Comments on: GARCIA FRAUD CASE ENDED AS JUDGE GRANTS SCIENTOLOGY ARBITRATION MOTION

By: Tony Ortega

Tony Ortega — Tue, 17 Nov 2015 12:18:00 +0000

In reply to seahen.

http://tonyortega.org/2015/08/02/garcias-appeal-rejected-and-now-the-couple-faces-the-real-possibility-of-scientology-arbitration/

By: seahen

seahen — Tue, 17 Nov 2015 12:14:00 +0000

Are the Garcia’s filing an appeal? They should go to the Supreme Court if they have to.

By: jeff

jeff — Thu, 26 Mar 2015 14:48:00 +0000

In reply to jeff. ...

By: Cymboli

Cymboli — Fri, 20 Mar 2015 19:01:00 +0000

He wanted this case out of his court. Period.

By: SkyBill40

SkyBill40 — Wed, 18 Mar 2015 18:11:00 +0000

On the 13th of March 2015, $cientology won and justice lost in not atypical fashion. What an utter shame that the sham of a “religion” that Scientology is was protected by the very laws which should expose it for what it is.

By: mockingbird

mockingbird — Tue, 17 Mar 2015 21:54:00 +0000

In reply to J. Swift.

Ugh , I specilize in the “basics” of breaking down Scientology “technology” hypnotism , mind control aka thought reform aka cognitive restructuring , basic social psychology , cognitive dissonance , rhetoric , plagiaristic resources used by Hubbard , the similarities of cults and abusive relationships , the underlying methods of controlling people in Scientology, loaded language and seeking effective ways to explain and counter the harm caused by Scientology. If there is ever anyway I can help with my talents as an ex cult member – meager as they may be – please ask as I see great value in so many of the efforts you and your wife both put forward . Here is my blog and I have over six hundred posts at ESMB – the vast majority if which are dedicated to breaking down the con . Mockingbird’s Nest.

By: Jgg2012

Jgg2012 — Tue, 17 Mar 2015 20:52:00 +0000

In reply to Nojoking.

http://liberalcommonsense.blogspot.com/2005/03/judge-james-whittemore.html
Right, his decision in the “greater Ministries” case (where the Paynes were convicted of running a Ponzi scheme that called itself a religion, and the followers rights were violated) is completely at odds with his decision here.

By: Nojoking

Nojoking — Mon, 16 Mar 2015 21:14:00 +0000

What about the 1st amendment rights of the person(s) who were the very ones that made up that religion? What would a religion be without it’s members? Could not attorney represent their client as a religious person instead of just a mere citizen with the same 1st amendment rights as the Church?

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 16 Mar 2015 14:01:00 +0000

In reply to FOTF2012.

The confidential nature of the IRS settlement with the church (and the fact of the settlement itself) are among the great mysteries of that period of IRS history. It has been commented on by former IRS officials as unprecedented and is / was the subject of much scorn by other religious groups who have been denied (in their view) similar treatment regarding the deductibility of portions of their parishioners donations.

As with all such matters, the decision is ultimately one of political will…the tide has definitely turned against Scientology and eventually this matter will probably come up for review…but I’m not counting on that to happen quickly.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 16 Mar 2015 13:52:00 +0000

In reply to Guest. Good points you make. I believe that eventually the contracts that Scientology is currently using to operate / protect their financial scam, will eventually aid their undoing. Not sure that the 1st Amendment was / is primarily an individual protection but it is an interesting assertion as that same Amendment also includes the right to peaceable assembly.