Roy Wallis "Religious sects and the fear of publicity" 4/5
Ron Newman
of publicity", first published in the UK magazine _New Society_
for 7 June 1973, pages 545-547.
In the first three parts. Wallis discussed the Christian Scientists'
attempts to suppress books that they disapproved of, then moved
on to disucss similar actions by the Church of Scientology.
Now, Roy Wallis begins to discuss Scientology tactics aimed at the
author himself.
Roy Wallis wrote a number of other essays about Scientology during
the 1970s and 1980s, as well as the excellent full-length book
_The Road to Total Freedom_ (Columbia University Press, 1977).
Much of the material in this essay eventually made its way
into that book.
-------------
Extensive litigation is only one of the hazards to which writers
on Scientology are subject. They appear to be disproportionately
subject to mysterious and unpleasant happenings. On one
occasion, a manuscript and, on another, a master galley proof of
books on Scientology mysteriously disappeared. One author on holiday
in Spain was questioned by the police when they opened a parcel
addressed to his lodgings containing obscene caricatures of
General Franco. Notices were put in trade journals declaring that
one publisher of a work on Scientology had gone bankrupt and retailers
were circulated with false notices to the effect that their stocks
of this work should be returned for cash. A bogus injunction was
served on one writer who had entered a suit for harassment against
Scientology in the United States. The complaint issued by her lawyers
includes making visits to the author's apartment late at night,
spying on her apartment, tapping her phone, employing a photographer
to follow her for three days, and numerous other attempts at
harassment and intimidation. The suit claims damages of several
million dollars.
My own experiences, while less dramatic, follow a similar pattern.
As a product of research for a doctoral thesis on Scientology, I wrote
a paper called "The sectarianism of Scientology," which I sent
to the leaders of the movement in East Grinstead for comments,
before publication. The comments I received clearly indicated that
they did not view the paper favourably, and a very useful body
of documentation was supplied to support their views, resulting in
slight modifications to the paper.
Shortly after this, a young man arrived at the University of Stirling
representing himself as a graduate of Bristol and claiming an
interest in Scottish religion. On being sent to see me he asked
if he might attend my lectures and tutorials, and also if I could
put him up for a few days. This I declined to do, having realised
that I had last seen him wearing a staff member's uniform at the
Scientology headquarters. I did not reveal my suspicions, being
unsure how to react, until the following day, when I learned that
he had visited my home in my absence, seeking to gain entry.
On being confronted, he agreed that he had been a Scientologist,
but claimed to be a defector, having come to Stirling to sell me
information. He gave as referees a professor at Bristol and
another prominent defector. The defector did not know the man,
while the Bristol professor recognised the description as belonging
to a former student who was apparently using an assumed name.
Before leaving Stirling rather hurriedly, the young man visited
students, claiming to be a friend of mine, asking about me,
my course and the "drug scene" at Stirling. It appears he then
visited another northern university seeking information.
A day or two later I received a telephone call from this young man
of an inconsequential kind, the tone of which could best be
described as "threatening to be threatening." I also received
a telephone call from someone claiming to be a policeman, which
was too garbled to make any sense at all. The net significant event
was the receipt of two letters, by a sociologist at the northern
university. The first was a covering letter, claiming the second
letter was circulating at Stirling. The signature was indecipherable.
The letter enclosed with it purported to be a reply to me, thanking
me for information concerning a drug scandal at the northern
university, implicating the sociologist, and indicating that
this information had been passed to the Drug Squad at Scotland Yard.
It was addressed from the Monday Club in London and bore a fair
facsimile of the director's signature. The letter was a forgery.
[to be concluded in part 5]
--
Ron Newman rne...@cybercom.net
Web: http://www.cybercom.net/~rnewman/home.html