rational thinker
10-11-2008, 10:07 AM
So basically has released this new feature in commemoration of their 10th birthday about a week ago and it is addictive. It is Google as it was in the year 2001. You basically search anything and all results come up as if it were 7 years ago. If you would like to view the actual web page, just click on View old version on the Internet Archive to the bottom right of each link. Anyways, on to the good stuff:
A.) As soon as I saw that this was from January, 2001 the first thing that I wanted to do was get a glimpse back to try and remember what life was like before 9/11:
1) I searched for "September 11th" and the top result was "Linux Security Week, September 11th 2000" - probably the last time 9/11 was mentioned in conjunction with computer security instead of national security.
2) I Searched for Osama Bin Laden and the top result was "Summary/Review of Reports Concerning Threats by Osama Bin Laden to Conduct Terrorist Operations Against the United States and/or her Allies - 23 Feb 98 to 16 Jun 98 " ( http://www.emergency.com/bladen98.htm ) The page talks a lot about Bin Laden's desire to kill Americans, both civillian and military - mostly in retaliation for American attacks - in Iraq.
3) I searched for something like "threat of terrorist attack in the United States" (I lost the exact original query) and the first result was a review of the 1999 Jessica Stern book, "The Ultimate Terrorists" ( http://www.issues.org/15.4/br_goodman.htm ). Some quotes from the article that I found to be interesting:
Stern also provides a strategy for deterrence that gives the Justice Department and the FBI greater leeway in initiating investigations of and infiltrating potential terrorist groups and prohibiting the dissemination of unclassified bomb-making information. In supporting such latitude, she recognizes that the cure might be worse than the disease but argues effectively that if Washington does not prepare in advance for a terrorist attack, then it is more likely to take actions that revoke civil liberties in the wake of one.
(Emphasis mine)
Stern falls into the trap that bedevils so many writers on terrorism: She exaggerates the number of recent acts of terrorism aimed at the United States as well as the likelihood that extremist Islamic groups are at the center of these acts.
Stern's book begs the question of overreacting to acts of terrorism, which the Clinton administration did in the summer of 1998...Senior CIA officials have made it known that they never considered the evidence as justification for military force in any event...The United States then blocked a UN investigation of the incident and has refused to apologize for its action. mistake. The damage to U.S. credibility in this affair was significant, and credibility is essential to any long-term campaign against international terrorism."
In any event, we should not forget that the problem of terrorism was far greater a hundred years ago...In fact, there has been a decline in terrorism since the Gulf War. Stern's The Ultimate Terrorists needs some perspective.
B.) As you could probably guess, I googled "Ron Paul" and (un)surprisingly he was still as big on the Internet as he is today. I also thousands of articles by conservatives back then, neo-conservatives now who kept defend Ron Paul's constitutional principles and his non interventionist views. Here is an example from Michael Reagan (a staunch neocon today): http://web.archive.org/web/20010831042757/reagan.com/HotTopics.main/HotMike/document-8.6.1997.4.html
C.) I discovered that Alex Jones has always been crazy. Just read this forum where posters kept getting updates about the Y2K craze that swept the nation in 2000. Just read what they're saying about what Alex is saying.:D
http://web.archive.org/web/20010714115810/pub5.ezboard.com/fyourdonfrm58.showMessage?topicID=546.topic
Edit: I see that Google has taken the direct link of their homepage so here it is for the lazy: http://www.google.com/search2001.html
A.) As soon as I saw that this was from January, 2001 the first thing that I wanted to do was get a glimpse back to try and remember what life was like before 9/11:
1) I searched for "September 11th" and the top result was "Linux Security Week, September 11th 2000" - probably the last time 9/11 was mentioned in conjunction with computer security instead of national security.
2) I Searched for Osama Bin Laden and the top result was "Summary/Review of Reports Concerning Threats by Osama Bin Laden to Conduct Terrorist Operations Against the United States and/or her Allies - 23 Feb 98 to 16 Jun 98 " ( http://www.emergency.com/bladen98.htm ) The page talks a lot about Bin Laden's desire to kill Americans, both civillian and military - mostly in retaliation for American attacks - in Iraq.
3) I searched for something like "threat of terrorist attack in the United States" (I lost the exact original query) and the first result was a review of the 1999 Jessica Stern book, "The Ultimate Terrorists" ( http://www.issues.org/15.4/br_goodman.htm ). Some quotes from the article that I found to be interesting:
Stern also provides a strategy for deterrence that gives the Justice Department and the FBI greater leeway in initiating investigations of and infiltrating potential terrorist groups and prohibiting the dissemination of unclassified bomb-making information. In supporting such latitude, she recognizes that the cure might be worse than the disease but argues effectively that if Washington does not prepare in advance for a terrorist attack, then it is more likely to take actions that revoke civil liberties in the wake of one.
(Emphasis mine)
Stern falls into the trap that bedevils so many writers on terrorism: She exaggerates the number of recent acts of terrorism aimed at the United States as well as the likelihood that extremist Islamic groups are at the center of these acts.
Stern's book begs the question of overreacting to acts of terrorism, which the Clinton administration did in the summer of 1998...Senior CIA officials have made it known that they never considered the evidence as justification for military force in any event...The United States then blocked a UN investigation of the incident and has refused to apologize for its action. mistake. The damage to U.S. credibility in this affair was significant, and credibility is essential to any long-term campaign against international terrorism."
In any event, we should not forget that the problem of terrorism was far greater a hundred years ago...In fact, there has been a decline in terrorism since the Gulf War. Stern's The Ultimate Terrorists needs some perspective.
B.) As you could probably guess, I googled "Ron Paul" and (un)surprisingly he was still as big on the Internet as he is today. I also thousands of articles by conservatives back then, neo-conservatives now who kept defend Ron Paul's constitutional principles and his non interventionist views. Here is an example from Michael Reagan (a staunch neocon today): http://web.archive.org/web/20010831042757/reagan.com/HotTopics.main/HotMike/document-8.6.1997.4.html
C.) I discovered that Alex Jones has always been crazy. Just read this forum where posters kept getting updates about the Y2K craze that swept the nation in 2000. Just read what they're saying about what Alex is saying.:D
http://web.archive.org/web/20010714115810/pub5.ezboard.com/fyourdonfrm58.showMessage?topicID=546.topic
Edit: I see that Google has taken the direct link of their homepage so here it is for the lazy: http://www.google.com/search2001.html