Aletho News


Are They Essentially Erasing Most Of The Internet?

By Michael Snyder | End Of The American Dream | August 14, 2022

What I am about to share with you is incredibly alarming, and so I hope that you will share this article as widely as you can. The Internet has made it possible for us to communicate directly with one another on an absolutely massive scale. For many years it truly served as a very robust “marketplace of ideas”, and it was not difficult to find a multitude of viewpoints on just about any topic that you could possibly imagine. Unfortunately, things have completely changed. As you will see in this article, much of the Internet has essentially been erased at this point. If you don’t understand what I am talking about, just keep reading.

For most of us, search engines are the primary tools that we use to find information on the Internet.

When they originally came on the scene, search engines could generally be trusted to present information in a neutral manner. The most relevant information was supposed to come up first, and less relevant information was supposed to be pushed farther down the listings.

Of course bias eventually started to creep in, and that was extremely unfortunate. Certain sources of information were purposely elevated while other disfavored sources of information were purposely suppressed.

But what if I was to tell you that we have now gotten to a point where the vast majority of the information on any particular topic is being purposely excluded altogether?

I know that this may sound crazy, and so I am going to take some time and prove it to you.

Google is the most prominent search engine in the world, and so let’s start there. Go to Google and do a search for “Donald Trump” and look at the top of the page to see how many “results” you get.

I just did that, and it says that there are about 451,000,000 results.

That should be plenty of information, because nobody would ever have the time to go through 451,000,000 results.

But the truth is that the search engine doesn’t actually give us that many results.

Scroll down and go to page 2. For me, it still says that there are about 451,000,000 results.

Most people would stop there, and the big search engines know this.

But I want you to try something. Just keep going to the next page for as long as you can.

For me, everything looks the same until I get to page 12. At the top of the page, it says “Page 12 of about 118 results”.


Needless to say, 118 results is a far smaller number than 451,000,000, and the vast majority of the 118 results that I have been given come from corporate media sources that generally have similar opinions of Trump.

At the bottom of page 12, there is a message that will seemingly allow me to pull up the rest of the 451,000,000 results. This is what it says…

In order to show you the most relevant results, we have omitted some entries very similar to the 118 already displayed.
If you like, you can repeat the search with the omitted results included.

That sounded good to me, and so I clicked on the link.

But it didn’t give me 451,000,000 results.

Instead, I can now click through 40 pages of results that mostly come from corporate media sources and that’s it.

The top of page 40 says “Page 40 of about 398 results”, and there is absolutely no option to go farther.

Do you understand what this means?

All but 398 of the 451,000,000 potential results have been purposely excluded.

You may be tempted to believe that this is just because Donald Trump is such a controversial figure.

So let’s try an example that is completely and utterly uncontroversial.

Let’s try putting the term “quilting” into Google.

I just did that, and the top of page 1 tells me that there are about 228,000,000 results.

And it keeps telling me that there are about 228,000,000 results until I get to page 26.

Once I get to page 26, the top of the page tells me that there are only 258 results.

But once again I am given the option of repeating the search with the omitted results included by clicking a link at the bottom of the page.

I just did that, and now I have been given 42 pages of results.

At the top of page 42, it tells me that there are only 414 results and it will not allow me to go any farther.

No matter what you search for, the pattern will always be the same.

You will only be given hundreds of results, and those results will generally be from certain types of sources.

Bing is the second largest search engine, and they do things a little differently.

If you do a search for “Donald Trump” on Bing, it will tell you that there are 194,000,000 results.

But for me, once I got to page 14 I noticed that they started to give me the same results on each page over and over again.

For dozens of pages, it was just the same results.

Do they really think that people wouldn’t notice?

Try it for yourself. Go to Bing and type in “Donald Trump” and just keep scrolling through the pages and you will notice this very odd pattern.

So at this point, the largest search engines are purposely restricting the amount of information that they give us.

And the vast majority of the listings that they do come up with are generally from certain types of sources that they wish to promote.

Yes, it is still possible to find truly independent sources of information, but it is becoming much more difficult to do so.

For example, once this article has been discovered by the search engines you will be able to find it if you type in the exact title.

But the vast majority of people just type in a single word or a short phrase when they are searching for something online, and those searches are going to be overwhelmingly dominated by certain types of sources.

In other words, the big tech companies have essentially put you and me in a box at this point.

We are going to be repeatedly fed information that they want us to consume.

As for everything else, what we are not allowed to find may as well not even exist.

Facebook, Twitter and the other big social media platforms do the same thing. They promote the things they want you to see, and they suppress information that they want you to avoid.

The information that they are keeping from us is still out there, but at this point the tech giants have pretty much been successful in essentially deleting most of the Internet for the vast majority of the population.

The inspiration for this article was a great YouTube video that was produced by a guy named Jimmy Corsetti. I would encourage you to share his video with everyone that you can, because he does a great job of breaking all of this down.

I still believe that search engines and social media platforms could be such helpful tools if they would just present information to us in a neutral way.

My hope is that many people that work in the tech industry will read this and that it will inspire them to push for reform.

Trying to greatly restrict the amount of information that we have access to is fundamentally wrong.

A vibrant “marketplace of ideas” is essential for any free society, and right now our “marketplace of ideas” is dying right in front of our eyes.

August 15, 2022 - Posted by | Deception, Full Spectrum Dominance | ,


  1. Are They Essentially Erasing Most Of The Internet?
    The Internet wasn’t created for YOU!
    Google, Bing and Operation Mockingbird. The CIA and Search-Engines
    Tuesday, 10th June, 2014
    In January 2005, I wrote an article entitled Operation Mockingbird. At that time very little was known about this highly secret Central Intelligence Agency media operation that dated back to 1948 when Frank Wisner was appointed director of the Office of Special Projects. Soon afterwards it was renamed the Office of Policy Coordination (OPC). This became the espionage and counter-intelligence branch of the CIA. Wisner was told to create an organization that concentrated on “propaganda, economic warfare; preventive direct action, including sabotage, anti-sabotage, demolition and evacuation measures; subversion against hostile states, including assistance to underground resistance groups, and support of indigenous anti-Communist elements in threatened countries of the free world.”

    Later that year Wisner established Mockingbird, a program to influence the domestic American media. Wisner recruited Philip Graham, the publisher of the Washington Post, to run the project within the industry. Graham himself recruited others who had worked for military intelligence during the war. This included James Truitt, Russell Wiggins, Phil Geyelin, John Hayes and Alan Barth. Others like Stewart Alsop, Joseph Alsop and James Reston, were recruited from within the Georgetown Set. According to Deborah Davis, the author of Katharine the Great (1979): “By the early 1950s, Wisner ‘owned’ respected members of the New York Times, Newsweek, CBS and other communications vehicles.”

    One of the most important journalists under the control of Operation Mockingbird was Joseph Alsop, whose articles appeared in over 300 different newspapers. Other journalists willing to promote the views of the CIA included Stewart Alsop (New York Herald Tribune), Ben Bradlee (Newsweek), James Reston (New York Times), C. D. Jackson (Time Magazine), Walter Pincus (Washington Post), Walter Winchell (New York Daily Mirror), Drew Pearson, Walter Lippmann, William Allen White, Edgar Ansel Mowrer (Chicago Daily News), Hal Hendrix (Miami News), Whitelaw Reid (New York Herald Tribune), Jerry O’Leary (Washington Star), William C. Baggs (Miami News), Herb Gold (Miami News) and Charles L. Bartlett (Chattanooga Times). According to Nina Burleigh, the author of A Very Private Woman, (1998) these journalists sometimes wrote articles that were commissioned by Frank Wisner. The CIA also provided them with classified information to help them with their work.

    Evidence for Operation Mockingbird first came from many different sources. Thomas Braden, head of the of the CIA’s International Organizations Division (IOD), played an important role in Operation Mockingbird. In June, 1975, Braden gave an interview to the Granada Television program, World in Action: The Rise and Fall of the CIA.

    “If the director of CIA wanted to extend a present, say, to someone in Europe – a Labour leader – suppose he just thought, This man can use fifty thousand dollars, he’s working well and doing a good job – he could hand it to him and never have to account to anybody… There was simply no limit to the money it could spend and no limit to the people it could hire and no limit to the activities it could decide were necessary to conduct the war – the secret war…. It was a multinational. Maybe it was one of the first. Journalists were a target, labor unions a particular target – that was one of the activities in which the communists spent the most money.”

    In another interview Braden confessed that the activities of the CIA had to be kept secret from Congress. As he pointed out in the article:

    “In the early 1950s, when the cold war was really hot, the idea that Congress would have approved many of our projects was about as likely as the John Birch Society’s approving Medicare.”

    Further details of Operation Mockingbird was revealed as a result of the Frank Church investigations (Select Committee to Study Governmental Operations with Respect to Intelligence Activities). According to the Congress report published in 1976: “The CIA currently maintains a network of several hundred foreign individuals around the world who provide intelligence for the CIA and at times attempt to influence opinion through the use of covert propaganda. These individuals provide the CIA with direct access to a large number of newspapers and periodicals, scores of press services and news agencies, radio and television stations, commercial book publishers, and other foreign media outlets.” Church argued that the cost of misinforming the world cost American taxpayers an estimated $265 million a year.

    Church showed that it was CIA policy to use clandestine handling of journalists and authors to get information published initially in the foreign media in order to get it disseminated in the United States. Church quotes from one document written by the Chief of the Covert Action Staff on how this process worked (page 193). For example, he writes: “Get books published or distributed abroad without revealing any U.S. influence, by covertly subsidizing foreign publicans or booksellers.” Later in the document he writes: “Get books published for operational reasons, regardless of commercial viability”. Church goes onto report that “over a thousand books were produced, subsidized or sponsored by the CIA before the end of 1967”. All these books eventually found their way into the American market-place. Either in their original form (Church gives the example of the Penkovskiy Papers) or repackaged as articles for American newspapers and magazines.

    In another document published in 1961 the Chief of the Agency’s propaganda unit wrote: “The advantage of our direct contact with the author is that we can acquaint him in great detail with our intentions; that we can provide him with whatever material we want him to include and that we can check the manuscript at every stage… (the Agency) must make sure the actual manuscript will correspond with our operational and propagandistic intention.” Church quotes Thomas H. Karamessines as saying: “If you plant an article in some paper overseas, and it is a hard-hitting article, or a revelation, there is no way of guaranteeing that it is not going to be picked up and published by the Associated Press in this country” (page 198).

    By analyzing CIA documents Church was able to identify over 50 U.S. journalists who were employed directly by the Agency. He was aware that there were a lot more who enjoyed a very close relationship with the CIA who were “being paid regularly for their services, to those who receive only occasional gifts and reimbursements from the CIA” (page 195). Church pointed out that this was probably only the tip of the iceberg because the CIA refused to “provide the names of its media agents or the names of media organizations with which they are connected”. Church was also aware that most of these payments were not documented. This was the main point of the Otis Pike Report. If these payments were not documented and accounted for, there must be a strong possibility of financial corruption taking place. This includes the large commercial contracts that the CIA was responsible for distributing. Pike’s report actually highlighted in 1976 what eventually emerged in the 1980s via the activities of CIA operatives such as Edwin Wilson, Thomas Clines, Ted Shackley, Raphael Quintero, Richard Secord and Felix Rodriguez.

    Carl Bernstein, who had worked with Bob Woodward in the investigation of Watergate, provided further information about Operation Mockingbird in an article in The Rolling Stone in October, 1977. Bernstein claimed that over a 25 year period over 400 American journalists secretly carried out assignments for the CIA: “Some of the journalists were Pulitzer Prize winners, distinguished reporters who considered themselves ambassadors-without-portfolio for their country. Most were less exalted: foreign correspondents who found that their association with the Agency helped their work; stringers and freelancers who were as interested it the derring-do of the spy business as in filing articles, and, the smallest category, full-time CIA employees masquerading as journalists abroad.”

    I published my article on Operation Mockingbird on the Spartacus Educational website in January 2005. I also posted my discoveries on the Education Forum. I then carried out a search for “Operation Mockingbird” at Google. First in the ranking was the Wikipedia entry. On 6th April, 2005, it said:

    “Operation Mockingbird is the name of a CIA project that may or may not have existed. It has been mentioned in several books and web sites, but its existence has not yet been determined. Some believe the operation is merely an urban legend or a conspiracy theory.”

    Clearly, the person who wrote this entry knew nothing about CIA operations. I therefore decided to edit the page. I therefore decided to write the entry for Operation Mockingbird on Wikipedia. However, as soon as I did this, it was deleted and the original entry was put back.

    My own page on Operation Mockingbird appeared in search-engines such as AltaVista, Yahoo and AlltheWeb. However, Google did not appear to have it in its database. This was surprising as at the time I was doing very well at Google from my other pages. In the past I have worked for national newspapers and I used my contacts to make inquiries about Google’s relationship with the CIA.

    I posted information on the Education Forum and had letters published in the national press about the failings of Wikipedia. Eventually I was contacted by a representative of Wikipedia and I was told that if I gave full page references for my history of this CIA operation they would allow it to stand.

    On 14th June, 2005, I was able to announce that my page on Operation Mockingbird had been restored to the Google database. (It now appeared at 3rd place in the ranking). So also was my page on Frank Wisner, the man who established Mockingbird. Another person blocked, Mary Pinchot Meyer, was also back in.

    Recently, I had reason to do a search for “Operation Mockingbird”. At Bing it came 2nd to Wikipedia. This was to be expected as it is the most detailed page on the web on the subject. In 7th place was the original debate we had about it on the Education Forum. However, I got quite a surprise, when I did the same thing at Google. It was on the third page in 22nd place. (The Education Forum was in 23rd place).
    Why has Google downgraded this page? I recently had an email from Bing stating:

    “For the second year, in blind tests, using the UK’s most popular web searches, more people prefer Bing results than Google!”

    I am not surprised; it will be my default search-engine in future.
    The current Wikipedia entry is also disturbing. Although it still contains some of the material that I produced, it has removed all reference to my website. Another important change is the removal of most of the journalists I named who were working for America ‘s leading media organisations. It would seem that Operation Mockingbird is still in existence and is having an impact on online information.

    No one knows the name and academic credentials of the person who did the final edit. Google gives Wikipedia a domain authority of 100 (that is why it always appears at the top of the rankings). However, that is not true of teachers in schools and universities who refuse to accept references from Wikipedia as we have no idea who has written the material.

    Source: Spartacus Educational Publishers Ltd.

    How the CIA made Google
    Inside the secret network behind mass surveillance, endless war, and Skynet—
    part 1

    By Nafeez Ahmed

    Why Google made the NSA
    Inside the secret network behind mass surveillance, endless war, and Skynet—
    part 2
    by Nafeez Ahmed


    Comment by Pip | August 15, 2022 | Reply


    YOUTUBE: YES, They Really Are *Deleting* the Internet And it’s WAY Worse Than You Think
    Aug 15, 2022
    Bright Insight
    1.34M subscribers
    I tried another experiment on multiple search engine browsers and what I found is unbelievably disturbing. Share this with others.

    I’m Jimmy Corsetti, and my channel is called Bright Insight.
    Follow and Support me on these other platforms where I can speak my mind and share TRUTH!
    Follow me on Instagram:
    Follow me on Rumble:
    Follow me on Odysee:
    Follow me on TikTok:
    Or, Tip me on Venmo! @bright_insight

    Must see Podcast I had with Danica Patrick!
    Check out my podcast with Joe Rogan for FREE on Spotify:


    Comment by Pip | August 15, 2022 | Reply

  3. Apparently, Google began limiting search results in 2016. They now limit results to 400.
    They also invert the results when searching for “delicate” terms. I’m not on the race bandwagon, but for example, I just searched for “black man kills white woman”- without quotes. You should try it and look at the results.


    Comment by hamburgertime | August 16, 2022 | Reply

  4. They’ve recently completely de-indexed Miles Mathis’ website on all Western search engines. You have to go to yandex to search within his articles.


    Comment by hamburgertime | August 16, 2022 | Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.