How The Church of Scientology Has Used, AND Still Uses The American Legal System To Destroy Critics - Page 3
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€
Continued on the next page
Follow Technorati