Patterson on the line: Watchtower claims that paying cash bond would cause “immediate irreparable harm and hardship”

by cedars 339 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse

• 

  ÁrbolesdeArabia

  Just a legal tactic, I've seen this trick used by different entities beings sued for large amounts of money (Apple's recent lawsuits had companies printing statements almost identical to what the Society is saying) The Society has plenty of funds to weather this mild storm, they are not going out of business any time soon. We all know why they seperated into different corps years ago, creating lots of barriers to get to the root of the problem.

  As a corporation, Cedars look for any kind of data regarding "Going Concern" and their management's assessment of how they will deal with the possibility of losing this lawsuit. Real Estate in New York, (the high end stuff) is very valuable and the Org always found ways to buy their buildings for nothing!
• 

  ziddina

  Crud, here I am, commenting without having read all 7 pages, but...

  In my experience, the Watchtower Society will use "Theocratic Warfare" to protect their assets. So, it would be natural for them to scream "POVERTY!" and "Financial Hardship!", no matter WHAT they were asked to pay.

  I sincerely hope that YOUR conclusions are more accurate than mine, Cedars, but I find it difficult to believe that the Watchtower house of cards is only 6 million dollars away from falling down.

  T'would be nice, though...
• 

  Vidiot

  Tylinbrando - "...why all the posturing by the WBTS?"

  Because they refuse to accept that due to their policies, they could be in the wrong.

  Because they are certain that - as God's chosen representatives - they cannot possibly fail...

  and/or

  ...because they think that if they lose, they can appear (to the faithful R&F) like unfairly treated victims.

  Because they hate "Satan's World", and being forced to change their ways by "Satan's World" is grating.

  Because when building an empire (no matter how small or imagined), collateral damage is viewed as acceptable, and they don't like to be shown otherwise.

  Because, like all conservative/authoritarians, they view humanity as fundamentally and irreperably bad, and as such, they are unable to believe that implementing progressive reforms could actually work to their benefit, either inside or outside the Org.
• 

  wannaexit

  As always, I enjoyed your article Cedars. The're great and we often discuss them over breakfast.

  I am also of the opinion that watchtower may be asset rich but cash strapped. In the last decade watchtower has had to pay out more than we think. I think of all the cases that have been settled out of court---who really knows how much watchtower has had to pay out.

  What I have come to believe is that what happens at the congregation level is usually a pretty good indication of the system problems. I would say that biweekly there is a begging for some sort of fund. The "give give" talks are relentless. And there is not amount of money that seems to be enough for them. -----
• 

  Vidiot

  ziddina - "In my experience, the Watchtower Society will use "Theocratic Warfare" to protect their assets. So, it would be natural for them to scream "Poverty!" and "Financial Hardship!", no matter what they were asked to pay."

  Not the wisest tactic in the Information Age...
• 

  Vidiot

  I just had the oddest image come to mind:

  Conti and her lawyers accepting the Patterson bond, then winning the appeal.

  After the deed is transferred to her name, she sells it to another religious organization...

  ...for a buck.
• 

  Justitia Themis

  Ok, article amended!

  Good job Cedars. Adjusting or amending an idea based on new information is not a sign of weakness, provided you don't threaten to disfellowship those who don't believe your new idea!

  Having one's written work critiqued is painful, but everyone who writes goes through it, and it makes the work better. I am particularly empathetic with you right now because I expect to have a bioethicist/medical expert/physician return to me this coming week my paper that he kindly reviewed. One of my professors recently teared up when speaking of receiving the publisher's responses to her most recent work; apparently, it doesn't get any easier with time since she is extensively published and writes law school textbooks.

  And everyone makes mistakes, so don't sweat those who are chidding you for any errors. The county attorney I referenced, despite practicing for 30 years, blew an issue, and third-year law school student was the one who had to deliver the news. (He took it graciously) I blew the bond issue, and 144,001 caught that. At least you put 'it' out there.
• 

  cedars

  Thanks Justitia, I do appreciate your input as well as that of others. It has helped immensely.

  Cedars
• 

  Scott77

  	"...Adjusting or amending an idea based on new information is not a sign of weakness, provided you don't threaten to disfellowship those who don't believe your new idea!..."
  	Justitia Themis

  Just curious, in what ways have Mr Cedars threatened to disfellowship those who don't believe in his new idea? And to Mr. Cedars, please can you comment or substatiate on Justitia Themis's comment that imply you have threatened to disfellowship those who don't believe in your new idea?

  Scott77
• 

  cedars

  Scott77 - It's flattering that Justitia thinks I have the power to do that, but sadly I don't!

  Cedars