Monday, June 29, 2009

I LOVE Google! Back off Anti-Trust trick.

Open Letter to Google and to the U S Dept of Justice in their latest non-helpful to the U S citizens attack on Google:

Here is the 'defence" I provide for Google as they are being subjected to a 'take-over' effort by the U S government:
1) Google is not driving other companies out of business --the other companies ' high prices for domains, lack of reliable services, lack of integrity, and failure to perform when contracts were involved, is the very reason the U S and the world needs Google.
2) Google provides most of its services free to the public including excellent email [gmail] and excellent free web pages and trust-worthy service as far as I know and I have had gmail and googlepages accounts since they were offered, and those are free to me. Whereas I spent money to get emails on and they never worked properly in four years and were always 'unset' as soon as I logged out; and I spent money to get emails with domain names on and on a hare-brained scheme to try to force me to recant religious beliefs took down my Christian content websites that were pure and undefiled and blocked my emails for at least 2 months, in their effort to resell domain names of mine that I had built up and advertised and marketed some of them for SIX years. Google on the other hand has always behaved properly toward me and honored their contract, even when my google domain and gmail was hacked by criminals when I proved that I paid for it they restored it to me quickly. on the other hand, a company that may have a true monopoly and stronghold since they have cheated, swindled me of the fruit of six years of my labor and money I paid into them, and have refused to restore my websites even though they know they are paid up, and even though they know I paid for them, and even though they know they were honorable and that the most of them were for the purposes of spreading the gospel and prolife message. should be sued for anti-trust and please do, and use this entry to bring that about. But google is the friend of all people everywhere and we the people of the United States want them to endure and continue independent of government harassment and persecution or take-over by the feds.
3) Google provides a free and unregulated press to all, via its news on the website under 'news' tab, and it provides 'youtube' which allows anyone to upload their video of news events they witnessed. If I were to guess who is behind the effort to regulate google, I would guess it is the NY Times and the Washington Post whose so-called news is usually only the canned, scripted sort, paid for by paid op-ed writers to disguise it as news, and provided for them from the U S Capitol or US Senate or US House of Representatives from their Public Relations [PR] staff, and is not news at all but propaganda. Google provides very necessary services to a nation that has had canned and scripted propaganda since that evil Roe decision usurped the true law of the nation which is the U S Constitution.
4) The take-over of all free services by the U S government in order to force people to have to buy internet services and to have to pay subscription fees to get internet news, is unconstitutional on the face of it. The First Amendment gives every citizen the privilege of worshipping GOD and saying, writing their beliefs, and it gives all citizens' collectively the 'right' to a free unregulated press which does not exist except for Google and also Yahoo which offer news on their main websites.
5) The people of the U S do not want socialist take-over of all services and we collectively reject the Obama plan to socialize the nation.
6) We the people do not want to be forced to pay for services like email when we have gmail-an excellent email and many features with it including the ability to send and receive emails with photos of family events in them and to 'chat' by clicking their name [google talk, though I have not tried I understand that it is a wonderful feature enabling free communication for families around the world.] It is unconstitutional for the U S Dept of Justice to harass Google because they are providing free services to all but of course they should not provide p*rnography-- I absolutely agree that there is no collective need of the nation for p*rnography! But a better way to end that is as China has done and say no services allowed with p*nography on them and then the problem would be solved for all and in the US Christians would not have to worry about cybercriminals hijacking their websites for evil, and the companies would be forced to build, create, ways to provide decent and moral content without compromising the ways, methods for the people to communicate.
7) Google is entitled to make a living and the services they charge for are optional, and it is unconstitutional for the U S Dept of Justice to try to drive Google out of business because Microsoft does not compete. Microsoft is over-priced and they, whether intentionally or not, have defrauded honest customers via their products like VISTA that locked out the owner [me in this case] who had just purchased a computer from supposely reputable office supply place with supposedly factory installed Microsoft, but then Microsoft said it was not legitimate but did I have control of what software was installed on the computer I bought from a retail store and paid a lot of money for? And did Microsoft make it right for me? No, they did not. I called them and they made a record of it they said, and the store picked up my computer and reinstalled [they said] and supposedly with certified Microsoft [they said] but then the next time I tried to use that computer I received Microsoft message of not legitimate software installed AGAIN and on top of that the so-called repair place for the retail store kept the original disk but I kept the certified Microsoft seal that was in the box, and then I had to buy textbooks on computers,and disable the VISTA to be able to regain access to my own 'new' computer! That is why Google is beating Microsoft because Microsoft is not honorable in the way they treat their customers. And Microsoft cannot compete because they want money for everything and open source of Linux, and open office, and yes, Google services have made Microsoft have to tow the line, they have not driven Microsoft out of business but made it not so easy for Microsoft to dominate the field of services of computers. It is unconstitutional for the U S Dept of Justice to try to drive out of business a company that provides enormous amounts of services to anyone free. IF google is for good as is their motto, why is the U S government harassing them?
8) The fact that Google worldwide was hacked earlier this year is most likely due to the intentional efforts by Obama to control and dominate every aspect of any company that produces any content/words, videos about him. That is unconstitutional for him to do that and everyone in the world knows that. If Obama used the Pentagon 's ability to seek and destroy computer operated [airplanes, ships, trains, voting machines,etc] to hack into Google on a massive scale they should be brought to justice and Obama should be impeached for violating the First Amendment collectively for the nation.
9) Google provides services that connect people in any nation with any other nation and they provide search engines and content free. That is not violating the anti-trust laws because a monoply by definition involves commercial content and is based upon the premise that they drive others out of business.
10)There is no evidence that Microsoft is suffering any since their owner gave millions to the cause of aborting babies worldwide --a wicked cause absolutely--and that is why the U S Dept of Justice baby-killing-enforcement-SS-Troops are trying to force Google to knuckle under; because Google tends to be prolife and does not censor prolife messages. Google in its desire to provide free services to all so any person may communicate with any other person, and to provide prolifers also a way to post their content, thus 'offends' the baby-killing-Big-Brother-ungodly-administration that seems to be determined to annihilate the world especially those that do not believe that government is GOD. It is unconstitutional for the Obama Administration to use the U S Dept of Justice to attempt to regulate the only free press in America or the world and that is Google. We the people of the United States have the constitutional right to a free and unregulated, uncontrolled by government press.
11) Prolifers are also guaranteed First Amendment liberties; those of us who are citizens and I am. And google provides services to me the same as they provide them to those who think they have a so-called 'right' to kill innocents. Freedom of press and freedom of religion are the cornerstones of any republic and the U S is a republic not a democracy. And there is a difference in the two forms of government-radical, major differences. And I know for certain the founders of this nation intended this nation to be a republic since that is written into the US Constitution.
12) Google provides services that no other company provides, and they do it very well. Why are you harassing them for being successful? The entire Obama Administration has it backwards. They want to reward those who destroyed their companies while drawing million dollar paychecks, with big big fat paychecks from TARP and from 'stimulus' and they did that. And the Obamites want to reward those who never made any effort to compete with any company like GM and Microsoft, and it seems they want to strong arm those who do provide services for the nation at no cost in a time of depression into not providing free services because they want to control and regulate and use the full force and credit of the U S government to force citizens to have to pay for what they get free now in a time of depression. If the Obamites continue on their path we will have the United Socialist Republic of America by the next election.
13 ) Withdraw your scam [anti-trust trial against Google], U S Dept of Justice --it is not in the best interest of the citizens of this nation.
/s/ Gloria Poole, Denver Colorado 80203 @ 8:12 AM, 29-June-2009
Update at 10:40AM after reading in Yahoo News that the Supreme Court failed to decide whether a movie that is decidely anti-Clinton [the news said, I do not go see movies about Democrats] that was made for showing during the campaign in 2008 is a campaign contribution or not. And here are my reactions to that decision:
if an anti-Hillary movie might even be considered campaign regulated by FCC content,then why was the anti-Bush movie that appeared a few weeks before the election not considered campaign regulated content? Do you smell a skunk in that whole approach? If the anti-Clinton movie no doubt financed by the Obama campaign who no doubt also financed the anti-Bush movie that was intended to put the entire Republican Party and republicans in a bad light, is regulated by the FCC because it protest democrats, then why should those movies that deliberately portray republicans including the then President of the United States as ignorant buffoons as the George Bush movie did not be considered as campaign material regulated by the FCC? Does the decision to try to outlaw the anti-Hillary movie while not outlawing the anti-republican-party movie smack of partisan control of the FCC? Because that is how it seems to me. Either they are both illegal under FCC campaign regulatory laws or neither is. If criticizing the Republican President and all republicans as a party in the run up to the election with very negative stereotypes about Christians in general and the Republican President specifically is not campaign material then how is it that an anti-Clinton movie who is no longer an elected official and not likely to ever be again, to be considered illegal under FCC campaign laws? Get a grip on reality, FCC !
Could you spell c-e-n-s-o-r-s-h-i-p of anti-Demoncrat material by the very agency that is supposed to guarantee a level playing field for federal candidates?
And also on the topic of the Supreme Court , hurrah for the decision that the white firefighters who passed the city issued test to certify them and were in line for promotion should have been promoted based on qualifications and NOT not promoted because the city feared the minorities would howl a protest because they failed to pass the qualifying exams. It is in the best interest of everyone in every place in America to have qualified in their field people in all positions and not political appointments based on skin color or the contribution the applicant made to the democratic party candidate.