Confirmation the FBI did investigate scientology in 2009

Free to shine

Shiny & Free
From Tony Ortega.

I really hope the reason the investigation was dropped is brought to light. This is big!

Confirmation of the 2009 FBI trafficking probe of Scientology that the church denied

Melissa Cronin over at RadarOnline dropped a bomb this morning that she let us in on recently: The FBI had complied with her request for documents related to its 2009/2010 human trafficking investigation of the Church of Scientology.

She tells us that she received a 300-page file pursuant to her request, and she posted a few of them this morning just to show finally that yes, this investigation did occur, even though the church lied repeatedly, saying that it did not.

“The church has no knowledge that this ‘examining’ ever occurred,” Scientology spokeswoman Karin Pouw said in 2013.

http://tonyortega.org/2017/05/03/co...-probe-of-scientology-that-the-church-denied/
 

dchoiceisalwaysrs

Gold Meritorious Patron
0tessa • an hour ago
Big question: why did the FBI didn't take the investigation further? What happened?

Tony Ortega Mod 0tessa • an hour ago
It's complicated.

http://tonyortega.org/2013/.

ETA:

"Tony Ortega Mod Science Doc • an hour ago
Our document hound, R.M. Seibert, also made this same request a couple of years ago. Melissa, however, apparently asked before we did, and she was simply first in line.

We're just thrilled that she's working with us to produce and write about these documents as a joint effort.

Much, much more to come..."
 
Last edited:

Type4_PTS

Diamond Invictus SP
It would be nice for the NY Times and other mainstream channels to cover this story in depth and do their own investigative reporting.

Once the masses see the CoS AS-IS I've been told by a source it will suddenly vanish.:coolwink:
 

HelluvaHoax!

Platinum Meritorious Sponsor with bells on
.
“The church has no knowledge that this ‘examining’ ever occurred,” Scientology spokeswoman Karin Pouw said in 2013.


JOURNALIST
Your church says you have "no knowledge"? Really?!

COS SPOKESPERSON
That is correct.

JOURNALIST
How is that even possible?

COS SPOKESPERSON
We, um, just didn't know.

JOURNALIST
I thought Scientology gave you
the power of "knowing how to know".

COS SPOKESPERSON
That's true. But Scientology also gave us
Total Freedom. Thus we are totally free
to know or not know about the really
criminal and evil things we do.
 

Type4_PTS

Diamond Invictus SP
.



JOURNALIST
Your church says you have "no knowledge"? Really?!

COS SPOKESPERSON
That is correct.

JOURNALIST
How is that even possible?

COS SPOKESPERSON
We, um, just didn't know.

JOURNALIST
I thought Scientology gave you
the power of "knowing how to know".


COS SPOKESPERSON
That's true. But Scientology also gave us
Total Freedom. Thus we are totally free
to know or not know about the really
criminal and evil things we do.


While Hubbard claimed that one of the definitions of Scientology is "knowing how to know" he instead implants his followers with a certainty that their beliefs are equivalent to knowledge, or in other words, believing = knowing.

And one"s certainty in those beliefs is a positive thing, according to Hubbard.

In reality, the most basic skill of an EX-Scientologist is infinitely more valuable.

Knowing how to [STRIKE]know[/STRIKE] blow.

THAT is the skill that will put a Scientologist firmly on the road to total freedom.
 

Free to shine

Shiny & Free
The Tampa Bay Times has a really good article on this. I can only quote a bit, it's worth reading.

Documents detail FBI investigation of Scientology that never resulted in charges

In May 2010, according to Cronin's story, an assistant U.S. Attorney filed a report titled "Grand Jury Investigation of Operations Overboard," a reference to the code name for the inquiry. After that, she said, the trail goes cold. No more documents.

What happened to the investigation? And why didn't it result in charges?

For its 2013 report, the Times interviewed experts who said the likely reason was a ruling in August 2010 by a federal judge in a civil case brought by two former Sea Org members, Marc and Claire Headley. The couple had sued the church, saying its harsh punishments and controlling tactics kept them from leaving for years.

The judge ruled in part that the First Amendment's guarantee of the free exercise of religion prevented the court from delving into whether the church's discipline methods were reasonable. To do so, the judge said, would "entangle the court in the religious doctrine of Scientology and the doctrinally motivated practices of the Sea Org."

In any criminal case brought against the church on the same issues, the experts said, the burden of proof would have been even higher and not easily met.
http://www.tampabay.com/news/scient...of-scientology-that-never-resulted-in/2322624
 

dchoiceisalwaysrs

Gold Meritorious Patron
I am not ready to review that statement by the judge as it is recorded in the case docs.

However, I will say there is something the judge missed

"the judge said, would "entangle the court in the religious doctrine of Scientology and the doctrinally motivated practices of the Sea Org."

I would say that and IANAL, that the concept should be full and state UNNECESSARILY entangle....

and from that I would have argued that it is necessary to entangle in order to not enable the 1st Ammendment to be used without regard to the rest of the Constitution.

I will leave it at that...time to make a meal.
 
Top