I'm sooooooo pissed
RedfaZey
It seems that Mr. Minton has yet to pay me for being a critic and posting on
here, heh. The bastard. Do the clams really believe we are paid by the LMT? You
know, funny thing is, being that the clams have a tendency to accuse others of
crimes they are committing, I'm wondering who is paying them to post pro-clam
things here? Of course, it wouldn't be money they'd receive, it would be rice
and beans I suspect.
Love, faZe
Norm Grange
> It seems that Mr. Minton has yet to pay me for being a critic
> and posting on here, heh. The bastard. Do the clams really
> believe we are paid by the LMT?
No, they do not. They wish others to believe that they believe
it. No one actually believes that the crime syndicate's goons
believe crtics are being paid to protest and object to
Scientology Inc.'s abuses.
> You
> know, funny thing is, being that the clams have a tendency to accuse others of
> crimes they are committing, I'm wondering who is paying them to post pro-clam
> things here? Of course, it wouldn't be money they'd receive, it would be rice
> and beans I suspect.
It's more sinister than that: they are not being paid to slander
and libel people here--- they are being threatened with ruin if
they fail to do so.
> Love, faZe
Fluffygirl
"RedfaZey" <redf...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20010418193400...@ng-cd1.aol.com...
>
> It seems that Mr. Minton has yet to pay me for being a critic and posting
on
> here, heh. The bastard. Do the clams really believe we are paid by the
LMT?
No, but then again I'm not a clam.
> You
> know, funny thing is, being that the clams have a tendency to accuse
others of
> crimes they are committing, I'm wondering who is paying them to post
pro-clam
> things here? Of course, it wouldn't be money they'd receive, it would be
rice
> and beans I suspect.
That's a spurious generalization and not true.
C
Android Cat
The OSA/handlers of the Toronto org have accepted more Minton Money than I
have. He bought me a Guinness, but he bought their lunches (except for a
couple whom the waitress didn't realize were part of the Co$ contingent.)
The usual Co$ dumb-ass manoeuvre: try to take up as many tables as possible
at the restaurant we normally break at. Gregg applied SP tech, and booked a
block of tables. The Co$ members were moved.
Ron of that ilk.
Android Cat
news:3ade4...@news2.lightlink.com...
>
> "RedfaZey" <redf...@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:20010418193400...@ng-cd1.aol.com...
> >
> > It seems that Mr. Minton has yet to pay me for being a critic and
posting
> on
> > here, heh. The bastard. Do the clams really believe we are paid by the
> LMT?
>
> No, but then again I'm not a clam.
No, I don't think you are. However, Peter Ramsay is. Anyone who carries
out the "program" without regard to wog law, I'll call a clam or
$cientologist. People who communicate, I'll respect and call
Scientologists.
Ron of that ilky.
ladayla
RedfaZey
>> LMT?
>>
>> No, but then again I'm not a clam.
No, you are not a clam exactly. I consider a clam to be someone willingly
doing illegal or unethical things for the cult. Now, I don't agree with you on
a lot and so be it. I have a problem with some of your views (as obvious), but
I respect you for the simple reason you will communicate with others and you do
not SEEM to be using any tech against other people, unlike clams such as
Demoss, Ramesy, etc., all.
Love, faZe
Fluffygirl
"ladayla" <ladayla...@newsguy.com> wrote in message
news:9bn8s...@drn.newsguy.com...
Like many Scientologists, I have known (and still know) a number of Sea Org
staff and former Sea Org staff. I once knew, for instance, a Sea Org chef
one time who was very proud of the meals he prepared and the nutritional
balance thereof.
I'm not saying nobody gets beans and rice; since I've read about the RPF and
the RPF's RPF I therefore have read accounts of people having that, and only
that, to eat. I'm not impugning, in any way, their testimonies.
But it's not everyone in SO, it's not all the time, and it's not even most
of the time.
Not only that, but the above quoted post does not even *say* it's SO staff.
The implication here (although when I look at the wording, I suspect
RedfaZey is being playful) is that all "clams" who post here may very well
live on beans and rice. Now that's obviously not true.
This is not the first post I've seen where this was implied- that it's
common for many Scn'ists - whether in SO or not- to live on beans and rice.
When Tory left CofS someone commented something to the effect that she
wouldn't have to live on beans and rice anymore. Well, that was pretty
interesting in view of the fact that she was a public.
I even had someone suggest to me on the ng that I leave CofS and one of the
ever-so-tempting enticements was that *I* wouldn't have to live on beans and
rice anymore. In view of all the lunches out with the girls I have and the
various pots of homemade this'n'that I make at my house, I found that most
amusing.
It's a stereotype and whenever I see it I'm going to rebut it.
C
Fluffygirl
Well, thank you. I appreciate that.
C
RedfaZey
>RedfaZey is being playful) is that all "clams" who post here may very well
>live on beans and rice.
Yes Indeedy. I was, in fact, being playful and did not mean to imply all scinos
were eating beans and rice, just those who post on here trying to disrupte and
just making a fool of themselves and their "church". I'm sure, sooner or later,
they will be sent to the RPF and will be eating beans and rice.
Love, faZe
ladayla
says...
of course. It is OBVIOUS that you were being playful.
I, otoh, was quite serious when I asked how Claire would know what the churchies
who post here are being paid. If a person is "off-lines" ( inactive, I believe
is her term), that person would have no way of knowing what exchange is being
promised by OSA. So, how do you know what the posters from OSA are being paid,
Claire?
la
Fluffygirl
I understand what you are implying.
So...
I didn't say or indicate, in any way, shape or form that I knew what they
were being paid.
I just said that I know that the beans and rice thing is a stereotype and
when you asked me about that I stated my reasons for that. At great length
(as usual). I have a pet peeve about the beans and rice thing as well as
people on the ng telling non-SO Scn'ists that they would be RPF'd. Those
statements are quite inaccurate as most stereotypes tend to be.
Although, I have to tell you, someone does not need to have had affiliations
with something to know things about them/it.
A good example of that would be the many individuals who post here who are
*not* ex-Scn'ists but yet have a pretty impressive grasp, in some respects,
of some or even many of the tenets of Scn as well as the practices and
assorted deeds of CofS and Hubbard.
I jumped in on this thread for the reasons previously stated.
C
Tommy
A legitimate question.
Well, Claire - or was that just conjecture on your part?
Tommy
--
Thank you for your very detailed letter regarding
Scientology. We haven't yet found a way to attack
these jackals who feed on children and young adults
who are too emotionally weak to stand by themselves
when they reach the age of consent.
Congressman Leo J. Ryan, shortly before being gunned down
by another cult in Jonestown
demy...@freedom.net
wrote:
It's not a stereotype, it's a *policy*. Certainly, it's joked about
here, and some of the "beans and rice" comments are obviously not
intended to be "factual accounts", just comments on people who are
pushing the envelope towards where that *policy* will be enacted.
Of course, when the comments are made about public members, CoS has
no way of actually enforcing that *policy*, so we are aware (critics
and all) that you won't actually be eating rice and beans, but if you
had been subject to that *policy* (and if they could enforce it) you
would have been.
There is a big difference between "stereotyping" and commenting on the
rather abusive *policies* of an organization.
>Although, I have to tell you, someone does not need to have had affiliations
>with something to know things about them/it.
>
>A good example of that would be the many individuals who post here who are
>*not* ex-Scn'ists but yet have a pretty impressive grasp, in some respects,
>of some or even many of the tenets of Scn as well as the practices and
>assorted deeds of CofS and Hubbard.
>
>I jumped in on this thread for the reasons previously stated.
>
>C
>
________________________________________________________________________
Protect your privacy! - Get Freedom 2.0 at http://www.freedom.net
Fluffygirl
<demy...@freedom.net> wrote in message
news:te283fk...@corp.supernews.com...
It is not a policy.
There are accounts (and I imagine that they are true) of people on the RPF
given that to eat.
But there is no policy that other Sea Orgers should always have beans and
rice (as I said, I actually once knew an SO cook and I've known others in
Sea Org, too, so I know what I'm talking about). There's no policy that
Class V org and mission staff should have beans and rice and there's no
policy that public people should have beans and rice.
Lower Org and Mission staff and public people have their own homes and cook
what they wish to.
And most Sea Orgers do not live on rice and beans.
>
> There is a big difference between "stereotyping" and commenting on the
> rather abusive *policies* of an organization.
Explained above.
C
Fluffygirl
"Tommy" <"tommy a "@ hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:nt8E6.290$MV6.1...@nnrp3.sbc.net...
It would be if it weren't wholly irrelevant to everything I was saying.
> Well, Claire - or was that just conjecture on your part?
Huh?
I conjectured nothing about OSA posters.
Try reading the posts again including the one where I answered this already.
C
Tommy
I believe demistify (and othere here) are conmmenting on the policy that
SO staff be served only rice and beans when they fail to increase stats
and move the entire org into a lower condition, not "all the time".
Of course, since the absurd policy of continually increasing statistics
cannot be met, it's a fairly good extrapolation that rice and beans are
on the menu from time to time.
Tommy
--
"... it brings into focus more than anything else the refusal by the
defendants to live by the law -- their apparently intractable conviction
that they are somehow above the law. This is illustrated by Mrs.
Hubbard's statement on the witness stand that she and her codefendants,
including these two defendants, felt they could do to others whatever
they perceived, however erroneously, others were doing to them."
-- Sentencing Memorandum in US v. Kember and Budlong;
Criminal No. 78-401(2)&(3)
Fluffygirl
I was hoping so, too, but turns out demystify thinks it's not only common in
the SO but he apparently ALSO thinks it's common all over Scn. I have
already answered him but here is what he said:
"It's not a stereotype, it's a *policy*. Certainly, it's joked about
here, and some of the "beans and rice" comments are obviously not
intended to be "factual accounts", just comments on people who are
pushing the envelope towards where that *policy* will be enacted.
Of course, when the comments are made about public members, CoS has
no way of actually enforcing that *policy*, so we are aware (critics
and all) that you won't actually be eating rice and beans, but if you
had been subject to that *policy* (and if they could enforce it) you
would have been."
I didn't actually need to paste it in since it already appears here but I
want you to take another look at what he said.
> Of course, since the absurd policy of continually increasing statistics
> cannot be met, it's a fairly good extrapolation that rice and beans are
> on the menu from time to time.
For RPF, or maybe it's RPF's RPF. But I maintain that there has been a
stereotype that all Scn'ists would get rice and beans and as I said earlier
someone even expressed happiness at Tory's being out since *SHE* wouldn't
have to eat rice and beans anymore.
And if you actually look at demystify's quoted text here where he says it's
a policy and he uses the pronoun "you" - and he says "public members"
presumably meaning *me*, you can see that he believes it to be far more
widespread than it is. He apparently thinks there's an HCOPL or something
like that about it.
So I found it necessary to elucidate and I'm going to do it again here.
There is no HCOPL saying that all Scientologists should get beans and rice
when they're naughty. Most of us have our own residences and cook what we
please. Those of us who are in residence at the church (SO staff) often get
plenty of other things to eat. I've known an SO cook and I've known plenty
of SO staff.
What demystify says is a FAR cry from rice and beans being on the menu "from
time to time". He even extends it to public members. He has subscribed to a
stereotype.
C
C
ptsc
>> I believe demistify (and othere here) are conmmenting on the policy that
>> SO staff be served only rice and beans when they fail to increase stats
>> and move the entire org into a lower condition, not "all the time".
>I was hoping so, too, but turns out demystify thinks it's not only common in
>the SO but he apparently ALSO thinks it's common all over Scn. I have
>already answered him but here is what he said:
>"It's not a stereotype, it's a *policy*. Certainly, it's joked about
>here, and some of the "beans and rice" comments are obviously not
>intended to be "factual accounts", just comments on people who are
>pushing the envelope towards where that *policy* will be enacted.
>Of course, when the comments are made about public members, CoS has
>no way of actually enforcing that *policy*, so we are aware (critics
>and all) that you won't actually be eating rice and beans, but if you
>had been subject to that *policy* (and if they could enforce it) you
>would have been."
The policy cited by Jon Atack is that staff members who repeatedly fail in
their tasks are assigned to "pig's berthing" and fed only beans and rice.
(Beans and rice aren't even mentioned in this "General report on Scientology"
but the only other mention of "pig's berthing" from Atack is a mention that it
was combined with beans and rice. Interestingly I don't have any of the issues
in question.)
Here's the paragraph:
45. The RPF is virtually a labour and thought reform camp. Members are
forbidden communication with any but their "bosun" (the head of the RPF); they
have to comply immediately with any order; they sleep even shorter hours than
other staff; they eat even poorer food than other staff (often rice, beans and
porridge for weeks. For some time in Florida, "RPFers" were fed left-over food)
(JCA-98); they sleep in "pig's berthing", i.e. without beds (JCA-99, JCA-100);
they do hard labour and menial tasks, including toilet and sewer cleaning; they
are rarely permitted time off; they receive one quarter of the already derisory
pay of other staff (JCA-101); and they have to write down detailed
"confessions", which may be published by the organization (JCA-102, JCA-103).
Finally, an RPF sentence is open-ended and may last for as much as four years.
Failure to comply leads to posting to the "RPFers RPF", which according to
witnesses has consisted of false imprisonment. False imprisonment or
"isolation" is a part of the "technology" of Scientology (JCA-104, JCA-105).
There are hundreds of former members who suffered the RPF.
JCA-98. City of Clearwater Commission Hearings, Re: Church of Scientology, 7
May 1982, testimony of David Ray, vol.3, pp.165-170.
[I'll note that something like this reference appears to be happening
currently. See the injunction trial COS FSO v. LMT, testimony of Barbro
Wennberg. She originally testified that pickets had disrupted her while taking
meals to children. Eventually under sharp cross-examination by John Merrett,
she admitted she was taking food to RPF'ers.]
JCA-99. Team Share System, Sea Org Executive Directive 3490 Int, 24 July 1986.
[This is the only referene to this issue that I have ever seen.]
JCA-100. Clearwater Hearings, 7 May 1982, testimony of Casey Kelly, vol.3,
pp.51-53.
JCA-101. RPF Policy Checksheet, Flag Order 3434R-25RA, 25 July 1974.
[This is another that would be nice to have.]
JCA-102. RPF Graduation Requirements Checklist, Flag Order 3434RC-56, 17 March
1980.
JCA-103. Confessional Procedure, HCOB 30 November 1978, Technical Bulletins of
Dianetics and Scientology, vol XII, Church of Scientology of California, Los
Angeles, 1980 edition.
JCA-104. HCOB Introspection Rundown - additional actions, 20 February 1974,
Technical Bulletins of Dianetics and Scientology, vol. VIII, pp.260-261, Church
of Scientology of California, Los Angeles, 1976.
JCA-105. Sea Org HCO Ethics Order, AOSHUK 2543, Confidential Board of
Investigation - Findings and Recommendations - Isolation Watch Heidi Degro,
September 1993.
[This is another one that would be nice to have.]
>I didn't actually need to paste it in since it already appears here but I
>want you to take another look at what he said.
I don't think any reputable source has ever said that rice and beans is by
policy something that public members have to live on, or that it is normal for
this to occur. It is, however, policy in the Sea Org and in some cases has
occurred on staff. (I'm only aware of policy to this effect on the Sea Org,
and even so, have never seen the policy in question.)
Rice and beans is not, in and of itself, that bad, except when done as the
entirety of a diet.
Numerous ex-Scientologists report living on rice and beans for extended periods
of time.
Woods was living communally in Los Angeles with other
scientologists and working 70 hours a week for the church when she was
diagnosed with endometriosis. Her condition required major surgery. While
recuperating, Woods reflected on her life and realized her working
environment at the scientology headquarters and the church's strict diet
of rice and beans might have brought on her illness.
"The physical conditions I worked under were less than optimum,"Woods
said.
It was 1982 when Woods decided to call it quits. At that time she
had already met Richard, a native of Sussex, whom she married in 1985.
They moved to Britain, but her scientologist past continued to haunt her
despite her peaceful departure.
"I didn't have any involvement with the church, but I wasn't
opposed to it either," Woods said.
The church, which had excommunicated Woods as a suppressive
person, distributed leaflets in 1993 calling her a "hate campaigner."
Woods sued for libel. The church countersued and then in 1995 and 1996
brought two more libel actions against her. A scientology spokesman
described Woods as "a spreader of disinformation who has caused untold
upset among families," as reported in a 1997 Sunday Times article.
[Bonnie Woods was sued for libel by Scientology for libel and vice versa. She
won a favorable settlement in her suit. They flat-out lost their suit.]
Bid recounts:
The "rehabilitation" consisted of lots of work, mainly cleaning, and started at
8 AM with roll-call. We had to say "Ay Sir" when called upon or spoken to. We
were not permitted to talk to people outside the DPF and later on not to
DPF-members from other countries. In that way be became isolated. The first
night we were only 2 people in a normal 2-beds room. Next night and the
following, we were 18 people in it. We happen to get breakfast sometimes, but
that was not normal. I remember one morning when the 82 of us got 16 slices of
bread to share and one man took 6 of them. It was near a civil war got started.
The meals was eaten in a cellar where we shared the space with lots of
pidgeons. It was very dirty, filled with birdshit. At one occasion I had to
fight with the pidgeons to get my meal. The food was never enough for all of us
and consisted of rice and beans. No plates, no cutleries and no pots. Once we
got soup, and I was lucky to possess a small plastic mug so I could drink it.
We used to feel like " the poor man with no spoon when the sky is raining
semolina".
Martin Ottmann reports in his affidavit:
"Sue Porter ordered that the whole FSO Crew was placed under the Rice and
beans-Flag Order of Hubbard. The staff of the FSO had to eat for a certain
amount of time nothing else than rice and beans. Liberty time on Saturdays got
canceled and the crew didn't receive any pay. Sue Porter gave later the order
to lift it. That happened three times from 1990 until 1992. "
Martin doesn't cite the specific Flag Order, but I believe it to be FO 3434RB.
Many ex-RPFers are reported as complaining of the diet in Stephen Kent's
article on the RPF, Brainwashing in Scientology's Rehabilitation Project Force:
The heavy workload should have warranted a high calorie diet, but several of
the former RPF inmates complained about the quality of the food. Despite what
Tonya Burden identified as an 18 hour workday, she indicated that often she
"received only 'rice and beans' and water" for her meals (Burden, 1980: 10).
Apparently Nefertiti ate what she called "soups or pigswills," only
occasionally flavoured with milk (Nefertiti, 1997: 9). Pat complained that "we
were fed really dreadful food," which she went on to clarify as "very
institutional, very poorly prepared," and which included "scraps and what was
left over" (Kent Interview with Patti, 1997a: 24). Pignotti reported the common
refrain that her RPF cohort ate after the rest of the staff was finished, but
the leftovers that they ate came from the kitchen and not items found on
people's plates (Kent Interview with Pignotti, 1997: 14; see Kent Interview
with Dale, 1997: 6). Poor diet may have been a contributing factor to Larry
Wollersheim loss of fifteen pounds during his six weeks on the RPF aboard a
ship (California Court of Appeal, 1989: 9269).
In conclusion. There's significant evidence to support rice and beans as a
punitive measure for Sea Org or staff, and especially RPF, and almost none, as
you say, to support it for public members, who eat on their own time anyway.
Most references to rice and beans on ars are joking, but then most posters it's
directed at are OSA, and therefore Sea Org, and therefore have likely
themselves indeed faced a spell of rice and beans every now and again. (If
they are treated according to performance, one imagines they spend a great deal
of time on RPF eating rice and beans.)
ptsc
demy...@freedom.net
wrote:
Nice wording there, and "acceptable truth", too. Who ever said
"always". They get punished with a beans and rice diet when they
are "downstat" and not producing enough money for the cult.
If they always got beans and rice, there wouldn't be a carrot
to reward them for the occasional "upstat" times.
>Lower Org and Mission staff and public people have their own homes and cook
>what they wish to.
>
>And most Sea Orgers do not live on rice and beans.
>
>
>>
>> There is a big difference between "stereotyping" and commenting on the
>> rather abusive *policies* of an organization.
>
>Explained above.
>
>
>C
>
Fluffygirl
<demy...@freedom.net> wrote in message
news:te701r5...@corp.supernews.com...
But D, *you* said that it's ~policy~. You implied that CofS would like to do
that to us all.I've demonstrated that this is not the case.
> Who ever said
> "always". They get punished with a beans and rice diet when they
> are "downstat" and not producing enough money for the cult.
If they are in RPF - or it may even be the RPF's RPF. Most SO'ers aren't in
RPF, and no nonSO person ever is.
And no, I'm not excusing the bad food when it occurs or anything else that
happens that's bad.
I'm debunking a stereotype that I felt you were implying. But I recognize
(and I should have said so before) that your point is that it can happen to
people and why should it. This dovetails with our discussion wrt SO on the
other thread and how can those things occur. So I won't rehash that there
since I typed my fingers to little nubbins on the other one.
>
> If they always got beans and rice, there wouldn't be a carrot
> to reward them for the occasional "upstat" times.
They *should* get carrots, too. I agree.
Ok, I'll stop being a wise-ass. It's just that I see the rice and beans
thing said here a lot.I've seen it said about people who've never come close
to being in SO. And that's just plain inaccurate.
C
demy...@freedom.net
wrote:
Certainly it IS policy. That policy dictates beans and rice for
staff of downstat organizations (of course, it's only effective if
the people are dependant on the "church" for food).
Nowhere have I stated or implied that "CofS would like to do that
to you all". In fact, I have stated exactly the opposite, that it
is POLICY to feed only beans and rice to staff and sea org when their
org is downstat, as a punishment. Unless YOU are saying that they
"would like" all the orgs to be downstat all the time, you have
twisted my words into your own "acceptable truth".
>> Who ever said
>> "always". They get punished with a beans and rice diet when they
>> are "downstat" and not producing enough money for the cult.
>
>If they are in RPF - or it may even be the RPF's RPF. Most SO'ers aren't in
>RPF, and no nonSO person ever is.
>
>And no, I'm not excusing the bad food when it occurs or anything else that
>happens that's bad.
>
>I'm debunking a stereotype that I felt you were implying. But I recognize
>(and I should have said so before) that your point is that it can happen to
>people and why should it. This dovetails with our discussion wrt SO on the
>other thread and how can those things occur. So I won't rehash that there
>since I typed my fingers to little nubbins on the other one.
Read my statements and don't exaggerate them into something that they
are not.
>> If they always got beans and rice, there wouldn't be a carrot
>> to reward them for the occasional "upstat" times.
>
>They *should* get carrots, too. I agree.
>
>Ok, I'll stop being a wise-ass. It's just that I see the rice and beans
>thing said here a lot.I've seen it said about people who've never come close
>to being in SO. And that's just plain inaccurate.
You have stated that there is no "rice and beans" policy. THAT'S just
plain inaccurate. Pretending that I said all members are given
nothing but rice and beans is also inaccurate.
Please read what I say before attacking next time.
demy...@freedom.net
wrote:
>
It IS a policy for anyone they can enforce it on. That means Sea Org
and any staff that is stuck depending on them for $30/week income plus
an illegal place to crash at the org (supplemented by whatever funds
they can take from the government for "unemployment" or "disability").
You know that, I know that, and anyone who's looked at the policies
knows that. You can't "not-is" it (or is that "as-is" it that makes
it go away -- my clam dictionary is in the other room).
>"It's not a stereotype, it's a *policy*. Certainly, it's joked about
>here, and some of the "beans and rice" comments are obviously not
>intended to be "factual accounts", just comments on people who are
>pushing the envelope towards where that *policy* will be enacted.
>Of course, when the comments are made about public members, CoS has
>no way of actually enforcing that *policy*, so we are aware (critics
>and all) that you won't actually be eating rice and beans, but if you
>had been subject to that *policy* (and if they could enforce it) you
>would have been."
>
>I didn't actually need to paste it in since it already appears here but I
>want you to take another look at what he said.
>
>
>> Of course, since the absurd policy of continually increasing statistics
>> cannot be met, it's a fairly good extrapolation that rice and beans are
>> on the menu from time to time.
>
>For RPF, or maybe it's RPF's RPF. But I maintain that there has been a
>stereotype that all Scn'ists would get rice and beans and as I said earlier
>someone even expressed happiness at Tory's being out since *SHE* wouldn't
>have to eat rice and beans anymore.
Of course they can't enforce insane policies where they don't have
control. They have control of SO members and some staff. In those
cases, *policy* is if their area is "downstat", they get nothing but
rice and beans as part of the punishment.
>And if you actually look at demystify's quoted text here where he says it's
>a policy and he uses the pronoun "you" - and he says "public members"
>presumably meaning *me*, you can see that he believes it to be far more
>widespread than it is. He apparently thinks there's an HCOPL or something
>like that about it.
And if you actually look at my post, I said explicitly NOT YOU, since
they obviously can't ENFORCE this policy on publics whose income and
menu are outside of their control.
>So I found it necessary to elucidate and I'm going to do it again here.
>There is no HCOPL saying that all Scientologists should get beans and rice
>when they're naughty. Most of us have our own residences and cook what we
>please. Those of us who are in residence at the church (SO staff) often get
>plenty of other things to eat. I've known an SO cook and I've known plenty
>of SO staff.
>
>What demystify says is a FAR cry from rice and beans being on the menu "from
>time to time". He even extends it to public members. He has subscribed to a
>stereotype.
I EXPLICITLY DO NOT extend it to members who have not placed
themselves under the control of their masters to this level.
We both agree, the policy is only ENFORCED in cases where the
"church" has that level of control over the members.
Can we also agree that the policy is abusive?
Fluffygirl
<demy...@freedom.net> wrote in message
news:te7pb7p...@corp.supernews.com...
Then you DO know it has NO application to non-SO members.
There is no written or unspoken policy that even implies such a thing in
CofS.
>
> We both agree, the policy is only ENFORCED in cases where the
> "church" has that level of control over the members.
>
> Can we also agree that the policy is abusive?
Yes, definitely.
C
Fluffygirl
<demy...@freedom.net> wrote in message
news:te7arpo...@corp.supernews.com...
Only SO. And only in the RPF. And there's nothing written.
>
> Nowhere have I stated or implied that "CofS would like to do that
> to you all". In fact, I have stated exactly the opposite, that it
> is POLICY to feed only beans and rice to staff and sea org when their
> org is downstat, as a punishment. Unless YOU are saying that they
> "would like" all the orgs to be downstat all the time, you have
> twisted my words into your own "acceptable truth".
Not my intention. Sorry.
But it does not and will not happen to ClV Orgs.
Well, I *tried*. I think it was the use of the word "policy" that got me
going.
Again, sorry for any screwups.
C
Birgitta
wrote:
-----------------------------
Not true. I was not an SO member. I as well as others came from CLV
Orgs.
Bid
Fluffygirl
"Birgitta" <birg...@boberg.nu> wrote in message
news:ji69etsa0b6gg9hpk...@4ax.com...
They stuck you in with a bunch of Sea Orgers, as I recall.
C
Warrior
>>>
>>> Certainly it IS policy. That policy dictates beans and rice for
>>> staff of downstat organizations (of course, it's only effective if
>>> the people are dependant on the "church" for food).
All Scientology org staff are dependent to some degree. When I was
a staff member at the Austin Org in the early 70s, my first ever pay
for the week was $7.00. That'll get you rice and beans for a week.
Maybe even some oatmeal and a bit of skim milk and toast.
>On Mon, 23 Apr 2001 08:49:27 -0700, "Fluffygirl" <csw...@home.com>
>wrote:
>>
>>Only SO. And only in the RPF. And there's nothing written.
Per LRH (and "church") policy, an org's FP allocation is subject to
cutbacks when the "GI" (gross income) is down. This is especially
true for the payroll sum.
>><demy...@freedom.net> wrote in message
>>news:te7arpo...@corp.supernews.com...
>>>
>>> Nowhere have I stated or implied that "CofS would like to do that
>>> to you all". In fact, I have stated exactly the opposite, that it
>>> is POLICY to feed only beans and rice to staff and sea org when their
>>> org is downstat, as a punishment. Unless YOU are saying that they
>>> "would like" all the orgs to be downstat all the time, you have
>>> twisted my words into your own "acceptable truth".
"The blunt threat of punishment alone and unmistakable can get stats up."
--L. Ron Hubbard, in a Flag Order
>On Mon, 23 Apr 2001 08:49:27 -0700, "Fluffygirl" (Claire Swazey) wrote:
>>
>>Not my intention. Sorry.
>>
>>But it does not and will not happen to ClV Orgs.
In article <ji69etsa0b6gg9hpk...@4ax.com>, Birgitta wrote:
>
>Not true. I was not an SO member. I as well as others came from CLV
>Orgs.
>
>Bid
I've been following this thread for a couple of days and thought this
would be a good time to post my thoughts, as well as a few applicable
policies. There certainly are other policy letters pertaining to this
subject. Additionally, there are Flag Orders (FOs), which are policy
for Sea Org organizations, on the specific subject of serving meals of
rice and beans when an org's stats are down.
HCO Policy Letter 13 February 1971 "Finance Series 2 - Financial Planning
Tips" is a key policy letter governing Scientology organization financial
planning and the allocation of money (often called "beans" by Hubbard, in
the context of finance). I am very familiar with this policy letter for
a couple of reasons. Number one, when I was the Financial Planning Chairman
for ASHO Day, I had to apply this policy with regards to deciding how the
org's financial allocation (called the FP sum) would be spent. Number two,
I studied this policy as part of my training for no less than six different
courses I did -- Director of Disbursements Full Hat, Treasury Secretary
Full Hat, Staff Status III (in my case the OEC Volume III, Treasury Division
Volume), Advisory Council Member Hat, Financial Planning Chairman Hat and
Finance Specialist Course.)
It is a basic policy of Scientology, based upon Hubbard's writings to
"reward up statistics and punish [also called penalize] down statistics".
When a Scientology organization's stats are down [and not just the "GI"
(gross income)], the org is punished in the form of a decreased financial
allocation. It's a matter of simple mathematics. Here's how it works
(I'll use realistic estimates based upon my experience at ASHO Day).
Let's say ASHO Day has a "GI" of $50,000 (which it often did) for the
week. Included in the $50,000 GI are gross book sales of $10,000 (which
is a very realistic figure). Here's where the money goes:
$50,000 - Gross Income (GI) - all GI rec'd is deposited to the FBO #1 Acct
- 10,000 - Gross Book Sales (GBS) - transferred to Org HCO Book Account
- 7,000 - FSMCs Paid (FSMCs Pd) - transferred to Org FSM Account
- 1,000 - Bounced checks (B Ck) counted on previous week's income
- 3,500 - Service Completion Awards Pd. (SCA Pd) - transferred to Org SCA
Acct.
- 1,000 - Memberships (Memb) - transferred to Org HCO Book Acct.
- 2,000 - Refunds/Repayments (Ref/RAP) - transferred to Org CVB Account
- 800 - Sales Tax on GBS - transferred to Org Main Acct.
---------
$24,700 - Corrected Gross Income (CGI)
- 4,940 - 20% to Sea Org Reserves (SOR)*
- 1,235 - 5% to Trustee Account (GOWW)*
- 1,235 - 5% to Org GO Account (GO Main Acct.)*
- 1,235 - 5% to Guardian Office Reserves (GO Defense Acct.)*
- 2,470 - 10% to Org Reserves and/or Backbills (Org. Reserve Acct.)*
- 500 - transferred to FBO #2 Acct. for Flag expenses incurred locally [@]
---------
$13,085 - Financial Planning Sum (FP Sum)
- 4,940 - for promotion (minimum 20% of CGI)*
- 5,434 - for basic expenses (as per FP#1 - not fixed, usually around 22%)
- 2,211 - for staff welfare (more about this below)
---------
500 - balance retained in FBO #1 Acct. for Bounced Check cushion [#]
* = These percentages are fixed by policy and are _not_ subject to cuts
by local org management. The policy is Board Policy Letter of 3 December
1972 Issue IIRC Revised 17 April 1976 "Financial Management Standardiza-
tion Series 3R - FBO & Treasury Financial Reports - Attachment Form
AC-1 - FBO Weekly Report"
# = A bounced check reserve (cushion) is to be built up gradually until
a reserve equal to one week's average gross income is achieved. The policy
is Board Policy Letter of 3 December 1972 Issue IIRC Revised 17 April 1976
"Financial Management Standardization Series 3R - FBO & Treasury Financial
Reports - Attachment Form AC-1 - FBO Weekly Report"
@ = This amount must be enough to cover any local Flag expenses authorized.
An example would be Flag missionaires in the org to handle an insolvent org.
The governing policy is Board Policy Letter 3 November 1972RB - "Finance
Series 14RB - Payment of Flag Bills Incurred Locally".
Note that fixed percentages of the org's income are taken away by various
management orgs. What is left is what the org gets to spend on its own
expenses. Per a policy written by L. Ron Hubbard (HCO PL "PES Account"),
Sea Org organizations (of which ASHO Day is one) are required to spend a
_minimum_ of 20% of the corrected gross income on promotion. Promotion
(all that junk mail that the cult sends out every week) is a mandatory
action. No weekly Financial Planning Executive Directive ("FP ED") would
ever be approved by the Executive Council or Flag Banking Officer without
the required 20% of the CGI for promo being allocated by the Financial
Planning Committee.
After promotion has been allocated for, the org's "basic expenses" are
the next priority. (More about this below.) "Basic expenses" include
such things as rent or mortgage, utilities, liability and theft insurance,
worker's compensation insurance, property taxes, administrative supplies
(such as paper, photocopy expenses, clay, pencils, pens, clipboards, etc.),
long distance telephone call expenses, tours expenses (airfare, food,
lodging, etc.) gasoline (usually for HCO Dir. of Communications), and so
forth.
If there is anything left over after management has taken its fixed per-
centages of income, and the necessary funds have been transferred to the
HCO Book Account, the Claims Verification Board Account, the Service Com-
pletion Award Account, and the org's promotion has been covered financially,
and the required 10% to Org Reserve Account and/or back bills has been
allocated, and the organizational basic expenses are covered (financially
planned for as well as funds being allocated), _if_ there is anything
left over, this is what is allocated for "crew welfare".
"Crew welfare" includes such things as pay (sometimes called a Sea Org
member's "allowance", or "stipend"), bonuses, food, child care expenses,
medical and dental expenses (ha ha ha), uniforms, etc. (These are the
most common types of things considered.)
Hubbard said that pay, bonuses, food and uniforms are subject to cutbacks.
And it was often the case that these things were cut, often completely.
In a week (as the example above) where the staff welfare amount was only
$2211, here's how it would have been spent:
$1511 - for non-SO contracted tech staff pay
700 - for the week's food allocation for approx. 100 staff
-----
$2211 - total "staff welfare" amount spent
You see, ASHO Day had generally 5-10 or so staff who were _not_ Sea Org
members. These were all tech division staff hired to ensure delivery of
the "tech". (ASHO Day always had a hard time getting and keeping _Sea Org_
"tech trained" staff in sufficient quantity, so we hired "public" members
to help with the delivery of auditing and C/Sing). Since _non-SO_ staff
do not live in Sea Org facilities, nor do they eat in the Sea Org galley
(cafeteria), they are responsible for their own living quarters, food,
transportation, and everything else. So they almost always received at
least _some_ pay. Many times, the non-SO staff would threaten to quit
when their pay was cut. True fact. As Payroll Officer, I always was
the first one to hear about it when a staff member was upset over a cut
in their pay. Many times, the non-SO staff received 1/2 of their promised
pay. Try to imagine a non-Sea Org staff member who had worked all week,
had "upstats", and was expecting to receive his/her pay of $400-$500
for the week. But when you go to get your pay on Friday evening, you
are told, "Sorry... Pay was cut by FP." And then instead of getting
what you were promised, you get half pay -- $200-$250! Needless to say
this didn't go over very well with the non-SO staff. (Ladayla, feel
free to comment.) :)
As you may have noticed, the $2211 for staff welfare was allocated to:
food for 100 staff - $700
and non-SO payroll - $1511.
The $700. for food doesn't buy much. And generally speaking, ASHO Day
had right around 100 Sea Org staff members when I was there between
1975 and 1983. How much food, or better yet, what quality of food can
a staff of 100 expect to receive when they must be fed with only $700
for the whole week???
I'll tell you. We got oatmeal (maybe some toast) and skim milk for
breakfast, and rice and beans for lunch and dinner. Sometimes this was
our diet for weeks on end. I am not exaggerating.
Now maybe you noticed there was nothing allocated for Sea Org members'
pay. That's because pay is not a necessity according to L. Ron Hubbard.
And back in 1981, there were more weeks that year that the Sea Org staff
received _no_ pay at all, than there were weeks we received _some_ pay.
And when we did get some "pay", it was usually around $6.00.
With $6.00 Sea Org members had to buy their own bath soap, toilet paper,
tampons, razors, deodorant, laundry soap, cigarettes, etc.
Here's the "more about that below" part I mentioned:
From L. Ron Hubbard's HCO Policy Letter 13 February 1971 "Finance Series
2 - Financial Planning Tips":
"Look over what your products should be, particularly your Valuable
Final Products, and then begin to get those products somehow anyhow.
This and only this is the shining reason why you can have a decent
allocation."
"SEPARATE OUT DIFFERENT TYPES OF EXPENDITURE. [...] Wages, food, uniforms,
fuel are subject to cutbacks where an activity is not able to demonstrate
production."
"The Finance people want to get cash to reserves and they resent justly
a freeloader activity that has subsidize or unwise think. They want to
give an activity X beans (money) and get back X beans plus."
"NEGLECTING NECESSITIES. When an FP [Financial Planning] body is not aware
of the necessities of its operation and neglects to FP for them Finance
people (Bureau Three Treasury and FBOs) have to do it for them. [...]
An FP body should have a list of vital necessities by division and FP
for those first before it begins to wonder. Strangely [!], pay, food,
uniforms are not considered necessities. They do not directly influence
an activity's income. A 'necessity' is what it takes to make products
and valuable final products. In a cap-in-hand activity food is qualified
as 'some food, oatmeal maybe'. Pay becomes 'maybe but no bonuses ever'.
Uniforms become 'none'. Recruiting posters YES. Fuel becomes 'economical
amounts carefully used'. Training materials becomes YES. So what's a
necessity? A necessity is what it takes to make the valuable final
product, not individual survival but group survival."
"The essence of getting money is making money in the first place. FP is
the second step of what do we do with the money we make. It will never
solve neglecting to make it. You always have trouble with money if you
don't make any."
---
From L. Ron Hubbard's HCO Policy Letter of 9 March 1972 Issue I "Finance
Series 11 - Income Flows and Pools - Principles of Money Management":
"GOVERNING POLICY
The governing policy of Finance is to:
A. MAKE MONEY.
B. Buy more money made with allocations for expense (bean theory).
C. Do not commit expense beyond future ability to pay.
D. Don't ever borrow.
E. Know different types of orgs and what they do.
F. Understand money flow lines not only in an org but org to org
as customers [customers - that's the word he used] flow upward.
G. Understand EXCHANGE of valuables or service for money (P/L Exec
Series 3 and 4).
H. Know the correct money pools for any given activity.
I. Police all lines constantly.
J. MAKE MONEY.
K. MAKE MORE MONEY.
L. MAKE OTHER PEOPLE PRODUCE SO AS TO MAKE MONEY."
---
"The blunt threat of punishment alone and unmistakable can get stats up."
--L. Ron Hubbard, in a Flag Order
Warrior - Sunshine disinfects
See http://warrior.offlines.org/
Birgitta
wrote:
The org had to pay 1800 $ per week for each person who got the
"advantage" of being "rehabilitated". Thus it became a successful
action for the SO to demand the orgs to send their staff and in some
cases public.
Indeed very expensive rice and beans.
Bid
Warrior
>On 23 Apr 2001 22:31:22 -0700, Warrior <war...@entheta.net> wrote:
>:
>:All Scientology org staff are dependent to some degree. When I was
>:a staff member at the Austin Org in the early 70s, my first ever pay
>:for the week was $7.00. That'll get you rice and beans for a week.
>:Maybe even some oatmeal and a bit of skim milk and toast.
In article <200104...@xenu.tygger.net>, f...@thingy.apana.org.au says...
>
>I wonder if Claire will answer this post of yours. She tends to leave yours
>alone for some reason.
I don't think that she disagrees with anything I've written. It would be
nice if she could post some of her experiences in Scientology orgs she's
been in.
Generally speaking, Scientology staff members who are not in the Sea Org
are responsible for their own food, accomodations, medical and dental care,
and other "welfare" (this is a term they use) expenses. Non-Sea Org staff
sign contracts, for example, for 2 1/2 or 5 years, while Sea Org members
are required to sign a billion year contract. For examples of SO contracts,
see http://warrior.offlines.org/seaorg1.jpg and
http://warrior.offlines.org/seaorg2.jpg.
Scientology staff members in non-SO orgs (referred to as Class V Orgs) and
in missions (Hubbard originally called them "franchises"), unless they are
Sea Org staff posted there, are on what is called a "proportionate pay
system". Under this system, each post is assigned a "unit value" according
to the staff member's position and training. For example, an Executive
Director may be assigned 20 units, whereas a department head may be "worth"
only 10 units. A staff member may increase his or her number of units by
getting more training. In Scienoland, naturally a staff member has greater
"worth" to the cult if he or she is highly indoctrinated into Hubbardthink.
So, someone who has trained on the Data Series Evaluator's Course (DSEC)
or the Organization Executive Course (OEC) receives more units than a person
whose "highest" training consists of doing the "full hat" for a department
or such. Similarly, a Class Zero auditor would not receive as many units as
a Class Six auditor.
When preparing the payroll, the Payroll Officer receives a sum of money
from the Flag Banking Officer (FBO). This sum is called the "payroll sum".
In order to determine the amount of pay each staff member will receive,
the Payroll Officer divides the total payroll sum by the total number of
units, in order to determine that week's "unit value". (Hubbard said,
"The most valuable beings on the planet are trained auditors.")
For example, let say that the payroll sum for the week is $500, and the
total number of staff members is 20. The Payroll Officer adds up the
total number of units that each person has "earned". Let's say the
total number of units comes to 250. In this case, the unit would be
worth $2.00 ($500. divided by 250 units). So if a staff member was "worth"
20 units, his pay for that week would be $40.00 (20 units X $2.00 per
unit).
A similar payroll computation often occured in the Sea Org during the
years I was on staff at ASHO Day. (I personally prepared the payroll
every week for a little over 6 years between November 1975 and December
1981.)
To use a very real example of how pay was done in 1976, I'll talk about
how I did the payroll based upon policy existing at that time.
ASHO Day had approximately 100 Sea Org staff and maybe a dozen non-Sea Org
staff. At that time, a Sea Org member's base pay was $10 per Flag Order
3075. So, in order to give every Sea Org staff member full pay, Financial
Planning Committee (done by Advisory Council, the Executive Council
(consisting of the Commanding Officer, the Chief Officer and the Supercargo),
the Flag Banking Officer (FBO) and the Assistant Guardian Finance (AGF) all
would all have to approve a sum of $1000 for Sea Org base pay. If "base pay"
was cut at any one of the aforementioned levels of "FP" approval, I would
have to re-compute base pay according to the sum allocated. If "FP Committee"
or the the FBO (or whomever) cut the sum to $500., then each staff member
would reeive 1/2 of their base pay, or $5.00.
The non-Sea Org contracted staff (who were all "tech" staff members) were
handled differently with regards to their pay. Typically, a non-SO "tech"
staff member would _theoretically_ receive a low base pay and an additional
amount based upon his or her "production". To give an example, a "tech"
staff who was a Hubbard Guidance Center ("HGC") auditor would be given a
base pay of say, $25.00 and an additional $4.00 for every "well done
auditing hour" (WDAH) audited that week. A Case Supervisor would probably
receive a base of $25.00, plus "production" pay equivalent to $1.00 for
every hour "C/Sed".
With a staff of approximately twelve non-SO "tech" people, the total pay
sum, in order to have to pay everyone full pay would have to be about
$3000. If "FP Committee" did in fact approve the full amount, then each
non-SO staff would receive an average pay of $250. ($3000 divided by 12).
If "FP Committee" cut the non-SO payroll sum to $1500 ("due to down GI
stat that week"), then each non-SO "tech" staff would receive 1/2 of their
expected (and contractually agreed upon) pay.
It would be cool (in my opinion) if some of the ASHO non-SO staff would
comment on the pay situation and how it personally affected them to receive
1/2 pay. Undoubtedly there are many who could comment. I wonder if any
of them are reading this?
Ron Dennis, Max Harvey, Frances Godwin, John Pantermuehl, Mimi Rogers,
Tim Melchior, Jana Moreillon -- any of you care to comment?
Catarina Pamnell
"Fluffygirl" <csw...@home.com> skrev i meddelandet
news:3ae4c...@news2.lightlink.com...
>
> "Birgitta" <birg...@boberg.nu> wrote in message
> news:ji69etsa0b6gg9hpk...@4ax.com...
> > On Mon, 23 Apr 2001 08:49:27 -0700, "Fluffygirl" <csw...@home.com>
> > wrote:
> > >But it does not and will not happen to ClV Orgs.
> >
> > -----------------------------
> >
> > Not true. I was not an SO member. I as well as others came from CLV
> > Orgs.
>
>They stuck you in with a bunch of Sea Orgers, as I recall.
We (speaking loosely, as I was on the 1983-84 Copenhagen DPF some months
later than Bid was) had a few Sea Orgers on the program, but the absolute
majority were Cl V staff from various European orgs. I believe that in the
first wave, when Bid was sent to Copenhagen, it was all the old GO staff.
Then they started to order regular Cl V staff there as well.
Stockholm org, where I worked, was still a pretty big org at the time with
maybe 70 staff. Practically all of the execs went to the DPF for a while,
and several other staff members as well, I'd say at least 20-30 people (not
all at the same time!). My twin on the program was sent there for having
failed while doing an e-meter check to find out that a new "preclear" was in
fact an undercover journalist. One guy was a quite new scientologist, who
had done a couple of introductory courses and the Purif, and then had been
recruited for staff. He was first sent to Copenhagen to do a hatting course
for the post he was supposed to go on, Dir Inspections and Reports. While on
the course, he somehow didn't make adequate progress and was put on the DPF
for several weeks. His non-scio brother, after a bit of hassle, got to visit
him. The brother was shocked by the appalling conditions, military-style
uniforms, scio guards patrolling the central railstation to prevent blows
etc., and turned into a major public critic of the CoS.
This DPF thing was a kind of "Short form RPF" with hard manual work, strict
discipline, writing O/Ws, ethics conditions and "gang bang sec checks." It
was run by an RTC mission. People were there for anything from a week to 3-4
months. The Cl V orgs had to pay FOLO EU over $1000 per week per person, I
don't remember the exact figure. The Gothenburg org eventually rented their
own apartment in Copenhagen and had their staff stay there, as it was much
cheaper than paying for "room and board" (sharing a small room with 6-7
others and eating rice or spaghetti off tin trays in a primitive basement)
at the Nordland.
Now, I want to stress that this was a very special situation at that time.
It is
*not* the way things are usually run. Cl V org staff normally don't live in
communes, and usually don't do heavy Sea Org-style ethics handlings. Some
don't eat very well since they often receive little pay (for example,
official 1998 financial records of the DK org say the staff there
got less than $45 per week [Ritzau, Oct 9 1999] while even on a minimum wage
job they would make at least $300 or so). If put in lower ethics conditions
they may lose some or all of that pay. But they are AFAIK not told what to
eat.
Catarina
ladayla
" Foundation", which means nights and week-ends. I had a real job. Also a
rocking little field practice. The incontrovertible fact is that the orgs didn't
pay. It was always "gravy" when I got paid by an org. CCLA got so far in debt
to me that I threatened to quit. I told them that their credit was no good with
me, and they would have to pay every week if they wanted me there to audit their
Celebs. ( who,btw were paying priority rates to get me as their auditor). CCLA
and I drew up a contract, agreeing on a weekly payscale. I think $20. per
hour.It was signed by the HGC staff, the Ethics Officer, and the Captain of
CCLA. They honored it for 1 week. The 2nd week, there was no pay.When I
protested, they threatened to cancel my certs. They couldn't do that because
they had no cause, other than that I wouldn't audit for free. What a bunch of
out-exchange maroons!
Not too long ago...last year....some foo from Flag called me and wanted me to
come audit at Flag. I asked her what the exchange was and she said prestige and
privilege of being a Flag auditor. Bwahahaha!
The last cycle I did at ASHO, for which I was not paid, was auditing, among
others, a pc named Brian McKenna. I was auditing Brian on confessionals. He ran
out of time and I walked him down to the REg and he bought 2 intensives. We used
'em up in sezssions and I put in for pay for the 35 or so hours that I had
delivered to Brian. ASHO said that they had no money. No pay.
LRH says that auditors are the most valuable people on the planet, but they are
treated like garbage. I remember that in the early '60s, when the Jo'berg (
confessional) first hit Washington, it was used to avoid paying staff. A staff
member had to have a confessional before he could get paid, but there was no one
to deliver the confessional. So...no pay.
Whatever it takes to get "beans in", and let "no beans" out.
ladayla
Android Cat
Money, Make More Money while reading.
http://cdn.soundclick.com/04/images/e/song/enturbulator009+makemoneymakemoremoney2.gif?version=1
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/pagemusic.cfm?bandID=23466
Warrior wrote:
> From L. Ron Hubbard's HCO Policy Letter of 9 March 1972 Issue I
> "Finance Series 11 - Income Flows and Pools - Principles of Money
> Management":
>
> "GOVERNING POLICY
>
> The governing policy of Finance is to:
>
> A. MAKE MONEY.
>
> B. Buy more money made with allocations for expense (bean theory).
>
> C. Do not commit expense beyond future ability to pay.
>
> D. Don't ever borrow.
>
> E. Know different types of orgs and what they do.
>
> F. Understand money flow lines not only in an org but org to org
> as customers [customers - that's the word he used] flow upward.
>
> G. Understand EXCHANGE of valuables or service for money (P/L Exec
> Series 3 and 4).
>
> H. Know the correct money pools for any given activity.
>
> I. Police all lines constantly.
>
> J. MAKE MONEY.
>
> K. MAKE MORE MONEY.
>
> L. MAKE OTHER PEOPLE PRODUCE SO AS TO MAKE MONEY."
>
> ---
>
> "The blunt threat of punishment alone and unmistakable can get stats
> up." --L. Ron Hubbard, in a Flag Order
Follow the thread back (to 2001) for information on org finance and life in
the Sea Org:
"The $700. for food doesn't buy much. And generally speaking, ASHO Day
had right around 100 Sea Org staff members when I was there between
1975 and 1983. How much food, or better yet, what quality of food can
a staff of 100 expect to receive when they must be fed with only $700
for the whole week???
"I'll tell you. We got oatmeal (maybe some toast) and skim milk for
breakfast, and rice and beans for lunch and dinner. Sometimes this was
our diet for weeks on end. I am not exaggerating.
"Now maybe you noticed there was nothing allocated for Sea Org members'
pay. That's because pay is not a necessity according to L. Ron Hubbard.
And back in 1981, there were more weeks that year that the Sea Org staff
received _no_ pay at all, than there were weeks we received _some_ pay.
And when we did get some "pay", it was usually around $6.00.
"With $6.00 Sea Org members had to buy their own bath soap, toilet paper,
tampons, razors, deodorant, laundry soap, cigarettes, etc."
And if you stick this out for the full five year term, they will graciously
cancel your freeloader debt? Wheee.
"A walk down the path of history is crunchy with the crispy corpses of
those who pooh-poohed or ignored the clown car of ridicule when it pulled-up
to the curb. Who would have thought such a tiny car could contain so many
infectious and revolutionary guffaws? Satires, parodies, blue humor, pants
to the ground ass-wavings, tea-dumping, Modest Proposal submiting, 7 dirty
word spewing, flag burning, frankly impolite, just plain rude and improper
expressions of ridicule have either ignited reform, fanned the flames or
kicked the corpse to make sure it was dead."
-- Stephen Jones
Ask not for whom the clown car honks, Scientology, it honks for *thee*.
--
Ron of that ilk.
Barbara Schwarz
Android Cat wrote:
> To
I know as certain that Ron never made that statement as I know that you
are a slimeball, Sharpy.
Barbara Schwarz (Looking for the original Mark [Marty] Rathbun. No
impostor, please!)
I am for the separation of ARS and hate! -- Barbara Schwarz, much more
of a chaplain as Barbz Graham is.
--
Barbzzzzz "Babbles" Graham, is the selfproclaimed "chaplain" of an
allegedly non-existing organization named ARSCC that doesn't pay taxes.
But if they don't exist, how come they have a Chief Financial Officer
(jail bird, drug loving and habitual offender Korey Jerome Kruse aka
"Simkatu" and "Vivaldi") who works and travels on behalf of ARSCC?
http://groups.google.com/groups/search?hl=en&q=%22Korey+Jerome+Kruse%22
Barbara Graham in her own words: "Anything's legal if you don't get
caught." And: "You asshole. I was *never* a good person, you sad piece
of crap. --
Spidergraham, Chaplain, ARSCC"
More: http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/extremists/graham1.html
http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/anti-religious-extremists/barbara-graham/conflict-with-the-law/
http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/index.php
The Chief Instigator
>Android Cat wrote:
>> To
>I know as certain that Ron never made that statement as I know that you
>are a slimeball, Sharpy.
Thanks for showing (once again) why you're so crazy that not even the "Church"
of Scientology could tolerate you...and that's no mean feat.
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (pat...@io.com) Houston, Texas
chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (TCI's 2006-07 Houston Aeros)
LAST GAME: Houston 3, Manitoba 1 (December 16)
NEXT GAME: Friday, December 22 vs. Chicago, 7:35