XPost: alt.sailing.asa, alt.usenet.kooks, rec.arts.poems   
   From: lady.aviatrix@gmail.com   
      
   "Rhonda Lea Kirk Fries"  wrote in   
   news:govfa2$oc3$1@blackhelicopter.databasix.com:   
      
   > miguel wrote:   
   >> On Sat, 7 Mar 2009 08:16:17 -0500, "atlas bugged"   
   >>  wrote:   
   >>   
   >>> "miguel"  wrote in message   
   >>> news:3c23r4h5a2kn0c8glhhk8go42darevf0vp@4ax.com...   
   >>>> On Fri, 6 Mar 2009 08:23:02 -0500, "atlas bugged"   
   >>>>  wrote:   
   >>>>   
   >>>>> "miguel"  wrote in message   
   >>>>> news:jid1r49ku14fequpult9494kn1qsijj0jm@4ax.com...   
   >>>>>> On Thu, 5 Mar 2009 23:42:03 -0500, "atlas bugged"   
   >>>>>>  wrote:   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> "John "C""  wrote in message   
   >>>>>>> news:N6KdnY0rzdS1CC3UnZ2dnUVZ_rvinZ2d@centurytel.net...   
   >>>>>>>> "ah", do you eat anything that doesn't come from Deco's zipper   
   >>>>>>>> ??   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> I'm actually worried about Vince.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> You should be, although not in the sarcastic, taunting way you   
   >>>>>> are suggesting.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> For obvious reasons I hold no regard for Vince. In fact it   
   >>>>>> wouldn't bother me an awful lot if he received some come-uppance,   
   >>>>>> to tell you the truth. Your posts suggest to me anyway that you   
   >>>>>> consider yourself some invincible litigation force, and at the   
   >>>>>> outset it would appear that you've stacked the deck in your favor   
   >>>>>> as much as possible. You filed in New Jersey, and you can   
   >>>>>> represent yourself and force your opponents to hire NJ lawyers to   
   >>>>>> represent them, so you've got the upper hand in the economic   
   >>>>>> warfare aspect of this. Some of the people you've named aren't   
   >>>>>> the brightest folks you might meet. But they'll hire lawyers who   
   >>>>>> are bright enough. If they have the money and the desire to see   
   >>>>>> this through to the end, it will not end well for you.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> You've filed a frivolous and baseless lawsuit against a number of   
   >>>>>> parties. It has been obvious for some time that you are using the   
   >>>>>> threat of litigation as a tool to try to bully people into   
   >>>>>> showing you more respect than they have. But your motives are   
   >>>>>> worse than that. Vince can make a good case now that your   
   >>>>>> litigation is motivated by the improper purpose of attempting to   
   >>>>>> get him fired. Perhaps in the end he may even thank you for   
   >>>>>> providing so much evidence for him to make his case.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> Another thing he may feel compelled to thank you for, in the end,   
   >>>>>> is naming his employer. If you hadn't named his employer, he   
   >>>>>> would no doubt have to fund his defense on his own, or in concert   
   >>>>>> with other defendants. But because you've named his employer,   
   >>>>>> perhaps the deputy AG they assign to the case will provide Vince   
   >>>>>> his defense as well.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> It would be ironic, don't you agree, if in your continuing   
   >>>>>> attempts to cause Vince employment harm you in fact did him the   
   >>>>>> great favor of persuading the state to provide his defense?   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> I note also that you've issued warnings about causing Rhonda's   
   >>>>>> future employment efforts harm as well.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> Frankly, that is so indistinguishable from extortion at gunpoint   
   >>>>>> that it sickens me to know there are lawyers like you out   
   >>>>>> practicing. I can only hope that when your bar association finds   
   >>>>>> out about everything you've done they'll yank your ticket.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> I doubt his employers are going to like the lawsuit - I'm   
   >>>>>>> including the college (they inadvertently admitted he's Pinku) -   
   >>>>>>> and while service to Michigan will take another week or two,   
   >>>>>>> he's next up for a burst of previously unpublished info.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> One thing I've learned about info is that it's like the bell   
   >>>>>>> that you cannot   
   >>>>>>> un-ring.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> Haven't seen him around for a while.  Uhhh, I mean her.  Or,   
   >>>>>>> whatever...I've   
   >>>>>>> got the "person's" info qued up to go public Monday   
   >>>>>>> night...ding!   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> Giving *me* a "ring" might just be a good idea sometime during   
   >>>>>>> biz hours Monday.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> This would be a Hell of a time for anyone to lose their job.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> County colleges are more popular now than ever, but also more   
   >>>>>>> broke.  I wonder what tips the scales when they decide who to   
   >>>>>>> cut?   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> I'm depressed too, though.  Miguel is going to beat me up.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> And Rhonduh thinks a lawyer suing to protect the integrity of   
   >>>>>>> his business   
   >>>>>>> is going to be disciplined by....the bar association.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> Please note, once again, that your inability to grasp the irony   
   >>>>>> and hypocrisy of your statement borders on insanity. You claim to   
   >>>>>> be litigating to protect the integrity of your business, but your   
   >>>>>> style of litigation is to attempt to destroy your opponents'   
   >>>>>> employment.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> Honest One, I know you're BFF's with Pinky-Sue and Rhonda, so   
   >>>>>>> you might want   
   >>>>>>> to check to make sure they're well.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> I sense tension between you and Art Deco, however.  Or not,   
   >>>>>>> that's just the   
   >>>>>>> impression I have.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> Oh, well, TTFN!   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> Here's in interesting thought -- just an aside. I notice you   
   >>>>>> didn't name Gary Burnore personally in your lawsuit. Instead, you   
   >>>>>> named Databasix.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> Let's suppose that Mr. Burnore were to decide to file a claim   
   >>>>>> against you for defamation in New Jersey, and that his lawyer   
   >>>>>> seeks to have it combined with the lawsuit you brought.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> That would certainly add context to the actions of a number of   
   >>>>>> other defendants.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> What do you think?   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> I think you aren't a lawyer.  I never take any action without   
   >>>>> understanding   
   >>>>> the law and the facts.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Objection: lack of foundation. Presumes facts not in evidence.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Sustained.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>> It looks as if you have read my complaint, but not a single New   
   >>>>> Jersey case   
   >>>>> or statute.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> You are disproving Lincoln's adage about self-representation.   
   >>>> Lincoln should have said "a man who represents himself has a   
   >>>> raving, insane lunatic for a client."   
   >>>>   
   >>>>> Moreover, are you representing you've read all the posts of all   
   >>>>> the defendants?   
   >>>>   
   >>>> I've probably read everything that's relevant to the frivolous   
   >>>> claims you've raised. Why don't you stop playing hide the ball and   
   >>>> just post the message IDs of articles you believe are actionable?   
   >>>>   
   >>>>> Do you have knowledge of any aspect of any economic circumstance   
   >>>>> of my firm?   
   >>>>   
   >>>> I've heard you're doing well enough to employ two secretaries who   
   >>>> by your reports are extremely hot and sexy. Is that still the case?   
   >>>>   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)