Scientologists Not Pleased with Paul Haggis, New Yorker

Hard to imagine anyone is surprised to find out that the Church of Scientology took some umbrage with the Lawrence Wright-penned New Yorker piece about Paul Haggis and the church's more untoward practices. (Like disappearing meddling wives, that sort of thing.) Still! Affect your best look of feigned surprise and check out what church spokesman Tommy Davis (Anne Archer's son to you, buddy) had to say about the 25,000 takedown.

Here's the Church of Scientology's official statement on the Haggis piece:

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.

Tommy Davis

Church of Scientology International

As Davis quotes, Lengel's article does mention an FBI source who claims the investigation against the church for human trafficking has "fallen short." Unfortunately that doesn't necessarily contradict what Wright wrote, which is that the case only remains open -- whether or not anything comes from it in the future doesn't necessarily change its open-ness. There's also the fact that Davis has shown himself to be an incredible truth massager. So, there. Meanwhile, expect Paul Haggis' self-predicted comeuppance to happen sooner rather than later.

· Church of Scientology fires a second salvo against the New Yorker [Independent UK]