GOOGLE: WHO'S RUNNING THINGS?

By Marilyn M. Barnewall
July 25, 2010
NewsWithViews.com

On July 18, 2010, it was announced that the Obama Administration had shut down 73,000 blogs hosted by Blogetery.com. News in the blogging world originally said the blogs were deleted under the provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act passed in 1998.

I’m quoting Dave Nalle at Dave Nalle's Blog. He says “Critics of this action believe that first amendment rights and due process should be respected and that the burden of proof should fall on the government to identify and punish only the actual wrongdoers rather than shutting down thousands of innocent sites to get a few malefactors.”

Another report denies that government action closed down all these blogs. It says the Intellectual Property Czar’s office and Digital Millennium Copyright Law may not have been responsible. Instead, an online magazine with al-Qaeda ties and article content about terrorist activities was at fault for the 73,000 blog closures.

According to this second report, the FBI’s only involvement was requesting user information about several sites and using a criminal code provision that doesn’t require a warrant. Reports say the owner of Blogetery.com or its provider over-reacted and began deleting blogs.

The only problem with the second story is that neither the FBI nor any other law enforcement group contacted the Blogetery owner. The people who shut him down won’t tell him why. It makes this second report sound like “Tell the public it’s terrorist related and they’ll be scared out of asking any questions” rhetoric.

My blog was with Google’s Blogspot.com, not Blogetery. Google, which owns Blogspot, deleted my blog on July 20, 2010. The reason it was removed is important – to you, and to me. The material it contained proves a man who paid $14,129 in erroneous civil tax assessments in 1992 was arrested for non-payment of those taxes in 1993 and was sent to prison for 22 years in 1995. My blog contained a copy of his 1992 cancelled check proving he paid the tax. It is frightening to realize that if “they” don’t want evidence of someone’s innocence made public – yours or mine included – they just hit “delete.”

Regardless, the cancelled check reproduced on the blog proved Lee Wanta in 1992 paid an assessed (not proven) $14,129 civil tax imposed by the State of Wisconsin. Governor Tommy Thompson’s minions said he hadn’t paid it and prosecuted him. The back of the check clearly shows the State of Wisconsin cashed the check in 1992, when it was written. While in prison, a vast fortune Wanta earned – and I emphasize the word earned – for the American people got stolen. Hmmm… No wonder they wanted him in prison!

Internet blogs provide information which “they” don’t want the public to see. A lot of the deleted blogs had Tea Party affiliations, for example. On the other side of that coin, many blogs contain disinformation – or, to put it bluntly, lies.
As many of my readers know, I wrote a novel – a spy story – to explain the follies of a private corporation called (in the book) the “Federal Central Bank.” I thought a story about international intrigue might keep readers awake while I explained the banking system. It was 2008 and I was trying to warn people of what was coming. Because a character I created for the plot had experiences similar to those of Ambassador Leo/Lee Emil Wanta (one of America’s best kept intelligence agency secrets), fate ordained the two of us would end up being friends. Until I wrote the book, I was entirely unaware of this patriot’s history and he knew nothing of me.

In January and April I wrote articles for NewsWithViews about Ambassador Wanta. His story is one of patriotism and bravery. As my readers know, I document what I say. To validate statements made in the articles, I created a blog containing legal documents. NewsWithViews published a link to the blog. On July 20th, Google deleted it.

The evidence of Lee Wanta’s innocence on civil tax charges and the kidnapping of a vast fortune intended for the American people, was deleted.

To create my blog, I used Blogspot.com (owned by Google). In addition to the cancelled check, I placed a portion of a legal document signed by a Federal District Judge directing Ambassador Wanta to “proceed with the liquidation of the corporations and report those transactions to the Internal Revenue Service in accordance with the Internal Revenue Code and then challenge the assessment of any taxes in a refund proceeding.”

In essence, Judge Gerald Bruce Lee clarified legal ownership of the $4.5 trillion CHIP (Clearing House Interbank Payment) wire transferred from the People’s Bank of China to AmeriTrust Groupe, Inc., in Richmond, VA. The funds were sent to Ambassador Wanta’s AmeriTrust Groupe, Inc. account at Bank of America in Richmond. Wanta owns all AmeriTrust stock. The money was and is his.

The Bank of China’s transfer of $4.5 trillion occurred after Judge Lee’s decision. Wanta was trying to comply with the Judge’s decision… liquidating corporations so he could pay taxes to the American government of $1.575 trillion. The money – his and your $1.575 trillion in taxes – was “kidnapped.” Lee Wanta can’t gain access to what the evidence says are his own lawful funds and you’re paying higher taxes because he can’t pay the $1.575 trillion to the IRS until the government gives him access to his funds. Since deficit government spending in 2010 exceeds $1 trillion, Wanta’s tax payment could eliminate the economic crisis, lower taxes, and stimulate job growth. Also on the blog was a Writ of Mandamus that tells this very complex story that, admittedly, sounds like science fiction.

Maybe that’s why the evidence disappeared from the Internet… why my blog was deleted?

Here is the email I got from Blogspot.com on July 20, 2010:

“Hello,

“Your blog at http://wantachronicles.blogspot.com/ has been reviewed and confirmed as in violation of our Terms of Service for: SPAM. In accordance to these terms, we've removed the blog and the URL is no longer accessible.

“For more information, please review the following resources:

“Blogger Terms of Service"
“Blogger Content Policy"

“-The Blogger Team”

I wrote an email response to them – it went to a “no-reply” address. Maybe Google and Blogspot can get the gist of it here.

From: "Marilyn Barnewall"
To: "Blogger"
Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2010 4:28 PM
Subject: Re: wantachronicles.blogspot.com/ has been deleted

You say one of several blogs I created violates Google's Terms of Service SPAM:

The Wanta Chronicles appeared as a link in an Internet news publication read by a million people a month. Are you saying Google opposes the First Amendment and the right of the American press to publish factual data and legal documents verifying news?

You removed several of my other blogs – blogs that had nothing to do with The Wanta Chronicles. They contained numerous uploads of personal and professional data never sent to anyone for any reason, political, legal, or otherwise. I don’t even publish my blog address in my articles. Please review marilynwrites.blogspot.com/ and tell me how that blog violates Google’s SPAM terms.

The first article describes how I refused a large loan request from a Denver football player nearing the end of his Bronco playing days who wanted to fund an exhibition boxing match with Mohammed Ali. This violates your SPAM policy?

What does Google have against freedom of the press?

You state my blog violates Google's SPAM terms and conditions. An Internet definition of E-mail spam: unsolicited bulk Email (UBE), junk mail, or unsolicited commercial email (UCE) means sending e-mail messages, frequently with commercial content, in large quantities to an indiscriminate set of recipients. Though a link to the blog was published in my article, I have never sent the link to more than five people. Hardly large quantities! Thus, hardly SPAM!

How did information verifying statements made in a news editorial become SPAM? The only way people could access The Wanta Chronicles was to click on a link either in my article or in an email someone sends linking to the article. SPAM involves sending something the recipient didn’t ask for. How does Google define SPAM? Content that opposes its political views?

I understand that Google owns Blogspot and can remove from public view that with which it does not agree. The American public will hopefully take note of your actions. You have removed validating evidence of a news story. You remove the facts from public view by deleting my blog. I’m confident you stand on legal – if immoral – ground.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech or of the press; or of the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

For my readers: Google might have forgotten the First Amendment. I haven’t – and I hope you haven’t. The Wanta Chronicles have now become Wanta Revelations and can be found here. The new site is still under construction. I still have some formatting to complete, but the truth still stands.

© 2010 Marilyn M. Barnewall - All Rights Reserved

http://newswithviews.com/Barnewall/marilyn143.htm

Read more: http://blogs.myspace.com/tom_heneghan_intel#ixzz0ussx0IuI