Going Clear, Part 12 – IRS, Wright fact inventions and joining sides

Going Clear, Part 12 – IRS, Wright fact inventions and joining sides

Larry Wright says, “in truth, the IRS was ill-equipped to make a case in court that Scientology or any other creed, was not a religion”. They weren’t and they weren’t with Scientology at that time.

As I stated, the question of Scientology religiosity had been resolved 20 years earlier. Had been repeatedly resolved cumulatively by a number of courts. There was dozens of opinions that made that contest. There was no case or controversy on whether Scientology is or isn’t a religion. In my involvement with Scientology since 1977. Already adjudicated. But he’s creating this whole scenario. You know.

Goes for 228 pages trying to convince everybody Scientology is not a religion, or shouldn’t be considered as such, and then says, because this is part of the whole propaganda campaign, they’re trying to get the IRS to reconsider their exemption ruling on Scientology. And I explained this to him. They have no, the IRS has no say in the matter. It’s out of their hands. They fought it in the 50s and 60s and lost. OK? And so the precedent that Scientology is a religion and entitled to, under law, and entitled to the protections of religion has been in place since 67, and the body of precedent has been growing unabated ever since. It’s so, the toothpaste is so out of the tube, that it’s never going back. And yet he states as fact that the IRS was sitting there getting ready to adjudicate something that they had no business, no expertise to adjudicate.

So, he states, we’re going to open up negotiations with the IRS in 1991. “The level of distrust between the negotiating parties was extreme. Made even greater for the IRS representatives who knew that Scientologists had stolen documents and wiretapped meetings at that very building”. Right? So, I mean, it’s just this constant choosing sides. He can’t just, he can’t just not choose sides. He can’t report anything objectively. He’s got to, he’s got to, he’s setting up a confrontation, he’s setting up a controversy, right, and he’s got to take sides. He’s got to in advance explain away any of their overreaching or prejudice. Justify it. OK? It’s a minor thing but it’s just strewn throughout here.