Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
From: dennis.l.erlich@support.com
Subject: COFS RAKES IN MILLION
Message-ID: <9511211811.0PK5E02@support.com>
Organization: L.A. Valley College Public BBS (818)985-7150
X-Mailer: TBBS/PIMP v3.35
Distribution: world
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 95 18:11:39 -0800
Lines: 77


rogue@ccs.neu.edu (R Agent)

bruce@blend.ugcs.caltech.edu (Bruce J. Bell)
>>Actually, from all reports, Scientology has a huge reserve fund.
>>However, they seem awfully reluctant to use it -- they're terribly
>>stingy about some things.

Me:
>    For staff.  They will always have plenty of money for
>    lawyers.  Just like the mafia.
   
Rogue:
>Yeah, but they're stingy in other ways, too.  Like against us.  They've
>been amazingly stingy with Net accounts, even to the point of blowing ops
>because they reused accounts (Chris Miller, the CancelPoodle).  It puzzles
>me, it really does.  Is it because the product isn't "bodies in the shop",
>and therefore of less immediate value?  Very short-sighted if that's the
>case.
                                                 
    Yes and no.  If they'd been able to use the net for 
    recruiting (hahahah), which they now will never be able, they
    would have poured money into accounts and such.

    Now they know that nothing in the way of advertising their
    scam on the net is going to do squat, and that only lawyers
    guns and money will do the trick, everything gets tight as 
    far as expenditures for staff projects like Handle ARS.

    'Sides their income (from orgs) has got to be sucky and
    undoubtedly staff are being blamed for that, and punished
    with bare-bone FPs (Financial Plannings).  The money their 
    spending for lawyers is Reserves suplimented by return on 
    investments.

Bruce:
>>They seem perfectly willing to use financial overkill when
>>they decide some particular person is an "enemy", though.

Me:
>    You betcha.

Rogue:
>We should definitely not let past trends lull us into a false sense of
>security.  Should they see the need, they could drop a million dollars on
>us.

    Oh, they for sure already have, and more.

>That can buy a lot of nastiness, in assorted flavors.

    It already has, I'd say.

    Paulette Cooper
    Snow White
    Mayor Gabe Cezares
    Gerry Armstrong
    suing Time Mag.
    rmgroup ars attempt
    Miss Blood
    anon.penet.fi
    raid on me
    raid on Arnie
    raids on Bob and Larry
    suing the Washington Post
    dirty tricking henry
    etc.

    The list is grossly incomplete, I know.

    I'd say that there was a "lot of nastiness."  Wouldn't you?

            +--------------------------------------+
           Rev. Dennis L Erlich  * * the inFormer * *
      dennis.l.erlich@support.com  +  inForm@primenet.com
                           "tar baby"