--- In [email protected], "Rick Archer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Some pundit news from a well-informed inside source: > > > > . The pundits were not given a clear idea of what their living > conditions here would be. They were not told they would be cloistered behind > fences. They understood that they would be free to move about and see new > things here. Most of them are very frustrated and stir-crazy in their > confinement. > > . The tuberculosis rumors are true. I don't know how many are > infected, but anyone who has had contact with the pundits has been tested. > > . In his sales pitch to lure them here, Bob "Raja" Wynne promised > them a $300 monthly stipend, but they are only getting $30. > > . The pundits are indentured to the TMO for at least 20 >years.
Wow. This is potentially a time bomb...and the key word here is "indentured". Because "indentured servitude" is close to if not on a par with "slavery", which is illegal in most parts of the world (in the U.S., anyway). This reminds me of an article several years back in which I read about Cuba and the way that the Communist regime there conducts business with multinational corporations that open up factories and mines in Cuba. The arrangement is that the multinationals pay the Cuban government directly for each hour of labor by the Cubans and the Cuban government, in turn, pays the workers. And, yup, you guessed it: the amount the government pays the Cuban worker is a fraction of what they receive from the multinational. At the time I read this article it was within the context of someone filing a suit against the Cuban government for violation of international treaties -- of which Cuba was a signatory -- by participating in slavery. I am not suggesting that the circumstances between the Cuban story and the pundits are similar in circumstances because there doesn't seem to be some middleman raking in a profit on the pundits' labor. But my point is: there are specific laws that seem to prohibit the kind of activity described above by Rick Archer and, if true, it is a veritable scandal in the making. I can see the headline now: indentured slavery alive and well in the cornfields of Iowa... ...or... The Maharishi enslaves Indian serfs; confines them like cattle. > They > were all obligated to take out loans to help build some SV structure. It's > not clear to me what the structure is. Perhaps their living and chanting > facility in India. I'll find out. Anyway, as long as they are punditing, the > movement covers the payments, but if they leave, they have to cover them. If > they don't Anand and Prakash Srivastava sic the police on them. This > happened to the ex-pundit from whom I got this information. > > . This pundit also said that the Srivastavas are very rich and > basically say to MMY, "Look, you're very old. Don't worry about these > financial matters. We'll take care of them." > > > > On a related note, I'm always arguing that MMY micromanages the movement and > no one tells him what to do. I think that generally this is the case, but I > can think of one incident which refutes this. When the Natural Law Party was > doing its thing, John Gray donated $50,000. He was promptly invited to come > to Vlodrop. When he got there, there was a tussle between Bevan and Hagelin, > Bevan arguing that John wrote "inappropriate" books and shouldn't be > permitted to meet with Maharishi and Hagelin arguing that the books helped > people and that he should meet with him. Apparently MMY let the two of them > work out the issue, although I've often seen him do that and then in the > end, do what he wanted to do anyway. A compromise was reached in which John > talked with MMY on the phone. I don't know whether that reflected MMY's > desire or not. In the conversation, MMY tried to recruit John to do stuff > for the movement, but John declined, saying he liked the way his life was > going. >
