[Calpernia]

>>>Honestly, the only question I have (and it leaves me sceptical) is how someone might have deliberately constructed the 3-image sequence and then added the three specific parts of the search term deliberately.

Cause the site has an embedded association to choose these pics with those words. THAT does not mean these pics won't show up in random order with other word associations; BUT these three pics are embedded to associate with this word combination specifically.

HENCE is why it was cached in google for this specific display.

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

Hey I'm post #5,201!! Whoo-hoo!

[angkor]

We're talking apples and oranges.

I'm asking how anyone would have had the time to flip through those 21,000 images one-at-a-time to find those three specific images. Of course you can add the associations once you find them, but how would you find them in the first place? There's no index, no thumbnails, no preview.

How would a jihadi know that the images he/she wanted were even there? Random luck? Hope? There is no clue whatsoever (none that I can find) that this image DB will have any pix of Staples, Luxor, or a 747. How would a jihadi know to use it?

I want to note that this is 21,000 images we're talking about, randomly ordered, no index or identification of even a single image in my sampling.

FYI, I'm not questioning the Google search. That's not my issue.