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.
-
40:33
Alexis Wilkins
1 day agoBetween the Headlines with Alexis Wilkins: Eric Adams, Tariffs, Nathan Wade MISSING & more
56.8K11 -
1:16:08
Steve-O's Wild Ride! Podcast
2 days ago $2.11 earnedBrandon Novak and Steve-O Avoid Discussion Of Sobriety - Wildride #234
60.8K18 -
4:15:30
GamerGril
16 hours agoWHORDE MASTER RETURNS | DAYS GONE
51.8K11 -
LIVE
Right Side Broadcasting Network
3 days agoLIVE REPLAY: President Trump Delivers Remarks in Prairie du Chien, WI - 9/28/24
4,363 watching -
2:59:48
Jewels Jones Live ®
1 day ago“TARGETING TRUMP’S LIFE” | A Political Rendezvous - Ep. 93
120K53 -
21:20
MYLUNCHBREAK CHANNEL PAGE
19 hours agoThe Palace in Dallas?
108K60 -
59:56
Trumpet Daily
1 day ago $13.48 earnedSwooning for Kamala Didn’t Work - Trumpet Daily | Sept. 27, 2024
90.7K47 -
1:05:58
Tate Speech by Andrew Tate
19 hours agoPETER PAN PEANUT BUTTER ALERT | EPISODE 11
205K129 -
26:51
Michael Franzese
1 day agoThe Moment That Changed My Life Forever...
113K33 -
3:48:28
The Big Mig™
1 day agoRage Against The War Machine Live in Washington DC
91.1K20