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
