|
|
|
Barrett's
"Battle of the Bulge"
Begins...
Opinion by Consumer Advocate
Tim
Bolen
Friday,
January 7th, 2011
Stephen Barrett, et al, filed some
paperwork Monday, January 3rd, 2011 in
the
Doctor's Data v Stephen Barrett Federal Court
case, in essence, demanding that the
Court Dismiss the case in its entirety,
financially sanction the attorneys for
Doctor's Data, and Formally Declare
Stephen Barrett as the "Czar/God
of US Health Care..."
I kid you not...
The papers filed in the case are so
ABSURD, even I, in my true skeptic
world, am sitting here with my mouth
hanging open in sheer disbelief - and I
read the whole thing several times
before I went to bed Monday night..
Michael K. Botts has stepped up to
bat... (maybe, sort of, etc.).
I told you this would happen. Now
will come the quackbuster's last-ditch
effort to destroy Doctor's Data - as
fast as possible. We'll call the
attempt "Barrett's
'Battle
of the Bulge'..."
Why? Because I see the similarity,
here, with the attempt NAZI Germany made
on December 16th, 1944 to reverse their
fortunes of war, stopping the Allied
Invasion of Europe.
Will this tactic work for
Barrett? (Start smiling right about here).
Absolutely not - for Barrett, and his band of
numby-dumbies are walking right into the situation
(trap) we want them in - they have put what
Barrett actually is, right on the line. In
the documents presented to the Court are the
arguments, I am not joking, that claim that Barrett
is some kind of ultimate Demi-God, fully qualified
(snort here) to decide US health care.
Perfect.
In the original 1944 'Battle
of the Bulge' the NAZI's were defeated, and
routed, in only nine days, and that battle was their
last effort to regain a power position.
However, in "Barrett's 'Battle
of the Bulge'..."
the Court has awarded Doctor's Data thirty (30) full
days to eviscerate Barrett's half-vast claims.
I am sure they will use their time well.
Read this to see the
similarities:
"Germany's goal for these operations was to split
the British and American
Allied line in half, capturing
Antwerp, Belgium, and then proceed to
encircle and destroy four Allied armies, forcing
the
Western Allies to negotiate a
peace treaty in the
Axis Powers' favor.[17]
Once accomplished, Hitler could return his attention
and the bulk of his forces to the
Soviet armies in the
east.
Fierce resistance, particularly around the key town
of
Bastogne, and terrain favoring the defenders
threw the German timetable behind schedule. Allied
reinforcements, including General
George Patton's Third Army, and improving
weather conditions, which permitted air attacks on
German forces and supply lines, sealed the failure
of the offensive."
The German offensive was stopped, cold,
nine days later on December 25th, 1944.
And, we all know what happened after
that.
Barrett's goal, with this legal
maneuver, is to get himself declared
Supreme by the US Court System.
How do you spell "megalomaniac?"
The whole basis for the Motion to
Dismiss anti-SLAPP claim, is that
Stephen Barrett is officially
"advising the government..."
so, in the quackpot way of thinking, is
immune to Complaint.
(Go ahead and shake your head in
wonderment here).
Before I tell you specifics about the
Fed Court paperwork, and let you laugh,
let me back up a little and bring this
all into perspective.
Perspective....
(1) This case was filed on June
18th, 2010. That was 203 days ago.
It took Goofy Barrett, and Absent Botts,
199 days to get a Motion to Dismiss
together. Ummmm?...
(2) Motions to Dismiss in Federal
Court are limited to fifteen (15) pages.
Barrett/Bott's Motions (there are
several - all related) and documents,
total two-hundred-seventy-one (271)
pages. Even more Ummmm...
(3)
Michael K. Botts, Barrett's supposed
"lead attorney," you will remember, is a
quackbuster. Here is what I wrote
about him once before in an article
titled
"Has
Stephen Barrett's "Puppet Master"
Appeared?"
"Why would someone pick Botts when he is
not a litigator? Because Botts is,
himself, a
quackbuster. He is close to being
an insider, and he is, clearly, a
zealot. You will find his name
interspersed through
quackbuster documents going back as
far as 1986. For instance, below is a
reference to the so-called
The Scientific Review of Alternative Medicine
and Aberrant Medical Practices
Publisher: Paul Kurtz
Editor in Chief: Wallace I. Sampson, MD, FACP,
Clinical Professor of Medicine, Stanford University
Managing Editor: Meghann French
Science Editor: Saul Green, PhD
Associate Editors: Barry Beyerstein, PhD, Timothy
Gorski, MD, Steven Novella, MD
Senior Editor: Michael K. Botts, Esq. "
(4)
Stephen Barrett took a
correspondence course from a mail order
Law School that, for years, advertised
on matchbook covers. Frankly, I
think, he has burned himself repeatedly
with the law information he thinks he
got in the mail.
(5)
Stephen Barrett, and his legal team
have been LATE for every required filing
in this case. Its like they forgot
where they left their crayons.
Attention Deficit issues?
(6)
Stephen Barrett, the guy who would
be the Czar/God of US health care,
has been formally declared, in a
Published Appeals Court decision (NCAHF
v King Bio) to be generally "biased,
and unworthy of credibility."
Hmmmm?
(7) After the suit was
filed, instead of answering the
complaint, Barrett, and his minions,
launched an all-out attack using the
internet search engines attempting to
destroy Doctor's Data quickly so they
could not financially pursue the case.
That has not worked. More, I
suspect that those that participated in
that action rightfully fear being added
on to the lawsuit in a Third, or a
Fourth, Amended Complaint. And, they
should be.
About
The Filings...
I read all the latest filing paperwork -
then I set it aside to think about it,
so I could get a picture of what is
happening behind the scenes over there
in quackpotville. What I see, over
there, is massive turmoil, anger,
accusations, finger-pointing and
bomb-shelter building. I'll
explain as I go along - but, in short,
Doctor's Data properly attacked, with
their well written, well targeted,
lawsuit, the intimidating facade
structure Barrett, and his handlers,
want the public to see.
Consequently, the quackpot structure is
very, very alarmed - as well they should
be.
By attacking this facade, and I am using
the word "facade" correctly, Doctor's
Data has put themselves in the position
of being able to examine, by order of
the Federal Court, ALL of that facade,
and all of the people in it, using a
process built into the Court System
called "Discovery."
At this point Barrett, and his minions
and handlers, are in a full-on panic -
and EVERY attempt, short of admitting
wrongdoing and removing the offending
material, to stop the use of
"Discovery," is going to be tried.
That's what this DESPERATE Motion move
is really all about.
Why doesn't Barrett just man-up, admit
his wrongdoing, and remove the
material? Because Barrett is, in
my opinion, a true
megalomaniac, and he simply cannot,
because of that personality deficit,
admit he did something wrong.
This nutbag really does think he is a
God. His minions think he is too.
And that puts this case into true
perspective - It's Push Comes to
Shove Time... We are down to the
nitty-gritty, right where we, in the
Health Freedom Movement, want Barrett,
and his minions and masters to be.
They have staked their entire Defense on
Barrett's credibility. Perfect.
Get out your baseball bats, folks,
Barrett is going to
"run the gauntlet."
The
Actual Filings...
There were four filings:
(1) MOTION by Defendants The
National Council Against Health Fraud,
Inc., Quackwatch, Inc., Stephen J.
Barrett to dismiss Plaintiff's Second
Amended Complaint (Wasserman, Matthew)
(Entered: 01/03/2011).
Two
pages.
In essence, this Motion requests the
Court to Dismiss the entire case based
on two legal claims: (a)
Pursuant to the
Citizen's Participation Act, 735 ILCS
110/1, or (b) Pursuant to the
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6)
Both of these are nonsense claims.
It is here, however, that Barrett's
Defense team claims that he, Barrett, is
to do-all, be-all, Demi-God of US health
care, and then make demand to have him
declared the Czar/God of US health care.
More, the
Citizen's
Participation Act, 735 ILCS 110/1
has never been tested in the Courts, and
the rambling writings about this by
Botts, are, to me, a far cry from a REAL
anti-SLAPP Motion.
One of their main claims is that the one
year Statute of Limitations has run out
on the Libel Claim, nullifying, they
say, the entire basis of the case.
What they want everyone, including the
Court, to ignore is the "republishing of
the statements" every time Barrett sent
out a new newsletter, filed a new
anonymous, or other, complaint, etc with
a medical Board, insurance company,
Federal Agency, newspaper, etc...
Then too, Barrett's minions republished
the articles taking over the first three
pages of the search engines right after
the case was filed. (chuckle
here).
More, Barrett's minions are maintaining
an SEO googlebomb system which requires
DAILY maintenance - republishing, in
effect, each day.
(2) MOTION by Defendants
Stephen J. Barrett, Quackwatch, Inc.,
The National Council Against Health
Fraud, Inc. for sanctions (Wasserman,
Matthew) (Entered: 01/03/2011).
Three pages.
I had to read this Motion and its back
up documentation several times, before I
got the picture. In essence,
Barrett and Botts are in a snit,
and want Doctor's Data's attorneys
"sanctioned" because:
(a) Doctor's Data sued not only
Barrett, but Quackwatch Inc, and the
National Council Against Health Fraud
(NCAHF) incurring, as they say,
additional legal expenses. (start
smiling - this is a good one), but
(b) they, TOLD Doctor's Data to drop
those Defendants, or else, and Doctor's
Data did NOT follow their orders.
(smile a little more, here).
The basis for their claim is that
Barrett "claims" that the NCAHF has not
been active since 2004, and Quackwatch
Inc was dissolved this last year - and
he, through his attorney Botts, TOLD
this to Doctor's Data and they continued
to sue them anyway.
Well, (get your laugh ready) this is
typical Barrett writing "law" to suit
his
megalomaniacal outlook. What
nonsense:
(a) Barrett never hesitated to use
the NCAHF name, as though it was VERY
active. In fact he used it every
week, claiming the Consumer Digest
newsletter was co-sponsored by the NCAHF
and himself.
(b) I wrote an article about the
NCAHF Board members, called
"Doctor's
Data V Barrett, et al - The NCAHF Board
Members are Screwed - REALLY Screwed..."
In that article I
wrote specific information about each
Board member - and ALL of that
information came from a quackpot
website, or from the individual Member's
website where they bragged about
their NCAHF Board Membership.
(c) The NCAHF corporate status
shows it to be active, with address in
California.
(d) Quackwatch, Inc, it looks to
me. was VERY active when Barrett first
wrote those articles about Doctor's Data
under their banner.
So, why is Barrett making these totally
foolish Motions? (grin here).
(a) Because, I think,
megalomaniacal Barrett, probably
pretty much told the NCAHF Board members
that he, Barrett, was the Czar/God here,
and they would not be required to do
anything except sit there and look
pretty. Now, of course, since the
NCAHF most likely did NOT follow
corporate rules for much of anything,
those same board members, I'd guess have
individually, or in groups, lawyered up,
and may well be threatening Barrett with
separate lawsuits, since they are VERY
much individually liable for NCAHF
actions. Wouldn't
surprise me a bit.
(b) When Barrett wrote those
article under the Quackwatch, Inc
banner, as I recall, there were only two
Quackwatch, Inc Board Members - Stephen
Barrett and his wife Judith.
Doctor's Data is already going after
those individual board members in their
pleadings. It appears that things
are not going well in the Barrett
households. It appears that
Stephen lives in North Carolina and
Judith in Pennsylvania. In short,
Judith's assets, which I'm sure she kept
separate, are now on the table.
(3) MOTION by
Defendants Stephen J. Barrett,
Quackwatch, Inc., The National Council
Against Health Fraud, Inc. for leave to
file Briefs in Excess of 15 pages
(Attachments: #
1 Exhibit Ex. 1, Part 1, #
2 Exhibit Ex. 1, Part 2, #
3 Exhibit Ex. 1, Part 3, #
4 Exhibit Ex. 1, Part 4, #
5 Exhibit Ex. 2, Part 1, #
6 Exhibit Ex. 2, Part 2) (Wasserman,
Matthew) (Entered: 01/03/2011).
Two
hundred sixty five pages.
I laughed all the way through this
reading of documents. It is
typical Barrett - a bury the Court with
meaningless, repetitive, bullshit
technique, hoping nobody actually reads
it, but the thickness of the submitted
paperwork appears to have importance.
In short, Barrett is challenging the
entire US court system over their
fifteen (15) page rule. To me, all
there is is repetitive whining and
screeching..
(4) NOTICE of Motion by Matthew
Charles Wasserman for presentment of
motion for leave to file,
40 before Honorable William J.
Hibbler on 1/13/2011 at 09:30 AM.
(Wasserman, Matthew) (Entered:
01/03/2011)
One
page.
Self-explanatory.
There will be a hearing over these
points.
Summary...
The concise, legally focused, documents
in these pleadings were written, and
submitted to the Court, by Mathew
Wasserman of the Chicago law firm.
Except for Barrett's personal claims to
Olympus, the whining and screeching was
submitted by Michael K.. Botts.
Note that I did not say Botts wrote this
stuff - for it smells very much like
something Barrett would write.
This is all just a delay tactic - to
keep away from Discovery.
So,
stay tuned. There is more coming.
Much more.
Tim Bolen - Consumer
Advocate
|
|