ProfessionalRakeback.com is a SCAM, and they are promoting a SCAM poker site named Full Flush Poker

[Game Protect]

What I find really strange about your postings is that you've completely blurred the line as to whether you are suing Kahn or you are suing FullFlush. You don't seem to even know who you are suing.

If you would be able to read, then you would realize Full Flush 70:30 litigation attempt. Not one word about Kahn litigation attempt.

When I say that it's weird that you are limiting a class action suit to just 5 people (and yes it is very strange), you state that you need to because that is all that FullFlush will pay. But then when you need to, you switch over to saying that it is Kahn whom you are suing.

- Limit a legal action to 5, to have the highest chance of payment is not weird or strange at all. But for a google legal expert it could indeed sound weird or strange.

- I have never stated that I need to.

- I have never stated that Full Flush will pay. The opposite is the case:

I don't know if Full Flush will pay or not.

- I have never said that I will sue Kahn.

In all capitalistic countries the burden of proof is on you. It's not a walk in the park in Europe any more than it is in the US to prove intent. A lot of people who have never been in a court before think that it is as simple as pointing out some incongruity in someone's actions and then the justice will say, 'Ah hah! Guilty!'. It takes a lot more than that. You really need to consult your lawyer.

Europe has a lot of capitalistic countries and in criminal cases the burden of proof is not on you. The only thing you need is a sufficient initial suspicion and then the police has to investigate. A google legal expert like you, of course can not know this.

Most countries in Europe uses Roman law and "Ignorantia legis non excusat" is part of it. As I already have stated, I don't know how such cases are handled in the US, but I highly doubt that the US uses the Roman law.

How on earth is telling us what cases you have won disclosing sensitive information?

Telling would be enough, no documents, no proof?

Most affiliates claim that part of the reason that they are in business is to protect their players. There is really nothing new in your business model. The only difference is that you claim that you are taking entities to court which you refuse the back up with any evidence.

I have neither seen or heard of any affiliate announcing legal action to claim the rights of its members, nor that ever anyone did it. Therefore, the business modell of Game Protect is worldwide unique.

The Full Flush Poker case could back up the evidence within a few weeks. But you as an alleged part of the management or silent share holder obviously have no interest that this will come true. Your persistently bad mouthing of Game Protect is another indication.

Implying that I work for FullFlush is the most idiotic and childish thing you could possibly say. Have you even bothered to read this thread.

1) Only Full Flush management know whether they will pay or not

2) You claim to know that Full Flush will not pay

If you count 1) + 2) together, then this implies that you are either a part of the management or a liar.

And once again in the above quote you switch back to suing FullFlush. Do you even know who those 5 selected people are even going to be involved in suing?

If you are not able to understand what Full Flush 70:30 litigation attempt means, what else can I say?