ESMB has entered archive mode. All posts and threads that were available to the general public are still readable. The board is still searchable. 

Thank you all for your participation and readership over the last 12 years.

If you want to join in the conversation, please join the new ESMB Redux at www.exscn2.net.



TEXAS JUDGE DENIES SCIENTOLOGY’S ‘ANTI-SLAPP’ MOTION IN RATHBUN SUIT

Discussion in 'Monique Rathbun' started by Emma, Mar 14, 2014.

  1. Veda

    Veda Sponsor

    Well, if "tech" was "in," and it was a covert "support" (euphemism for "attack") operation, it would begin and end covertly, without the true source being revealed.

    The judge would remove himself from the case, or the judge would make a decision in Scientology's favor, and there would be no evidence of anything improper.

    What was on display with the spectacle of squirrel busters with goofy camera hats, and the other instance of harassment, was overt, not covert.

    Even the efforts at spying were goofily obvious.

    So, maybe "tech" is "out" in the CofS.

    We should be grateful that Miscavige has either forgotten, is neglecting, or is too distrusting of his underlings, and too nervous, to use covert "dirty tricks" tech, per Hubbard.

    IMO, it would be a good idea, however, if we did not forget what it was, and that it exists as "tech." :)
     
  2. Friend

    Friend Patron

    What is next? Will the end product come out faster than expected?
     
  3. TG1

    TG1 Angelic Poster

    Agree!
     
  4. freethinker

    freethinker Sponsor

    I'm not saying they couldn't do it but there is precedence and track record in this case.

    For Waldrip to suddenly make an obscure ruling and end it all in one shot, Jeffrey would have to make a big goof and he has demonstrated to me that that would be highly uncharacteristic. This guy does his homework and so does this judge.

    Even though covert, this case has a track record and it would show up, just by being way off the mark because it is not just exes that know their dirty tricks now, it is everyday people who have been following the news which Scientology is spattered all over in the last few years or 6.

    I'm not saying they couldn't or wouldn't but they are up against someone who knows all their tricks and a judge with some balls. That makes the game different for them.


     
  5. HelluvaHoax!

    HelluvaHoax! Platinum Meritorious Sponsor with bells on


    It's all right there in the Creed of the Church. . .

    T
    hat all men of whatever race, color, or creed were created with equal rights.

    That all men have inalienable rights to their own religious practices and their performance.

    That all men have inalienable rights to their own lives.

    That all men have inalienable rights to their sanity.

    That all men have inalienable rights to their own defense.

    That all men have inalienable rights to conceive, choose, assist or support their own organizations, churches and governments.

    That all men have inalienable rights to think freely, to talk freely, to write freely their own opinions and to counter or utter or write upon the opinions of others.

    That all homo novi have inalienable rights to cancel the rights of all men and do the "greatest good" as long as they can get away with it and not get caught. ​
     
    Last edited: Mar 16, 2014
  6. TG1

    TG1 Angelic Poster

    I agree with this, too!

    And that's why Monique's lawsuit was filed.
     
  7. Gadfly

    Gadfly Crusader

    Yep, THAT is the UNWRITTEN one that is actually always practiced.
     
  8. Veda

    Veda Sponsor

    I think many more people are now aware of Hubbard's/Scientology's overt attack "tech" or methods. I don't think many more people are aware of Hubbard's covert attack "tech" or methods.

    So far the case has been going very well, and one hopes it will continue that way. I see no reason to speculate about the future of this case, other than to keep my fingers crossed for a good outcome.

    The earlier post was just a reminder that - per Scientology "tech" - there is know how and "philosophy" concerning causing events to occur with no visible connection to Scientology, events that are not even known by the target to have originated with Scientology.

    In other words, we wouldn't know. We could guess, and we could speculate, but that's all.

    Scientology has done stuff and has manipulated people, and has silenced people, and no one has found out.

    Sometimes Scientology gets away with it.

    So far, Scientology, using whatever tactics it's using, in this case, is losing. :)
     
  9. NoName

    NoName A Girl Has No Name

    What royally sucks for Scientology's 20+ high-priced lawyers is that Sugar Ray and Hizonner seem to understand the corporate structure of the cult better than they do. To me that's been the lulziest part of oral arguments so far. :duh:
     
  10. HelluvaHoax!

    HelluvaHoax! Platinum Meritorious Sponsor with bells on


    LOL

    Why do I get the impression that when there is a conference call with Miscavige, if his 20 lawyers were all in the same conference room, huddled around a speaker phone, when the world's greatest OT was speaking they would all be smirking at each other and miming the "jerk off" motion.
     
  11. AnonKat

    AnonKat Crusader

    As long as they are payed a mountain of cash each , they will be fine either way it goes I think.

    28693542.jpg
     
  12. westgrinsted

    westgrinsted Patron

    Trying to file an "anti-SLAPP" motion is a proof of utmost perversity. SLAPP=(Strategic Law suit Against Public Participation) is the kind of suit a federal agency, a government a city, or big corporation would file in order to intimidate a citizen bringing up embarrassing subjects. It is the kind of a suit an oil company would file against a fisherman complaining about pollution. The anti-SLAPP motion is there to protect David against Goliath so in the case in point they tried to reverse the roles. They pretended Monique was filing a frivolous suit and the squirrel busters were being hindered in the expression of freedom of speech and their "religious rights". They also pretended David Miscavige is a religious Leader, too busy with "ecclesiastical matters" to have anything to do with this issue. When someone lies all the time, it is impossible to avoid falling into some contradictions. The Church confessed they had harassed the Rathbuns, so that they would divert attention from Captain Black Heart. The Judge that Church of Religious Technology, Church of Scientology, Religious Technology Center independently from the maze and the sham of legal corporations for profit of of a "religious" nature are a business and that they where not happy about Rathbun because he would lure clients away. When I see people brandishing their new titles "patron with honours" "humanitarian", etc. and I see the millions of dollars that go away in smoke, paying 22 fancy attorneys in a Court in Texas, I just feel like throwing up.
     
  13. degraded being

    degraded being Sponsor

    Wallace is already associating himself with low life and should be up to speed by now on the COS's history in litigation dirty tricks etc, so should be quitting as soon as possible -taking into account that he can't just "up and leave".
    Considering the unexpected way he turned up to help COS in court, and considering COS's history, it is fair to wonder if Wallace himself was leveraged into being on the COS team...somehow.
    Just say'n.
     
  14. Gadfly

    Gadfly Crusader

    Then go ahead and DO IT!!!!!

    This is my most common response to much of Hubbard's And Scientology's behavior:

    :puke2: :puke2: :puke2: :puke2: :puke2: :puke2: :puke2: :puke2: :puke2: :puke2: :puke2: :puke2: :puke2: :puke2: :puke2: :puke2: :puke2: :puke2: :puke2: :puke2: :puke2: :puke2: :puke2: :puke2: :puke2: :puke2: :puke2: :puke2: :puke2: :puke2: :puke2: :puke2: :puke2: :puke2: :puke2: :puke2: :puke2: :puke2: :puke2: :puke2: :puke2: :puke2: :puke2: :puke2: :puke2: :puke2: :puke2: :puke2: :puke2: :puke2: :puke2: :puke2: :puke2: :puke2: :puke2: :puke2: :puke2: :puke2: :puke2: :puke2: :puke2: :puke2: :puke2: :puke2: :puke2:
     
  15. degraded being

    degraded being Sponsor

    The goofy hats etc could have been on policy if they were noisy and goofy enough to utterly destroy Marty's Cabin Counselling business. Not a safe auditing environment.
     
  16. Veda

    Veda Sponsor

    They were on policy and they were tech. OVERT - visible - tech.

    Squirrel Busters were just "doing what Ron says."

    From LRH:

    "NEVER BE INTERESTED IN CHARGES, DO yourself, much MORE CHARGING, and you will WIN." [Capitalization in original]

    'Manual on Dissemination of Material', March 1955.


    "Overt investigation of someone or something attacking us by an outside detective agency should be done more often and hang the expense. It's very effective. Often an investigation by a private detective has alone closed up an entheta source or a squirrel organization...

    "Tell the detective, 'We don't care if they know you're investigating them for us. In fact, the louder the better'."

    'HCO Manual of Justice', 1959


    "Any meeting held by them should be torn up. The names of persons attending should be collected and they should be labelled SP as they have left Scientology. These people are SP because they are seeking to avoid auditing [including Sec Checking in an Organization] and retain their withholds...

    "Treatment - They are each fair game, can be sued or harassed...

    "Harass these people in any possible way...

    "Label publicly 'ideas which preach no auditing [Note: Auditing by squirrels doesn't count] are simply Suppressive Actions to deny people gains.'

    "Tear up any meetings held and get the names of those attending and issue SP orders on them..."

    'HCO Executive Letter', 27 September 1965


    "...You find out where he or she works or worked, doctor, dentist, friends, neighbors, anyone, and phone 'em up and say, 'I'm investigating Mr./Mrs.________ for criminal activities'.

    "You say now and then, 'I have already got some astounding facts', etc., etc., (Use a generality) - It doesn't matter if you don't get much info. Just be NOISY." [sic]

    'HCO Executive Letter', 18 February 1966


    "Never discuss Scientology with a critic. Just discuss his or her crimes, known or unknown. And act completely confident that these crimes exist. Because they do."

    Confidential Policy Letter, 'Intelligence Actions', 25 April 1968


    "Statements one makes can be curved. 'She had a birthday party' becomes 'The delinquent's inner circle gathered yesterday for a sex orgy and pretended to the police it was a birthday party. No one was jailed'."

    'Public Relations Series 18', 21 November 1972


    The point is that there's more "tech," having to do with covert actions.

    Covert "tech" in not as well understood as it should be, IMO.
     
  17. degraded being

    degraded being Sponsor

    .
    .

    With all the lies and contradictions on record so far, and other factors, the legal defense reminds me of this: you know when you cook up some spaghetti and after it's cooked you throw it into a bowl which is a bit too small, and the bowl tips over and you try to grap the spaghetti but it's slippin' and slidin' and won't be grabbed, and faster than you can say "Fail" it's all slipped down the sink hole.
     
  18. freethinker

    freethinker Sponsor

    I think Lone Star was talking about Dib Waldrip. :coolwink:




     
  19. Lone Star

    Lone Star Crusader

    Well I was saying that if OSA fair games the Judge then that would cross the line for Wallace Jefferson given his position and reputation in Texas. Yes I'm sure Wallace has figured out that he's representing a nefarious organization. But lawyers represent shitheads and criminals all the time. Nothing new there. But if illegal tampering of a State Judge is done by the defendants I predict that he will leave the team if it is clear to him who dunnitt. There are already some respectable law firms in Texas who refused to represent CSI, RTC, and DM. He won't be a part of slimy behavior toward a respected fellow Judge who's even in his same Party.
     
  20. degraded being

    degraded being Sponsor

    Yes he was, but he included this: "...Wallace might even quit the team if they try to fair game the judge..."