Tom Cruise Received Free Labor from Church of Scientology--Human Trafficking Probe Continues

#TomCruise

#ChurchofScientology

#HumanTrafficking

Sounds like the Ricky Gervais Golden Globes comment isn't the worst thing he's faced this year.

Still pretty cute, who wouldn't work for Tommy, even gratis?

What kind of labor? Trafficking, mmm!

The New Yorker turned tabloid now, actually worse. They started spreading outright lies, something that can be often noted when observing anti-scientology rants. One example: The New Yorker press release and Lawrence Wright’s profile on Paul Haggis, “Paul Haggis vs. the Church of Scientology,” released Monday, reported on an alleged federal investigation. The New Yorker was well aware the Church knew nothing of the investigation but had refuted the same claims based on a case already thrown out by a Federal Court Judge. Nonetheless, The New Yorker irresponsibly used the same sources who were discredited in the dismissed case to claim an “investigation” so as to garner headlines for an otherwise stale article containing nothing but rehashed unfounded allegations.

Allan Lengel, a former Washington Post reporter who writes for AOL News on federal law enforcement matters, filed this late today in a breaking story on Wright’s allegations: “The author cites two sources in the FBI who ‘assured me that the case remains open.’ However, a federal law enforcement source told AOL News the investigation has fallen short and no criminal charges are expected to be filed.” Click here for the article: http://www.aolnews.com/2011/02/07/church-of-scientology-faces-controversy-over-latest-abuse-allega/.

Obviously, this contradicts what Wright wrote in The New Yorker. If you published Wright’s account, this contradiction should be made known to your viewers and/or readers.

The New Yorker article is just another thinly veiled tabloid piece repeating old and new rumors from people with an axe to grind with the Church of Scientology. The New Yorker author Lawrence Wright could not come up with a single line that has not been discarded as the work of fanatic anti-religionists a long time ago. This piece actually sheds a new light on him as a researcher and writer. How much does his obvious hate against religion taint his judgment? This piece has been written by someone with a deep-set hatred against religion and spirituality. Just like the Hollywood dude Haggis, who openly confesses that he makes a living putting his personal life traumata in movie scripts, Lawrence Wright lives his anti-religious hatred in writing one-track minded articles and books. The New Yorker, putting on tabloid colors for a moment, has allowed him to air his therapy sessions and that is their choice but one really has to ask: I don't really want to waste my time reading something like this.

To be fair, it said members worked for Tom. So is this an organization just helping each other out? Were these people not members, they're charging that they were kidnapped or illegals or what? Needless to say, Tom Cruise can afford people to perform those functions for him, but if I help someone out for free, what's illegal? They're saying they were slaves? I'm just needing clarification.

Katie needs to wake up to who this guy Cruise really is. Cheap. As far as trafficking, wouldn't a church have protections as long as nothing underage or explicity illegal was going on? Churches offer services such as home repair and home building in the name of good works, but if this is outside of the Church of Scientology, hard for me to call that outfit a church, but if it is outside the purview, then usual laws would apply.