Guest guest Posted March 6, 2011 Report Share Posted March 6, 2011 It's not vague at all. If you have a case whereby you've been denied your rights because several entities refuse them to you by colluding, then you have a case against them. Sharon's been illustrating this in so many of her posts (the US Chamber, for instance). If you keep your medical records and legal records, you may or may not have proof of collusion. One interpretation of collusion from www.dictionary.com is: " a secret agreement between opponents at law in order to obtain a judicial decision for some wrongful or improper purpose " I fail to understand why some refuse to use sources like the above when they don't understand things. It's faster and more accurate than waiting for a lengthy explanation from a list member. Barth www.presenting.net/sbs/sbs.html SUBMIT YOUR DOCTOR: www.presenting.net/sbs/molddoctors.html --- Copyright 2011. The content of this post is considered the property of the author and shall not be reproduced, copied, or shared with another e-mail list, public forum, or individual without the written permission of the author. All rights reserved. d> That is just to vague to understand anything. Forget about it. d> God Bless !! d> dragonflymcs d> Mayleen d> ________________________________ d> From: Patilla DaHun <glypella@...> d> dragonflymcs < > d> Sent: Sat, March 5, 2011 8:05:55 PM d> Subject: Re[4]: [] Re: (no subject) d> Evidence of collusion! d> Barth d> www.presenting.net/sbs/sbs.html d> SUBMIT YOUR DOCTOR: www.presenting.net/sbs/molddoctors.html d> --- d> Copyright 2011. The content of this post is considered the property d> of the author and shall not be reproduced, copied, or shared with d> another e-mail list, public forum, or individual without the written d> permission of the author. All rights reserved. d>> Evidence of what ?? Please explain yourself, not everyone here knows Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 6, 2011 Report Share Posted March 6, 2011 I never refuse sources myself, I do not know if others do or not , I like sources but thought maybe you could enlighten us about Rico since you brought it up. I understand it is clear to you, cause you have the expertise in this and have been dealing with this yourself. I just thought maybe the rest of us could understand in plain English on Rico since maybe most of us are not familiar with legal terms it can become confusing to some of us. So a quick simple explanation of what and how it works would have been a good thing to some of us in being helpful. God Bless !! dragonflymcs Mayleen ________________________________ From: Patilla DaHun <glypella@...> dragonflymcs < > Sent: Sun, March 6, 2011 6:56:16 PM Subject: Re[6]: [] Re: (no subject) It's not vague at all. If you have a case whereby you've been denied your rights because several entities refuse them to you by colluding, then you have a case against them. Sharon's been illustrating this in so many of her posts (the US Chamber, for instance). If you keep your medical records and legal records, you may or may not have proof of collusion. One interpretation of collusion from www.dictionary.com is: " a secret agreement between opponents at law in order to obtain a judicial decision for some wrongful or improper purpose " I fail to understand why some refuse to use sources like the above when they don't understand things. It's faster and more accurate than waiting for a lengthy explanation from a list member. Barth www.presenting.net/sbs/sbs.html SUBMIT YOUR DOCTOR: www.presenting.net/sbs/molddoctors.html --- Copyright 2011. The content of this post is considered the property of the author and shall not be reproduced, copied, or shared with another e-mail list, public forum, or individual without the written permission of the author. All rights reserved. d> That is just to vague to understand anything. Forget about it. d> God Bless !! d> dragonflymcs d> Mayleen d> ________________________________ d> From: Patilla DaHun <glypella@...> d> dragonflymcs < > d> Sent: Sat, March 5, 2011 8:05:55 PM d> Subject: Re[4]: [] Re: (no subject) d> Evidence of collusion! d> Barth d> www.presenting.net/sbs/sbs.html d> SUBMIT YOUR DOCTOR: www.presenting.net/sbs/molddoctors.html d> --- d> Copyright 2011. The content of this post is considered the property d> of the author and shall not be reproduced, copied, or shared with d> another e-mail list, public forum, or individual without the written d> permission of the author. All rights reserved. d>> Evidence of what ?? Please explain yourself, not everyone here knows Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.