How The Church of Scientology Has Used, AND Still Uses The American Legal System To Destroy Critics
Article submitted by Number 6
What is lawfare and how does this relate to the cult?
In the post 9/11 era, new terms and new ideas to describe how war is currently being fought today have popped up in the media, in the press, in the think tanks and on blogs on all sides of the spectrum. One such term is lawfare. On page 55 of the book Unrestricted Warfare, it calls for the use of “international law warfare (seizing the earliest opportunity to set up regulations)†along with a set of other types of warfare that an enemy with more firepower cannot withstand for long. Since 2001, the term has been used to describe how individual supporters of terrorism have tried to silence people who expose them.
Take the case of Khalid bin Mahfouz, a Saudi Arabian billionaire who sued American author Rachel Ehrenfeld for libel in the UK because in her book Funding Evil she named him as a major contributor of money to terrorist organizations. British libel laws place the burden of proof on the defendant, and given Dr. Ehrenfeld’s limited resources even with government documents as proof, she lost. In 2008, Governor George Pataki of New York signed Rachel’s law, which grants protection to American citizens being sued by what are called libel tourists. The laws of the US and the UK are different when it comes to freedom of speech and the protection of that right.
Lawfare, to give you a tl;dr (too long, didn’t read) definition, is the use of a country’s legal system by an individual or corporation to utterly crush their adversaries. The term is currently used in the context of the War on Terror, but the definition should be broadened to include any other individual or group who tries to ruin an adversary in court, including and especially, the Church of Scientology.
“We are going to sue your ass and your balls!â€
Recently, the Canadian magazine Maisonneuve published an article on long time Scientology critic Gerry Armstrong, detailing the enduring harassment campaign against him. The author of the article goes so far as to call him Scientology’s Salman Rushdie, because of the severity of the Church of Scientology’s harassment of him.
Armstrong was once in the close inner circle of Scientology’s founder L. Ron Hubbard, and was asked to help author Omar Garrison to compile a biography of Hubbard. When he found out much of Hubbard’s life story had so many discrepancies, to put it lightly, he couldn’t work on the biography project anymore. When he left the cult in 1981, Gerry had boxes of material on L. Ron Hubbard that were embarrassing for the founder and his “Church”, and so began the harassment campaign against Armstrong.
In 1986, Armstrong signed a gag agreement with the Church of Scientology, yet he over time, he found the agreement so restrictive of his basic human rights, he could NOT remain silent. (Listen to Glosslip’s incredible interview with Gerry Armstrong for more on this epic case).
Because Armstrong had broken the agreement, the cult has sued him many times in the state of California and tried to put him in jail. He fled to his hometown of Chilliwack, Canada but even there, Gerry Armstrong gets no rest.
The “lawfare” waged against Gerry Armstrong by the Church of Scientology epitomizes this new form of harassment and torment of an individual by a much larger more dangerous adversary. The Church of Scientology breathes down Armstrong neck at all times, and thusly, Gerry has NOT been able to find a job, and every job he has had in the past he was forced to leave. That is lawfare. Destroying the enemy by any means possible so that he or she cannot have a life. Although the Church of Scientology has another name for lawfare: fair game.
“To get PC incarcerated in a mental institution or jail, or at least to hit her so hard that she drops her attacks. â€
In 1968, a young author from New York wrote an expose about Scientology, which later was expanded into her 1971 release The Scandal of Scientology. Paulette Cooper did not know that this would bring about a long campaign to destroy her entirely. The Church of Scientology even went so far as to frame her for bomb threats the Church of Scientology sent to itself with stationary stolen from Cooper’s apartment. In this day and age of CSI, she may have been let off the hook in no time, but in the 1970’s, the Scientologists did a remarkable job of framing her for a crime she did not commit.
Cooper, whose entire world was on the brink of disaster, was facing 15 years in prison because of the Church’s efforts to destroy her. But, as luck would have it, the arrogance of the Church caught up with them and in 1977, the FBI raided Scientology offices around the country and discovered a vast volume of paperwork linking them to something ominously called:Operation Freakout. Operation Freakout, was a Church concocted and executed plan that expanded on their success with the previous forged bomb threat and included details on how CoS operatives would ultimately destroy Cooper through endless lawsuits, and perhaps get her to kill herself (ostensibly so they wouldn’t have to). Thankfully, after that discovery, Paulette Cooper was finally exonerated of all charges.
Paulette later wrote in an article in 2007:
“As for me, I often wish I had never ever heard the word ‘Scientology’. But given the same situation, I would still do it all over again. I would not have been capable of remaining quiet, because I learned too many scary things and talked to too many people who were being hurt.â€
Cooper paid a huge price to expose Scientology, not just through her book but also through what happened in her life for more than a decade. That is lawfare. For the entire decade, they did not let her go on with her career or her life, and she paid a price for it.
The wolves in watchmens’ clothing
For a long time if Scientologists wanted to get out of the cult, they could call the hotline for the Cult Awareness Network (CAN) and get help from experience anti-cult activists. Since 1996 however, the Church of Scientology operates CAN as another front group.
The Church of Scientology launched a massive lawsuit against CAN and its former director Cynthia Kisser, and in 1996 the CAN declared bankruptcy. As part of the ruling against the CAN, it had to turn over boxes of confidential files on all the cults it tracked, including Scientology . Nowadays if one visits the website for the new CAN, one can see how different it is from the old CAN. There is no section on Scientology, and all the sections on other cults blame psychiatry for the actions of those cults. The scapegoating of psychiatry should be a dead give away for those who are familiar with this cult.
This is lawfare. Crippling an adversary through lawsuits and then administering a hostile takeover is an act of war. And other cults that are smaller than Scientology in size and influence have benefited from Scientology’s “religious cloaking.”
Pleading the First in court
The Church of Scientology is well known for always bringing up religious freedom, and the right to practice a religion other than Christianity. The cult claims it has the right to practice certain things because it’s covered by the First Amendment. In 1989, the Church of Scientology appealed the initial ruling for the Wollersheim vs. Church of Scientology of California case, saying the practice of “fair game†against critics and former Scientologists is “a core practice of Scientology and therefore protected as religious expression.â€
Now think of what a heinous precedent that would set, especially when dealing with cults. If this appeal was upheld, then cults could later point to this lawsuit and hide behind it. The FLDS in Texas tried that already, and other groups and individuals that wage lawfare on their opponents could easily argue that it’s a “religious practice†making lawfare far more prevalent in American courtrooms than ever before.
Best example of the worst example
Compared to Khalid bin Mahfouz, the Church of Scientology is a giant when it comes to lawfare. Bin Mahfouz only has power in the UK, but the Church of Scientology has established itself worldwide. Many critics of the Church of Scientology, including the internet activist group Anonymous, and the brave group of critics referred to as the Old Guard, as well as the growing mainstream media, fell it is vital that the Church of Scientology be made an example of.
Perhaps steps such as reporting the lawyers representing the Scientology cult should be reported to local Bar associations every time they send ‘cease and desist’ letters to people for exercising their free speech rights. A movement to involve the ACLU, as well as, Congressmen and Senators might create enough noise to make the Church of Scientology the subject of a Congressional hearing.
Something must be done to make the best example of the worst example of lawfare.
Pink Stripe WordPress Theme Designed by Joni Mueller &
All it takes for evil to triumph….
Comment by marcab — June 30, 2008 @ 7:35 pm
Right-o. Edmund Burke.
Comment by number 6 — June 30, 2008 @ 8:03 pm
Dawn,
Offer still stands to come on either audio or here and talk about legal ways for protesters to protect themselves.
-M
Comment by M — June 30, 2008 @ 11:01 pm
The so-called ‘church’ of $cientology is crumbling. It has too many enemies, spread over too much of the world, to be able to attack in the “old” way. Miscavige knows that the end is near — perhaps that explains the massive effort to acquire real estate. (Which is bought by the parishioners but owned by The Trust…Miscavige.)
He’s going to bolt.
Comment by martha — July 1, 2008 @ 2:37 am
[...] American Legal System To Destroy Critics Posted by Temple of Xenu under fair game, law How The Church of Scientology Has Used, AND Still Uses The American Legal System To Destroy Critics Recently, the Canadian magazine Maisonneuve published an article on long time Scientology critic [...]
Pingback by How The Church of Scientology Has Used, AND Still Uses The American Legal System To Destroy Critics « Temple of Xenu — July 1, 2008 @ 7:06 am
It is sad that a policy that has backfired for them so often — fair game — is still the name of their game. Even rats learn to try something new when they do the same thing with bad results. Come to think of it: rats are a good analogy.
Gerry Armstrong has been a hero to many of us for almost 25 years. What he has done took tremendous courage and I am glad to see that he is starting to get the recogntion he deserves.
Paulette Cooper
Comment by Paulette Cooper — July 1, 2008 @ 7:49 am
as much as the “church” of Scientology has many, many enemies spread across the globe, it still has it’s strongest ally.. one it keeps trying to strengthen, ignorance…
This is Scientology’s weapon, it’s shield… it’s everythnig..
I started my new blog only recently because only recently did I find out just how insane this organisation is… Luckily for every one person informed we have the means with which to inform hundreds more…
Comment by Unmasked — July 1, 2008 @ 8:46 am
I read Paulette Cooper’s book over a number of weeks, and found that it was disturbingly odd in relation to how Scientologists in the Co$ acted in that era in relation to how those in the Co$ of the 21st Century act the same way, but with more force.
This is why we go out and draw attention to ourselves, so that others who turn a blind eye due to their fear will have something to focus on that isn’t going to attack them. This is so they have a way to show interest without the possibility of being harassed by a DANGEROUS CULT. This is in remembrance, a memorial to those who had to deal with what the cult shoveled in their direction since they had no real way of defending themselves.
This is to make sure that anyone else that gets the same idea from you fuckers will know that people are out there, waiting. Waiting with floodlights ready to pour out onto their operation so others will know where to go to look for answers, so they can see the evil being committed.
Hail Xenu.
Comment by Anon — July 1, 2008 @ 9:13 am
M
So you’re saying masks are illegal then? In some areas yes, but in most areas, we can legally conceal our faces, okay? Anonymous already knows the local laws for their areas.
Comment by number 6 — July 1, 2008 @ 9:20 am
Interesting comparison on the Watchtower’s practice of shunning dissident members.
Disfellowshiped person (DF) is called a suppressed person (SP) in Scientology
Jehovah’s Witnesses are an arrogant oppressive cult that has antagonized millions of people and broke up thousands of families.
They whitewash all your wicked Watchtower history then go on bigoted slanderous personal attack rants to try to silence and intimidate critics.
You infuriate everyone with your anti-social attitude and then cry out that you are being persecuted.
Jehovah’s Witnesses don’t proselyte they ‘metastasize’ like cancer.Jehovah’s Witnesses are in the F.O.G (Fear Obligation & Guilt)
http://www.cultwatch.com/news.html
Comment by Space Ghost — July 1, 2008 @ 11:14 am
The walls are tumbling down, and the evil that is Scientology is being exposed more and more each day. I am not even that outspoken but have convinced at least 15 people that the cult needs to be fought and that it is a good and just fight.
Comment by Watts Anon — July 1, 2008 @ 2:06 pm
The late Hubbard gave Scientology enough rope to hang itself with the paranoiac vindictive legacy that he left as a basis of his policies & so called technology.
Sooner or later the grave that Scientology attempts to dig for its adversaries will become its own grave.
Undemocratic principles are the inherant enemy of people.
Comment by Moneen — July 1, 2008 @ 2:22 pm
Thank you glosslip for having the balls to take on this corrupt organization knowing what they have done to Paulette, Gerry and others.
It’s only a matter of time before their 60 year reign of terror is brought to an end.
Comment by Rachel — July 1, 2008 @ 6:39 pm
Great series of articles. Hail Xenu!
Comment by Sal the Bartender — July 2, 2008 @ 9:37 am
I am a Scientologist and I have read a lot of anti Scientology articles and I have found that the level of truth in them is very low. Scientologist just want to improve themselves as spiritual beings and create a better world through the use of Hubbard’s teachings. Part of the Scientology structure deals with attachs on Scientology aimed at impeding people to study and and follow Scientology. So if someone starts a campaign of lies aimed at destroying Scientology he will have to face the rightful action of Scientology aimed at impiding him to do so!
One should respect the religion of others!
Comment by Frank G — July 2, 2008 @ 12:03 pm
“I am a Scientologist and I have read a lot of anti Scientology articles and I have found that the level of truth in them is very low.”
=
“Oh SHIT, they’re on to us…time to start lying and making shit up about critics!”
Say hello OSA, your future is bleak.
Comment by NotAnOSATroll — July 2, 2008 @ 2:27 pm
“Part of the Scientology structure deals with attachs on Scientology aimed at impeding people to study and and follow Scientology. So if someone starts a campaign of lies aimed at destroying Scientology he will have to face the rightful action of Scientology aimed at impiding him to do so!”
Frank G is that a threat of fair game? I sure hope not because this proves what the critics have been saying all along and has even been documented in court. Any other religion using these kinds of tactics which you apply so liberally and “without sorrow” would also be criticized. No one cares WHAT you believe, it’s the methods you employ to silence your critics by every means possible, the abuses towards your former and present members, and your fraudulent pyramid money schemes hiding behind all your “fronts” like Wise, NarCONon, CCHR and many, many others. ANd quite frankly Frank why do you come on these blogs if you think they are all lies? Worry much? Must be close to Staturday.
Comment by Mitsu Too — July 2, 2008 @ 4:32 pm
To have an opinion and to express it, that is one thing.
To attack an established institution is another thing.
Most people realize this difference. Some of those wrote the USA’s Bill of Rights. Others, however, are unable to observe that an individual’s opinion resides in a different kettle of fish than his actions.
Rarely indeed is lawsuit filed to prevent a person from expressing their opinion.
Comment by Terryeo — July 2, 2008 @ 10:11 pm
Frank G,
There are other ways to defend your religion that don’t involve destroying critics. Oh, but you can’t do that, because everything Gerry Armstrong has said so far is true.
And Terryeo, have you heard of Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation. It’s not as rare as you say, you know.
Comment by number 6 — July 2, 2008 @ 11:53 pm
“Rarely indeed is lawsuit filed to prevent a person from expressing their opinion.”
Ha ha! No seriously. Ha ha!
Comment by Rachel — July 3, 2008 @ 2:46 am
Terryeo, at what point does a strong opinion become an attack? Who decides? You? And, what difference does it make that the opinions/attacks are made of/on an established organization?
There is a simple solution:
If everything we’ve alluded to is false, prove it.
Natural rationality and skepticism would lead one down this path:
Ex-members say there’s an RPF that’s horrible. You say there isn’t. The ex-member doesn’t have anything at stake, but the Church does. This leaves one more inclined to believe the ex-member.
Current critics and protesters say they’ve been harassed, followed, and threatened on a criminal scale. You say Fair Game ended years ago. The critics don’t have anything at stake, but the Church does. This leaves one more inclined to believe the critics and protesters.
Disconnected family members and ex-members tell horrible stories about families being being forced apart in and outside of the Church at the request of the Church. You say disconnection doesn’t exist or, it does, but it’s at the behest of the member. You can’t even get your story straight on this one, but, even if you could, one would still be inclined to believe the disconnected family members and ex-members because, and you see where I’m going with this, they don’t have anything at stake, but the church does.
You get the idea. Prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that the allegations aren’t true and it all goes away. Pretty easy, really. That is, unless it’s all true. Which it is.
Comment by Anon, Anon, My Boyfriend's Back! — July 3, 2008 @ 1:01 pm
[...] How the Church of Scientology used, and STILL uses, the American legal system to destroy critics 11 07 2008 Glosslip: How the Church of Scientology used, and still uses, the American legal system to destroy c… [...]
Pingback by How the Church of Scientology used, and STILL uses, the American legal system to destroy critics « Number 6-Anonymous Warrior — July 11, 2008 @ 5:15 pm
Freedom of religion is a right for ALL AMERICANS. Scientologies have the same right to practice what they believe and non-believers have the same right.
The problem with this country today is Youtube Yuppies and Google Geeks have nothing else to do with their time. How is protesting the Chruch of Scientology helping your fellow man? Start a food drive for the homeless or volunteer in a hospital. The protests against the Church of Scientology are conducted for fame. If Tom Cruise and other famous people were not connected to the Church, no one would give a crap about Scientology.
Leave them alone and they will leave you alone. Harass and protest someone…be prepared for the same treatment back.
Comment by ANON1 — July 23, 2008 @ 9:34 am
to Anon 1
Good point.
Anons say that Scientology is using the legal system but Scientology wouldn’t need to use it if it wouldn’t be attacked!
Scientology delivers Courses,Counseling and in a Church one can also buy Scientology books. If a person does not like the principles of Scientology he can and should follow a different religion and leave Scientology alone…
Comment by Frank G — September 9, 2008 @ 11:03 am
Scientologists…. you have no confront. Where is “hiding” on the Tone Scale again?
You come here, looking to refute what you are told are terrible lies about your “Church” (while engaging in what could be construed as threats of harm), but you have forgotten to bring one very important thing to the table: facts. Anon can back up their words with reams of documentation. You have none but the say-so of your superiors. you hide in fear from the facts because you believe that somehow your “eternity” is at stake? Yet the people you work so hard to ruin, destroy and even kill, no longer have the option of an eternity, do they?
Scientology is self and egocentric. Everything is fine if it will benefit the Scientologists and everything is geared to make this the case. Grandstanding for photo ops in disaster zones, however, never does your “Church” provide the actual relief materials. The Purif is expensive and runs the risk of destroying the liver, but someone gets paid, right? What “Church” has what is essentially a “secret service” and retains a pool of lawyers?
DM IS YOUR SP. Superpower will never be completed. Ideal Orgs are being purchased with parishioners money, and yet, they are near empty. DM has squrreled the tech and sold it back to you over and over; GAT, the “New Basics”. DM has lied to you about corporate support of Way to Happiness too… Kimora Lee, for example NEVER agreed to support it. Dell Computers has outright denied involvement in the project, as has Coca-Cola in Pakistan. What else has COB lied to you about?
Your constant lie about protesters and critics being “apostates” has worn thin beyond use. There are more standing against you now than you ever had in legitimate numbers, so how can you claim they are all apostates? The dam has not only craked, it is about to burst and sweep Scientology Inc. away. I hope you have an exit strategy planned.
Comment by MKUltra — November 17, 2008 @ 10:44 am
[...] note: An earlier version of this article on a celebrity gossip blog called Glosslip but this article is still relevant today. In this article, I wrote mainly about how the “Church” [...]
Pingback by Scientology 101: How the Church of Scientology uses ‘lawfare’ to silence its critics - Counterknowledge.com — December 13, 2008 @ 2:07 pm