I’ve come to hate all things Google.

And, though I am ashamed to admit that I was into the Google-sponsored YouTube site, I am guilty of pawing around for the May 23 release of Freedom Watch and saw the message:

“patriotsnetwork.com YOUTUBE TOOK AWAY MY ABILITY TO UPLOAD FULL LENGTH VIDEOS WITHOUT NOTICE. YOU CAN WATCH IT AT PATRIOTS NETWORK ON THE FRONT PAGE.”

I was disappointed, but I wasn’t surprised.

I would expect Google, comprised of a nest of Marxists, to be censorial toward any one defending freedom and the U.S. Constitution. Host Judge Napolitano mainly interviews Republican Senators and Representatives, Reason Magazine editors/writers and his regular stable of freedom-fighters in an effort to convey his message.

It wouldn’t set well with the Google gang. After all, the multinational corporation that owns YouTube is said to have donated $373,212 to the Obama presidential campaign. Do you think that might have something to do with the removal of videos that espouse a strong Libertarian-Ron Paul-for-President bent?

Another one of my favorite shows, InfoWars.com, is consistently under fire. In late 2010, Google actually did send out written “notices” that InfoWars.com videos were being removed. Why? Were Marxist groups not able to stomach host Alex Jones’ hard-hitting exposés that reveal the truth? Jones won the argument with logic. Most--maybe all--videos were eventually restored.

I have no quarrel with Google as a private corporation holding the right to set its own terms, policies and standards. If I don’t like them, I can shun Google, which is what I’m doing. But it is unprofessional not to provide explicit reasons why any material was dumped. Google simply holds to a nasty habit of removing material unceremoniously.

It’s past due for an ingenious company to provide an alternative to YouTube.

In fairness, the Freedom Watch video was reinstated a day or two later, only in an inconvenient format. However, I know exactly how the Liberty Writers at patriotsnetwork.com must have felt the day Freedom Watch was canned.

On Tuesday, May 17, without any warning, Google stripped me of my gmail account, citing “unusual activity”.

Does “unusual activity” mean suddenly “excessive”? Not enough traffic? Or I was caught opening my account to print out documents from a commercial machine that used Google Chrome?

I had adamantly refused to install the browser in my computer despite Google carrying through on its threats to remove features such as “spell check” and “automatic draft”, further downgrading me to viewing copy in HTML only.

Nobody to whom I sent notices advising that my gmail address was defunct could offer any explanation for the cyberspace czar’s pulling such a bizarre con job on its subscribers.

Google “generously offered” to issue a “new access code” to my cell phone or voice mail when I provided my mobile phone number to them.

I neither have a cell phone number nor voice mail...which means I’ll never be back in that account again. And, since Google did not see its way clear to provide warning of the shut-out, any important mail that had yet to be backed-up elsewhere has been lost.

Even if I owned a cell phone, I don’t think I’d reinstate the gmail. I’ve had enough of Google’s Big Brother strong-arm, dictatorial tactics. This action does, however, seem incongruous in view of Google’s policy to get everybody in the world on a gmail account so they can gather statistics by snooping on our mail or posting it online.

Since cell phone numbers are not compiled into print or Internet directories like land line phone numbers are, my suspicious mind believes Google is shutting down gmail accounts as a devious way of collecting cell phone numbers from customers in order to establish a database which will be sold to the government, telemarketers and used by Google to promote its products to cell phone customers.

Well, surprise!

Google isn’t getting a cell number from me! And I have deleted Google from my computer (but they can still track me) in favor of Ask.com as a search engine. So far, it works super-fine.

Anybody thinking of making the switch, don’t use the Bing search engine; it’s owned by Microsoft, which is controlled by and partially-owned by Google which is dangerously thick as thieves with the United Nations, governments at ever level and telecommunications corporations--all spying and eavesdropping on you.

Meanwhile, all I personally have to say to Google is “Good riddance to bad rubbish.”