Alex Gibney: Going Clear

Discussion in 'Media' started by DeathHamster, Nov 24, 2014.

  1. This is a great video.

    I haven't yet seen the documentary, but if key points from this video - or its affidavit - were not quoted, then an important opportunity was missed to educate the public on an important issue.
  2. This is a great video.

    I haven't yet seen the documentary, but if key points from this video - or its affidavit - were not quoted, then an important opportunity was missed to educate the public on an important issue.
  3. The Wrong Guy Member

    • Like Like x 1
  4. The Wrong Guy Member

    Three Content Marketing Campaigns Gone Bad

    By Larry Dobrow, MediaPost

    I recently attended a content-marketing minisummit in which a bunch of smart-talkers revealed the tricks of the trade to content luddites. Turns out the most effective strategy is to hit the right audience with the right piece of content at the right time via the right channel. No, really, it’s just that simple.


    Larry-stalking content marketer number two is, a multimedia play created by the Church of Scientology to push back against an HBO documentary that debuted on Monday night. Based on the carefully segmented, name-naming-and-shaming mini-movie that serves as the site’s centerpiece, I am guessing that this documentary is unflattering in a way that, say, Some Kind of Monster is not, ornately multihued metal-whisperer sweaters be damned.

    The FreedomMag blitz began well in advance of the HBO film’s airing; I heard about it long before I learned about the documentary itself. It’s eye-opening in ways that even the most strident counteroffensives rarely are. Take its assessment of one of the former Scientologists who, presumably, gets a lot of screen time in the HBO flick: the mini-movie reveals a dozen of her pseudonyms, recounts a passage about her promiscuity in a book she wrote and alleges she was expelled from the Church for “violent assaults” and prostitution. It also reproduces nude photos she sent to web pals who responded to her Internet ads for… I guess we’re calling it “companionship” nowadays. Others are characterized and reduced using similarly loaded terminology: “the soulless sellout,” “the raging bully,” etc.

    So yeah, the Freedom movie is astonishingly effective at presenting every one of its targets as less-than-credible sources of information about not just Scientology, but anything more involved than a quick two-plus-two calculation. Unfortunately, this frothing vigor works against it. It succeeds less in poisoning me against the people in the HBO doc (and the filmmakers who chose to chronicle their allegations against the Church) than it does in piquing my interest.

    Based on the clip’s allegations, I don’t know what could possibly be revealed in the documentary that merits this kind of thermonuclear response... but I kind of have to watch now to find out, don’t I? “Sorry, honey. We can get back to binge-watching Two and a Half Men some other day. Tonight, we’re taking an express train to Smear City.”

    The full article is here:
    • Like Like x 5
  5. Incredulicide Member

    Someone on reddit was prompted by seeing Going Clear to recount their experience applying for a job at big blue:
    Last four paragraphs:
    During the interview, my interviewer and I became embroiled in a debate over the existence of L. Ron Hubbard. I proposed that L. Ron Hubbard existed in her mind only, and she countered that for me to have mentioned him, he must also exist in my mind. I contended that Hubbard’s predilection for ascots was an absurdity beyond comprehension. She argued that for me or anyone to have recognized that absurdity, it must have been comprehended; thus his existence is self-evident based solely on his ridiculous fashion sense. I was beaten, but she told me she liked my Moxie (which, coincidentally was being sold at the concession stand in the screening room).

    I passed the interview and was given a job offer. I was to be a floater, which should not be confused with being an angel since you don’t get a uniform. Still, ethical ramifications were bothering me. Would it amount to heresy if I were to unionize the Church? I just couldn’t accept intense meditation as a medical plan.

    I was given a job offer wherein my salary appeared to be part of a pyramid scheme, and I was being allowed to get in on the ground floor. I know I should have been happy because the potential for growth was tremendous, but I’d been burned before.

    I went home and hid from the Scientologists. I didn’t want to work for them, but before too long, I received a phone call. When I checked my voicemail, I heard, “Earnest, you can not run from the Church. Wherever you go, we will find you and make you to lie down in green pastures with semi-celebrities. We’ve made you an offer you can’t refuse. If, however, you choose to refuse, please call us so that we can schedule someone else to work the concession stand in the screening room.” I did not heed the call of the Church, and as punishment, I soon found myself employed at
    Blockbuster Video, which somehow failed to outlast the Church of Scientology despite having shelves full of Tom Cruise.
    • Like Like x 5

  6. I'm telling this guy in the comments that it's coming to a theatre in Toronto on May 8.
  7. pedrofcuk Member

    • Like Like x 6
  8. Seriously???
  9. mojo Member

    It SHOULD be, but the IRS have said they won't comment....if they had AT LEAST said they wouldn't comment on ongoing investigations, at least we'd have that much. Tax avoidance is the foundation for Scilon scams. If they are tax liable their books would be subject to scrutiny of the govt if the IRS wished...right now, Scientology is able to act with impunity....cause there's no way the accounts would stand up to a serious audit that wouldn't implicate the Scilons in all sorts of illegal activities. Slave wages being one of them
    • Like Like x 2
  10. TrevAnon Member

    ^ I don't know about US law, but Dutch tax authorities will always decline to comment on a single tax payer as they are not allowed to do that. If there are questions about a specific church or legal entity, they will only say that churches in general or those types of legal entities in general etc. have to follow these or those rules.

    Could that apply here?
  11. RightOn Member

    ALSO the Crimes, the crimes!
    There are SO many people who have come forward to tell their story of forced disconnection, coerced abortions, mental and physical abuse, illegal regging tactics, people held against their will, human trafficking, passport confiscation, reading their "parishioner's" mail, and much more.
    ALL illegal. Tax exemption is not supposed to be granted to any organization if it is guilty of any illegal activity. THE US GOVERNMENTS WRITTEN LAW.
    Yet, Scientology is tax exempt.
  12. RightOn Member

    I think all exs that have come forward to tell their stories, and who were victims or witnessed ANY illegal activity (your mail be going through, coerced abortions, punishments, child labor, passport confiscation , being held against your will etc) by the COS needs to write up a detailed "KR" (when and where, court cases etc..) and send it to the IRS. And with that write up include the exact words of the law written about the rules for tax exemption.
    I don't know if you should include your own state's rules or what the government wrote up or both?
    AND and ask for an explanation of why the COS is still exempt.

    Also be sure to document when it was sent it and keep a copy for yourself.
    And then we can list all the people who sent it in. :D

    This is such a simple idea, but can turn out to be quite effective.
    Should I start a new thread for this?

    If anyone has an account on ESMB, maybe cross post this idea over there?
  13. The Wrong Guy Member

    How Scientologists are dealing with the popularity of Alex Gibney’s film ‘Going Clear’

    By Tony Ortega, The Underground Bunker


    We checked in with one of our sources inside the church, who spends time with a group of church members who are “OT.” In other words, they’re longtime members who have reached the “Operating Thetan” levels, which cost tens of thousands of dollars each.

    Our source tells us that in his group at least, “there has not been one mention of the documentary.”

    He is certain that they’ve all heard about it and may have read some of the press. But church officials are “handling” curious members by sending them to the Freedom magazine website, which contains videos and articles intended to hurt the credibility of the people who appear in the film.

    Our source explains why this is keeping members from talking about Going Clear, at least in the near term:

    “OSA is telling people the movie is nothing new and it’s the same worn out lies. And Scientologists are indoctrinated not to spread entheta [negative information], so everyone is wary of bringing up a subject like this, as one could be written up or at the minimum be directed to talk to an OSA or ethics terminal.”

    As we described in great detail on Monday, Scientology is a snitching culture. Members are encouraged to turn in others — even members of their own family — by writing “Knowledge Reports” or “KRs” to the ethics division. That can result in a member being pulled in for a “sec check,” a brutal interrogation with an “E-meter.” The subject of the interrogation has to pay for the privilege, and depending on what they reveal, they may be subject to being “declared” a “suppressive person” and kicked out of the organization. All other Scientologists then have to cut off contact with the “SP,” even if it means ripping apart a family.

    With that threat hanging over them, it’s really no wonder why Scientologists might be careful about mentioning the documentary to anyone, even their closest friends or family members.


    We told former Scientology spokesman Mike Rinder what our source said, about OTs remaining silent for fear of being swept into ethics violations.

    Rinder said he agreed with us that people in the church itself will probably do their best to ignore the movie. “But Miscavige has a tougher job in the long run,” he added. “I think what’s going to happen is a process of osmosis. These people are going to hear from people they know, who maybe aren’t in the church, or are different parts of their family, and eventually their curiosity will get the better of them and they’ll watch it.”
    • Like Like x 5
  14. RightOn Member

    ^^^^ Plain and simple. they are not
    • Like Like x 1
  15. The Wrong Guy Member

    Head of the Church of Scientology, Jim Keyes - David Letterman

    Published by Late Show with David Letterman on April 3, 2015

    Dave welcomes the head of the Church of Scientology, Jim Keyes.

    David Letterman Takes on Church of Scientology Going Clear

    David Letterman 'Going Clear' Sketch: "When You Want Science Mixed with Geology, the Answer Is Scientology"
    • Like Like x 5
  16. Look at the closing agreement between Scientology and the IRS. It's saturated with religious lingo. That was done on purpose. It's a trick. A ploy. Scientology is tricky. Even though the IRS, technically, does not have the authority to decide what is or is not a religion, it was tricked into - de facto - doing so.

    Many things that would be illegal are not, or the courts are afraid to become involved, because of the religion angle.

    This is one reason why it's so ill advised for certain people - who should know better - to keep calling Scientology THE CHURCH and a RELIGION, over and over again, and without any mention of the cynical and fraudulent nature of that supposed religiosity.

    It may be necessary to identify Scientology as the Church of Scientology occasionally, but, frankly, it's self defeating to repeatedly call it the Church.

    Why do you think Scientology trains its followers to repeat as often as possible, "Church," "religion." etc. when confronted by critics? Scientology knows the psychological and propaganda war regarding Scientology as a religion is far from won.

    Public opinion regarding Scientology as a religious institution influences judges and politicians.

    Let Scientology repeatedly call itself a religion and a Church. Don't help them! They can do it themselves without our help.
  17. mojo Member

    • Like Like x 1
  18. RightOn Member

    This has a shit load of info on the IRS agreement with the COS
    • Like Like x 4
  19. RightOn Member

    • Like Like x 7
  20. RightOn Member

    I hope people that watched Going Clear, who ever witnessed seeing a protest in action anywhere (passer bys, the general public or video watchers) and thought "oh those silly people with their Tom Cruise and anti Scientology signs, don't they have anything better to do?" :eek:
    NOW realize and think…"holy shit! They were right all along!" :D
    • Like Like x 3
  21. TrevAnon Member

    At the Underground Bunker, a short Dutch story from some newspaper was posted by "Hansje Brinker".



    Church of Scientology under fire again

    The Church of Scientology is somewhat accustomed to criticism, but in the new documentary "Going Clear" all the brakes have been removed. In May, the film will premiere in the US on the HBO pay channel, the Netherlands may follow later.

    Scientology has been under fire for decades because it is said to strain its members financially. Documentarian Alex Gibney calls the church a "church of terror ". In his film, he states that members end up in "camps" if they do not do their best to get to higher spiritual levels. The ideology "sticks to you like a glue," an ex-member says in "Going Clear". "Also nice, thoughtful people can be drawn into it," says Lawrence Wright, who wrote the book on which the film is based.

    In the Netherlands, the church has a few hundred active followers. Laren dentist Hans Beekmans is proud of his membership. "I just see a lot of good things." He knows where the documentary originates from. "There are many industries that would benefit if people are doing bad. That the church will establish world peace, they do not like. "The Gibney film is unworthy of the word "documentary", church spokesman Merel Remmerswaal said. "I know there is nothing in it that I see here happening in the church myself." According to her in the film only former Scientologists who were in the movement years ago are speaking. They were put out "because of the use of violence and telling lies". "It's always the same ex-members who repeat the same lies over and over again. Until people think that there must be something true. "

    That members give money to the organisation makes sense, Beekmans says. "Religion exists by virtue of parishioners. Donations are not enforced." With the money good things happen, he says. "We have distributed 250,000 booklets of luck [literal translation, TWTH booklets are meant, TrevAnon] in Amsterdam. From the statistics you could see that crime has fallen there. "

    Not only the American HBO, also Louis Theroux, theBBC documentary maker has recently dived deep into Scientology. He said that Friday as a guest at "College Tour". Whether his experiences were as bad he would not reveal yet.

    End translation

    Good thing to see confirmed that "Donations are not enforced" :p and that COS only has a few hundred members. :)
    • Like Like x 8
  22. The Wrong Guy Member

    Oscars: 'Going Clear' Leads Host of Strong Doc Contenders From Year's First-Quarter

    By Scott Feinberg, The Hollywood Reporter

    The first-quarter of 2015 came to an end this week, and Oscar-obsessives like me are already sorting through the wreckage (Jupiter Ascending, Mortdecai, Hot Tub Time Machine 2, Chappie, etc.) in search of this year's The Grand Budapest Hotel, an early release with the juice to hang on through the entire year. My own early assessment: there isn't such a film — at least of the narrative sort. There are, however, several documentaries that might fit the bill.

    The year's most buzzed-about documentary feature, if doc series (HBO's six-part Robert Durst exposé The Jinx), is certainly Oscar winner Alex Gibney's Going Clear: Scientology and the Prison of Belief. The dishy look inside the practices of the titular religion premiered at Sundance and is now airing on HBO. While some may feel that the film demeans a faith shared by more than a few members of the Hollywood community and therefore may shy away from it, the doc branch of the Academy, which determines the category's Oscar nominees, may take another view of the film.

    A sizable portion of the 221-member branch reveres Gibney, a two-time nominee (he won for 2007's Taxi to the Dark Side), and his prolific output (he's also behind the new HBO doc Sinatra: All or Nothing At All). And besides, Going Clear wouldn't be the first doc to paint a not-entirely-flattering portrait of a religion and wind up with an Oscar nom. Indeed, the relatively short list of 21st century nominees includes Twist of Faith and Deliver Us from Evil, films that focus on sex abuse in the Catholic Church, and Jesus Camp, a film about Evangelical Christians.

    The article continues with a discussion of other contenders, here:
    • Like Like x 6
  23. The Wrong Guy Member

    'Going Clear' Proves That L. Ron Hubbard's "Religion" Is More Ruse Than Revelation

    By Bill Gibron, PopMatters

    Scientology got its start as a tax scam. Its founder, sci-fi author L. Ron Hubbard, needed a way to hide the money he was making as a successful self-help guru via his bestseller, Dianetics, and the notion of forming a “religion” brought on the possibility of earning not-for-profit status from the IRS. Unfortunately, this wouldn’t occur until after Hubbard died, his legacy left to a young upstart named David Miscavige.

    Thanks to a premeditated plan of lawsuits and coercion, Scientology got its wish. Now, with less than 50,000 active members in the “church”, the infamous organization can claim nearly $3 billion in value.

    Pretty stunning when you consider that this is a faith based on a sham, a set up which claims to help emotional and psychological issues, but actually requires the potential member to spend untold sums of money being “audited” in order to attain an ever-shifting “something” called Clear. It’s then, and only then, where one learns the dogma, Hubbard’s handwritten Creation story — and it’s a whopper.

    Last three paragraphs:

    Going Clear illuminates the standards for maintaining the flock: intimidation, embarrassment, alienation and isolation. But it also suggests that someone famous, like Travolta, has hundreds of personal confessions to draw from in order to keep him committed. Or take the Church’s highest ranking, most evolved member, Tom Cruise. For him, Scientology is a wellspring of personal and professional perks, something that even his international fame can’t provide him with. Someone slams his character? Scientology sends in its lawyers. The actor needs a new plane and/or trailer to travel to his next film? L. Ron’s gang foots the bill. Remember those people earning less than a dollar an hour to do the organization’s bidding? They are the one’s installing sound systems in the superstar’s home and picking out his potential paramours.

    All fingers point to Miscavige, a growing personal paranoia, and a lack of core leadership post-Hubbard. While the slick charlatan can con Washington out of a simple tax status, he has a more difficult time dealing with the less than happy members of his flock. Thus, we hear testimony about life in “The Hole”, the equally awful camp for the member’s kids (whom Scientology classifies as a “burden”), and the various tortures used to find potential internal enemies to the cause. Again, when you add in the origin story, the NSA like secrecy, the hidden wealth, and the complete lack of transparency, Scientology becomes more like the mafia and less like a legitimate religion.

    Scientology doesn’t offer up a god so much as a pragmatic pyramid scheme, which keeps its members goal oriented and constantly seeking something more, for a fee. With all the money coming in, it makes sense that keeping as much of it has possible has always been the group’s primary design. As Going Clear argues, this method of maintaining a religions comes with its own price — the price of people.
    • Like Like x 9
  24. The Wrong Guy Member

    Tom Cruise's OFFICIAL Response to HBO's GOING CLEAR

    Published by nottomcruise on April 2, 2015

    Tom Cruise finally ends his silence and responds to allegations made in Alex Gibney's provocative documentary on HBO, GOING CLEAR. We also learn that he really enjoys Authentic Greek Yogurt. Marissa from Buzzfeed was fortunate enough to get the scoop.
    • Like Like x 6
  25. Anonymous Member

    In Canada, it's the same. An individual citizen's taxes are the business of no one else; i.e., I can't file an FOIA to investigate any individual citizen. Well, I suppose I could file a FOIA but it will be rejected.

    If the Income Taxes Agency (CRA in Canada) thinks this that or the other church is hinky, they will investigate but news stories of outcomes are rare.

    There was a Canadian case a couple or so years back when a Canadian was refused a tax write-off for donating to the cult of $cientology.

    CDN $42.000 dollars was involved. Lulz were had.
    • Like Like x 6
  26. Directv, Midcontinent, AT&T U-verse, Brighthouse, Consolidated Communications, Time Warner Cable, Verizon FIOS and Cox will be giving a free weekend of HBO from 4/10 thru 4/13 (4/12 for Consolidated).
    Going Clear is showing on 4/11 on Directv.
    More people will have access to the documentary! Good job HBO!
    Tell everybody
    • Like Like x 7
  27. Unfortunately I do not hink it will matter how many signatures the petition gets, as the White House will not meddle with this at all and the IRS would not either. The IRS had ample opportunities to do so and did not, so this documentary will not change a thing in this regard. The IRS and the government do not have the cojones
  28. RightOn Member

    When I started this fight many moons ago, it seemed like there was little light at the end of the tunnel.
    Over the years the veil has been lifting and great strides have been made to expose this litigious cult for what it is.
    Public pressure can help.
    Never say never ;)
    • Like Like x 8
  29. Hugh Bris Member

    It's the same here, AFAIK, but, with our two tiered justice, those in power aren't held to the same standard. There is a long history, starting no later than FDR, of sitting presidents using the IRS to go after their political opponents. It's nothing new, but this time around it's pretty blatant.
    • Like Like x 2

  30. What may take hold is if this receives enough attention (and numbers on the petition), political candidates may play to please these people and go after the Obama Administration IRS. While this is Obama's last term, it may play well into the GOP's hands if they want to further bring attention to IRS foibles that happened under Obama.

    Now I know this happened in 1993 but the GOP sees the IRS as the bad guy now, and politicians are looking for avenues to use against their opponents. That's why I signed the petition. I know it will go nowhere and we've had a variety of petitions over the years that went ignored. But some enterprising politician may see this as an opportunity.
    • Like Like x 5
  31. Hugh Bris Member

    If a politician wants to make this an issue, we can jump on the bandwagon.
    I think it turns on celebrities, especially Cruise. If the public start seeing him in a new light, not as movie star, not as couch jumping crazy celebrity, but as someone who should have spoken up, but didn't (oh, and his relationship with Suri) then public pressure on the IRS/gov could turn the tide.
    just my 2¢
    • Like Like x 2
  32. lol this is funny as shit. u can have ganja in Cali and it is not a problem. hey bro, how much? I have a medical card for maryjane :p

  33. RightOn Member

    If Tom puts all his cards on the table and tells everything that he knows about the COS that he is holding back then wouldn't they lay off a bit?
    Does anyone know the reason why he is holding info back? I mean, didn't he say he is holding back more info?


    EDITED: I just watched Tom's interview. I wasn't aware (or didn't remember) that one of his family members was put on the RPF for 4 years after talking to him.
    So, maybe that is why he is holding more back.
  34. Tom, my botha, past it on. Ain't nuthin' wrong with a little pot here and there. Dunno why so worry. Be happy. It is all good.
    • Dislike Dislike x 1
  35. Incredulicide Member

    "Going Clear" Is a Powerful Indictment of the Insidiously Absurd
    Last three paragraphs:
    Often people point out that while they may not like Scientology, other religions have done worse things. But are horrible things—human-trafficking, torture, incarceration—not still horrible because other things may have been worse?

    I originally saw Going Clear several weeks ago in L.A., in a theater located a few blocks down Sunset Boulevard from the monolithic Scientology complex featured in the movie. I was massively depressed. The church owns billions of dollars of real estate around the world—maybe even trillions. It is too rich to be challenged.

    Or is it? According to the website of Tony Ortega, an investigative journalist interviewed in the film, I learned that Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR) has considered a push to get the IRS to review its 1993 ruling. A push like this would require a big popular groundswell. Citizens might need to be stirred emotionally as well as intellectually. If Going Clear moves others the way that it moved me, this is certainly plausible. Or at least more plausible than Xenu dumping bombs and Thetans into volcanoes.
    • Like Like x 3
  36. promise of settlement? a la Debbie? dunno, but it is weird that all of a sudden he goes balls to the wall AFTER the docu, on Twitter and shit
  37. Hugh Bris Member

    er, no. MG Lord is number challenged. Billions, certainly possible, trillions, not a chance.
    • Like Like x 2
  38. The Wrong Guy Member

    Alex Gibney on Scientology’s culture of “vitriol and hate”: “If you do leave, they go after you hard”

    The Oscar-winning director on Scientology’s vicious counterattack – and his new movies on Sinatra and Steve Jobs

    By Andrew O'Hehir, Salon


    What has surprised you about the reaction to the film? First of all, the Church of Scientology has officially released various official statements and websites and videos attacking “Going Clear,” so let’s start there. Is there anything that surprises you about their counterattack?

    Not really. It’s kind of textbook. What’s textbook about it is it’s full of so much vitriol and hate, which is, if you think about it, kind of unusual for a church. Sure, what’s his name from the Catholic League, Bill Donohue, will do stuff like that. But this is like textbook, fair game. Straight out of the Hubbard manual. Hollywood Reporter sent them 25 questions and said, “Please respond to these allegations specifically.” And their response was to ignore all of them and just to say, “Alex Gibney is a liar and a bigot and everybody who’s involved in the project are bigots and liars and cheaters.” That kind of thing. So it’s not surprising, but it is amazing to see that kind of hostility expressed. And that’s how they do it.

    They have not attempted to offer any specific rebuttals of any kind? Because I certainly haven’t seen that.

    No, they just say, “Everything’s false, there are no misdeeds, but everybody involved is a bigoted asshole.”

    It’s an extraordinary level of avoiding the issue, isn’t it? They avoid the questions more completely than the Soviet Union ever did, than the Catholic Church ever did.

    Absolutely, they make all those institutions look good. If you dig down deep, it is a little like the Soviet Union or some Orwellian organization. For example, they will say, “Marty Rathbun is an admitted liar.” And it’s true. Marty [a former Scientology spokesperson] admits that he lied — on behalf of the church! Then they went after Spanky Taylor [John Travolta’s former personal assistant and church liaison] and said, “After she left the church she got involved in a horrible organization that was predatory and was so bad that it was sued out of existence.” They don’t say that the Church of Scientology sued it out of existence. It was called the Cult Awareness Network and it was designed to help people. Then it went bankrupt and Scientology bought its name. So if you wanted to go get help from the Cult Awareness Network, you were actually walking right into the Church of Scientology. Amazing.

    Now people like Bodhi Elfman and Danny Masterson [both current Scientologists] are coming out and making these comparisons: “How would it be if there was a documentary done on Jews in which you only interviewed Nazis?” So that gives you some sense of a skewed perspective. But to give the devil his due, they used to post these anonymous sites and smear people. Now they’re coming right out front: These are official Church of Scientology sites, putting bull’s-eyes on people’s faces.

    On yours?

    No, but this woman Sara Goldberg has a bull’s-eye on her face. They’ve done a video on me — they went after my dad, who’s dead. They’re saying he had some involvement with the CIA back in the day, which is probably true. But so what?

    Here’s what we won’t know for a while: How wounded is the church, both internally and in the world, by this extremely bad moment of publicity? I mean, this has to be the worst moment of publicity that they’ve ever had.

    I think that’s true. There were an incredible number of people who watched the broadcast on Sunday night, and we’ll have to see what comes of that. Now people are circulating petitions asking for the church’s IRS exemption to be withdrawn.

    Hasn’t Sen. Ron Wyden has been looking into that?

    Theoretically. He sent a query over to the IRS, which could either mean he’s serious about it or it could mean that he wanted to get some constituent off his back. But he is one of the people on the Senate subcommittee that would be in charge. There’s plenty of precedent for denying that, even for big organizations. The Supreme Court took a case involving Bob Jones University, about 10 years before Scientology got its exemption.

    If you think about it as a church that practices disconnection, a really vicious form of cruelty toward families, a church that hires tons of private investigators to harass people. Because their M.O. is not beating people up, they don’t do that. They try to torment you psychologically, which is perfect for this organization that despises psychology but is all about mental mind games. Some of our people [i.e., who spoke out in “Going Clear”] have been threatened physically. Some of them have been threatened with having their homes taken away. Then there’s all this physical abuse that’s gone on. It’s hard to understand why that is a tax-deductible activity, why that should be supported.

    They’ve been effective for a long time at getting people to back off, because they’re so dogged and so litigious and so tough. Like I said, we went to networks to get footage and couldn’t license it. We “Fair Used” it anyway, but it wasn’t worth their trouble, I’m assuming. They wouldn’t tell me.
    • Like Like x 7
  39. The Wrong Guy Member

    • Like Like x 5

Share This Page

Customize Theme Colors


Choose a color via Color picker or click the predefined style names!

Primary Color :

Secondary Color :
Predefined Skins