Dulloldfart
Squirrel Extraordinaire
Great. Then we can move on to the serious business of discussing your spanking fetish.
Paul
London Org- Current scene
- Thread starter Vittorio
- Start date
Great. Then we can move on to the serious business of discussing your spanking fetish.
Paul
Pixie
Crusader
Great. Then we can move on to the serious business of discussing your spanking fetish.
Paul
So you've noticed..
Good twin
Floater
Sorry guys. I know you both are ready to move on, but I have to disagree with this Pixie. I think there are quite a few here who have the 'knowitall' attitude, are rude, paranoid and quite happy to jump down anyone's throat who dares to disagree. It happens. My opinion.....fair enough?:confused2:
Pixie
Crusader
Hey no worries Good Twin! As I said before on another thread, there will always be people we like, people we don't and vice versa, it's only human, however I was simply stating my own personal experience here. Perhaps I've not been on the board long enough to have met these other non-freezerzone 'rude paranoid happy to jump down anyones' throat who dares to disagree' types. It was only my experience Good Twin, and you are welcome also to yours.
And yes Good Twin.. most definatly fair enough!
Smitty
Silver Meritorious Patron
reply to Terril Park
Smitty
Either you are not telling the truth, or scientology has left you with a clouded memory.
The issue is not about whether or not it is your practice. The fact is that you did it.
Smitty
Terril park
Sponsor
I've apologised, for something I can't even remember. I have admitted to making mistakes including here and now.
I'm sort of willing to make reparations, but don't know my exact offense.
The only ex OSA person I recall in my 7-8 years of greeting people new to the FZ had a connection to a european country. You're welcome to comm privately.
Incidentally I have no bad feelings to those ex GO or OSA. The majority
of those here regardless of previous existence or posts demonstrate
lifelong good intentions.
Cat's Squirrel
Gold Meritorious Patron
While shopping in my local supermarket in E.G. the other week, I bumped into a staff member (lets call her ‘Nancy’, as I don't want to be traced just yet) from London. At least I thought she was staff, but it turns out that she had left a few months ago.
The last time I had spoken to her, she had been travelling up each day from E.G. on the train along with several other guys. A few years ago, when DM announced that London was going to be an ideal org, a whole load of OT-level public signed up. The usual suspects: Mauro Calcioli, Lorraine Bulger, Sharon Kloss, Hanny Barram, Caroline Wood, Debbie Taffe, John Turczak and others. All good people and mostly quite sane and pleasant to talk to. Of course, they still have their blind spots. I remember having a conversation with Sharon at the event where the basics were launched last year. She was twittering on about how He had personally taken charge of the project and only He was able to push it through to completion. She seemed surprised that I asked who ‘He’ was.
Perhaps you can guess - answers on a postcard please.
She obviously couldn't see the outpoint that numerous supposedly super-able people had all failed to do something as mundane as track down original texts and get them published correctly. Hardly quantum physics, and something supposedly inferior wogs do all the time.
I remember thinking at the time of the announcement of the plans for London – “Well, this will be a good test of OT powers. With this number of the cream of the UK public, there can be no excuses for not getting St. Hill sized PDQ.” Well, that was getting on for 4 years ago now and I don’t see them making it any time soon. But, I guess that doesn’t matter anymore as the idea of being St. Hill size seems to have been quietly dropped. CoS management (what’s left of it) have obviously realised this isn’t feasible anymore and are pushing the concept of ‘Ideal Orgs’. This works much better, as they don’t have to be any particular size or come under the spotlight as to how much they are ‘producing’. And, at the same time, public can be regged for a nice shiny, extravagantly over the top building that the org never owns and can be charged rent for, ad infinitum. A nice little earner! But, they can pretend that this is expansion.
Anyway, I spoke to ‘Nancy’ for a while about the conditions at London. She wasn’t too committal about how it was doing (the usual, “things are going well”), but she revealed some interesting info about the pay situation. Apparently, staff are given just about enough to cover their travelling expenses, which is about £50 on the train. So, they work 40 – 50 hours per week, for nothing! I asked her how most people coped. She replied that the only way it could work, is if they had a partner who had a good job or else they had property etc that they could rent out and bring in an income.
This tallies with what I saw on a copy of the new London contract, where the applicant has to agree to work without monetary reward and they might get expenses if they are lucky. I remember reading an HCOPL where Hubbard says that if Orgs are well run and are productive, there should be plenty of pay for staff to have a decent standard of living. But now, not only do all these guys have to pay through the nose to get their OT levels, and donate to the IAS etc, they are expected to join staff and work for nothing! I guess that is just another ‘improvement’ in the Miscavige era. Talk about out-exchange. I wonder how much longer it will take before the staff realise this and start leaving like ‘Nancy’ has?
Interesting. When I was at Plymouth Org the staff were paid £4 a week and expected to draw unemployment benefits to cover their living expenses - for an up to 66 hour week. It turned out that £4 was the maximum you could earn without it being deducted from your benefits.
Pixie
Crusader
Wow! Allowed to draw unemployment benefits!!? Well we were not, we were told this was 'other fish to fry'.
Reasonable Lady
Patron with Honors
Cat's Squirrel
Gold Meritorious Patron
Wow! Allowed to draw unemployment benefits!!? Well we were not, we were told this was 'other fish to fry'.
They had to, because the org was poor (in the financial sense); most of the public there were on lower level courses, a few did more advanced courses such as the Pro TRs course but most of them went to St Hill for anything halfway advanced.
Snuffy
Patron Meritorious
I did this for a while when working at London Org in 1999. This was with a child to support and everything. Then the govt changed the law and no longer allowed "voluntary" employees to claim, so I had no income whatsoever and couldn't pay rent or buy food. I was - surprise, surprise - made to feel guilty for "blowing" my post so I could at least claim benefits while I looked for a real job. In six months of working full time for the org I think I made in total about £5. Maybe I'm wrong on that, because I think there was one week where everyone made something like £20. Whoo-hoo!
RK
Pixie
Crusader
I was at London Org to Snuffy as you know, and I can back you up on this totally, however for me, it wasn't a case that I couldn't get governement support, it was that the CLO would not allow it (other fish to fry) although that was pre 99 so it seems from what you say that the government did change the rules.
Oh yes, those were the days.. no money, no food, and in our case at one point, living in our car.
I often wonder how my ex husband coped, I spent four years writing to Int about what happened to us to no avail, but I gave up in the end, he however did not and the last I heard he was STILL writing uplines to get some feeback from McSavage. Heartbreaking. A 'very' dedicated SO member, I often wonder what became of him.
Pixie
Crusader
Sorry but no Snuffy. I'm back in communication with my old scientology friend but because we had a little spat a couple of months back - I told him I was on an ex forum - it's like getting blood out of a stone.. but I'm chip chip chipping away at him just as my other friend did for me until I finally cracked and woke up.
London Foundation
This email from the HAS London Fdn was leaked on Enturb. I see Lorraine Bulger is still in....
QUOTE< From London Foundation
27th August 2008
Dear all,
London has a beautiful Ideal Org building. We need to be a place where people have the confidence they can attain freedom. This will be done by the causative actions of many as quoted from LRH bellow.
Scientology and Dianetics can change the world. We all have that as our common agreement. We all have benefited from Scientology one way or the other. When standardly delivered in a standard org the results are phenomenal.
Recently with the advent of the Basics books and lectures this has been more evident than ever. Our Academy is filling, our recoveries are soaring, our HGC is filling and the resultant success stories are very moving.
On the London Foundation team we have an OT VIII, Class VIII, 3 Ls completion at the helm- Lorraine Bulger. This is sure to push only the most standard tech forward and correct any outpoints.
Scientology still does not have religious recognition in the UK. London is the centre of the European world. Please do what you have to to ensure that Scientology gets its deserved religious recognition in London. From here many European countries will follow suite. Don_t be a spectator. It is imperative and your responsibility that you play a part in the sanity and expansion of this incredibly versatile city.
Here are LRHs words:
The ideal org would be an activity where people came to achieve freedom and where they had confidence they would attain it.
The ideal org is the image one builds toward. It is the product of the causative actions of many. Anything which is short of an ideal org is an outpoint that can be put right. The end product is not just an ideal org but a civilization already on its way.
-LRH ED 102 INT, 20 May 1970
Lets expand!
Much Love,
HAS LDNF> QUOTE
Still lying about soaring stats, how sad.
Solo
This email from the HAS London Fdn was leaked on Enturb. I see Lorraine Bulger is still in....
QUOTE< From London Foundation
27th August 2008
Dear all,
London has a beautiful Ideal Org building. We need to be a place where people have the confidence they can attain freedom. This will be done by the causative actions of many as quoted from LRH bellow.
Scientology and Dianetics can change the world. We all have that as our common agreement. We all have benefited from Scientology one way or the other. When standardly delivered in a standard org the results are phenomenal.
Recently with the advent of the Basics books and lectures this has been more evident than ever. Our Academy is filling, our recoveries are soaring, our HGC is filling and the resultant success stories are very moving.
On the London Foundation team we have an OT VIII, Class VIII, 3 Ls completion at the helm- Lorraine Bulger. This is sure to push only the most standard tech forward and correct any outpoints.
Scientology still does not have religious recognition in the UK. London is the centre of the European world. Please do what you have to to ensure that Scientology gets its deserved religious recognition in London. From here many European countries will follow suite. Don_t be a spectator. It is imperative and your responsibility that you play a part in the sanity and expansion of this incredibly versatile city.
Here are LRHs words:
The ideal org would be an activity where people came to achieve freedom and where they had confidence they would attain it.
The ideal org is the image one builds toward. It is the product of the causative actions of many. Anything which is short of an ideal org is an outpoint that can be put right. The end product is not just an ideal org but a civilization already on its way.
-LRH ED 102 INT, 20 May 1970
Lets expand!
Much Love,
HAS LDNF> QUOTE
Still lying about soaring stats, how sad.
Solo
Div6
Crusader
This is complete GLUTZ PR......isn't RTC the Guarantor of Standard Tech? (yeah, right) This justs admits the "enemy line" that tech is OUT, even with GAT.
As if being an "L's" completion has ANYTHING to do with DELIVERING Standard Tech.
Gawd.
I am so glad I am not them.
Iknowtoomuch
Gold Meritorious Patron
"It is imperative and your responsibility that you play a part in the sanity and expansion of this incredibly versatile city."
Dulloldfart
Squirrel Extraordinaire
Yes indeed. Play YOUR part in shutting down this incredibly batshit insane cult.
Paul
asagai
Patron Meritorious
"Scientology still does not have religious recognition in the UK. London is the centre of the European world. Please do what you have to to ensure that Scientology gets its deserved religious recognition in London. From here many European countries will follow suite."
This is a very interesting thing to say in view of the whole "religious" angle regarding National Minimum Wage and the Australian Senate inquiry.
Usually the CofS does not "carry the enemy line" or promote difficulties, so one has to wonder why this is being highlighted to the members!
I can only assume it is because the CofS, in the UK, operates under the COSRECI cloak of the Australian religious charity and that charity status is being investigated by the Australian Senate and that the religious/volunteer staff "religious cloaking" is being investigated by the UK Revenue & Customs.
Looks like they are on the ropes to me and admitting it to the "parishoners".
This is a very interesting thing to say in view of the whole "religious" angle regarding National Minimum Wage and the Australian Senate inquiry.
Usually the CofS does not "carry the enemy line" or promote difficulties, so one has to wonder why this is being highlighted to the members!
I can only assume it is because the CofS, in the UK, operates under the COSRECI cloak of the Australian religious charity and that charity status is being investigated by the Australian Senate and that the religious/volunteer staff "religious cloaking" is being investigated by the UK Revenue & Customs.
Looks like they are on the ropes to me and admitting it to the "parishoners".
Dulloldfart
Squirrel Extraordinaire
I suspect the real reason is sloppy (or no) Issue Authority. Note the spelling mistakes, for example. Maybe they think a relatively low volume mass e-mail doesn't need it. Obviously individual e-mails wouldn't--although are org staff allowed to send individual (org) e-mails?
Paul
Similar threads
