Letter to Madeline Albright
Hon. Madeline K. Albright
January 5, 2000
Dear Madam Secretary:
United States policy toward two important European countries has been
hijacked by the influential Church of Scientology.
Germany and Sweden have both been pressured by our government to adopt
policies which are more sympathetic to Scientology. The United States is
even pressuring Sweden to change its constitution to deprive its citizens
access to certain government documents.
These two nations share our commitment to democracy and belief in
fundamental human and civil rights. They regard the Church of Scientology
as a dangerous threat to those values. There is ample evidence to prove
their assessment correct.
Scientology, which operates under the guise of religion, is actually a
criminal cult which robs its members of their money and their ability to
think independently. All over the world, courts have repeatedly found that
Scientology operates illegally, motivated by insatiable greed and a
determination to destroy those who oppose it. I have enclosed a selection
of quotations from judges' opinions in these cases.
In the United States, Scientology's long-running war with the Internal
Revenue Service led the cult to infiltrate U.S. government agencies in an
effort to steal or destroy information the government had about the cult's
illegal activities. Members of the cult - including the wife of its founder
L. Ron Hubbard - were convicted and sent to prison as a result. Hubbard
himself escaped prosecution by going into hiding until his death in 1986.
This pattern - of infiltrations, theft, forgery, and fraud - has been
repeated by the cult all over the world.
Most recently, the church has been indicted in Florida for its involvement
in the death of Lisa McPherson, a Scientologist who was trying to leave the
cult.
Is it any wonder Germany seeks to protect its citizens from so ruthless an
organization? Scientology places loyalty to the cult above patriotism, the
love of family, and individual thought. It is, ipso facto, a totalitarian
movement. The German government is constitutionally obligated to protect
the country from such a threat to liberty.
Given Germany's past, it is remarkably qualified to identify totalitarian
movements and the threat they represent. Current U.S. policy is
disrespectful to the legitimately constituted courts that have found
Scientology to be a dangerous fraud. It is presumptuous and wrong for the
United States to place its own misguided understanding of the situation
ahead of the German government's solemn obligation - to its citizens and the
world - to stop the Scientology cult in its tracks, before the mistakes of
the past can be repeated.
Sweden has one of Europe's most liberal laws concerning a citizen's right to
access public information. In conjunction with freedom of speech and
freedom of the press, it is regarded as a basic constitutional right. Now,
because the law threatens the ability of Scientology to continue its false
religion scam, our country is trying to meddle with the Swedish constitution
itself. What right does the United States have to effect constitutional
changes in another nation simply to bring it into accord with our domestic
policy? Have we any respect for Swedish sovereignty or the rule of law?
It is precisely this kind of arrogant interference that hurts our reputation
abroad and efforts to carry out serious diplomacy.
The United States should stop treating friendly nations like children.
Germany and Sweden have both reached policies regarding Scientology that are
in accord with their laws and national interests. We should respect their
right to define for themselves what kind of groups pose a danger to their
citizens.
Respectfully yours,
Jeffrey A. Liss
Enclosure: What Judges Say About Scientology
Return to The Skeptic Tank's main Index page.
Jeffrey Liss
8 Jan 2000
Secretary of State
United States Department of State
Washington, DC
cc: His Excellency Rolf Ekéus, Ambassador;
His Excellency Juergen Chrobog, Ambassador
The views and opinions stated within this web page are those of the
author or authors which wrote them and may not reflect the views and
opinions of the ISP or account user which hosts the web page. The
opinions may or may not be those of the Chairman of The Skeptic Tank.