ScienceNotScientology
Patron
That's actually peanuts compared to most heads of international charities and she has to deal with the shitheads uplines ... fuck even if I was still a scn I'd take a HARD PASS on that posting.
No but people at ABLE and other CN logins can rate the charity and they are probably bumping that rating like friends+family members stat push their amigos restaurant ratings ... and also that's really low percentages for the NGO space in terms of salaries and whatnot, which makes the other ratings higher by default.Re: CCHR Executives Salaries posted online - Jan Eastgate makes $49,000 - VP's $57.00
I am a looooong time lurker/watcher of the CO$ with family that had to escape in a big way.
So, I am taking an Intro to Business class and the first assignment is to find 2 non-profit organizations we'd like to donate to, using Charity Navigator as a way to evaluate the non-profits. My first search was for CCHR. I chose a Scientology front group because if they had a high rating, I'd question the sites ability to rate non-profits. CCHR is given 3 stars and 81.34 points out of 100. On the very bottom of the rating profile, this is stated:
[h=1]Charity Representative Login[/h][h=1][/h][h=1][/h][h=1][/h]This charity has an official representative registered with Charity Navigator.
Does this mean that someone from Scientology works for or is on the board? To me that would influence it's rating. Any thoughts would be much appreciated Do you think this means that someone from Scientology works for or is on the board of Charity Navigator? To me that would influence it's rating
.Re: CCHR Executives Salaries posted online - Jan Eastgate makes $49,000 - VP's $57.00
I am a looooong time lurker/watcher of the CO$ with family that had to escape in a big way.
So, I am taking an Intro to Business class and the first assignment is to find 2 non-profit organizations we'd like to donate to, using Charity Navigator as a way to evaluate the non-profits. My first search was for CCHR. I chose a Scientology front group because if they had a high rating, I'd question the sites ability to rate non-profits. CCHR is given 3 stars and 81.34 points out of 100. On the very bottom of the rating profile, this is stated:
[h=1]Charity Representative Login[/h][h=1][/h][h=1][/h][h=1][/h]This charity has an official representative registered with Charity Navigator.
Does this mean that someone from Scientology works for or is on the board? To me that would influence it's rating. Any thoughts would be much appreciated Do you think this means that someone from Scientology works for or is on the board of Charity Navigator? To me that would influence it's rating
Yes, no apologies needed for your "rant" it is an understandable and logical view, even if I don't entirely subscribe to it. I'm familiar with most of your examples and do subscribe to your beliefs on DM though, that fucker is totally a sadistic, megalomaniacal, also greedy and self-centered..
Your point is a good one--that it could be Scn trying to game the system, cheat, or just like their way to wherever it is that they are so fanatically trying to go.
Historically, Hubbard & Scientologists ( beginning in 1950, as Dianetics) degenerately lied about virtually everything they had done, were doing or could do--if paid enough.
That being the case, it really wouldn't matter whether Scientologists had unethically embedded themselves within the Charity Navigator. Because, had they been detected and denied such undue influence, Scientologists would simply check that ruse or "black op" off the list--and, without missing a beat, launch right into the next way to circumvent the safeguards.
Scientologists tried (and famously failed) to play this lying game with WIKI, which ultimately got them banned from having editorial access.
However there are many instances when Scientologists DID "win" with their treacherous scheming. The Cult Awareness Network ("CAN") comes to mind. Recall that they sued that entity to death, bankrupted it--them bought it in bankruptcy court for pennies. Thereafter, Scientologists were literally installed in CAN's offices, answering the phone "Cult Awareness Network"! LOL. When anyone would ask about Scientology, they would die and misdirect them. These were HUGE wins for Scientologists.
I won't belabor the point by listing out countless other examples of how Scientology cheated, defrauded and broke the rules/laws to get what they wanted.
Your inquiry is of real merit, as with any other earnest WHISTLEBLOWING efforts to rid the world of the cruel hoax called Scientology. However, it bears noting that it is not only what Scientology DOES that bears scrutiny--but, what Scientology IS.
Because Scientology itself is a front.
Scientology itself is a ruse.
Scientology itself is a black op.
Hubbard's front, ruse and black op. To make a fortune and gain fame.
Many get distracted and don't realize that Scientology was set up with Hubbard describing it as "the religion angle".
Scientology is an avaricious madman's wet dream. A money machine that also provide a ready-made outlet for his creative writing drive AND his uncontrolled megalomania. People think because Hubbard was "researching" and looking for the "holy grail" to turn mortals into Gods, that there must have been some redemptive significance to it.
Hardly!
It was just "CONTENT" for the hoax.
When Hubbard died, the entire hoax was assumed by another sadistic, megalomaniacal madman, Miscavige.
Scientology is simply nothing more and nothing less than a vehicle--an instrument--for those two sociopathic con men. All gains (financial, power & fame) accrue to just those two.
Did anyone really think someone else is benefiting? LOL
ps: Sorry for the rant. I'm really a much nicer person when I haven't been CultMugged[sup]tm[/sup]. LOL