Implicit in answer.

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2002-03-12 07:56:31 (GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

OOPS! Please read: fraudulent

Although Google hits your rackettering 13 times, it does so 72,800 times for "racketeering." Should you be interested in the latter, it means running a racket which is illegal deal, business whihc makes a lot of money by fraud (P. Collin, English Law Dictionary). Cf. "racketeer = one who extorts money or advantages by threats of violence, by blackmail, or by illegal interefernce with business or employment" (Longman's English)

Hope this helps,

Jacek

See the following link:

letspeak.proz.com/kudoz/139894 - 13k

English-Spanish question on organized crime text.

Translation Workplace: KudoZ: Translation Questions
... Jan 28, English>Spanish, Law/Patents, RACKETTERING,TAMPERING
WITNESS,ARSON,FORGERY ARE CONSIDERED UNDER ORGANIZED CRIM, 2. ...
letspeak.proz.com/glossary/?bs=1&level=easy - 30k -

The following definitions are from the Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of Law:

1. The extortion of money or advantage by threat or force

2. A pattern of illegal activity (as extortion and murder) that is carried out in furtherance of an enterprise (as a criminal syndicate) which is owned or controlled by those engaged in such activity.


Fuad

The defect with some of the above definitions is that they are lacking the concept of an ongoing bvusiness. "Fraud", for example, can be a single transaction between two parties, rather than a continuing business (further, "fraud" is not necessarily criminal).

The definition above is from the Americal Heritage Dictionary.

... to a linguistic comment.

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2002-03-23 17:20:57 (GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

PS.
I am here because I am entitled to be here, as a Proz member answering and commenting (properly, unlike some people) on English monolingual questions. I am not aware that I need Olga\'s permission to do that, unless she has become the site owner when I wasn\'t looking. Her constant unprofessional and offensive remarks are becoming very tedious. Are there no moderators around to stop her?

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2002-03-23 23:57:29 (GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

Olga said above:
\"The glossary being full of wrongly accepted entries is solely the fault of those native speakers who do not bother to point out the mistakes right on the spot thus confusing the Asker and consequent users\".
That is extremely rich, coming from someone who reacts to native speakers correcting the mistakes of non-native speakers by hurling abuse at them (the native speakers). Don\'t they have the parable of the mote and the beam in Hungary?

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2002-03-24 00:11:12 (GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

Olga thinks that 22 March (two questions) and 12 March (one question) is 2-3 weeks ago. That\'s how numerate she is.

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2002-03-24 00:17:26 (GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

Her literacy is beautifully demonstrated by the poetically inventive quotations below (especially \"For a native Hungarian it will do\"), which she attributes to me but which I never could have come up with, being a mere Brit (see the Rubik question for her poor opinion of us).
What does this \"quotation\" show? An inferiority complex? I sure don\'t know, but a specialist might.
I will continue to press buttons below her answers, and when they are dead wrong like the one above, which as a non-native speaker she never should have answered, I will say so. I guess that just like in the Rubik question, the result will be abuse.