Source: http://www.gerryarmstrong.org/50k/legal/a7/3411.php
Timestamp: 2019-04-25 19:59:52+00:00

Document:
affirmative defenses to Scientology’s claims in its complaint, each of which defenses also requires that the motion be denied.
There is a clear triable issue regarding clear criminal duress applied by Scientology to shudder Armstrong into signing the subject “contract” (Wilson Decl., Ex. A.) that Scientology has for seventeen years sought to enforce and used to fair game him, and is here seeking to enforce by motion for summary judgment. There is an equally clear triable issue regarding the cynical and criminal fraud perpetrated by Scientology to get Armstrong’s signature on its “contract.” There are triable issues regarding essential elements in determining the enforceability of the “contract’s” $50,000.00 per utterance liquidated damages penalty, pursuant to which Scientology seeks by summary judgment a monetary award against Armstrong of $10,050,000.00. Or, accepting Scientology’s “evaluation” of “damages” at $50,000 per utterance, the “contract” is criminally unfair to Armstrong monetarily and hence unenforceable.
Scientology also seeks general damages against Armstrong, which even Scientology acknowledges must be “proven at trial,” none of which general damages Scientology has shown or even identified in its motion. (Complaint, Third Cause of Action) In its complaint, Scientology also seeks $1,000,000 in punitive and exemplary damages against Armstrong, claiming that he did what Scientology says he did “intentionally, wilfully, fraudulently, and maliciously” … “to defraud and oppress” Scientology; and Scientology has not shown or even attempted to show that there is no triable issue as to Armstrong’s intention, willfulness, fraud or malice in all or anything that he has done, or any fraud or oppression he inflicted on Scientology.
Armstrong pled forty-four affirmative defenses in his answer to Scientology’s complaint. Wilson Decl., Ex. B. Scientology did not file a demurrer or motion to strike Armstrong’s answer in total or in part, and his affirmative defenses asserted in this case remain live and valid. Scientology’s implied or pretended “undisputed material facts,” which are necessary for Scientology to obtain its summary judgment, that all of Armstrong’s affirmative defenses pled herein have been “litigated vigorously” in some other Marin Superior Court case, that all have been adjudged to not be valid defenses, and that as a result Armstrong has no defense whatsoever remaining in the instant case, are completely untrue, completely disputed, and are false statements, claims and acts in furtherance of crimes being perpetrated by Scientology against Armstrong.
conditions that Scientology seeks to enforce, Scientology’s efforts of any kind to enforce these conditions, including by using the Marin Superior Court, and Scientology’s other acts of fair game against Armstrong since he signed the “contract,” are unlawful writings or acts in furtherance of egregious violations of U.S. Federal criminal civil rights statutes, specifically 18 U.S.C. §241 and § 242. Armstrong’s Separate Statement of Disputed and Undisputed Facts (“Sep. Stat.”) No. 52.
Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, ... shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.
Armstrong has recently filed a complaint report with the U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division Criminal Section requesting investigation and prosecution of the Scientology-related “beneficiaries” of the subject “contract” for these and other crimes, including by the unlawful use of this Court to further these crimes. Armstrong Decl., Ex. A, incorporated herein by reference. Scientology’s complaint in this case, its “contract,” its earlier lawsuits against Armstrong in this Court, its “injunction,” “judgment,” “OSCs re contempt,” “contempt orders,” “arrest warrants” and now the pending summary judgment motion are all unlawful because they all are in furtherance of these crimes. Sep. Stat. No. 51.
not participating in this crime, which this Court cannot lawfully do. There is no lawful action possible except to deny Scientology’s motion, and in fact to stay the whole case pending the resolution of the investigation and any prosecution of the crimes identified in Armstrong’s Complaint Report.
This Court has the authority obviously to call for an investigation by the Marin Superior Court of wholly related and relevant judicial impropriety by a Judge of the Superior Court that is brought to this Court’s attention. The earlier series of summary adjudication and summary judgment orders against Armstrong, the injunction, judgment, contempt orders and arrest warrants in the case that Scientology relies upon and cites to support its present summary judgment motion are so patently illogical, so legally baseless, so dishonest, and so willfully, vituperatively violative of Armstrong’s rights secured to him by the U.S. Constitution and laws that these orders and actions constitute clear evidence of and acts in violation of 18 U.S.C. §242. Sep. Stat. No. 53.
- Armstrong’s Opening Brief in Appeal No. A075027.
No one can lawfully be required by this or any other Court to obey any unlawful order. The power or authority of a Court to enforce an unlawful order, or even to make an unlawful order is not given, or even mentioned, in any California or U.S. Statutes. There remains a gargantuan triable issue regarding the lawfulness of this Court’s orders that form the basis for Scientology’s summary judgment motion.
This Court can dispose of Scientology’s summary judgment motion simply by truthfully answering this question: If there existed a global organization employing intelligence operators and operatives, private investigator thugs, high powered and low ethics attorneys, and thousands of aggressive mind controlled fanatics; if this network had a billion dollars, a history of criminality, and policies calling for crimes against people, including a policy called “Fair Game;” if the Judge of this Court hearing this summary judgment motion was a private individual that agents of this network, or cult, in execution of “Fair Game” had already assaulted, run into bodily with a car, terrorized on the freeway, threatened to put a bullet between her eyes, staked out her home, framed her with crimes, brought false criminal charges against her, broke into her car and stole her documents, disseminated her psychotherapy records, terrorized her for five years, and subjected her to a vicious global black propaganda campaign; if her family, friends and colleagues had been similarly “Fair Gamed;” and if she was delivered the message that she had to sign the Fair Game cult’s “contract” or she and her family, friends and colleagues would be targeted for more “Fair Game,” would this Judge feel at all threatened, pressured, menaced?
See, Scientology v. Armstrong (1991) 232 Cal.App.3d 1060 , 283 Cal.Rptr. 917 Scientology declared Armstrong a “Suppressive Person” right after he left in December 1981 and has considered him an SP and Fair Gamed him ever since. Armstrong has studied Scientology for thirty-five years and acquired a great deal of knowledge of and experience in the field, particularly regarding the Suppressive Person Doctrine and the philosophy, methodologies, application, and defense to Fair Game. Sep. Stat. No. 12-14.
In his 1969 policy letter “Battle Tactics” Hubbard ordered that his Scientologist troops must “fight on the basis of total attrition of the enemy,” the ordinary, good people identified as “Suppressive Persons.” Hubbard ordered that the Scientology troops, must “go all the way in and obliterate” these people, “expend the maximum” of these people, “make the war costly” to them, cut off these people’s “communications, funds, connections,” deprive these people of “political advantages, connections and power,” take over these people’s territory, “raid and harass” them. Hubbard ordered that the “public opinion” to be headed for is “a frenzy of hate” against the SPs, and that Scientology and Scientologists are to “degrade the image” of “Suppressive Persons” “to beast level.” Hubbard ordered how the Scientology troops were to view their campaign against SPs: “Never treat a war like a skirmish. Treat all skirmishes like wars.” Sep. Stat. No. 15-17.
Pursuant to Scientology’s Suppressive Person Doctrine, and in execution of the Fair Game policy, Scientology’s agents have assaulted Armstrong, run into him bodily with a car, terrorized him on the freeway, threatened to put a bullet between his eyes, staked out his home, framed him with crimes, brought false criminal charges against him, illegally videotaped him, broke into his car and stole his documents plus irreplaceable artwork, disseminated his psychotherapy records, terrorized him for twenty-two years, and subjected him to a vicious global black propaganda campaign. Scientology has waged a war of total attrition on Armstrong that continues to this day, and seeks to go all the way in and obliterate him, to expend him, to make the war costly on him, to cut off his communications, funds and connections, to deprive him of political advantages and power, and to raid and harass him. Scientology and those persons serving its malevolent purposes have pumped out a river of black propaganda to degrade Armstrong’s image to best level, and to turn public opinion into a frenzy of hate against him. Sep. Stat. No. 19.
If the Judge of this Court, as a private individual, was given the message, perhaps by someone close to her, perhaps her own attorney who wasn’t joking, that if she doesn’t sign this billion dollar Fair Game cult’s document or her communications, funds and connections will be cut off, she will be deprived of political advantages and power, she will be raided and harassed, her image will be degraded to beast level, public opinion will be turned into a frenzy of hate against her, and she will be obliterated; and her lawyer, and his family, and all sorts of other people, will also be cut off, deprived, raided, harassed, degraded and obliterated, would she feel at all threatened, pressured or menaced?
factual conflicts in favor of the non-moving party) creates the appearance, in this circumstance, where huge sums of money and basic human rights are involved, of judicial malfeasance. Because what Scientology is seeking to deprive Armstrong of by “contract” are his basic and vital rights and privileges secured to him by the U.S. Constitution and laws (Sep. Stat. No. 54) it was crucial that Judge Thomas found no triable issue as to duress in the menacing events leading up to Armstrong’s signing. Otherwise, and automatically, what Scientology was doing would constitute a crime, which is exactly what happened and is happening. The former Marin Superior Court Judge was also a former Marin County Prosecutor and had to have known of the existence of 18 U.S.C. §241 and §242.
It is not possible that Judge Thomas was not aware that if he didn’t sign Scientology’s documents he could be Fair Gamed, his communications, funds and connections could be cut off, he could be deprived of political advantages and power, he could be raided and harassed, his image could be degraded to beast level, public opinion could be turned into a frenzy of hate against him, and he could be obliterated; and his associates, and his family, and all sorts of other people, could also be cut off, deprived, raided, harassed, degraded and obliterated. The Judge was clearly aware of Fair Game, and aware of what happens to Scientology’s Fair Game targets, because at a minimum he saw the mass of evidence of Fair Game attacks on Armstrong.
defenses, ignore the terrible duress Scientology subjected Armstrong to, grant Scientology a summary judgment against Armstrong, and, even though it constituted a flagrant violation of U.S. Civil Rights statutes, to deprive Armstrong of his basic rights and privileges secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, including Armstrong’s right to defend himself, his family and associates against Scientology’s Fair Game. Sep. Stat. No. 53.
It is instantly obvious that the U.S. Secret Service would take very seriously an organization’s calling for the “obliteration” of the U.S. President. A person communicating in some way, even through a lawyer, that he was going to go all the way in and obliterate the President, would doubtlessly be prosecuted for such a threat. The President, of course, has the Secret Service, all the nation’s law enforcement departments, the FBI, CIA, NSA and the whole U.S. Military to protect him from those who would obliterate him. But the people that Scientology declares to be Suppressive Persons and targets for obliteration have no agents or army or fortresses to protect them. The personal menace that a domestic organization and individuals compelled and determined to wage a war of total attrition on, and to go all the way in and obliterate an average, common person like Armstrong must be much greater than for the President.
Armstrong’s attorney Michael Flynn told him that if Armstrong didn’t sign Scientology’s “contract,” Scientology would continue to Fair Game him, Flynn and his family, the other Scientology victims that Flynn represented, and Fair Game anyone else Scientology wanted. Armstrong knew very well what Fair Game was, and understood very well the terrible threat Scientology was making. Sep. Stat. No. 20. To say that there exists no triable issue as to duress in this case is irresponsible, and in light of this Court’s deprivation of Armstrong’s basic rights and privileges by irresponsibly ignoring this monstrous duress, criminal.
Armstrong, his lawyer, friends and associates, prior to the signing. Sep. Stat. No. 19. Scientology promised through Armstrong’s attorney Michael Flynn, as an inducement to get Armstrong to sign, to end Fair Game forever against everyone including Armstrong. Sep. Stat. No. 21. Immediately following Armstrong’s signing, Scientology continued to Fair Game him, and has continued to Fair Game him to this day. Scientology’s acts against Armstrong in execution of the Fair Game policy following his signing of the “contract” included, but are not limited to, distributing edited, perverse versions of illegally, secretly made videotapes of him, filing sworn statements about him in legal proceedings falsely accusing him of crimes, by threatening him, by filing false criminal charges against him, by assaulting him, by carrying out a massive global black propaganda campaign against him, by forging his signature to hate postings to the Internet, by spying on him, by further secret videotaping of him, by terrorizing him and his friends on the freeway and with a phony bomb threat, by obtaining unlawful court orders against him including the Marin Superior Court’s summary adjudication and summary judgment orders, injunction, judgment, contempt orders, and arrest warrants, and by seeking “judicially” and extra-judicially to deprive him of his rights and privileges secured to him by the U.S. Constitution and laws. Sep. Stat. No. 22.
they’re printed on,” that these conditions were “unenforceable,” and that Armstrong couldn’t “contract away [his] Constitutional rights.” Sep. Stat. No. 24. Unbeknownst to Armstrong at the time of the “settlement, Flynn entered into a “contract” with Scientology that according to Flynn requires that he not assist Armstrong in any way if Scientology Fair Games Armstrong, which Scientology has done. Armstrong believes that such a “contract” that prohibits an attorney from assisting his client is unlawful, and is an act by Scientology in furtherance of its 18 U.S.C. §241 conspiracy to deprive Armstrong of his rights and privileges secured to him by the U.S. Constitution and laws. Sep. Stat. No. 25.
Because of Flynn’s assurance that the “contract’s” liquidated damages condition was not worth the paper it was printed on, there was absolutely no negotiation by Armstrong with Scientology, or even via Flynn with Scientology, regarding liquidated damages and no discussion whatsoever regarding their reasonableness. It was completely understood by Armstrong at the time of the settlement that the liquidated damages condition and amount were utterly unreasonable. Armstrong is certain that they are just as unreasonable today, and, he believes, even more unreasonable given the now obvious conclusion that this liquidated damages condition, its enforcement by Judge Thomas, and every way in which it has been used by Scientology against Armstrong and against others, constitute acts in furtherance of serious civil rights crimes. Sep. Stat. No. 26.
>Hahaha!!!! I am looking forward to that. We should make a betting pool.
>I bet that Dennis Erlich has received $1,000,000.
I'll say $1,500,000. That's my figure.
it would have to pay Armstrong what his potential utterances are worth over his expected life span, or sextillions of dollars.
The actual monetary damage caused to the Scientology “beneficiaries” by Armstrong’s utterances is quite obviously zero. Scientology has never produced one shred of evidence to support its necessarily claimed no triable issue as to the reasonableness of the liquidated damages condition and amount at the time of the December 1986 “settlement.” There could be no such evidence, obviously, because there could be no other monetary figure than zero damages that can reasonably be equated with any or all of Armstrong’s utterances. Scientology lawyer Wilson admits as much in an exchange between Wilson and Armstrong in 1996. On October 7, 1996, Armstrong wrote by e-mail to all the Council Members of the Los Angeles City Council concerning the decision to rename an LA street “L. Ron Hubbard Way.” On October 23, 1996 Wilson wrote to Armstrong threatening that Armstrong’s letter to the LA City Council constituted a violation of Scientology’s injunction signed by Judge Thomas. On November 7/11 Armstrong wrote back to Wilson, and on December 11, 1996 Wilson sent Armstrong a letter stating “the impact of your letter was negligible at best, more likely nil. Pursuit of further remedy thus is unnecessary.” Sep. Stat. No. 27. It is clearly impossible to explain logically how a four page letter, along with the twenty-seven page Decision in Scientology v. Armstrong, LA Superior Court Case No. C 420153, e-mailed to each of the LA City Council Members, has a value of “negligible at best, more likely nil;” yet Armstrong’s minuscule comment that is practically unrelated to Scientology “I'll say $1,500,000. That's my figure.” is worth $50,000.00. The Decision, which was affirmed on appeal, condemns Fair Game and Scientology’s Fair Game attacks on Armstrong and others, and is a central motivator in Scientology’s campaign to gag and punish Armstrong in violation of 18 U.S.C. §241.
There is a triable issue as to the conditions and relationship existing between Scientology and Armstrong at the time of the “settlement,” which conditions and relationship must be examined by the trier of fact. At the time of the “settlement,” Scientology was a billion dollar enterprise, whereas Armstrong had no money whatsoever and no bargaining power. Scientology had hundreds of lawyers. Armstrong’s lawyer was himself a Fair Game target and victim and had been compromised by Scientology to the point that he was pressuring Armstrong on Scientology’s behalf to sign the “contract” to end Fair Game against him and his family, assuring Armstrong that Scientology would end Fair Game forever if signed, and also insisting that the liquidated damages condition was not worth the paper it’s printed on. Scientology also linked the liquidated damages condition to all the other “contractual” conditions by which Scientology unlawfully sought to deprive Armstrong of his rights and privileges secured to him by the U.S. Constitution and laws. Sep. Stat. No. 28.
First, the validity and enforceability of the Agreement was aggressively contested by Armstrong through all possible legal process available to him in that matter. When judgment was decided against him on this issue, he sought reconsideration of it. When that was denied, he appealed. Thus, he had every opportunity and indeed, took all opportunities to litigate this issue. Motion 7:6-9.
Scientology, however, has unclean hands in this matter, having engineered the dismissal of Armstrong’s appeal by unlawful means and with the abetment of Marin Judge Gary Thomas.
documents before a motion could be heard, and claiming that Scientology’s “contract” “requires no less.” Armstrong took this letter from Wilson, who did not copy Ward with the letter, to be a threat and an impermissible tampering with a subpoenaed witness. Armstrong wrote a declaration, executed January 26, 1997 and sent it to the U.S. District Court Judge presiding over the Ward case to advise him of the threat from Wilson.
68. On January 23, 1997 I received in the mail from Grady Ward a subpoena, a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit T, for production of documents in his case.
69. On January 24 I received from attorney Andrew H. Wilson a fax letter, a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit U, threatening prosecution in Armstrong IV if I provide documents to Mr. Ward pursuant to his subpoena. This letter is frightening to me, and supports why I am sending this declaration directly to the Court, and why the "settlement agreement" and the Thomas order are illegal. Mr. Ward does not have the time to wait for my testimony until Scientology's motion for protective order is heard before he must file this testimony. In my opinion, that is precisely why Mr. Wilson has sent his threat letter. Ex. I, 43:13-26.
(3) hinder, delay, or prevent the communication to a law enforcement officer or judge of the United States of information relating to the commission or possible commission of a Federal offense or a violation of conditions of probation, parole, or release pending judicial proceedings; shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.
(2) the testimony, or the record, document, or other object need not be admissible in evidence or free of a claim of privilege.
fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.
Since Judge Thomas unlawfully punished Armstrong for making known to the proper judge the Wilson threat and witness tampering, Judge Thomas’s punishment constitutes an act depriving Armstrong of his rights and privileges secured to him by the U.S. Constitution and laws in violation of 18 U.S.C. §242. Nowhere in the contempt order that Judge Thomas signed is there any mention of Wilson’s threat letter, which is what caused Armstrong to send the declaration making known the threat to the judge on the Ward case. Sep. Stat. No. 34. Assuming that Judge Thomas read Armstrong’s declaration and knew about Wilson’s threat letter, it becomes obvious that the injunction that Judge Thomas is enforcing by signing Scientology’s contempt order and the “contract” that the injunction enforces, have an unlawful purpose. According to Wilson and Judge Thomas, the “contract” and injunction prohibit Armstrong from reporting violations of U.S. Federal criminal statutes. If Judge Thomas did not read Armstrong’s declaration for which he punishes Armstrong for sending it to the U.S. District Court Judge, then by Judge Thomas’s willful dereliction of duty in signing Scientology’s contempt order without knowing what act he was punishing, he nevertheless acted to deprive Armstrong of his rights and privileges secured to him by the U.S. Constitution and laws in violation of 18 U.S.C. §242.
After getting Judge Thomas to sign the unlawful contempt order (Ex. J) Scientology then used this order to unlawfully get Armstrong’s appeal from the injunction and judgment of the Marin Superior Court dismissed. Using Judge Thomas’s unlawful contempt order, attorney Wilson on behalf of Scientology convinced the Court of Appeal that Armstrong was not entitled to maintain his appeal because of the fugitive disentitlement doctrine. Scientology’s and Wilson’s engineering of the dismissal of Armstrong’s appeal from Judge Thomas’s unlawful injunction and judgment constitutes a series of acts in furtherance of crimes under 18 U.S.C. §241. Sep. Stat. No. 35.
A party may move for summary adjudication as to one or more causes of action within an action, one or more affirmative defenses, one or more claims for damages, or one or more issues of duty, if that party contends that the cause of action has no merit or that there is no affirmative defense thereto, or that there is no merit to an affirmative defense as to any cause of action, or both, or that there is no merit to a claim for damages, as specified in Section 3294 of the Civil Code, or that one or more defendants either owed or did not owe a duty to the plaintiff or plaintiffs. A motion for summary adjudication shall be granted only if it completely disposes of a cause of action, an affirmative defense, a claim for damages, or an issue of duty.
Armstrong has asserted in his answer to Scientology’s complaint forty-four affirmative defenses. Wilson Decl. Ex B. Sep. Stat. No. 36. Scientology did not file a demurrer or a motion to strike any of Armstrong’s defenses in this case. Sep. Stat. No. 37. Scientology has not provided any evidence in its motion for summary judgment that there is no merit to all or any of Armstrong’s affirmative defenses, has not disposed of any or all of these defenses, or even identified the forty-four affirmative defenses for potential disposal. Sep. Stat. No. 38.
Armstrong believes he possesses, has always possessed, and cannot lawfully but possess a right guaranteed by the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution to the free exercise of religion that permits all of the utterances he has ever made about Scientology or the “beneficiaries.” He has written about this right to freedom of religion, and necessarily this affirmative defense to Scientology’s complaint, hundreds of times in different legal pleadings, declarations and other public statements. See, e.g., Answer, Forty-First Affirmative Defense, 77:1-82:8, Wilson Decl. Ex. B, Complaint Report, Armstrong Ex. A, 57:182-76:241. Sep. Stat. No. 39.
any mention of the Judge’s having dealt with this subject and defense, is completely missing from Scientology’s moving papers. Sep. Stat. No. 40 . In fact, Judge Thomas’s refusal to deal with the religious issue and the free religious exercise defense, when these were squarely and voluminously before him, is compelling evidence of judicial malfeasance. Sep. Stat. No. 41.
defense of freedom of religion, given all that has happened between Scientology and Armstrong in the past twenty-two years, and what has happened in this Court in the litigations between Scientology and Armstrong in the past twelve years, constitutes another criminal act in violation of 18 U.S.C. §241. Sep. Stat. No. 44.
Armstrong is a Christian, Scientology is antichristian and Armstrong has a ministry that involves defending Christianity and Christians from Scientology predations and fraud. Armstrong is a Prophet to Scientologists who brings them God’s Word as directed. Armstrong is the founder and head of the Church of Wogs ® which is a global faith dedicated to protecting wogs from Scientology defamation and persecution. Wogs is the term Scientologists use for non-Scientologists, and is a racial epithet both inside and outside Scientology equivalent to “niggers.” Armstrong is a wog. Armstrong’s utterances about Scientology and wogs constitute religious scripture. Scientology has said nothing in its summary judgment motion about any of these material facts and the defense of freedom of religion in which they are elements. Sep. Stat. Nos. 45-47.
and class against being beastified, attacked, menaced and obliterated by Scientology constitute an obvious violation of 18 U.S.C. §242. Sep. Stat. No. 48.
Judge Thomas ruled on summary adjudication in 1995 that the subject “contract” is lawful and enforceable. The Judge signed Scientology’s injunction enforcing the conditions that deprive Armstrong of a great number of his rights and privileges secured to him by the U.S. Constitution and laws. These rights and privileges include, but are not limited to: right to the free exercise of religion; right to freedom from slavery; right to freedom of speech; right to self-defense; right to freedom of association; right to due process; right to communicate with or petition government agencies; right to report crimes; litigant’s privilege; doctor-patient privilege; clergyman-penitent privilege. Sep. Stat. No. 54. In signing the injunction that unlawfully deprives Armstrong of these rights and privileges, Judge Thomas ignored and refused to deal with valid affirmative defenses, e.g., religion, and ignored or perverted clear evidence of duress, fraud and the unreasonableness and unenforceability of the liquidated damages condition. Armstrong has alleged, with a great amount of supporting evidence, in his Complaint Report to the Department of Justice, and herein claims, that Judge Thomas violated 18 U.S.C. §242, with his various orders in this case. We have over eight years of experience and evidence for interpreting the injunction and Judge Thomas’s other orders and their effects on Armstrong, others and justice. There exists an obvious triable issue as to the lawfulness of the injunction and other orders of Judge Thomas on which Scientology bases its motion for summary judgment.
In its core and operation, Scientology is a global intelligence organization. There should be no doubt that any person or company that employed me would become targets for Scientology intelligence gathering and covert operations.
Through threat, fraud and judicial malfeasance, Scientology has obtained various court orders in California, which the organization insists are enforceable around the world, that prohibit me from mentioning my experiences in or knowledge of Scientology, even saying the word "Scientology," on penalty of U.S. $50,000 per utterance, plus being jailed and fined. Just for writing this resume I will be penalized $50,000, jailed and fined, and for sending it to any potential employer, or for apprising any potential employer of this situation involving Scientology I will also be penalized $50,000, jailed and fined.
Scientology will view as Suppressive Persons or Suppressive Groups any person or company that might hire Armstrong, will run intelligence operations against those persons or companies, will seek through operations and attacks against those person or companies to cut off Armstrong’s communications, funds and connections, to deprive him of advantages and power, to raid and harass him, and to obliterate him, and cut off any employer’s communications, funds and connections, to deprive Armstrong’s employer of advantages and power, to raid and harass that employer, and to obliterate that employer. Armstrong has a legal duty therefore to disclose his knowledge of Scientology, his experiences, his beliefs and anything else that would explain the threat Scientology is and would be to any potential employer. Sep. Stat. No. 50.
Based on the foregoing, Defendant Gerry Armstrong respectfully requests that Scientology’s motion for summary adjudication should be denied, and further that this Court initiate an investigation into actions taken by this Court against Armstrong, specifically Judge Gary Thomas, that constitute violations of 18 U.S.C. §242.
Executed on March 23, 2004 at Chilliwack, B.C., Canada.

References: §241
 § 242
 §242
 v. 
 §241
 §242
 §241
 v. 
 §241
 §242
 §242
 §241
 §241
 §242
 §242
 §242