the reason the FBI won't do anything.

[Mimsey Borogrove]

Reading the book The Looming Tower says it all - the FBI, the CIA and the NSA are bureaucracies and the agents, the staff etc. are buried in the mentality that that breeds. After reading page after page of how the 3 agencies wouldn't share data amongst each other, how the ambassador to Yemen has her own addenda, and blocks investigation into the destruction of the Cole, it maddeningly is brought home how totally preventable 9-11 was. I was listening to the book on tape while stuck in traffic and boy, I was so furious. But I have no question in my mind any longer why the FBI investigation of Scientology has bogged down, and likely will never occur unless some nasty hideous totally preventable incident happens and they step in to sweep up the fallen bodies.

They shame our country.

Mimsey

 

[Idle Morgue]

The reason the FBI won't do anything? I think El Con stated the reason in his Es Pee TECH:

Criminal minds think alike?

They both operate off the same TECH! Mind control techniques...

 

[Red Valiant]

Reading the book The Looming Tower says it all - the FBI, the CIA and the NSA are bureaucracies and the agents, the staff etc. are buried in the mentality that that breeds. After reading page after page of how the 3 agencies wouldn't share data amongst each other, how the ambassador to Yemen has her own addenda, and blocks investigation into the destruction of the Cole, it maddeningly is brought home how totally preventable 9-11 was. I was listening to the book on tape while stuck in traffic and boy, I was so furious. But I have no question in my mind any longer why the FBI investigation of Scientology has bogged down, and likely will never occur unless some nasty hideous totally preventable incident happens and they step in to sweep up the fallen bodies.

They shame our country.

Mimsey

Sadly this a great topic. In and around July and August 2001, I was having a very good discussion with an FBI agent in the Boston area re: the problems I was experiencing the $cn cult. They were intensely interested, or it would seem. But then 9/11 happened. I got a quick message that they were in an overload mode and would get back to me. I had no options to press them at this point. They were responding to a greater terrorism threat.

 

[Lermanet_com]

In 1997 I had a closed door meeting with some State Department officials at their HQ in DC.
They explained that $cientology's lobbying efforts - specifically their ability to get pressure placed onto Congressmen and US senators who THEN make referrals on behalf of thier constituents to the State Department - In this case it was to condemn Germany for supposed human rights abuses.

I produced a binder of information, indexed, cover letter, tabbed, 4" thick, they said that congressmen and senators were being sent piles color glossy literature... and that this binder was the first hard data THEY had seen, however, they advised me that what we had to do was the same thing and better, to our congressmen, to get THEM off their back...

(The above are not the words of that meeting but the gist of the meeting I walked away with after that 2 hour meeting)

It was shortly thereafter that I was actually asked to leave a Congressional hearing for wearing a SCIENTOLOGY KILLS T shirt..but after being ejected from that meeting staffers from two different congressmen buttonholed me and asked for more data, - I gave them the same 4" thick briefing pack., after making, at my expense about 60 of them... I still have my master copy of that, if someone whom I feel I trust completely to actually use it, can convince me they will..but back then there were few of us.. I bet you could put together your own with 20 years additional $cientology atrocities and evidence.

A summary written at the time titled "Two Bad Days at Black Rock" (A play on the classic Spencer Tracy Movie title "Bad day at black rock") is HERE

A day or two ago I posted an additional (bigger picture overview) answer to the question here LINK in another thread.

 

[Smurf]

But I have no question in my mind any longer why the FBI investigation of Scientology has bogged down, and likely will never occur unless some nasty hideous totally preventable incident happens and they step in to sweep up the fallen bodies. They shame our country

The FBI exists on a budget established by Congress. Sadly, they have to focus on investigations that are cost-efficient. I was interviewed several times by the FBI who said they could investigate Scientology & establish a finding of facts that could lead to criminal indictments, but the FBI doesn't issue the indictments; the courts do.

The problems do not lie with the FBI; it lies with the courts, which Scientology has influenced over the years. If the courts refuse to issue indictments, the FBI's hands are tied, despite spending thousands of dollars & time investigating the cult. The FBI is aware of this, and before the spend alot of time & resources on an investigation, they weigh the probability of the courts whether they will take action or not.

 

[Mark A. Baker]

... The problems do not lie with the FBI; it lies with the courts, which Scientology has influenced over the years. If the courts refuse to issue indictments, the FBI's hands are tied, despite spending thousands of dollars & time investigating the cult. The FBI is aware of this, and before the spend alot of time & resources on an investigation, they weigh the probability of the courts whether they will take action or not.

Not exactly. The courts do not have principle responsibility for determining an indictment for prosecution. The courts are there principally to see that the law is followed. Prosecutions are not typically originated by the courts.

The power of indictments rest with prosecutors, either state or federal depending upon legal jurisdiction. In many cases this power is also contingent upon the findings of review by a grand jury as called by the prosecutor. Prosecutors, for reason of cost & politics, are reticent to indict without a strong sense of likelihood of a successful prosecution. If they don't think it likely they will win[/B a case] they are unlikely to prosecute it.


... In many, but not all, United States jurisdictions that use grand juries, prosecutors often have a choice between seeking an indictment from a grand jury and filing a charging document directly with the court. Such a document is usually called an information, accusation, or complaint, to distinguish it from a grand-jury indictment. To protect the suspect's due-process rights in felony cases (where the suspect's interest in liberty is at stake), there is usually a preliminary hearing, at which a judge determines whether there was probable cause to arrest the suspect who is in custody. If the judge finds such probable cause, he or she binds, or holds over, the suspect for trial. ---http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indictment


The fact remains that the legal system is complex one representing divergent principles. That is constitutionally mandated as well as being a result of common law. That is what provides a measure of protection from gross abuse of the legal system. That is what leads to attempts by partisans to game the system. As such it is a necessary evil. It would be a far worse situation for universal civil rights if obtaining indictments and successful prosecution was made easier.


Mark A. Baker

 

[Enthetan]

Not exactly. The courts do not have principle responsibility for determining an indictment for prosecution. The courts are there principally to see that the law is followed. Prosecutions are not typically originated by the courts.

The power of indictments rest with prosecutors, either state or federal depending upon legal jurisdiction. In many cases this power is also contingent upon the findings of review by a grand jury as called by the prosecutor. Prosecutors, for reason of cost & politics, are reticent to indict without a strong sense of likelihood of a successful prosecution. If they don't think it likely they will win[/B a case] they are unlikely to prosecute it.


... In many, but not all, United States jurisdictions that use grand juries, prosecutors often have a choice between seeking an indictment from a grand jury and filing a charging document directly with the court. Such a document is usually called an information, accusation, or complaint, to distinguish it from a grand-jury indictment. To protect the suspect's due-process rights in felony cases (where the suspect's interest in liberty is at stake), there is usually a preliminary hearing, at which a judge determines whether there was probable cause to arrest the suspect who is in custody. If the judge finds such probable cause, he or she binds, or holds over, the suspect for trial. ---http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indictment


The fact remains that the legal system is complex one representing divergent principles. That is constitutionally mandated as well as being a result of common law. That is what provides a measure of protection from gross abuse of the legal system. That is what leads to attempts by partisans to game the system. As such it is a necessary evil. It would be a far worse situation for universal civil rights if obtaining indictments and successful prosecution was made easier.


Mark A. Baker

There's also the issue that federal prosecutors are humans. They have their own issues (girlfriends the wife doesn't know about, homosexual dalliances, insider trading, etc), and they know that upon indictment there will be teams of Scn PI's looking into every aspect of their lives, and their bosses lives. They are probably more afraid of DM than they would be of the drug cartels.

 

[elwood]

There's also the issue that federal prosecutors are humans. They have their own issues (girlfriends the wife doesn't know about, homosexual dalliances, insider trading, etc), and they know that upon indictment there will be teams of Scn PI's looking into every aspect of their lives, and their bosses lives. They are probably more afraid of DM than they would be of the drug cartels.

It has nothing to do with being afraid of the CoS. All Government agencies run on budgets and they have to allocate their resources accordingly. They tend to go for the highest profile/least risk cases. I doubt that Scn is seen as much of a threat.