrees to Plead Guilty Crime: Money manager could get 15 years in prison for running one of the largest Ponzi schemes in history.

The source of the H-1B text given was here.

Hello James Bowery,

We are not able to run the following Ad Group you have created using the Google AdWords Select Advertising Program:

Ad Group #2, from Campaign #1

Thank you for advertising on Google. At this time, we are not running ads for sites that discriminate against any person, group, organization, or company. We review ads on a case-by-case basis and reserve the right to not run certain ads, or certain categories of ads. Due to our current ads policy, we are unable to run your ad on Google.

Google believes strongly in freedom of expression and therefore offers broad access to content across the web without censoring results. At the same time, we reserve the right to exercise editorial discretion when it comes to the advertising we accept on our site, as noted in our advertising terms and conditions. Please note that the decisions we make concerning advertising in no way affect the search results we deliver. We will continue to show search results for this type of site.

Please feel free to email us at adwords-support@google.com if you have further questions or concerns.

Sincerely,

The Google AdWords Team

Lapin pointed out that according to published reports, the film's director, Ron Howard, did this at least partly because he hoped to garner Academy Award recognition.

"Given that the Hollywood establishment indeed includes a considerably greater proportion of people of Jewish ancestry than does the American populace as a whole, Mr. Howard was concerned that the Academy would justifiably spurn a film that lionized an anti-Semite," Lapin explained. "To call that a 'stranglehold' may not be polite, but it is no lie, either."

Lapin says he cannot understand why it is acceptable for Howard to "acknowledge this reality, however implicitly; but when Billy Graham did so, long ago and in private, it was somehow different 'chilling and frightening,' in Mr. Foxman's words."

Why would www.FreeOccident.org proclaim to the world the righteous actof someone who is obviously a prominent Jew if the objective of www.FreeOccident.org is biased against Jews?

No, the hard facts of the situation are that I ama personraised to have no bias against Jews nor any group except perhaps "sinners" as defined quite strictly within the text of the Bible. Outgrowing that training and adopting the typical counter-culture lifestyle of the boomer generation, I encountered other sources of equally noxious indoctrination. Sensitized to fundamentalist indoctrination I recognized the tell-tale signs of dogma. Unfortunately for those not raised in as easily-debunked a tradition as fundamentalist religion, the pseudo-intellectual pronouncements of Boasian political correctness took root in their young minds via the crytpo-theocracies of media and academia. Both are de facto organs of state religious beliefs as they receive large amounts of direct support from the government. In the case of the media, that support extends back at least to the Telecommunications act of 1934 and its "public benefit" provisions ajudicated by the Federal Communications Commission.

Beyond outgrowing that early training and watching, in horror, as highly intelligent childhood friends slowly disintigrated into Boasian droids, additional life experiences combined with relentlessly independent inquiry as an adult, to trigger my old rural Quaker heritage of "Speaking truth to power." You deny Jewish power exists and is under-discussed by mainstream media over which Jews have self-admitted disproportionate influence? How is that possible for you to do with a straight face without virtually schizoid self-deception?

A person who spent a good deal of time in national politics and, having gotten twolaws placed on the Federal books,comes to the emotionally wrenching conclusion that media bias washeavily and unethically biased toward Jewish nepotism and therefore against the public -- specifically the aspects of the public that represented the most enfranchised of prior generations.

This is not the stuff of "bias" or "discrimination" except insofar as knowledge and experience in combination with perception and cognition lead to "bias" and "discrimination".

If my experience had taught me the hard reality that any other entity, including, for example,those of my ownQuaker background, were similarly entrusted with the public interest under the Telecommunications Act of 1934, and hadself-servingly failed in the ethical, if not legal,obligations of that trust, I would have appear "bias" against them. When individuals act as a group, it becomes unreasonable to demand that oneaddress them as individuals unless they are exceptional individuals such as Rabbi Labin.

This is not to say that Google is demanding that web pages to which ads link should address people as individuals, of course. They state that "bias against" "people" as well as "groups" or other entitites are to be disallowed. This is an untennable policy as stated since they are now required to disallow all opinions if those opinions contain any negative connotations.

Quite simply, the fact that FreeOccident.org was singled out in this manner proves the urgent necessity, not only for its existence, but for wider exposure of fora of this nature.

Hello James Bowery,

We are not able to run the following Ad Group you have created using the Google AdWords Select Advertising Program:

Ad Group #2, from Campaign #1

Thank you for advertising on Google. At this time, we are not running ads for sites that discriminate against any person, group, organization, or company. We review ads on a case-by-case basis and reserve the right to not run certain ads, or certain categories of ads. Due to our current ads policy, we are unable to run your ad on Google.

Google believes strongly in freedom of expression and therefore offers broad access to content across the web without censoring results. At the same time, we reserve the right to exercise editorial discretion when it comes to the advertising we accept on our site, as noted in our advertising terms and conditions. Please note that the decisions we make concerning advertising in no way affect the search results we deliver. We will continue to show search results for this type of site.

Please feel free to email us at adwords-support@google.com if you have further questions or concerns.

Sincerely,

The Google AdWords Team

Lapin pointed out that according to published reports, the film's director, Ron Howard, did this at least partly because he hoped to garner Academy Award recognition.

"Given that the Hollywood establishment indeed includes a considerably greater proportion of people of Jewish ancestry than does the American populace as a whole, Mr. Howard was concerned that the Academy would justifiably spurn a film that lionized an anti-Semite," Lapin explained. "To call that a 'stranglehold' may not be polite, but it is no lie, either."

Lapin says he cannot understand why it is acceptable for Howard to "acknowledge this reality, however implicitly; but when Billy Graham did so, long ago and in private, it was somehow different 'chilling and frightening,' in Mr. Foxman's words."

Why would www.FreeOccident.org proclaim to the world the righteous actof someone who is obviously a prominent Jew if the objective of www.FreeOccident.org is biased against Jews?

No, the hard facts of the situation are that I ama personraised to have no bias against Jews nor any group except perhaps "sinners" as defined quite strictly within the text of the Bible. Outgrowing that training and adopting the typical counter-culture lifestyle of the boomer generation, I encountered other sources of equally noxious indoctrination. Sensitized to fundamentalist indoctrination I recognized the tell-tale signs of dogma. Unfortunately for those not raised in as easily-debunked a tradition as fundamentalist religion, the pseudo-intellectual pronouncements of Boasian political correctness took root in their young minds via the crytpo-theocracies of media and academia. Both are de facto organs of state religious beliefs as they receive large amounts of direct support from the government. In the case of the media, that support extends back at least to the Telecommunications act of 1934 and its "public benefit" provisions ajudicated by the Federal Communications Commission.

Beyond outgrowing that early training and watching, in horror, as highly intelligent childhood friends slowly disintigrated into Boasian droids, additional life experiences combined with relentlessly independent inquiry as an adult, to trigger my old rural Quaker heritage of "Speaking truth to power." You deny Jewish power exists and is under-discussed by mainstream media over which Jews have self-admitted disproportionate influence? How is that possible for you to do with a straight face without virtually schizoid self-deception?

A person who spent a good deal of time in national politics and, having gotten twolaws placed on the Federal books,comes to the emotionally wrenching conclusion that media bias washeavily and unethically biased toward Jewish nepotism and therefore against the public -- specifically the aspects of the public that represented the most enfranchised of prior generations.

This is not the stuff of "bias" or "discrimination" except insofar as knowledge and experience in combination with perception and cognition lead to "bias" and "discrimination".

If my experience had taught me the hard reality that any other entity, including, for example,those of my ownQuaker background, were similarly entrusted with the public interest under the Telecommunications Act of 1934, and hadself-servingly failed in the ethical, if not legal,obligations of that trust, I would have appear "bias" against them. When individuals act as a group, it becomes unreasonable to demand that oneaddress them as individuals unless they are exceptional individuals such as Rabbi Labin.

This is not to say that Google is demanding that web pages to which ads link should address people as individuals, of course. They state that "bias against" "people" as well as "groups" or other entitites are to be disallowed. This is an untennable policy as stated since they are now required to disallow all opinions if those opinions contain any negative connotations.

Quite simply, the fact that FreeOccident.org was singled out in this manner proves the urgent necessity, not only for its existence, but for wider exposure of fora of this nature.

Hello James Bowery,

We are not able to run the following Ad Group you have created using the Google AdWords Select Advertising Program:

Ad Group #2, from Campaign #1

Thank you for advertising on Google. At this time, we are not running ads for sites that discriminate against any person, group, organization, or company. We review ads on a case-by-case basis and reserve the right to not run certain ads, or certain categories of ads. Due to our current ads policy, we are unable to run your ad on Google.

Google believes strongly in freedom of expression and therefore offers broad access to content across the web without censoring results. At the same time, we reserve the right to exercise editorial discretion when it comes to the advertising we accept on our site, as noted in our advertising terms and conditions. Please note that the decisions we make concerning advertising in no way affect the search results we deliver. We will continue to show search results for this type of site.

Please feel free to email us at adwords-support@google.com if you have further questions or concerns.

Sincerely,

The Google AdWords Team

Lapin pointed out that according to published reports, the film's director, Ron Howard, did this at least partly because he hoped to garner Academy Award recognition.

"Given that the Hollywood establishment indeed includes a considerably greater proportion of people of Jewish ancestry than does the American populace as a whole, Mr. Howard was concerned that the Academy would justifiably spurn a film that lionized an anti-Semite," Lapin explained. "To call that a 'stranglehold' may not be polite, but it is no lie, either."

Lapin says he cannot understand why it is acceptable for Howard to "acknowledge this reality, however implicitly; but when Billy Graham did so, long ago and in private, it was somehow different 'chilling and frightening,' in Mr. Foxman's words."

Why would www.FreeOccident.org proclaim to the world the righteous actof someone who is obviously a prominent Jew if the objective of www.FreeOccident.org is biased against Jews?

No, the hard facts of the situation are that I ama personraised to have no bias against Jews nor any group except perhaps "sinners" as defined quite strictly within the text of the Bible. Outgrowing that training and adopting the typical counter-culture lifestyle of the boomer generation, I encountered other sources of equally noxious indoctrination. Sensitized to fundamentalist indoctrination I recognized the tell-tale signs of dogma. Unfortunately for those not raised in as easily-debunked a tradition as fundamentalist religion, the pseudo-intellectual pronouncements of Boasian political correctness took root in their young minds via the crytpo-theocracies of media and academia. Both are de facto organs of state religious beliefs as they receive large amounts of direct support from the government. In the case of the media, that support extends back at least to the Telecommunications act of 1934 and its "public benefit" provisions ajudicated by the Federal Communications Commission.

Beyond outgrowing that early training and watching, in horror, as highly intelligent childhood friends slowly disintigrated into Boasian droids, additional life experiences combined with relentlessly independent inquiry as an adult, to trigger my old rural Quaker heritage of "Speaking truth to power." You deny Jewish power exists and is under-discussed by mainstream media over which Jews have self-admitted disproportionate influence? How is that possible for you to do with a straight face without virtually schizoid self-deception?

A person who spent a good deal of time in national politics and, having gotten twolaws placed on the Federal books,comes to the emotionally wrenching conclusion that media bias washeavily and unethically biased toward Jewish nepotism and therefore against the public -- specifically the aspects of the public that represented the most enfranchised of prior generations.

This is not the stuff of "bias" or "discrimination" except insofar as knowledge and experience in combination with perception and cognition lead to "bias" and "discrimination".

If my experience had taught me the hard reality that any other entity, including, for example,those of my ownQuaker background, were similarly entrusted with the public interest under the Telecommunications Act of 1934, and hadself-servingly failed in the ethical, if not legal,obligations of that trust, I would have appear "bias" against them. When individuals act as a group, it becomes unreasonable to demand that oneaddress them as individuals unless they are exceptional individuals such as Rabbi Labin.

This is not to say that Google is demanding that web pages to which ads link should address people as individuals, of course. They state that "bias against" "people" as well as "groups" or other entitites are to be disallowed. This is an untennable policy as stated since they are now required to disallow all opinions if those opinions contain any negative connotations.

Quite simply, the fact that FreeOccident.org was singled out in this manner proves the urgent necessity, not only for its existence, but for wider exposure of fora of this nature.

Hello James Bowery,

We are not able to run the following Ad Group you have created using the Google AdWords Select Advertising Program:

Ad Group #2, from Campaign #1

Thank you for advertising on Google. At this time, we are not running ads for sites that discriminate against any person, group, organization, or company. We review ads on a case-by-case basis and reserve the right to not run certain ads, or certain categories of ads. Due to our current ads policy, we are unable to run your ad on Google.

Google believes strongly in freedom of expression and therefore offers broad access to content across the web without censoring results. At the same time, we reserve the right to exercise editorial discretion when it comes to the advertising we accept on our site, as noted in our advertising terms and conditions. Please note that the decisions we make concerning advertising in no way affect the search results we deliver. We will continue to show search results for this type of site.

Please feel free to email us at adwords-support@google.com if you have further questions or concerns.

Sincerely,

The Google AdWords Team

Lapin pointed out that according to published reports, the film's director, Ron Howard, did this at least partly because he hoped to garner Academy Award recognition.

"Given that the Hollywood establishment indeed includes a considerably greater proportion of people of Jewish ancestry than does the American populace as a whole, Mr. Howard was concerned that the Academy would justifiably spurn a film that lionized an anti-Semite," Lapin explained. "To call that a 'stranglehold' may not be polite, but it is no lie, either."

Lapin says he cannot understand why it is acceptable for Howard to "acknowledge this reality, however implicitly; but when Billy Graham did so, long ago and in private, it was somehow different 'chilling and frightening,' in Mr. Foxman's words."

Why would www.FreeOccident.org proclaim to the world the righteous actof someone who is obviously a prominent Jew if the objective of www.FreeOccident.org is biased against Jews?

No, the hard facts of the situation are that I ama personraised to have no bias against Jews nor any group except perhaps "sinners" as defined quite strictly within the text of the Bible. Outgrowing that training and adopting the typical counter-culture lifestyle of the boomer generation, I encountered other sources of equally noxious indoctrination. Sensitized to fundamentalist indoctrination I recognized the tell-tale signs of dogma. Unfortunately for those not raised in as easily-debunked a tradition as fundamentalist religion, the pseudo-intellectual pronouncements of Boasian political correctness took root in their young minds via the crytpo-theocracies of media and academia. Both are de facto organs of state religious beliefs as they receive large amounts of direct support from the government. In the case of the media, that support extends back at least to the Telecommunications act of 1934 and its "public benefit" provisions ajudicated by the Federal Communications Commission.

Beyond outgrowing that early training and watching, in horror, as highly intelligent childhood friends slowly disintigrated into Boasian droids, additional life experiences combined with relentlessly independent inquiry as an adult, to trigger my old rural Quaker heritage of "Speaking truth to power." You deny Jewish power exists and is under-discussed by mainstream media over which Jews have self-admitted disproportionate influence? How is that possible for you to do with a straight face without virtually schizoid self-deception?

A person who spent a good deal of time in national politics and, having gotten twolaws placed on the Federal books,comes to the emotionally wrenching conclusion that media bias washeavily and unethically biased toward Jewish nepotism and therefore against the public -- specifically the aspects of the public that represented the most enfranchised of prior generations.

This is not the stuff of "bias" or "discrimination" except insofar as knowledge and experience in combination with perception and cognition lead to "bias" and "discrimination".

If my experience had taught me the hard reality that any other entity, including, for example,those of my ownQuaker background, were similarly entrusted with the public interest under the Telecommunications Act of 1934, and hadself-servingly failed in the ethical, if not legal,obligations of that trust, I would have appear "bias" against them. When individuals act as a group, it becomes unreasonable to demand that oneaddress them as individuals unless they are exceptional individuals such as Rabbi Labin.

This is not to say that Google is demanding that web pages to which ads link should address people as individuals, of course. They state that "bias against" "people" as well as "groups" or other entitites are to be disallowed. This is an untennable policy as stated since they are now required to disallow all opinions if those opinions contain any negative connotations.

Quite simply, the fact that FreeOccident.org was singled out in this manner proves the urgent necessity, not only for its existence, but for wider exposure of fora of this nature.

Hello James Bowery,

We are not able to run the following Ad Group you have created using the Google AdWords Select Advertising Program:

Ad Group #2, from Campaign #1

Thank you for advertising on Google. At this time, we are not running ads for sites that discriminate against any person, group, organization, or company. We review ads on a case-by-case basis and reserve the right to not run certain ads, or certain categories of ads. Due to our current ads policy, we are unable to run your ad on Google.

Google believes strongly in freedom of expression and therefore offers broad access to content across the web without censoring results. At the same time, we reserve the right to exercise editorial discretion when it comes to the advertising we accept on our site, as noted in our advertising terms and conditions. Please note that the decisions we make concerning advertising in no way affect the search results we deliver. We will continue to show search results for this type of site.

Please feel free to email us at adwords-support@google.com if you have further questions or concerns.

Sincerely,

The Google AdWords Team

Lapin pointed out that according to published reports, the film's director, Ron Howard, did this at least partly because he hoped to garner Academy Award recognition.

"Given that the Hollywood establishment indeed includes a considerably greater proportion of people of Jewish ancestry than does the American populace as a whole, Mr. Howard was concerned that the Academy would justifiably spurn a film that lionized an anti-Semite," Lapin explained. "To call that a 'stranglehold' may not be polite, but it is no lie, either."

Lapin says he cannot understand why it is acceptable for Howard to "acknowledge this reality, however implicitly; but when Billy Graham did so, long ago and in private, it was somehow different 'chilling and frightening,' in Mr. Foxman's words."

Why would www.FreeOccident.org proclaim to the world the righteous actof someone who is obviously a prominent Jew if the objective of www.FreeOccident.org is biased against Jews?

No, the hard facts of the situation are that I ama personraised to have no bias against Jews nor any group except perhaps "sinners" as defined quite strictly within the text of the Bible. Outgrowing that training and adopting the typical counter-culture lifestyle of the boomer generation, I encountered other sources of equally noxious indoctrination. Sensitized to fundamentalist indoctrination I recognized the tell-tale signs of dogma. Unfortunately for those not raised in as easily-debunked a tradition as fundamentalist religion, the pseudo-intellectual pronouncements of Boasian political correctness took root in their young minds via the crytpo-theocracies of media and academia. Both are de facto organs of state religious beliefs as they receive large amounts of direct support from the government. In the case of the media, that support extends back at least to the Telecommunications act of 1934 and its "public benefit" provisions ajudicated by the Federal Communications Commission.

Beyond outgrowing that early training and watching, in horror, as highly intelligent childhood friends slowly disintigrated into Boasian droids, additional life experiences combined with relentlessly independent inquiry as an adult, to trigger my old rural Quaker heritage of "Speaking truth to power." You deny Jewish power exists and is under-discussed by mainstream media over which Jews have self-admitted disproportionate influence? How is that possible for you to do with a straight face without virtually schizoid self-deception?

A person who spent a good deal of time in national politics and, having gotten twolaws placed on the Federal books,comes to the emotionally wrenching conclusion that media bias washeavily and unethically biased toward Jewish nepotism and therefore against the public -- specifically the aspects of the public that represented the most enfranchised of prior generations.

This is not the stuff of "bias" or "discrimination" except insofar as knowledge and experience in combination with perception and cognition lead to "bias" and "discrimination".

If my experience had taught me the hard reality that any other entity, including, for example,those of my ownQuaker background, were similarly entrusted with the public interest under the Telecommunications Act of 1934, and hadself-servingly failed in the ethical, if not legal,obligations of that trust, I would have appear "bias" against them. When individuals act as a group, it becomes unreasonable to demand that oneaddress them as individuals unless they are exceptional individuals such as Rabbi Labin.

This is not to say that Google is demanding that web pages to which ads link should address people as individuals, of course. They state that "bias against" "people" as well as "groups" or other entitites are to be disallowed. This is an untennable policy as stated since they are now required to disallow all opinions if those opinions contain any negative connotations.

Quite simply, the fact that FreeOccident.org was singled out in this manner proves the urgent necessity, not only for its existence, but for wider exposure of fora of this nature.

Hello James Bowery,

We are not able to run the following Ad Group you have created using the Google AdWords Select Advertising Program:

Ad Group #2, from Campaign #1

Thank you for advertising on Google. At this time, we are not running ads for sites that discriminate against any person, group, organization, or company. We review ads on a case-by-case basis and reserve the right to not run certain ads, or certain categories of ads. Due to our current ads policy, we are unable to run your ad on Google.

Google believes strongly in freedom of expression and therefore offers broad access to content across the web without censoring results. At the same time, we reserve the right to exercise editorial discretion when it comes to the advertising we accept on our site, as noted in our advertising terms and conditions. Please note that the decisions we make concerning advertising in no way affect the search results we deliver. We will continue to show search results for this type of site.

Please feel free to email us at adwords-support@google.com if you have further questions or concerns.

Sincerely,

The Google AdWords Team

Lapin pointed out that according to published reports, the film's director, Ron Howard, did this at least partly because he hoped to garner Academy Award recognition.

"Given that the Hollywood establishment indeed includes a considerably greater proportion of people of Jewish ancestry than does the American populace as a whole, Mr. Howard was concerned that the Academy would justifiably spurn a film that lionized an anti-Semite," Lapin explained. "To call that a 'stranglehold' may not be polite, but it is no lie, either."

Lapin says he cannot understand why it is acceptable for Howard to "acknowledge this reality, however implicitly; but when Billy Graham did so, long ago and in private, it was somehow different 'chilling and frightening,' in Mr. Foxman's words."

Why would www.FreeOccident.org proclaim to the world the righteous actof someone who is obviously a prominent Jew if the objective of www.FreeOccident.org is biased against Jews?

No, the hard facts of the situation are that I ama personraised to have no bias against Jews nor any group except perhaps "sinners" as defined quite strictly within the text of the Bible. Outgrowing that training and adopting the typical counter-culture lifestyle of the boomer generation, I encountered other sources of equally noxious indoctrination. Sensitized to fundamentalist indoctrination I recognized the tell-tale signs of dogma. Unfortunately for those not raised in as easily-debunked a tradition as fundamentalist religion, the pseudo-intellectual pronouncements of Boasian political correctness took root in their young minds via the crytpo-theocracies of media and academia. Both are de facto organs of state religious beliefs as they receive large amounts of direct support from the government. In the case of the media, that support extends back at least to the Telecommunications act of 1934 and its "public benefit" provisions ajudicated by the Federal Communications Commission.

Beyond outgrowing that early training and watching, in horror, as highly intelligent childhood friends slowly disintigrated into Boasian droids, additional life experiences combined with relentlessly independent inquiry as an adult, to trigger my old rural Quaker heritage of "Speaking truth to power." You deny Jewish power exists and is under-discussed by mainstream media over which Jews have self-admitted disproportionate influence? How is that possible for you to do with a straight face without virtually schizoid self-deception?

A person who spent a good deal of time in national politics and, having gotten twolaws placed on the Federal books,comes to the emotionally wrenching conclusion that media bias washeavily and unethically biased toward Jewish nepotism and therefore against the public -- specifically the aspects of the public that represented the most enfranchised of prior generations.

This is not the stuff of "bias" or "discrimination" except insofar as knowledge and experience in combination with perception and cognition lead to "bias" and "discrimination".

If my experience had taught me the hard reality that any other entity, including, for example,those of my ownQuaker background, were similarly entrusted with the public interest under the Telecommunications Act of 1934, and hadself-servingly failed in the ethical, if not legal,obligations of that trust, I would have appear "bias" against them. When individuals act as a group, it becomes unreasonable to demand that oneaddress them as individuals unless they are exceptional individuals such as Rabbi Labin.

This is not to say that Google is demanding that web pages to which ads link should address people as individuals, of course. They state that "bias against" "people" as well as "groups" or other entitites are to be disallowed. This is an untennable policy as stated since they are now required to disallow all opinions if those opinions contain any negative connotations.

Quite simply, the fact that FreeOccident.org was singled out in this manner proves the urgent necessity, not only for its existence, but for wider exposure of fora of this nature.

A warning to those considering using Google's page ranking service (which tracks your surfing habits, which isn't a problem since it is very upfront about it.) Overall, it works pretty well and it has found several pages of genuine interest to me that I would not have found otherwise. Also, I have no reason to think that they're doing anthing sinister with the information (and I don't care.)

However, since I like slashdot so much (I assume that is why) it's been serving up advertisements for other projects that link to SourceForge whenever I run google searches; for example, the white supremacist publication the Free Occident, which is powered by SourceForge.

Now, I'm not one of those people who thinks Google should try and filter hate speech from search results. Likewise, I don't think that the Free Occident should somehow be prevented from using SourceForge's software - open source means open, Voltaire was right, etc. However, I think google should draw the line at serving advertisements for articles about how "If you hear about a 100-million-dollar swindle, then you know that it has to be a Jew."

I've dumped a copy of the html for the search result in my journal - paste the Extrans into an html file to see it in close-to original format. It appears from the first version in my journal that the ad appears ABOVE the search results - this is not the case.

Free Occident is a web log, but I find it far more worrisome that they've purchased an ad on google than if they were trying to blog some search term, like "White Power," or even "Occident."

Yes, I'm Jewish.

A warning to those considering using Google's page ranking service (which tracks your surfing habits, which isn't a problem since it is very upfront about it.) Overall, it works pretty well and it has found several pages of genuine interest to me that I would not have found otherwise. Also, I have no reason to think that they're doing anthing sinister with the information (and I don't care.)

However, since I like slashdot so much (I assume that is why) it's been serving up advertisements for other projects that link to SourceForge whenever I run google searches; for example, the white supremacist publication the Free Occident, which is powered by SourceForge.

Now, I'm not one of those people who thinks Google should try and filter hate speech from search results. Likewise, I don't think that the Free Occident should somehow be prevented from using SourceForge's software - open source means open, Voltaire was right, etc. However, I think google should draw the line at serving advertisements for articles about how "If you hear about a 100-million-dollar swindle, then you know that it has to be a Jew."

I've dumped a copy of the html for the search result in my journal - paste the Extrans into an html file to see it in close-to original format. It appears from the first version in my journal that the ad appears ABOVE the search results - this is not the case.

Free Occident is a web log, but I find it far more worrisome that they've purchased an ad on google than if they were trying to blog some search term, like "White Power," or even "Occident."

Yes, I'm Jewish.