It is so much thought and even more speculation about the role played by a living English German from Hanover. Here again an important contribution of my opinion, "neutral" person, the intelligent questions and bring new facts.
At first I got the situation Blädtke - Augsburg really interested only in passing. A few days ago I was getting closer but sometimes get to the bottom, a few days had tried to leave and for me to bring light into darkness. I could not explain everything. But some things that came to light, have given me a lot to think.
Socrates told you: "I know that I know nothing!" - You knew about him that he was very wise and well read, so at that time already had a sound education, if one can say that.
Even today one can observe that intellectuals or rather "professionals" who have been properly trained in their field, be expressed most carefully, so they do not take the same face value or believe everything that question, not least, and especially the "accused" and then judge yourself first.
uneducated people reason often now, not knowing that being the case, the judge must they think might be more complex. I call it simply as a working concept and context even "fools".
Having said that I can hold on because of my self-made and financed by none (!!!) research the following things: first
Augsburger writes at 7:08:10: "In his home town .... he (WL) brought more money to believers ... Fact: I know some members of the NAC in the local town. No one knows something is not even the head of the church thereof.
second Augsburger writes that the then President of the District Church Saur "forbidden" would have to sue the believers their money. The fact: at the time as L. was there, was the President of the District Church Kuehnle and Saur!
third There are no original founding of a company prohibition. The competent authority in the UK could not confirm me.
4th There is no warrant in the United States. Anyone who works through the portal through the entries and controlled only a little English, can read that was present a display which was then adjusted again. When a process is set?
5th There is no legal title to L. In the amount of EUR 120.000,00 because of rent arrears in Denia. Which was not even the landlord. There is actually a title in the amount of approximately EUR 50,000.00, which was however not honored because ats against the landlord a claim for damages in excess of EUR 120.000,00 is (here the amounts were probably mixed up!) and due to the fact that the entire complex due to illegal building has no phone line and work an entire department with top-notch programmers could not. This can get you out if you ask the landlord and a former employee who confirmed this.
6th Augsburger also alleges that there are "injunctions" and now have the forums set their publications. If it were so, then the fool please note: if you know a "preliminary injunction" the court shall, then, the Court confirmed that false and illegal things were common! For the assertion true things are allowed. It is striking fact that all relevant forums, and usually stop their coverage after a few weeks later cleared. So either the L. got temporary injunctions or the forum, came to the realization of who they went to the glue. In both cases it is not just for Augsburg and Blädtke to speak.
7th Blädtke writes that there were over 120 signatures against L. Pinos. Frank Schubert writes above, that there is no 120 people live. There are, I've checked it, not even 20!
8th If a church leadership of the NAC "relevant evidence" as Blädtke Augsburger writes and checks, which carries out the things, but then later L. is activated again, then it could also mean that nothing was found, right? That this course and Augsburger Blädtke does not fit into the stuff is clear.
9th Blädtke writes at 15:08:10, that must have flowed in the last 5 years "at least half a million" by L. at the NAC, but at the same time that L. would be bankrupt and would not meet its obligations ... somehow I am missing the logic here, but a fool can see the obviously different.
10th Blädtke writes at 22:08:10, that in Berlin there is a new case: for fraud could not be determined because there were not resident in Germany. It provides a letter to the internet which shows that someone L. indicated there (probably Blädtke?) And the investigations were discontinued! Mr. Blädtke, So you think there is a sentence? And that is to say that not because of fraud can be ascertained as L. does not live in Germany? I thought he lives in Pinos? That was clear, right? And why is something set, if there is some truth? Who's the idiot now?
11th Blädtke then writes that he had in February 2010 criminal charges against L. refunded. Why are the file number of the criminal proceedings against you on the Internet and not to L.? Were these procedures also set and only the run again against you? Here again I am missing the logic.
12th Augsburg before summarizing on 31/08/10 again and says: "Whether or not Blädtke get right in this dispute but not the most important ..." How? What then? Blädtke but says that he has acquired the customer lists and contracts, and computer and simultaneously there is a legal opinion confirming that the signatures and documents are forged on the web. And now it does not matter if Blädtke get right or not? Am I the fool?
13. At 5:09:10 Blädtke then writes that a woman would Habekost hold as the only employee the "position". to investigate simple: there are no women ats Habekost and there are several employees working.
summary: Even though I could not do much research, so that little indication enough for me, what Blädtke play for Augsburg for a game, either they operate consistently and deliberately slander or they are real idiots ... or both.
Richard width Weger
Richard.Breitenweger @ hotmail.com
Augsburger more thing to you, sir. Write something of payment orders, court judgments and enforcement Announcements from the months of March and June 2010. Where did you, as self-appointed officer Orthomolekuloge and not legal, because they come from? Yes certainly not by Mr. L. yourself.
0 comments:
Post a Comment