Quote Originally Posted by LegioXXXUlpiaVictrix
Why? (...) Similarly, I heard some story about someone being arrested and interrogated for borrowing some communist book in either a European or American country. The problem was, he was a student in history and reading the book for research, but assumed to be a communist-terrorist for requesting it from his library. I don't believe a computer algorithm or human being either for that matter can draw very accurate conclusions about people's intentions or desires from looking at their log in a particular place.
Because they don't know which is why they would investigate the person.
It's not at all meant to be a perfect concluder of facts (though if they are really that illogical (or stupid), they should not even be in the position to judge in the first place), but as a hint to "possibly dangerous ones". Then when they have investigated they can be sure whether the person in question is really dangerous or not.

By the way, you used the word "Similarly" as if your hypothetical idea of...
I wonder how this will work. If I search for "9/11" "Al-Qaeda" "Bomb", will the google service recommend me to become a suicide bomber today?
...was similar to the first quote in this post. It did not include something as... "noticeable" as "Bomb", then again what I've read about the story of the student wanting to do communist research is hearsay at best without factual detail.

Or "Similarly" was used to refer to the idea of...
What if I do this to search for news articles?
...but we don't know if it is similar because the story about the student is (presumably) true, and whether you've done the search and have been investigated and arrested and interrogated.
If we would have to judge with the current information, it is probably false that you yourself have been arrested and interrogated, though the registration of your search, if true, can be assumed to be true at least.