Co$ Staffers: Burdens on Society?

Louise Cook, Fri 05 Mar 1999

From: look@pcug.org.au
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Re: Co$ Staffers:  Burdens On Society?
Date: Fri, 05 Mar 1999 14:30:49 GMT
Message-ID: <36e4ea5b.3651688@newshost.pcug.org.au>

On Thu, 04 Mar 1999 23:40:42 -0800, Don NOTs <xenu@mailbox.co.za>
wrote:

>If Co$ staffers are so poorly paid, do many of them go on public
>assistance?
>
>It would be a sick joke if the cult not only didn't pay taxes of any
>kind but collected welfare money as well.  When I was in Xenu City this
>past December, a teacher in the public school system told me that the
>children of cult member all availed themselves of free school lunches
>whereas the offspring of taxpayers paid for the privilage.
>
>Does anyone have any information on this?
>
>Don NOTs
>(SP5)


I am preparing a long detailed post on this subject, in short:

OUT ETHICS AT THE CANBERRA ORG (AUSTRALIA)

Matthew Dent is a Course Supervisor at the Canberra org.  He lived on
the unemployment benefit last year while working up to 90 hours a week
at the org.  He lied to the government each fortnight about looking
for work.  He had a government flat which he sublet for a profit.  He
has two children yet has no time or money for them. Late last year he
actually got a job in Sydney and got off the dole.  It was a cash in
hand job and he did not pay tax.  He is now back working 8.30am to
10pm seven days a week at the Canberra org  while the other supervisor
is in Sydney.  He is not enrolled to vote.  He will be 30 this year. 

Then there is Anna and Dean Detheridge.  She was the receptionist and
he is the Ethics officer.  Before they married he shared her
government flat and she lived on the Single Parent Pension.  She
remained on the Single Parent Pension for quite some time after they
married.  

Karen and Andrew McGowan (the Executive Officer) also live in a
government flat. They have are not responsible for, participate with
or contribute to the three children they have. 

I believe the org is out exchange with the community, for despite the
community providing money, shelter and child support it cannot avail
itself to any of the services offered without paying more.

No wonder the Canberra org is so downstat.

BTW The *soup kitchen* provided by charity each Friday night for the
down and out is well frequented by the local Scientologists.  Talk
about downstat and out exchange.  The shabbily dressed, sickly looking
staff are poor public relations.  

From: look@pcug.org.au
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Re: Co$ Staffers:  Burdens On Society?
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 00:03:11 GMT
Message-ID: <36e7b662.351684@newshost.pcug.org.au>

On 7 Mar 1999 08:04:24 GMT, fun@thingy.apana.org.au (David Gerard)
wrote:

>On Fri, 05 Mar 1999 14:30:49 GMT, look@pcug.org.au <look@pcug.org.au> wrote:
>
>:I am preparing a long detailed post on this subject, in short:
>:OUT ETHICS AT THE CANBERRA ORG (AUSTRALIA)

>
>Goddamn.
>
>I wonder if they'll try to sue for libel over this one.
>
>I might put it on the page next update (whenever that is ... ahem) and see
>if they bite.
>
>(I don't think it would help a case against me if they didn't do something
>about the original post.)
>
>[And it could always be put up in Holland, where the complainants would
>have to bring an action themselves under Dutch law.]
>
>
For a libel case, (and Australian law is quite strict about libel,
more so than the USA, with the first amendment),  the information
published has to be shown to be untrue, misleading or contain
distorted facts; it has to be shown that the reputation of the person
claiming libel has been impaired or damaged in some way.  I maintain
that the facts presented in my post are true and will only result in
criminal prosecution for the people mentioned if they are taken to a
court of law.  I also think that the reputation of the people
mentioned is not good enough in the first instance to be damaged. :)
I don't think the Canberra org wants their activities bought into the
courts.  Last financial year Matthew Dent earned $1001 from the Church
of Scientology for working up to 90 hours a week. Last May he worked
from 8.30am untill 10pm for 28 days solid.  He claimed "Jobsearch
Allowance" (the dole) for the entire period.  He paid no child
maintenence to either of his children during that financial year. The
courts and journalists would find alot of interest in this case.
C'mon David, put it on the page!