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.



David Mayo, Bill Robertson, Robin Scott -More Truth Revealed and Realities uncovered

Discussion in 'General Scientology Discussion' started by rockyslammer, Apr 14, 2011.

  1. AnonKat

    AnonKat Crusader

    Is that an auditing session ?
     
  2. Veda

    Veda Sponsor

    Not unless a priest pressing a young boy's face into his crotch is a process.
     
  3. AnonKat

    AnonKat Crusader

    You are absolutely right of course and that is why I onley focussed on the money motivation. Ironic really that people use money motivation to accuse Rathbun like if they were Church Members.


     
  4. uniquemand

    uniquemand Unbeliever

    Everyone needs to make a living. I don't have a problem with that.
     
  5. Mark A. Baker

    Mark A. Baker Sponsor

    Arrogance was not the case with David. :no:

    The reason for 'noses out of joint' had more to do with the commonly recurrent theme of 'standard tech flame wars' among independents. There is something of a tendency among some who leave to doubt those who stay 'in' longer than they themselves did. In the worst cases this can lead to open disputes about tech & hurt feelings.

    David was unique in that he was readily received with an overwhelmingly warm welcome by the greater number of the disaffected due to the high regard so many had for him as a result of prior experience with him in the church. The story of his departure was also unusually horrific for that time.


    Mark A. Baker
     
  6. Mark A. Baker

    Mark A. Baker Sponsor

    I don't disagree with the sentiment expressed. Frankly, I think gag agreements are contrary to the public interest in all cases and should not be enforceable clauses of any contracts. They are however perfectly legal and standard aspects of many commercial contracts and legal settlements.


    I disagree, U. Churches need some form of legal structure as do other groups. Corporations are a key way in which this can be accomplished. The problem lies not with incorporation itself but with the permissive character of laws defining & regulating corporations in the u.s. as they are today.

    Corporations in the united states need to be legally deprived of the civil rights which have been extended to them by the courts. There is no need for a corporation to have all the civil rights that a citizen or resident immigrant has, it is contrary to the well being of the commonwealth.


    Mark A. Baker
     
  7. draetti

    draetti Patron

    I see, chlng, and I didn't want to make someone lesser by expressing my thankfullness to David Mayo.

    Two things which you probably didn't get:

    I'm in Europe, and "local" meant in my vicinity. The transfer over the distance was probably by far more efficient and fast with an organisation than without. (Why the AACs run the show mainly - as far as I know - and not Candacraig or Dianasis or an other European Center which may have started at the same time is out of my knowledge. The nearby AAC was just the first contact I had with Tech out of the Church. But I could imagine - also if I had had a choice - David Mayo was known to me, and the Senior CS in Church, and I was needing trust and authority at the time - I very probably would have chosen the AAC also if had known other options.)

    I also told my story as from my viewpoint and impressions then. It doesn't claim truth or perfect evaluation, it's just how I experienced things.

    But in general, not seen from this point, I completely understand that an organisation "wins" not necessarily "to right" in competition with a loose network of individuals. In general I would tell that's much more paradise. The picture of paradise was against the relative hell before, not the absolute best situation imaginable.
     
  8. rhill

    rhill Patron with Honors

    Everyone is free to earn a living. I myself do from time to time point out that Marty earns a living from delivering Scientology. My point is not to condemn that he earns a living from it, but to point out he is most likely inherently biased when it comes to find objectively about Scientology and Hubbard. It's because of that sort of economic bias there are such concepts as "disclosure" and "conflict of interests." David Mayo's case just can't be used for comparison here, so it's total nonsense to use him to make a point about the "hypocrisy" you say you see out there.
     
  9. AnonKat

    AnonKat Crusader

    Yes it can , he alsoo made a living once delivering scientology

    I am using this aspect.
     
  10. rhill

    rhill Patron with Honors

    You were not, you focused on his settlement with the Church following following years of legal assault, not on his business for delivering Scientology (for which he got legally assaulted by the Church, and "denounced" by Marty just a few days ago.) Look at your demotivational poster again.
     
  11. tiptoethrutheminefield

    tiptoethrutheminefield Patron with Honors

    Regarding the New Wage in general, it would be nice to see some supposed 'guru' able to make a living that DOESN'T involve the same con they paid into.

    If Marty were able to take his super-ableness and make a living outside of selling Scientology, I'd have some respect. As it is, none.
     
  12. rockyslammer

    rockyslammer Patron

  13. David Mayo

    David Mayo Patron with Honors

    The "legal" terms?

    This reminds me of a point that I have often wondered about. What if the terms of the "agreement" violate the Constitution of the United States of America, especially in regard to Free Speech as well as other clauses? What if, speaking in supposition, the agreement was signed under duress, possibly including one or more death threat(s) toward self and loved one(s)?

    In such circumstances could such an agreement still be binding?

    If so, WTF! :omg::omg::omg:
     
  14. Jachs

    Jachs Gold Meritorious Patron

    I just heard 911 being called to Hemet for multiple asshole walnut cracking emergency at the mention of the Constitution of the United States.
     
  15. David Mayo

    David Mayo Patron with Honors

    Drop ALL gag orders!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Absolutely!

    Take up the cry: Drop all gag orders! Drop all gag orders! ...
     
  16. Jachs

    Jachs Gold Meritorious Patron

    One would , in such a situation that is heavily forced under duress with death threats against kin and self say it is not enforceable and is Criminal and would TOTALLY violate the Constitution of the United States of America.

    Shouldnt be binding.

    and YES WTF!! :omg::omg::omg:
     
  17. Carmel

    Carmel Crusader

    :thumbsup:
     
  18. SchwimmelPuckel

    SchwimmelPuckel Genuine Meatball

    No.. In such circumstances a gagorder would be invalid.. If it's not invalid it would be plausible reason for starting a civil war.. IMO... But I ain't no lawyer..

    :unsure:
     
  19. David Mayo

    David Mayo Patron with Honors

    Point of credibility

    Brilliant! Take up the cry.

    Free the gagged!

    There will be no true reform without that step.

    Free the gagged!

    There will be no true reform without that step.

    Free the gagged!

    There will be no true reform without that step.

    D
     
  20. David Mayo

    David Mayo Patron with Honors

    Provided they arfe legally constituted!!!!

    ... provided only in that they are legally constituted.

    Hear ye, Hear ye, Hear ye.