Which Big Book? AA's or the cult's?

A Comparison of Step 3 from David C Icons so-called”big book recovery“ website

with the book Alcoholics Anonymous

David C Icons/Jim W’s website	Big Book of Alcoholics Anonymous
This is a decision to go on with the program and the practical consequences are that we decide to do the other steps and try to behave in accordance with the spiritual principles of honesty, unselfishness, love and purity, (the 4 Absolutes of the Oxford Group cult) and that we will follow the guidance of our sponsors.	Not in the Big Book. No mention of having to follow the 4 Absolutes or having to follow the guidance of a sponsor, or any other person. N. B. Remember the words of the Big Book itself. “To show other alcoholics precisely how we have recovered is the main purpose of this book.” (AA; page xiv - foreward to the 1st Edition.) In other words - if something isn’t precisely there in the book, it wasn’t meant to be there.
If we have followed all the suggestions given in the before, and are ready to follow all that our sponsor suggests further, then we can answer this question with a firm, ‘Yes’.  (As we said before, for most of us, we learn to trust our Higher Power by first placing our trust in our sponsor.)	Not in the Big Book. No mention of having to follow a list of Daily Suggestions, or any other daily quota of tasks, prior to taking step 3. Again no mention of having to follow what a sponsor suggests or what anyone else suggests. No mention of having to “trust” any human being or human power, sponsor or otherwise.
And then we read out the prayer, while on our knees.	Not in the Big Book. No mention of any specific body posture required to say/read 3rd step prayer, or indeed any other prayer found in the book.
This step was better done with a sponsor Misrepresentation of the Big Book. Taking Step 3 with someone other than a sponsor is not mentioned as an option in the website. Misrepresentation of the Big Book. Taking Step 3 alone is not mentioned as an option in the website. It must be done with a sponsor	Not in the Big Book. The actual text says “We found it very desirable to take this spiritual step with an understanding person, such as our wife, best friend, or spiritual advise. But it is better to meet God alone than with one who might misunderstand…” (page 63) (for example, a sponsor may not understand my conception of a God who does not require kneeling, or other matters pertaining to personal faith, custom and culture.)
We do not retake Step Three as we go through the programmer	Not in the Big Book There is no clear instruction in the Big Book that we cannot retake Step 3 if we desire to do so.
Omission of the fact that the Big Book says that many used the prayer, thus implying that there were those who did not, yet were still included in the fellowship (Many of us, but not all of us). Omission of the option of using another prayer, or different wording, is not allowed in the website. Again misrepresenting the actual Big Book text, which allows for individuals to follow their own conscience.	Many of us said to our Maker, as we understood Him… (page 63) The wording was, of course, quite optional so long as we expressed the idea.. (page 63)

(our thanks to this contributor for their analysis)

Cheers

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)

"To Alcoholics Anonymous from Alcoholics Anonymous - A call for moral inventory and leadership in A.A."

Quote from an email currently in circulation (together with pdf attachment - see below for download link):

"To whom it may concern,

Attached is a copy of a minority report submitted for consideration by AA Conference (GB 2012).

Summary:

To Alcoholics Anonymous from Alcoholics Anonymous - A call for moral inventory and leadership in A.A.

This document comprises an analytical and critical survey of the Fellowship in 2011, discussing the complex dynamics surrounding current events occurring in the USA, UK and Canada and relating these to past events and to AA Traditions and Concepts.

The discussion begins with two examples of active leadership, one by Bill W. in the 1940s, the other by a committee in Santa Monica California USA, in 1958; it then moves on to include current events. The outcome exposes a hazardous departure from Tradition, serious and growing internal divisions and public concerns. It also exposes a widespread and hazardous misconception in the application of A.A. Traditions. And a situation where neither A.A. Tradition, nor General Warranties of Conference are withstanding in today’s fellowship. This causes us to feel duty bound to place this as a minority report before the UK General Service Conference 2012.

Background

The grounds for submission of a minority report;
The principle of anonymity upheld.

1) The conference procedures are given in the AA Service Handbook for Great Britain section 10-3, 10-4. This can be accessed online at the UK GSO website:

http://www.alcoholics-anonymous.org.uk/members/index.cfm?PageID=98&DocumentTypeID=21

Concept V explains the criteria and reasons for sending a minority report.

A minority report can be sent by any AA members, at any level in the service structure from A.A. group to Conference.

Concept V states that all minorities should be encouraged to file minority reports whenever they feel that a majority is in considerable error. That they should charge themselves with the actual duty to file a minority report if they consider the issue to be such a grave one that it could affect A.A. as a whole. The main function of a minority report is to protect against the making of a grave error and to restrain those in authority from unjust uses of their power. The well heard minority is therefore our chief protection against an uninformed, misinformed, hasty or angry majority.

The Conference steering committee will decide whether to put the contents of the report and any questions arising from it to conference for discussion.

2) “Anonymity is the spiritual foundation of all our traditions, ever reminding us to place principles before personalities.” (Tradition 12)

It is AA Tradition that the names of those who make submissions of topics /questions to conference are kept confidential. The same principle of anonymity applies to minority reports. It also applies to officially published AA pamphlets and books, the authors are not accredited except for a few titles by Bill W. The names of authors of the report are not accredited since this, according to AA Tradition is irrelevant, the subject matter of the report is what is important. It was co-authored by a number of AA members residing in the UK.

In fellowship

......"

Comment: A useful analysis of the challenge presented by cult groups within the Fellowship both in Great Britain and North America

Enjoy the read!

Cheers

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)

(our usual thanks to our reporters)

Medications and AA II

“Submitted by Anonymous on Sun, 2011-10-09 08:13.

“Two months before I got sober I was hospitalized for two weeks, diagnosed with Bi-Polar disorder/manic depression. I convinced my doctors that I was just an ACOA blowing off steam and got off of medication. I went on a wild bender and soon wound up in AA.

About 18 months into sobriety I was hospitalized again, this time for six weeks. Thank God for the support of my AA friends through that ordeal. My then sponsor accused me of 'chewing my booze'. I put her name on the "do not want to see list' and she wasn't allowed in to see me. I later fired her and got another sponsor.

I was discharged and have been on Lithium ever since (22 years). For me, managing my mental illness is crucial to my sobriety and staying sober is crucial to managing my manic depression. I have had only one hospitalization since and that was after breast cancer surgery. I was hospitalized for one week and had a second surgery, to clear the margins, during that stay.

My doctors, especially my psychiatrist, are wholly supportive of my sobriety and we work together to keep me healthy.

I used to carry around the pamphlet, 'AA Members Medication and other Drugs'. I'd read the section about AA having no opinion, that it's between the member and their doctors, at meetings, when so called old-timers would bash people for taking prescribed medications, painkillers, psych drugs etc. I know it was helpful to the confused member on medication. They came up to me after the meeting and thanked me. I have sponsored a few of them.

I have been sober for over 24 years and have been on medication for 22 of those years. I know that without my medication, my sobriety would be nonexistent today. And, staying sober allows me to manage my mental illness.

I am so grateful for the tools of the program, especially the Grapevine. Several years ago there was in issue called The Forgotten Chapter with stories about members with mental illness. I still have that issue and read it when I need to be reminded that I am not unique in AA.

Keep up the good work”

Above is an extract from the AA Grapevine site (the US based magazine) – the I-Say forum. This production is generally much punchier than Share (GB) with some really lively discussion both in the articles and in the forum.

Check out these links: http://www.aagrapevine.org/forums/i-say-forum and this link for editorial policy: http://www.aagrapevine.org/index.php?q=forum-policy

Comment: A shrewd member indeed, 'launching' their sponsor at the first sign of authoritarianism! Are you having problems with your sponsor? Are they getting a bit pushy? Have they become increasingly childish and grandiose? Are they becoming interfering and intrusive? Solution – show them the DOOR!

Cheerio

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)

Medications and AA

“I was driven away from AA (or so I thought) by my first sponsor and first home group. I was taking a desperately needed antidepressant, without which I had already been hospitalized. My sponsor "fired" me and my home group said I couldn't do service work.

Despite this abrupt dismissal, I searched for AA's ideas about prescribed medications. To my relief, I learned AA had no policy against these medications; in fact, they allowed their use if used as prescribed. Only my doctor and counselor can advise me on medication use -- AA groups who prohibit participation in AA when the only requirement is a "desire to stop drinking" can do harm and -- sometimes -- force depressed individuals into suicide. This is not what AA is about ... AA should help and accept those who try to maintain sobriety.

I found most other groups I visited had no prohibition against antidepressants. In fact, when directly and honestly addressed, other members say they use them but are reluctant to admit it in AA rooms.

I have been sober and actively participated in AA meetings, speaking in hospital settings, and taking my medication as prescribed for more than 2 years now. I think my greatest service to AA is to declare my thanks for the AA stance on these medications. I do that, making no secret of my antidepressant use. I do a lot of service work and sponsor people, some of whom need medications to stay sober.

What could have happened to me when I was fired by my first home group and sponsor could have had a much different ending. If I had stopped my medication (as demanded by that sponsor), I don't know if I could have continued in AA, or if I would be alive today, for that matter.

We in AA should aspire to help other alcoholics. We are not there to dabble in matters that don't concern us. We shouldn't negatively affect others' sobriety with our laymen's "wisdom" on medications. People with treated depression can be productive members of AA; others who try to meddle in our lives do so at their own peril. If a life is lost because of meddling, I hope there is room enough in your amends -- and in God's heaven -- for you. Rejoice in having a sober AA brother or sister, regardless of the circumstances that brought them their sobriety.”

Comment: Above is an extract from the AA Grapevine site (the US based magazine for AA) – the I-Say forum. Maybe Share would like to introduce the same facility in Great Britain!

Check out these links: http://www.aagrapevine.org/forums/i-say-forum and this link for editorial policy: http://www.aagrapevine.org/index.php?q=forum-policy

Cheers

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)

Newbury Design for Living (affiliated with the Wimbledon Design for Living group)

It would seem that the above group is in a state of suspended animation. According to the online update the venue itself is closed although other sources indicate that this is not the case. However don't be at all surprised if it should resurface - properly rebranded of course! The Wimbledon branch however is still going strong although we might say that one of its attendees has been rather economical with the truth. Despite the fact that we were told by this person that only conference approved literature was on display we found on our last visit that alongside this was a whole load of other stuff - booklets, pamphlets, even CDs (no doubt the production of some eminent “circuit speakers” plying their trade), some of which carried the imprimatur of the Wimbledon Design for Living Group. But then of course variety is the spice of life! (assuming that there is no 'poison' intermixed!)

Cheerio

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)

(our usual thanks to our reporters)

A taste of freedom.....

“Without a Higher Power - One Size does not fit all for this atheist in recovery

AA Grapevine January 2010

This atheist "walked into our midst," and stayed.

 At the age of 52, I attended my very first AA meeting on Oct. 7, 2001. I have not found it necessary to take a single drink since. Were it not for AA it's likely I would never have put together one continuous week of sobriety.

Finding all the "God stuff" in the Twelve Steps a bit hard to swallow, I immediately latched onto Tradition Three, which states, "The only requirement for AA membership is a desire to stop drinking."

I also had the good fortune of stumbling across a Twelve Step study during my first week of recovery. It has been my home group ever since. That was where someone drew my attention to the chapter on Step Two in the "Twelve and Twelve" where it states, "First, Alcoholics Anonymous does not demand that you believe anything. All of its Twelve Steps are but suggestions."

I also learned in my home group about a fellow called "Ed" in the essay on Tradition Three in the "Twelve and Twelve." His real name was Jimmy B. One of the pioneering members of the New York group, Jimmy B. was apparently the first diehard atheist to find lasting recovery in AA. His personal story eventually made it into the Second Edition of the Big Book as "The Vicious Cycle." An internet search turns up lots of interesting information about Jim. He is my personal AA hero.

Eventually I also discovered the pamphlet "Questions & Answers on Sponsorship" where, much to my relief, it points out that "some alcoholics have been able to achieve and maintain sobriety without any belief in a personal Higher Power." That includes me.

In an article published in the April 1961 edition of the Grapevine (reprinted in "The Best of Bill"), Bill W. laments: "Though 300,000 have recovered in the last 25 years, maybe half a million more have walked into our midst, and then out again. . . . We can't well content ourselves with the view that all these recovery failures were entirely the fault of the newcomers themselves. Perhaps a great many didn't receive the kind and amount of sponsorship they so sorely needed."

I certainly know what that's like! I ended up firing two sponsors in my first three months of recovery. The first one dogmatically insisted that I absolutely had to turn my will and my life over to the care of some kind of Higher Power if I wanted to stay sober long. My second sponsor relapsed.

Unfortunately, sponsors who actually follow the excellent suggestions outlined in "Questions & Answers on Sponsorship" seem to be about as rare as four-leaf clovers. I ended up without a sponsor for 15 months before hooking up with my current sponsor. By then I had made a lot of progress working a personalized program of recovery I had designed for myself, one that makes absolutely no reference to any kind of "Higher Power" concept--not even using my home group or AA as a whole as a substitute for God. My new sponsor's first official advice to me was, "Whatever you've been doing is obviously working well for you, so let's not try to 'fix' it."

After years of studying the Twelve Steps in my home group and discussing them with my sponsor, I now understand why faith in "God as we understood Him" was so vitally important to Bill W. and most of the AA pioneers.

As clearly explained by Dr. Harry Tiebout in the appendix of the book Alcoholics Anonymous Comes of Age, they nearly all suffered from some form of narcissism. Their narcissism had effectively blocked their recovery from alcoholism and eventually turned them into low-bottom drunks of the "hopeless variety."

The obvious cure for rampant narcissism and grandiosity is greater humility; and as it says in the essay on Step Seven in the "Twelve and Twelve," "the attainment of greater humility is the foundation principle of each of AA's Twelve Steps."

However, as Dr. Silkworth points out in "The Doctor's Opinion," "The classification of alcoholics seems most difficult." Ultimately, he tells us, all alcoholics "have one symptom in common: they cannot start drinking without developing the phenomenon of craving." That certainly describes me. All of us do have issues of our own that we need to deal with if we are to stay both sober and happy, often issues that "the attainment of greater humility" simply will not touch.

The program of recovery I work directly addresses my issues. The only person in the world it needs to work for is me, and it does that very, very well. Today I am not only sober, I am far happier than I had ever dreamed it was possible for me to be.

I now have a dozen sponsees of my own. Four of them, like me, are atheists who have absolutely no use for the Higher Power concept. Two of those have already enjoyed over four years of continuous sobriety.

Obviously I do not insist that my sponsees must all work the same program of recovery, nor do I tutor them in the program of recovery I designed to address my own issues – "defects of character," if you wish. Instead, I encourage each of them to follow my example by identifying their own issues, and then working a deliberate, systematic, active program of recovery designed by themselves, for themselves, to directly address their issues.

Over the years I have endured a lot of criticism from other AAs for my unorthodox beliefs, especially for my refusal to endorse the Twelve Steps as a perfect one-size-fits-all program of recovery for every alcoholic. But if Bill W. were alive today, I'm sure he would approve. As he suggested in the long form of Tradition Three, "Our membership ought to include all who suffer from alcoholism. Hence we may refuse none who wish to recover."

That certainly includes me. My fondest hope is that if enough others follow my example, someday it will include millions more like me who previously might have "walked into our midst, and then out again."

GREG H.

San Diego, Calif”

Comment: None needed!

Cheerio

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)

What's in a logo? Quite a lot apparently! (“Wessex Intergroup”)

It would seem (or so we have heard) that the newly formed “Wessex Intergroup” has jumped the gun somewhat so eager was this fledgling enterprise (or “cuckoo in the nest”) to establish its credibility as part of the AA service structure. In their efforts to give some semblance of authenticity to this “bastard” creation (note the use of the term “bastard” in this context does not imply invective, but merely an established reference to progeny who may not be entirely “legitimate”) the members in question purloined the AA logo, subsequently employing it as a letterhead on at least one of their “official” communications (see here). Apparently their use of the AA logo on this particular piece of correspondence aroused indignation in some quarters viz.

“A number of people have questioned the use of the AA logo and letterhead by an outside enterprise.”

The application of the terms “outside enterprise” so incensed the newly elected (?) chairman (?) of this “bastard” invention - “Wessex Intergroup” - that he was inspired to protest in a characteristically bombastic style (in our view he would definitely qualify as a “Mr Outraged from Tunbridge Wells”), and even managed to drag us into his objections. In another communication addressed to some unfortunate (in this case “sans logo”) he argues:

“Dear......

I think it should be remembered that the Wessex Intergroup is not an outside enterprise. All the constituent members are members of the Fellowship of Alcoholics Anonymous, this does rather sound like typical Cult Watch indoctrination twisting Guidelines and Traditions to suit their own questionable aims.

I have asked the Board to tell us on what authority they can deny the existence of an Intergroup which may make the use the logo quite legitimate. However, in the meantime we are not using the AA logo on our letter head as a matter of courtesy. Unfortunately the document that went out was written earlier and it was an oversight in my not changing the logo.

With love in Fellowship,

Paul P

On behalf of the Wessex Intergroup”

Well there you have it! Obviously it's all our fault! We really should know better by now! Remember: We (the cult) are ALWAYS right and you (the rest of the world) are ALWAYS wrong! Phew! That's a relief! For one horrible moment there the whole fabric of the cosmos seemed rent asunder! But now that the proper order of things has been fully restored we can continue with our little history. Unfortunately for Mr Outraged it would appear that it isn't in fact our fault at all! Who would have believed it! Nope.... Despite the new “Chairman's” protestations (and his fall back position “a matter of courtesy” …... Oh purrrrlllease!) it would seem that the General Service Board seem to hold to the same opinion ie.:

“ A number of people have questioned the use of the AA logo and letterhead by an outside enterprise.

The enclosed communication from ….... ( our board member ) clarifies the current situation :-

In response to …......'s request I can inform all parties, that the General Secretary of AA has sent a letter to all those who have an interest in "whether this Intergroup would be of benefit to the Fellowship".

A copy of that letter has also gone to Paul P along with a request NOT to use the logo until such times as the Fellowship accept the new Intergroup.

When all the replies are back from the Fellowship the Board will inform those concerned of their decision.

…....”

(our edits)

So it would seem that the novice “Chairman” of this new “Intergroup” has actually got it all WRONG! (sounds of the universe disintegrating all about us – we cower in terror!). Still this shouldn't be a problem because you MUST recall at this point that the cult operates on the basis of a completely different set of guidelines and principles to Alcoholics Anonymous – most notably their version of Tradition Four: “Each group should be completely autonomous, free to do absolutely anything it likes, and without any regard to any possible consequences for any other group or member or even AA as a whole”. (We think we got that right – feel free to correct us of course Mr “Chairman”!). But then if that particular sleight of hand doesn't do the trick they can always fall back on the “minority view” defence together with a bit of “punitive action” thrown in, and maybe even play the “martyr” role etc – but then what do we know? Who are we to question our betters? (Is it here that our sponsor is supposed to come to the rescue perhaps?)

Cheerio

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)

PS We do hear that the “bastards” (see above on invective) are still actively involved in cult service activity in PI work, hospitals etc. Would the real AA like to stand up?

PPS We would request that if we are to be maligned by cult members (something, by the way,we enjoy greatly!) we would appreciate it if at least they got the name of our organisation right! It's aacultwatch

More from Derbyshire....and Mid-Trent....and Notts....and Leicester... the plot thickens!

“They [Derbyshire intergroup] had us [Derby City groups] thrown off the local list of meetings twice, had every member of our meetings removed from service twice, and persuaded all three local intergroup to deny us membership. Their sponsees and those influenced by them reliably neglected to mention the existence of our group to helpline callers even when we were allowed on the list.

The intergroup situation is essentially a sham. The old East Midlands Intergroup was felt to be too large, and was dominated by a few Notts old-timers, so …..... created The Mid-Trent and Derbyshire Intergroups, which are still run by acolytes of those same Notts old-timers …....... with the cultists in tow or leading on occasion. Mid-Trent IG failed in fairly short order, and Derbyshire IG is just a fig-leaf for the Notts old-timers (or "senior AAs" as they like to be called) continuing to run things. They would rather have the cultists at the helm than a truly independent IG. We showed the senior AAs the literature we sent you and they did nothing, then allowed the cultists to throw us off. Leicester simply ignores the Intergroup, "Notts and Leicester IG" is only so called because Leicester can't even be bothered to turn up to announce that they are leaving.

I can give a lot more detail, but that's the essential position. When we were denied IG membership,we were told by ….. members (acting as IG emissaries) that all three IGs had had to deny us membership as a "unity issue". That this was the basis on which we are not in the IG makes our expulsion from service on the grounds of our non-membership all the more unreasonable.

In terms of documentary evidence, they have not in the past minuted any decision to throw us off, and have only gone in writing about the decision at all on this occasion, in the letter they sent to us."

Comment: We did contact Derbyshire IG to get their side of the story – the silence is still quite deafening!

Cheers

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)

(our usual thanks to this contributor)

Tolerate all but the intolerant!



Dissent in Derby – what exactly is going on in this intergroup?

We have received recent contacts from members within this intergroup including the following:

“Whilst we may not agree with you in every detail of your approach, we are happy to offer you information and assistance to try to support the achievement of our common goal, an AA of genuinely autonomous and effective meetings.

As well as their base in Long Eaton, the Derby Wednesday and Sunday "Friends Meeting House" meetings were taken over by the cultists around a year ago, and they also now run a number of "informal meetings" in Derby and Long Eaton. These "informal meetings" do not appear on the GSO list, and are run by the cult as explicitly and exclusively Christian affairs with no pretence of following AA tradition.

You can see confirmation of what I am telling you on the intergroup website here. Look at the meeting minutes for confirmation of their promotion of "informal meetings" [apparently this entry has now been removed from the intergroup website], their version of step 4 worksheets, and the use of a 1940's version of "questions and answers on sponsorship".

Bill is the name of their local leader. He is based in Long Eaton. His firmest follower is Geraldine, who has infiltrated the local Derbyshire intergroup, along with a number of other cultists including her soon to be ex-husband Jez.

The local intergroups under the influence of the cult removed every member of our groups [Derby City centre] from the 12-step list, and responders rota a couple of weeks ago.

Regards

…..”

Cheers

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)

(our usual thanks to this contributor)

Joys of Recovery Detroit (US)

Over the past few years from time to time we've received a few emails in relation to the above group. The name is suggestive (although not necessarily) of some kind of connection with the Joys/Visions cult in the UK. It does seem though that there is more of a direct linkage than that. Indeed we are given to understand that David (The Icon) C has been a regular visitor over the years and is even sponsor to at least one of its members. We are told that he enjoys some status within the group hierarchy, this led apparently by a husband and wife double act who function as “mummy and daddy” to its members. (The latter two have moved out of the area but still continue to sponsor many members of the group “cascade style”” thereby effectively controlling the group conscience. See below). English by birth David C has is now a resident in the US. For those of you who are not familiar with the cult lineage the Icon took over from the founder of the Joys movement, David B, when the latter finally shuffled off this “mortal coil” in 1998. He is one of the central coordinators of the cult's activities in the Great Britain and Ireland, and co-author of one of the cult websites from which so much of their ideas are drawn (including this little sample – now withdrawn from the website). We are told that the Detroit group exhibit all the usual characteristics of the Joys cult. As mentioned above they operate a “cascade style” of sponsorship ie. a hierarchical system based on the notion that recovery is impossible without the “direction” of a sponsor and moreover that compliance must be absolute; the sponsee must ALWAYS defer to the will of the sponsor. This is an effective paraphrase of Step Three (see here for our ironic interpretation of the steps 'cult style') . This dogma driven approach results in a top down pyramid power structure with the main sponsor(s) “running the show”, and dictating the group conscience to successive layers of sub-sponsors (sponsees). Those who fail to fall into their appointed role within this schema will find themselves excluded and indeed subject to summary “excommunication” from the collective; dissent - unlike misery apparently - is NOT optional. Effectively the central principle of AA , that each person (in order to recover) should seek to establish some kind of conscious contact with a God or Higher Power of their understanding, has been displaced by “sponsor power”, this last concept a direct contradiction of both the Steps and of the second “pertinent idea” referred to in Chapter Five “How It Works”:

(b) That probably no human power could have relieved our alcoholism

leading to the conclusion:

(c) That God could and would if He were sought.

Note: the complete absence of the terms “sponsor”, “sponsee”, “sponsorship” throughout the entire basic text.

We shall see though what we shall see

Cheerio

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)

(our thanks to our various reporters)