"Bishop" <The Bishop@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in
news:skoQe.51339$2Q3.1446@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Try http://www.sarahbranson.com/
> It sure reads like a big mess. Not sure I understand
> what it is all about... threats and all that...
Go to http://www.sarahbranson.com/#contents
and move forward. Not that I
understand it all. You may get as far as a statement by me that says as
much.
Have a look at http://www.sarahbranson.com/harassment/sb11feb/default.htm
and see if you believe she was told in telephone conversations by Google
A "They replied that there was nothing that they could do." ("if they
could remove it from their search engine.") [para 8]
B "that web service providers cannot generally scrutinize the contents
of material sent to or hosted by them." [para 17]
Or "I confirmed with the post office that it had been delivered by
telephone." [para 17]
Do you think a qualified legal professional could make three convenient
mistakes in a row?
Do you think blocking my access to services is okay?
--
T Moore
N E Manchester, England
http://sitemenu.tom-moore.com/
