OFFICE OF SPECIAL AFFAIRS
22 September 1988
OSA Network Order No. 1061
HCO PL 16 Feb. 69 BATTLE TACTICS
The court system has been used violently against us. The answer is to develop ways to use it against litigants so effectively that they become incapable of harassing us through it.
If the court system can be used against an upstat by the unscrupulous downstat, then certainly it can be used to rapidly nullify any downstat.
The why of all this is that lawyers delay and prolong in order to make money.
Therefore, if it can be made too expensive for them to continue a case against us, they will drop it. Not only that, they won’t start one in the first place.
If they use the court system to harass and hurt and make life unlivable for us, then this reveals that the court system can be so used. If it can be used that way, then new ways to use it against litigants can be developed so they wish to God they had never had the idea of harassing us in the first place.
The strategy could be called, “punitive defense.”
The word would get around mighty quick. “Don’t tangle with or sue Scientology.
It just buys so much trouble and expense, we can’t face it.”
The best defense is a new method of attack; all legal.
STRATEGY AND TACTICS
There is a strategy in war which can apply to Legal. It is a very clever strategy and time tested, but never picked up and used generally. It consists of exhausting the resources of the enemy or potential enemy without even engaging in a direct confrontation. The end product is that he goes into despair and succumbs.
It can be worked in many ways.
And even while you are doing this, wins and precedents can be gotten out of existing cases. That would leave you practically unassailable while you continue to apply the above strategy.
The war should be on enemy terrain and you should keep it there. Our lawyers ought to be quoted Clausewitz’s “On War.” The purpose of war is to bring about a more amenable frame of mind on the part of the enemy. You always fight on the enemy’s ground—not yours. You always bargain with the other fellow’s chips and on his ground.
One must realize that jurisprudence is a form of warfare and follows the rules of war.
In warfare, he who invents or uses a new or better strategy or tactic will win, not only the battle, but the whole war itself.
Ghenghis Khan invented new cavalry tactics and won. The Hittites in 1500 B.C. put a swordsman on a horse and won. New tank tactics caused the early German wins of WW II. Positioning of a city or army is also a crucial part of such strategy.
The same applies to Legal.
The whole idea is to mount a prompt legal offensive and to win and win out of it anything that can be gotten out of it.
The only loophole on the matter is if terminals on these lines remain timid and if the attorney retained to handle it is defensive and incompetent.
Attackers of Scientology are basically cowards and they are basically liars. The first factor is handled by a good legal attack on them personally and individually.
The second factor means any competent attorney defends against all.
The above is the general analysis of handling attackers and what lies back of any strategy. It does not advocate doing anything illegal.
It will work. One simply has to be brilliant, have a brilliant lawyer who wants to END cases quickly and DO the job.
L. RON HUBBARD