My right of privacy has been continuously abused on the internet, first by the search engines, and then by judges who have refused to enforce state laws regarding privacy rights of the individual.

At the time I first discovered the violation of my rights on the internet, I was living in Wisconsin. Wisconsin has a "right of privacy" statute which prohibits the use of any living person's name or picture for advertising purposes without first obtaining the written consent of the person.

A few years ago, I did a search for my name on Yahoo. When I typed my name in Yahoo, Yahoo immediately suggested a related search for "bev stayart levitra" in its dropdown menu. Levitra is one of the most heavily advertised drugs on the internet and elsewhere, along with Viagra and Cialis. All are male sexual dysfunction drugs.

My attorney wrote to Yahoo to complain. He received no response from Yahoo. I was forced to file suit against Yahoo in federal court in Milwaukee to stop this violation of my rights under Wisconsin law.

Yahoo's attorney then wrote to my attorney, and explained that Yahoo had an existing "block' on the use of a person's name in connection with Viagra and Cialis, but did not have a similar block on the use of a person's name in connection with Levitra. Yahoo's attorney stated in his letter than Yahoo would now institute a similar block in connection with the use of my name with Levitra.

But I almost immediately discovered that Google was also suggesting a related search for "bev stayart levitra" in its dropdown menu when I typed my name in Google. Further, Google, unlike Yahoo, was then suggesting thousands of related searches for a multitude of other products and displaying ads for these products in connection with my name. None of these ads bore any connection to the search results for me or to my prior suit against Yahoo.

Google is paid a fee each time a viewer clicks on an ad. My attorney wrote to Google to complain. He received no response from Google, and I was then forced to sue Google in federal court in Milwaukee. My complaint was assigned to Judge Lynn Adelman. Judge Adelman abruptly dismissed my suit without a trial or even a hearing. He said that (1) my name had no commercial value, and (2) that Google was deriving no financial gain by using my name in connection with sexual dysfunction drugs.

I appealed his decision to the Court of Appeals in Chicago. My appeal was assigned to a three-judge panel headed by Judge Joel Flaum. This panel held that it was a matter of public interest for Google to use my name to display ads for Levitra because I had previously sued Yahoo for using my name to display ads for Levitra. The panel ignored the fact that Google was also using my name to display thousands of ads for products unrelated to Levitra. The panel also ruled that Google's use of my name to generate ad revenue was "incidental" rather than "substantial."

A mere six weeks before deciding my case, Judge Flaum had been a member of a three-judge panel which decided another right of privacy case under Wisconsin law, Bogie v. Rosenberg. Judge Flaum, as a member of this panel, upheld the dismissal of Bogie's complaint. Judge Flaum twice cited Judge Adelman's prior 2011 dismissal of my suit against Yahoo, in which Judge Adelman ruled that Yahoo's suggested search of "bev stayart levitra" was incidental rather than substantial. This was despite the fact that Yahoo had agreed in the future to cease linking my name to ads for sexual dysfunction drugs.

I then realized that Judge Flaum had cunningly used Judge Adelman's decision against me in Yahoo by ruling on the Bogie v. Rosenberg suit immediately before ruling on my suit. In Bogie v. Rosenberg, Judge Flaum cited Judge Adelman's decision against me in Yahoo twice. Judge Flaum then used the Bogie v. Rosenberg case against me to decide my suit. Judge Flaum could not have used Judge Adelman's decision in my prior suit against Yahoo directly against me in my suit against Google, so he inserted another case, Bogie v. Rosenberg, immediately before mine, and then cited Bogie v. Rosenberg against me.

In June of 2013, I asked the U.S. Supreme Court to review my suit against Google. The U.S. Supreme Court denied by petition for certiorari in October of 2013.

The owners of Google are Sergey Brin and Larry Page, both of whom are Jews. Judge Adelman and Judge Flaum are both Jews. Four of the eleven judges on the U.S. Supreme Court are Jews, Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, Elena Kagan, and Sonia Sotomayor (a Jewish surname),

Google is displaying search results for me which are nothing but attack blogs written by Jewish bloggers, including Eric Goldman, previously Eric "Schlachter" (he recently changed his name from "Schlachter," the Hebrew word for "animal slaughterer" to "Goldman"), Mike Masnick ("Techdirt"), John Pospisil (he titled his blog "Bev Stayart Cannot Give You an Erection" and called me a "frigging idiot"), and Danny Goodman, among many other Jewish attack bloggers.

The initial violation of my rights was perpetrated by the Jews Sergey Brin and Larry Page at Google; the subsequent ratification of the violation of my rights was instituted by Judge Adelman and Judge Flaum (both Jews); and the U.S. Supreme Court (comprised of over one-third Jewish judges) denied me the opportunity to review my case.

Jews represent only 2% of the U.S. population.

The 98% of the population who are not Jews are being sold up the river by Jewish judges giving a pass to Jewish wrongdoers.