Updated: Did Jeffrey Epstein's Google's founders engage in anti-competive behavior against UpRights News and/or any of its contributors after Jeffrey Epstein's Trump gutted net neutrality to crush dissent and superfund Jeffrey Epstein's organized crime syndicate?

UPRIGHTS NEWS WAS MARKETED GOOGLE'S SEO SERVICES AS PART OF A PAID WEB HOSTING PACKAGE

As specified below, UpRights News was marketed not one, not two, but three Google services to increase internet presence, including but not limited to a business profile, and SEO search engine optimization services, and UpRights News was marketed Google services four times, and in a manner that required payment in order to receive the same.

Said differently, the Google SEO "optimization" services were not free to UpRights News. We had to pay for these Google SEO services marketed to us, as follows (to protect the privacy of our website host, we have blacked out their information).

As specified above and below, the web host for UpRights News marketed some of their different the legal terms for different website packages.

By default, this web host recommends its "Bestseller", the "Pro" package, which is an abbreviation for "Professional Website Package", and this is one of the three out of four paid packages offered by this website hosting and development company, with only one of the packages being "free".

As illustrated below, this "Pro" package markets specific legal terms, benefits, and features unique to each package, and the more a buyer pays, the more of the marketed services and certain legal terms apply, or don't apply, for example, anyone who pays for a subscription, prepays in advance, and so the "No Start-up costs" obviously doesn't apply if a cost is prepaid, which is just common sense.

As specified above, and a little later below, UpRights News prepaid for the "Pro" package for a full year.

As specified above and below, the "Pro" website hosting and development package comes with many different features and benefits, including three different Google services, and only those who pay for the same can access these Google services.

The next print screen proves that UpRights News was invoiced for the "Pro" package and thus invoiced for the marketed Google SEO services in July 2023.

The next print screen, when coupled to the print screen above, proves that UpRights News' invoice for the marketed Google services was paid for in July 2023, and paid in full, for an entire year.

The next print screens prove that among these Google services UpRights News was marketed and paid for included a Google business profile to "increase visibility" and to "index" the website pages of UpRights News "faster".

As specified in the very first print screen at the top, UpRights News was marketed that the website, if they purchased the subscription, would include a "complete" website in 10 minutes, optimized for Google. Part of this includes every page being developed have a Google search engine optimization (SEO) control page, as follows. The title and description fields allow for keywords to be placed, which Jeffrey Epstein's Google uses to optimize the search for that specific page. This way when Google's web crawler bots search the internet, those who pay for Google services marketed to them, have an advantage relative to those who don't pay for Google's marketed services, with respect to being found online.

You'll note for this blog settings page for this article that we employed very specific language in (1) the searchable title, (2) which appears in the searchable description, and (3) which appears in the searchable "Google Search" page example.

Accordingly, on this page alone we have optimized the Google search engines with partners of Google to be more "visible" and to have this web page and our webiste be "indexed faster", as marketed to us, and as prepaid by us for these Google SEO services. 

Furthermore, we optimized "every" published web page containing one news article in a similar manner, as follows. 

First, we went to the SEO settings, which is marketed as managing "everything related to search engine optimization", which we prepaid in advance. 

Then we search engine optimized every major section of our investigative news sections that we want to be public. The green box beside every section of our investigative news is specified as having been "optimized" for search engines, in particular Jeffrey Epstein's Google's search engine, supra. The blue box is for web sections we don't want optimized or which deactivated, having changed our strategy. Note that out of the 21 different sections, only 1 section was not optimized.

To help keep score here, we optimized every article we published at least three different ways in the blog settings, then we separately optimized every different section we wanted published. Then we also optimized every page or article we published beyond the blog settings, as follows. Note, out of the 151 articles we have published, 149 articles have been "optimized" for "increased visibility" on Jeffrey Epstein's Google, "faster indexing" on Jeffrey Epstein's Google, and that the two articles (blue boxes) that haven't been optimized are articles we are currently working on, and so they are "not visible to Google", as specified, which of course means that the 149 other articles that have been published, are visible to Google, as they should be, because that is the marketed service we are paying a premium for, and as a reminder, this section of our web hosting and web develop to "manage everything related to search engine optimization", which we prepaid in advance.

So there can be ZERO doubt that we optimized (1) each of our 149 published articles, (2) each of our 20 news sections,  and (3) all three of our 149 individual blog settings, within the section of our web host responsible for managing "everything related to search engine optimization" in order to "optimize" search engine indexing "faster"(within 10 minutes per the marketing), in order to achieve "increased visibility", as collectively marketed to us prior to us paying for these SEO Google services, and thereafter.

All of this is important, because we and others have been unable to find UpRights News online more than once, while using Google search engine, and other search engines as well, which amounts to us being defrauded, and silenced in violation of our 1st Amendment rights to free speech, for the purpose of intimidating us, and/or for the purpose of obstructing justice for active criminal investigations, criminal prosecutions, lawsuits, and/or other investigations - (is)(are) (a) reasonable inference(s).

And because we publish a very specific or niche type of news - hyperfocused on the organized crime syndicate of Jeffrey Epstein and their orbit - which includes the founders of Google, per the U.S. Virgin Islands' Attorney General, who we have written about - then there is no doubt in our minds who is behind this ongoing harm against us. Res ipsa loquitur malum in se, this natural evil speaks for itself.

After letting others know about our news site - and being with them while they tried to look us up, but could not find us - we then looked ourselves up, and were able to document that we also failed to find our Google search engine optimized investigative news online, including on Google engine, and yet we,

(1) optimized every one of our 149 articles (149), each of which includes the worlds "up", "rights", and "news" in at least the domain name or URL, and we

(2) optimized the blog and page settings for each of the 149 articles in three separate fields (3 x 149= 447), many of which specify UpRights News right in the SEO description, and we

(3) optimized each of the news sections housing the 149 articles, and we 

(4) optimized many to most of the images we have provided in our articles by adding keywords like UpRights News to the titles of the images, and we

(5) we paid a premium for Google to index all of this "optimization" "faster" (within 10 minutes per the marketing) for "increased visibility" as also marketed to us, but as proven below, when we tried to look up UpRights News from a hotel computer in Santa Cruz, CA, we found ZERO reference to UpRights News, which means that Google didn't optimized us at all as we paid for and as was marketed to us before we paid for the same and thereafter, and also proven below, no one else on Google has the same news company name as us, or else they would have appeared below.

Note also below that we searched for "uprightsnews" as one word, because the same is found in every article and page we publish, and that Google chose to instead provide us results for "Upright News", and, suggested that we try looking up results for "uprightsnews" instead, which is what we searched for, and so this is sadism or intentional infliction of severe emotional distress evidence that Google is both denying UpRights News visibility by changing the search terms to not find us, while proposing to us and/or to others that they should engage in a circular argument, where if we clicked on the search terms we searched for in the first place, it is a reasonable inference that Google would have redirected that search to "Upright News" instead, as they did here.

Since then we have found additional evidence of our inability to find ourselves on Google, despite using Google's SEO services, where we cut and pasted unique language that only one of our articles employed, into the search engine, as found below.

Specifically, we added very unique search terms into Google, by cutting and pasting at least the following language from one of our article titles, and where titles are searchable by web crawler bots, "added a war crimes investigator to his team, after Jeffrey Epstein's Trump linked ICC's child trafficking Putin's war crimes against" - and ZERO articles came up, despite the fact that we optimized this article for Google.

Here's the article we cut and pasted that language from right out of the Google SEO 'optimized' title and article.

Elsewhere with this article you are currently reading you'll find we did optimize this article for Google, but here is further evidence of that, which both proves when we had optimized the article, and that the article was optimized on Google, and that the optimization terms in the searchable description box, searchable page title, and searchable "Google search page example", EACH contained the unique search terms that only this Google SEO optimized page contained, below, and yet as illustrated above, our Google search for these Google SEO optimized search terms in as many as THREE different searchable boxes was unable to find our article, the only article Google was optimized to find, but didn't. "It looks like there aren't many great matches for your search", is what Google responded with and provided us (and thus others) with Reuters articles instead, in an anti-competitive manner, because only our article should have come up at the top of the search results, because only our article had SEO optimized the unique search terms we employed for Google's search engines.

Two minutes before this failed search, above, to find our 'Google optimized' article - and our existence online - which wasn't optimized by Google as we prepaid for and as marketed to us - we had tried with even fewer search terms from the same article, only to not find us in search results again, below, and so this is now three different provable searches, each of which should have found us online based on our unique and optimized search terms, but didn't, forming a pattern. 

Similarly, we also asked others in Santa Cruz to try and find us online, and they weren't able to either, which we or the authorities could eventually subpoena our web host to prove the same as to who connected with their servers, requiring us to type the URL in to help them find the same, and where at least three different people couldn't find the same, one middle aged white Caucasian male from Canada, who works in the energy sector, who ate at a restaurant on the Santa Cruz pier and paid by credit card, on the same evening as one African American woman who was middle age and from New York, who went to Red Room in Santa Cruz, and probably paid by credit card, and one white male from San Jose, who works for Jeffrey Epstein's Amazon as a manager, who also went to Red Room, and also likely paid by credit card on the same evening.

This Santa Cruz experiment to try and get others to find us occurred within the week before September 2, 2023, per another article we wrote, where one the people we spoke to seemed to have stalked one of our investigative reporters, as specified in https://www.uprightsnews.com/imperial-cults/1456037_is-the-global-organized-crime-syndicate-of-jeffrey-epstein-stalking-uprights-news-editor-in-chief-and-or-witnesses-who-have-spoken-to-uprights-news-in-the-same-manner-that-jeffrey-epstein-s-david-koch-s-donor-trust-s-project-veritas-and-or-turning-point-usa-have-done-to-others-elucidating-crimes, which helps narrow down the date of the experiment, which we will try and narrow down even further, but suspect all of this happened circa on the evening of August 31, 2023 to September 1, 2023.

So enough info to track down no less than 6 different attempts to find us online had failed, despite us paying for Google search engine optimization, which we employed, but to no avail. 

Accordingly, we couldn't find us online, nor could others, on at least six occasions, and these people were from different areas, different countries, with different types of phones, different providers, and yet where every day we operate, we should be more and not less visible.

As illustrated below, there are no fewer than 149 unique domain names containing the letters and words "uprights" and "news", and each of those pages has been optimized with SEO language, along with the many images therein, and so there was no technical reason for Google not to find at least one of our 149 "optimized" pages, which we optimized with one of their partners, who may have also been defrauded, if they are paying Google a percentage of the funds collected to provide us these SEO services, as marketed.

As illustrated below, EACH of our articles and our news sections include the words and letters "uprights" and "news" within our domain names, for no fewer than 149 pages.

Outranking our exclusive use of "UpRights News" keywords in the scrolling document above, was "upright faces", "Upside" and "News", "Upright News" - but here it is important to differentiate - we uniquely spell the name of our news publication, "Uprights", plural, as in up your "rights", or united progressive (up) "rights", and so this very unique search term with the word "news" should have been found, because as promised, "a complete website", "optimized for Google" can be made in "10 minutes". And yet as specified above, we made this website in July 22, 2023, and this search was performed almost exactly two months later, on or after September 22, 2023.

This begs the question, did UpRights News publish at least one article that was Google SEO optimized that had the unique search terms "uprights" and "news", given that none of the highest ranking search results employed the word "uprights" and "news" together? The answer is we sure did, and at least by September 18, 2023, as found on our home page.

And we already proved that we had optimized that page for Google, above and below, supra and infra, on September 18, 2023, and so days before Septmember 22, 2023, and where as marketed, Google optimization for a complete website takes 10 minutes.

And as we specified, we had optimized this page, that had a "green" square beside it, and not a blue square, supra, including in the title of the news article, which specified "UpRights News", which thus should have outranked any other article like the six pages of result above, which didn't employ these unique search terms or keywords together.

And where clicking on this SEO link from above, results in the following SEO settings page for every article we publish, and in three different pages on this SEO settings page, literally in every field or box possible, we added the search terms "UpRights News", which did not appear in the above Google search four days later.

Despite the fraudulent marketing to trick us into providing payment by specifying a complete website that is Google optimized in 10 minutes, let's give everyone the benefit of the doubt here, and say it takes days and not 10 minutes for Google to update their ability to search. Then did UpRights News ever publish any other article with the unique search terms that were optimized, specifically, "Uprights News"? Yes we did, and many times more than once, and all the way back to August 28, a month ago, as follows.

But there is another strategy we employed on every single page and article beyond adding the keywords "uprights and news" to every article's URL address, or website address - we added a legal disclaimer that mentions "UpRights News" at least five different times, as follows.

This means that we optimized the keyword search terms for internet searchs 149 web pages times 5 references to "Uprights News", for a sub-total projection of no less than 745 "UpRights News" search term projections associated with 149 web pages that had those keywords embedded in the web page addresses, for a total minimum projection by us using these search terms 745+149=894 times, which doesn't include all the other ways we optimized our website in order to be "visible" and in order to be "indexed faster", as was marketed to us, and which we paid for.

But we optimized our website even more, by adding "UpRights News" in our searchable banner, also found on almost every page, so 894+149 =1,043 times minimum our website projected the unique search terms "UpRights News".

Now it is important to note that Jeffrey Epstein's Google is "the largest news aggregator in the world", and that we paid to have Google market us, to compete against Google news service, and yet Jeffrey Epstein's Google didn't help us "index faster", nor in "10 minutes", nor increasing our "visibility", nor in an "optimized manner" as collectively marketed to us, and which we paid for, but instead, it seems pretty clear that Google and/or others harmed us, and concealed us from the public, to not let our reporting or speech be heard, in violation of our 1st Amendment rights.

Isn't this textbook anti-competitive behavior begging an antitrust lawsuit by the DOJ, FTC, and/or US Attorneys General? This is the same kind of behavior the FTC just sued Jeffrey Epsetin's Jeff Bezos' Amazon for, with 17 Attorneys General in tow?

It is a reasonable inference that we have not been optimized for our entire operations, despite paying for the same, and despite optimizing every page we published, sometimes in 3 to 5 different ways, or more when you could the keywords we added to images - because two months later, and despite almost 1000 SEO optimizations of the keywords "UpRights News", we didn't appear at all, and others who didn't employ these search terms did appear instead. Res ipsa loquitur malum in se, this natural evil speaks for itself.

Accordingly, were we defrauded by false marketing by a Google partner in order receive payment from us in a manner consistent with fraud, and/or was our web host defrauded by Google, and/or did the two join and further an ongoing conspiracy to defraud? It seems at least one of these fraud situations is true, based on the evidence, infra.

Were we defrauded by Jeffrey Epstein's Google, because of our reporting of Google's founders being possibly implicated in the financing of the child kidnapping, child sex trafficking, and child rape operations of Jeffrey Epstein, as expressed and/or implied by the U.S. Virgins Islands' Attorney General's Office and/or their attorney(s)?

They subpoenaed Google in their investigation of JPMorgan and Jeffrey Epstein, and specified that all of the business between JPMorgan and Epstein was for sex trafficking, and they subpoenaed Google, Elon Musk, and/or Leon Black.

Did Google finance the child kidnapping, child sex trafficking, and child rape operations of Jeffrey Epstein, as expressed and/or implied by the U.S. Virgins Islands' Attorney General's Office and/or their attorney(s)?

Is that the intent behind why we have been defrauded in an ongoing manner for as great as two months, to silence our reporting in violation of not just our free speech, but that of Common Dreams, and The Hartmann Report? Is the same reasonably intimidating when some of the world's richest companies and billionaires are involved in the violation of our constitutional rights? Would such intimidation reasonably have a chilling effect and further witness, victim, and/or government informant intimidation for the exclusive purposes of obstructing justice and retaliating, harassing, and/or discriminating against UpRights News and/or its contributors?

Ongoing conspiracies do not require others to know one another, nor to know the specifics of the conduct of one another, but rather, they only need to overtly further a common purpose.

But is there any evidence that we implicated Google or their founders before September 22, 2023, because if we only implicated them afterwards, we would not have given them any reason to violate our rights, and the rights of those other news agencies we distribute, violating our collective rights to free speech, and in a manner that defrauded us?

It turns out we published many articles about Google and/or their founder prior to us finding out that they were violating our 1st Amendment rights in a fraudulent and anti-competitive manner, as follows.

We have since found additional evidence supporting our claims made above, where we searched for "uprightsnews", which is found in as many as 149 of our articles in the website addresses, give or take some articles back to that date, but ZERO visibility for UpRights News on Google as marketed to us and as we prepaid for.

OTHER INTERNET BROWSERS WE HAVEN'T PAID SEO SERVICES FOR CAN FIND US ONLINE NO PROBLEM

The next body of evidence supporting our claims herein this article proves that other web browsers, specifically DuckDuckGo, who didn't market SEO paid services to us, and who we didn't thereafter pay for SEO services, can readily find us online, per a search conducted yesterday, as follows.

Here's another example of DuckDuckGo able to find us no problem, based on our update to this article on September 28, 2023, populating nearly all their search engine results based on the same keywords we used at Google, specifically the name of our publication, "UpRights News".

It is a reasonable inference that if a web browser (DuckDuckGo), who we are not paying to find us online, can readily find us online - then of course Google, whose SEO services were marketed to us and thereafter we paid for the same and employed the same - should also be able to find us as readily as DuckDuckGo, which of course isn't the case.

All of this and more supports our claims that Google is intentionally seeking to engage in antitrust, retaliation, witness intimidation, obstruction of justice, and/or other ongoing harm against us due to their founders' close relationship with child kidnapper, child sex trafficker, and child rapist, Jeffrey Epstein, in a manner that has defrauded us and/or interfered with our economic activity and/or other harm. 

This is a reasonable inference based on all of this evidence. There is little to no other reasonable explanation for us not being as visible on Google as we are on DuckDuckGo, and repeatedly not being visible at all to ourselves nor others.

We didn't pay for the Google SEO marketed services to only occasionally be found online buried in search result, or not at all, but to always rank at the top and across the search results as DuckDuckGo is doing.

Here's another example from 09/28/2023, using our phone, of Google failing to propose our news publication, but proposing all sorts of other things instead, and yet the marketing claim was that in 10 minutes, we'd have a complete website that was Google optimized. It's been months Google, and "UpRights News" has been SEO optimized projecting no less than over 1000 searchable references to "UpRights News", including in Google specific SEO applications. Why can't you always find us Google? Why don't we always populate most of your first pages of results like we do in DuckDuckGo? Why aren't you recommending us Google? What happened to our business profile and $500 in Google ad credits you promised Google? You verified us, so where is our business listing Google? We think you should rename your company Zero.

Later in the morning, after we added updates to this article, our Google Chrome operating system, and/or Google accounts,

(1) provided us yet another (third) variation of the login page, (where sometimes we are greeted with a single user name and password page to login to our Google computing devices and Google accounts, and then other times we are presented with a two page login page, one of which asks us if we would like to sign in with children's accounts, and a third variation of the login page also asks us if we want to sign in with a business account), and

(2) now is denying us the ability to open up our files with an editor as was always the case until this morning (September 28, 2023), and

(3) won't allow us to transfer files on our Google Chrome operating system under our Google account, and

(4) won't allow us to transfer all of our files off our Google Chrome operating system under our Google account, as summarized below, followed by the evidence for the same.

This is what happens when we try and open one of our files on our Google Chrome system connected to our Google account - nothing. Nothing happens now. The file simply refuses to be opened. The orange in the background is our desktop picture and is clearly not the same picture as the file we are trying to open below, which until this morning would otherwise open for editing, now being denied that functionality by Google. Now the only way for us to view our files is to upload them online to our news articles, because Google is leaving us no other choice here.

That's a whole lot of toxic harm coming from Google if our reporting wasn't credible, which proves that our reporting is very credible, and Google perceives the same as a threat to them, and to Jeffrey Epstein's crime syndicate, is a reasonable inference, based on these recent escalations of ongoing harm.

The following proves that our computer is a Google ChromeOS (see orange tab). 

For the record, because Google has defrauded us, we don't agree to any of their terms of services, nor any rights they perceive they have, seeing as our rights are being violated, and it looks like our rights are being violated by Google here, based on a preponderance of evidence, and/or evidence beyond a reasonable doubt. Furthermore, contracts of adhesion or take-it-or-leave-it agreements, like any of the big tech companies operating in CA, are unenforceable in California (which is why our online operations are located outside of California), but fraud crimes are enforceable as are other crimes and harm.

Here, Google Chrome's operating system has informed us that it has failed to transfer our files from one folder to another using Google Chrome operating system and Google accounts to connect to the same, as evidence of a denial of service cyberterrorism, cyberwarefare, cyberbullying, cyberstalking, cyberharassment, conversion of private property, retaliation against a protected whistleblower, intimidation of a victim, government informer, and witness for the purpose of obstructing justice, and/or other harm.

Here's the evidence Google also won't allow us to transfer our files off of this Google Chrome computer, and so there is definitely something in these files that Google does not want others to learn about, and we know what it is! Here's a hint, what rhymes with Jeffrey Epstein's ongoing organized crime syndicate?

In other reporting, we have specified that we experience cyberattacks during assault and battery with deadly weapons incidents involving aircraft, for example as happened today. Note the add in the bottom right corner operating at the same time as the cyberattack (Google). Pretty strange for a "live flight" we were trying to identify after it dive-bombed our operations, not to be found on radar. It is hard if not impossible for most planes to just disappear from a radar, which ping a wave off the plane, which rebounds the wave back. But it is entirely possible for someone operating software (Google Ads) on the radar site to interfere with the same to obstruct justice for those involved in terrorism against UpRights News.

Here's the proof it was Jeffrey Epstein's Google operating that ad, during the cyberterrorism attack our radar service provider experienced as we tried to identify the terrorist harassing us by air, which we were able to prove by clicking on the blue x in the top right corner of the ad, which then results in the following.

A preponderance of evidence and/or evidence beyond a reasonable doubt of our claims herein this article? Yes, per our researched and stated opinions, based on all of this evidence, herein this article, and across all of our related articles, is a reasonable inference.