Alleged Scientology OSA Network Orders. 549 pages.

[JustSheila]

Here is the OSA Invest Officer checksheet with links to most of the more important references(thank you, Anonymous! )

http://www.gerryarmstrong.org/50grand/cult/osa-int-ed-508r.html

 

[JustSheila]

My take on these extracts that I've read says it's real Hubbard.

There's no-one else that I've read who can do the self-important verbose pontification in quite the same self-aggrandizing manner as the dead Guru.

And I used to believe these rat turds he scattered to us minions were truly pearls of wisdom.

FUCK YOU, OSA !!!

I hope these dox are another nail in your collective coffin.

I'm convinced. They're real. Not 'officially' real, bootleg real. I've checked all those we have against every online doc we have and they match, except the formatting is a little different and they don't have the end signatures as in previously released OSA N/W Orders. Maybe that changed over the years and this is the newer version. I don't know where these came from, Wikileaks, probably, since they are all together in a set like this.

I'm not one with too much pride to admit I was wrong, but I am never embarrassed to be skeptical and careful. After leaving scn, I'm not so easily scammed. That's not a bad thing, is it?

The later ones and revised ones are different because they are newer and because apparently DM is running out of people who can speak and write English worth a damn. I am NOT joking, and that's what is SO funny. I'm convinced these are all L Ron Hubbard's words from some time period, tape or otherwise, and where Elcon made mistakes in his speech or where it needed better formatting for an issue, why good ol' DM seems to have kept those mistakes in and taken the corrections out. With DMs bloated ego and love of rewriting and reissuing and not always giving any details of where these excerpts came from (some of them various LRH tapes and OODs items), the newer OSA NW Orders look even more stupid than the old ones and make Hubbard look dumber than ever. Maybe that's what we should be expecting, right? An increasingly dumb Church of Scientology. Even judges have made comments about this. What was smart 60 years ago isn't so good now, and taking corrections out to get back to original speaking and English errors... why, that's just lamebrain.

So it's true. Scientology decreases intelligence. Joining the Church of Scientology will lower your IQ and make you stupid. The ridiculous 60s quotes on psychiatry with no editing of any kind were issued as orders to OSA from DM in the 90s and 2000s. No wonder every spokesperson they have writes with more insane hyperbole than the last. Sheesh!

There may not be a useful org board in here (I guess those are on some other references) but there is a lot of documentation as proof that the Church of Scientology is, in fact, an insurgent group with policies directly stating its aims to subvert and control the US and other governments and those policies are used for current training of its staff under the guise of "religious protection."

Footbullet, much?

Here's a goody from OSA Network Order 24, Confidential The State of the Enemy issued 1 Mar 2006

You will have,as time marches on, a whole society in propitiation.

There are loads of these. Enough, I believe to get any governments to sit up and notice, if they haven't already.

So I'm with you on this, Scooter:

FUCK YOU OSA!!
(and fuck you too, DM, you arrogant, semi-literate idiot)

 

[ethercat]

NOTE TO ADMIN or MOD: Are you okay with me starting a thread posting each one of these actual issues as I find and verify them (as verified by others who were OSA or other, duplicate copies from other sources on the net)? There may be hundreds, and some are as long as 8 or 10 pages. Please let me know.

Are these things copyrighted? I would assume so. In that case, NO, we are specifically NOT OK with you posting a thread full of copyrighted documents, nor can we give permission to anyone to break the law.

Each individual is responsible for the content of their own postings. If required by a legitimate court order or subpoena, we must turn over all identifying info requested by a legitimate legal document. If someone wants to take on a project such as this and take that risk themselves, they would be better off creating their own web site instead of possibly focusing legal eyes on ESMB.

 

[Ogsonofgroo]

Are these things copyrighted? I would assume so. In that case, NO, we are specifically NOT OK with you posting a thread full of copyrighted documents, nor can we give permission to anyone to break the law.

Each individual is responsible for the content of their own postings. If required by a legitimate court order or subpoena, we must turn over all identifying info requested by a legitimate legal document. If someone wants to take on a project such as this and take that risk themselves, they would be better off creating their own web site instead of possibly focusing legal eyes on ESMB.

Or just yard it over to WWP to ge told to gtfogdiaf. Host the crap, dribble and fair use sensible, put the crap in the proper forums, case solved!


*paranoia will destroy ya*

The main thing folks should know about stu7ff like this is to quote a small, pertinent point that is of interest of the(op) poster, tell us why this matters to YOU, then now gtfo and diaf. Post the link to the article/site/host, fair usage is generally a paragraph or less, not pages of docsd, this site is a hub, not a host in my honest opinion. Links folks, the forums, go get!

iya.

 

[Veda]

Dead Agent Packs, used to slander "enemies," omit any author attribution or indication of source. They are not copyrighted.

Scientologists - when encountering curious "wogs" - often insist confidential Intelligence issues have no "issue authority" therefore, their often disgusting content cannot be blamed on Scientology.

Hubbard's original confidential and highly confidential Intel issues sometimes contain no author attribution of any kind. Other times, just "LRH" or an "R."

Scientology is a multi layered and compartmentalized operation. Around 1992 (possibly to appease - and fool - the IRS), Intel packs were broken up. Limited and compartmentalized materials provide an incomplete picture. It also prevents all but the top people from getting a complete picture.

Even a few offensive non confidential issues were edited and public versions made (for PR reasons), while the original versions remained the issues used.

All the original 1960s and 1970s issues by Hubbard are regarded as his senior instructions. These are the materials on which Scientology operates.

Incomplete versions are for mid or low level functionaries.

It also serves to protect Scientology which, rather than reform, has become even more covert.

______​

President of the Church of Scientology Check sheet, 1988:

This is a Public Relations post, yet this check sheet contains some Intel, and related, issues.

http://www.xenu.net/archive/go/heberhat.htm


Check sheet for the 1974 Information Full Hat:

http://www.xenu.net/archive/go/ic_conts.htm

The 1977 FBI raids also revealed a Covert Ops study course and check sheet which concentrated on dirty tricks entirely. Most of these documents were already in the Information Full Hat, but here there was additionally drilling, etc.

There were drills on spreading rumors, creating incidents which reflect badly on others, successfully assuming a disguise, on finding effective Hate/Love buttons, on finding what a person considers valuable or is protecting, on creating altered or phony documents, etc.

Besides drills there were clay demos. "Clay demo: It is advantageous to use deception when attacking."

 

[ThetanExterior]

I was out long before DM and "the Basics" came out, and I haven't looked at them, even tho Spouse has bought the fooking things.
Seems to me that you can't copyright ideas.
If DM changes a few things in an LRH taped lecture , can DM then copyright it as 'lrh'?, altho it isn't precisely the same?

carry on

I remember seeing something a few years ago that said the actual classification of Hubbard's books with the Library of Congress, or wherever they are officially classified, wasn't the way most people would expect them to be.

Take for instance a book such as The Fundamentals Of Thought.

Most people would expect the book to be classified as Title: The Fundamentals Of Thought, Author: L. Ron Hubbard.

But I believe the actual classification is Title: The Fundamentals Of Thought L. Ron Hubbard, Author: Based on the works of L. Ron Hubbard.

So when you see a book cover showing: The Fundamentals Of Thought, L. Ron Hubbard - that is not the title plus author, it's just the title.

If this is true then I would think it gives DM leeway to change the books pretty much any way he wants to.

I don't know how this relates to tapes but I'm sure DM will have a way of doing what he wants with those also.

 

[JustSheila]

Are these things copyrighted? I would assume so. In that case, NO, we are specifically NOT OK with you posting a thread full of copyrighted documents, nor can we give permission to anyone to break the law.

Each individual is responsible for the content of their own postings. If required by a legitimate court order or subpoena, we must turn over all identifying info requested by a legitimate legal document. If someone wants to take on a project such as this and take that risk themselves, they would be better off creating their own web site instead of possibly focusing legal eyes on ESMB.

Thanks, Ethercat.

Oddly, no, apparently the OSA N/W issues are no longer copyrighted. According to the more recently out ex-OSAs, DM dropped using copyrights on the "confidential" (aka, legally and morally reprehensible) materials of COS for later deniability. I don't think that means squat for deniability, though... the idiot seems to have dropped copyrights on the entire OSA N/W series, including PRish issues, rather than just the objectionable ones, and since various OSA references are referred to in other, copyrighted publications, that spoils his whole deniability plan. COS was always so big on cross-referencing things, and that really works against them here.

Regardless, COS may hassle ESMB because that's what it does, so Og's suggestion is better. Will keep off ESMB except fair quote useage and links.

Or just yard it over to WWP to ge told to gtfogdiaf. Host the crap, dribble and fair use sensible, put the crap in the proper forums, case solved!

Yup. You guyz already have this, but it needs to be sorted so that each issue can be pulled up on the Internet by name and number. I'll get over there later today to chat.

Dead Agent Packs, used to slander "enemies," omit any author attribution or indication of source. They are not copyrighted.

Scientologists - when encountering curious "wogs" - often insist confidential Intelligence issues have no "issue authority" therefore, they're often disgusting content cannot be blamed on Scientology.

Hubbard's original confidential and highly confidential Intel issues sometimes contain no author attribution of any kind. Other times, just "LRH" or an "R."

Scientology is a multi layered and compartmentalized operation. Around 1992 (possibly to appease - and fool - the IRS), Intel packs were broken up. Limited and compartmentalized materials provide an incomplete picture. It also prevents all but the top people from getting a complete picture.

Even a few offensive non confidential issues were edited and public versions made (for PR reasons), while the original versions remained the issues used.

All the original 1960s and 1970s issues by Hubbard are regarded as his senior instructions. These are the materials on which Scientology operates.

Incomplete versions are for mid or low level functionaries.

It also serves to protect Scientology which, rather than reform, has become even more covert.

______​

President of the Church of Scientology Check sheet, 1988:

This is a Public Relations post, yet this check sheet contains some Intel, and related, issues.

http://www.xenu.net/archive/go/heberhat.htm

Thanks, Veda.

COS actually made it easier than ever to show the dual nature of its activities by doing this. All a person has to do is separate the issues marked ''Confidential" and "Highly Confidential" from the rest to see which policies senior management uses versus what is given to the rank and file. Any judge can see the covert, manipulative game of Scientology that way, and like you pointed out in the Heber Hat, those confidential references are referred to in other places, so aren't so easily denied.

 

[dchoiceisalwaysrs]

I tried and failed to snip that exact quote from Sheila's post. LOL.

It is a collection covering years and years.
Some of those could have been removed before Mike Rinder was ever issued a 'hat pack'.

I have seen a number of the GO issues which I think predated the FBI raids, hmmm they might be found in the files which the FBI acquired during the July 1977 raids. Also there were a number of GO issues or hat write ups done by the key players of the time between 1972 and 1977, which I have seen but dealt with these issues.. I can't recall if they make reference to LRH advices or orders, but I wouldn't be surprised if they don't as hubbard was hiding behind them.

Of course there was also this.

""In January 1980, fearing a raid by law enforcement agencies, Hubbard's representatives ordered the shredding of all documents showing that Hubbard controlled Scientology organizations, finances, personnel, or the property at Gilman Hot Springs. In a two week period, approximately one million pages were shredded pursuant to this order."

--California appellate court, 2nd. district, 3rd. division, July 29, 1991, B02

I do wonder also what is still retained but in the underground vaults.

Another thought is how the defendants in the Rathbun case did not IIRC provide the documents as requested by Ray Jeffrey in that case, but stalled, diverted the case via Anti-SLAPP and then case was dropped, so the files of scientology never got pushed for again.
I don't have proof obviously but I do wonder how some of the lawyers for CSI, RTC and the gang can even stand up in courtroom these days.

Aren't lawyers liable for conspiring to hide or destroy evidence of crimes?

I will try to find the request in the discovery part of the pre-trial... but for now

HH the jokerman, hits the nail on the head Feb 4th 2014.

"

Scientologists don't call it "scraping clean incriminating evidence".

They call it "erasing low-toned, contra-survival entheta". I probably should have added "on this planet" in there somewhere to give it a sense of gravitas. LOL
________________________

Scientology literally saved my life! Without Ron's books I would have frozen to death!!! (see avatar)

Scientology in one word? HelluvaHoax!

I never felt as free as when I freed myself from "Total Freedom".

For offended Scientologists reading this blasphemy about L. Ron Hubbard---my apologies for talking about real life without lying to you, like Scientology, with goo-goo theta-talk. I know you don't have a floating needle right now. You're not supposed to.
"

 

[dchoiceisalwaysrs]

My old cassette PDC tapes had copyright blabber on each intro to a lecture. The more recent Basics lectures I purchased online from libraries didn't have any verbal copyright notification. I don't think they were pirated. The CDs were sealed in their case and were complete with booklets.

Did the box that they came in have pictures of squirrels all over it?

 

[dchoiceisalwaysrs]

I found a sweet little tidbit in an HCO PL that is still current and has been on the Invest Officer checksheet (OSA INT ED 508R) that may just get COS classified by The Office of Homeland Security as a subversive group or worse:

This is from HCO PL 15 Aug 60, Dept of Govt Affairs:



http://www.gerryarmstrong.org/50grand/cult/pl-dept-govt-affairs.html#goal

(Thank you, Gerry Armstrong )

Hell if I remember where but in the last week or so I commented about the FBI labeling CST and Church of Scientology as domestic terrorist. Oh yes,, it was on Tony Ortega's blog. And I made the comment because it was right there in an image of an FBI doc. . I'll try to find it.

ETA: Found it inside Panopea Abruptas post

https://disqus.com/home/discussion/theundergrondbunker/saturday_313/#comment-3303618146

 

[Churchill]

Here is the OSA Invest Officer checksheet with links to most of the more important references(thank you, Anonymous! )

http://www.gerryarmstrong.org/50grand/cult/osa-int-ed-508r.html

This checksheet is what I remember.
I'm not sure if it's part of this checksheet, but there was also a write-up I was given on assuming false identities that involved the grisly task of scouring old obituaries or cemeteries and finding a child that had died shortly after childbirth and then obtaining a duplicate birth certificate, after which one could add supporting false identity documents with relative ease.
I wonder how many Scientologists read that write-up over the years.
The OSA Network Orders, by contrast, read more like manifestos; sterile, and disconnected from the nefarious and sometimes gruesome ecclesiastical activities that the tax-exempt Church of Scientology engages in. The reality of what Scientology engages in is a lot more damning than the OSA Network Orders would suggest.
Finally, whether they are real or not, and I suspect not, I do want to give a very heartfelt shout out to OSA:

FUCK YOU, OSA!

 

[ThetanExterior]

Thanks, Ethercat.

Oddly, no, apparently the OSA N/W issues are no longer copyrighted. According to the more recently out ex-OSAs, DM dropped using copyrights on the "confidential" (aka, legally and morally reprehensible) materials of COS for later deniability. I don't think that means squat for deniability, though... the idiot seems to have dropped copyrights on the entire OSA N/W series, including PRish issues, rather than just the objectionable ones, and since various OSA references are referred to in other, copyrighted publications, that spoils his whole deniability plan. COS was always so big on cross-referencing things, and that really works against them here.
Regardless, COS may hassle ESMB because that's what it does, so Og's suggestion is better. Will keep off ESMB except fair quote useage and links.
Yup. You guyz already have this, but it needs to be sorted so that each issue can be pulled up on the Internet by name and number. I'll get over there later today to chat.

You could see if ESMB member OSAOPS will put them on www.meepthorp.com

 

[OSAOPS]

Meepthorp's next reveal is in progress. Soon.

 

[Knows]

I looked briefly through the table of contents and a number of OSA Network Orders.

I found an interesting conflict between OSA Network Orders #139 and #142, both of which were issued on the same day, both taken from writings of Hubbard from different times. Here's excerpts from both of them:

#139


#142

Ahhhhhh yes - the ole "Hubbard Law of Commotion"

Heh - good job for spotting one of out of millions - " Hubbard's Law of Commotion "

 

[JustSheila]

I'll be at WWP tonight or tomorrow. (I imagine they've already gotten stuff underway, cause they don't mess around!)

 

[lotus]

. . .
I demand an Independent Special Counsel and Bipartisan Committee
investigate the subject and present its findings before we proceed any further. *

This is the single greatest witch hunt of an OSA exec in Scientology history!

 

[HelluvaHoax!]

. . .
I demand an Independent Special Counsel and Bipartisan Committee
investigate the subject and present its findings before we proceed any further. *

* Guarantees this thread will go on for a really long time.

.

 

[phenomanon]

Okay. here's the Copyright data from the Titanium-looking case that the tapes " Thought, Emotion, and Effort are housed in.: none on the case itself. None on the Cassette case anywhere. The Cassette itself has the Copyright notice, entered in miniscule lettering around the top of the cassette in gold letters. last copyright looks like 2007.

hope that helps

 

[Watchful Navigator]

Alleged Scientology OSA Network Orders. 549 pages.

Provided by Watchful Navigator aka Scott Gordon.

https://watchfulnavigator.files.wordpress.com/2017/04/osa-nw-orders.pdf

https://watchfulnavigator.wordpress...igator-leaks-osa-intelligence-training-vault/
(See link OSA NW ORDERs at top left under green banner.)

Cover:

https://watchfulnavigator.wordpress.com/2017/05/01/watchful-navigator-leaks-osa-intelligence-training-vault

It has been a long, long time since I signed into ESMB. Last I was here was to defend and explain Lia Kia's ("Yuliya Keaton") Sea Org infiltration and return - which contrary to Ortega's statement at the time, was none of my doing until she got in there and needed my help (my phone number on her phone is what made OSA's External Security Chief Beth McKinley push the red alert buzzer to Int Base).

I leaked the OSA NW Orders pack, though I am not at liberty to say who and where I got it from. Suffice it to say that in the heady days of the emerging new Independent Scientologist movement, we were quite united in our dedication to take down Miscavige, and there was a lot of trust amongst those of us who were boldly "under the radar" (I was still in "good standing" though no longer on staff).

In order to remind those to whom it really matters who will be reading this, at great personal risk I leaked one of the most exclusive and extensive e-mail lists of Scientology "OLs" including Dennis Clarke, Bruce Wiseman, Mark Schreffler and lots of celebrities (which was later used in the Debby Cook e-mailing to extensive PR damage and loss of membership - the e-mail list made available to me by a slip-up of the sender who hit "cc" instead of "bcc" which I caught alertly and passed on) - and this OSA NW Orders pack was passed on to me. I am pretty sure that most or all Indy leadership of this time had a copy of this pack.

I tried many times to "wikileak" this pack, but wikileaks was always down when I went to do it. I have made many inroads to the Freedom/Truth/Justice movements (some here would call some of them "conspiracy nuts") so I first leaked them to their huge Facebook groups of 30,000+ members, for my own protection. I then made lots of noise on a wide variety of ex- and pro- Scientology Facebook groups, being one of the rare, active, ongoing whistleblowers who also continues to practice Scientology auditing independently.

In the second comment of this thread is a link to an Ortega statement which I find very curious and thought-stopping in its contradictory nature:

* * * * * BEGIN EXCERPT * * * * *

Tony Ortega Mod • 11 minutes ago

Gordon posted this a couple of weeks ago. There are issues with it, not the least being that it was never actually published by the church and is not an official Scientology issue.

I may be writing something about it later. But at this point, Gordon has put the source of this document in some serious risk, and he doesn't seem to care.

* * * * * END EXCERPT * * * * *

Actually, a bit "chilling" is the word. Tony seems to know who authored the pack (which I can only guess at, since I do not honestly know, other than I am pretty sure it was smuggled out of the church). I have put this "source" of the pack (assuming he means its compiler?) at "serious risk" - which - how would you take that statement if you were the whistleblower? Would you find comfort in that statement?

The fact is that I do care or I would not have taken the risk of leaking it!

FreeBeingMe:

I'm going with Mike Rinder's assessment. Mainly because I've read Ex-OSA Watchful Navigator's posts at Martyland wherein he admits to conducting an OSA type op on Karen at outer banks and seems really bent out of shape Ex's and Whistle-blowers (and me in particular) are exposing, denouncing and discussing the horrible abuses the mafia crime wave of $cientology is inflicting on people.

is referring to my being "bent out of shape" over his crashing and trashing our tech discussion post on "The Pilot" writings here at ESMB some years back, which basically drove me off ESMB all this time, discouraged as hell that help and cooperation from freezoners in taking down the criminal church wasn't going to be possible with that kind of ugly.

I still cannot fathom the wisdom of trashing independent practitioners who, by undercutting church prices and offering a far safer alternative to authoritarian organization, could be natural allies in driving them out of business. The 1982 exodus seems to have been filled with the spirit of cooperation between many differing factions and yet for whatever reason, we have sadly failed to come together in way too many areas.

On the other hand, I am equally baffled and outraged with the Hubbard loyalists who remain programmed to Fair Game, and the batty sci-fi hold-outs who want to believe they are "chief BT" and think they can somehow practice that "sourcery" and still fancy themselves "ethical."

I have tracked with Marty all the way, and while I am not a fanatic follower, I have admired and defended his brand of whistleblowing all along through the changes, revelations and attacks. I still do not know what to think of the latest, but I have not given up on his eventual clearing of the air. I do know that I can count on him if I end up needing advice on the violent reaction heating up over this alleged "serious risk" I've stirred up.

At bare minimum, this is highly embarrassing to those who had been holding the pack. Any one of them could have at least wikileaked this anonymously (I did so simultaneous to the DM birthday release of 30 April).

So far I have acted alone. In some degree of coordination with those few folks who really understand, but alone.

And I have done this all out in the open (I am somewhat surprised the public Facebook activity on this was not picked up - a lot of this was done under duress of a huge take-down of "Free Scientology: Chat" which unexplainedly without notice, went "public" and was over-run with spammers - it was not my group but I was given admin privileges eventually, and we have it under control now and even back on "public" mode - open to Xenu jokes and even with some of the nutty history of those attacks preserved to get a flavor of what happened - for the curious and the lulz).

I am actively engaged in the impossible project of cleaning the therapeutic value of auditing procedures from the control-freak religious practices and I know most here view that as "hopeless" (please -I get so tired of the "raisins" cliche which makes me barf ...my "hates" button...).

That's my thing - technical research - my real "agenda" as it were, and explains why I get miffed at Ortega and other actors who in my opinion seriously misrepresent the real reasons the Scientology sociological experiment so gruesomely failed and is failing (except for the fact it still generates huge revenues).

I know I will be called OSA. Ah well. I am not asking for trust here - I have steeled myself not to care. Truth is my only religion anymore (I am a decidedly "non-religious" Scientologist and support in principle but am not a part of, the new Indy church organization). I think OSA is mainly a "paper tiger" (not to minimize Fair Game operations still in play against Mike Rinder and Ronnie Miscavige and many, many others) and I truly believe that there are largely unpublicized operations that go way above OSA's pay-grade both in and out of the church's sphere of operations, and that contrary to Scio assumptions, powerful interests exist just as much to keep this lucrative sociological experiment going, as to "shut it down."

It is a "controlled opposition" melee, tailor made to hide its true origins and depth of deception. I really don't think near enough people have reached the "core of the onion" - (keep peeling). Of course, I am a "conspiracy nut" (cuz even though I "flatly" reject flat earth, NASA still fakes photos (joke) - ...hope I don't get banned...).

Side-by-side, all of these old GO references we have looked at so far, match word-for-word with this newer OSA NW Orders leaked pack. It looks highly similar to the whole "Golden Age of Knowledge" books release with the fancy new fonts and such. I've seen many good comments here already, so I won't belabor those related points already made.

https://mikemcclaughry.wordpress.co...ce-courses-and-more-resources-for-historians/
Here is a valuable resource as a "link to all links" as it were. Even the downed Gerry Armstrong resource site with Guardian's Office references has been recovered in order to assemble the best collection of Guardian's Office issues, I think you will find in one place.

Notably missing from this new pack (besides some others already pointed out here) are these damning GO references:

"Counter-Attack Tactics" - 28 Mar 1972
"Intelligence Principles" - 28 Mar 1972

The "new" issues that seem to be unaccounted for in relation to older GO packs? These are compilations of lecture and other excerpts that whoever put this together seems to have assumed it would be helpful for OSA staff to have. (This pack was not in use in 2001 when I completed my "Full Hat" at PAC Base, and someone has said it is dated 2003(?)

I have subscribed to this thread so that I can answer further questions, and I will try to check in more.

I believe my FreeScientology project will go nowhere without full honesty and transparency all the way through, and here is some of my background covering my 11 years in OSA (though I need to update this soon, because I have changed a lot over the last years...)
https://watchfulnavigator.wordpress.com/about/

 

[JustSheila]

Good to see you posting here again, Watchful Navigator. Welcome back.

Thank you for uploading and releasing these documents, which apparently have been kicking around for years.

For the record, you were NOT one of the persons I was referring to as extreme with conspiracy theory. Most people aren't, there have been dozens and dozens of folks who follow conspiracy theory here and ESMB has plenty of active members who still follow that stuff. Some of it I find personally interesting and even plausible. As I said earlier, lots of conspiracies actually happen and are true. Conspiracy stuff was only ever an issue at ESMB, AFAIK, when the conspiracy itself was not scn related AND promoted attacking a minority group of which some ESMBers were members. You write of everyone working together, so I am sure you can see how that sort of thing would be divisive.

----

As for the issues:

There actually ARE some tweaks and changes here and there in these new OSA N/W references which were not in the original original Guardian Orders. For example, one of the investigatory references has 'with the use of the Freedom of Information Act' or similar edited in. Seeing this was one of the things that convinced me of the legitimacy of these OSA N/W orders. When that revision to the Guardian Order first appeared, it was in italics, and that is the way I first read the issue. Back in the late 70s/early 80s, all revisions were in italics. I remember that one and guarantee you that L Ron never referred to using the FOIA in the original context in which he is quoted. Later, no italics - as if it had never appeared any differently, and the same was done with some HCO PLs, etc. when DM took over. Churchill might remember that one; I sure did, it was changed after the FBI raid. I'm sure Jesse Prince can also confirm that the REAL OSA N/W orders have these sorts of tweaks in them written in as if they had always been that way. In other words, for legal reasons, not all of the OSA N/W orders are exactly the same as the pre-raid GO references. COS' story was that those who went to jail were renegades and their actions were off-policy, but actually, they weren't. The originals were destroyed, of course, but somewhere exists the LRH reference where these references were quoted.

In Frank Oliver's Invest Officer Hat Pack, there is an org board, but it is not one of the OSA N/W references. That answered my question on that subject, but unfortunately, I could not see it well enough to read it. IDK if you or anyone else has the computer ability to get a legible copy of this off the original, but I very much want to see it. Here is the link, again: https://www.scribd.com/document/4839...liver-Full-Hat

It's a shame there are so many OSA N/W orders missing. #1 establishes the network. If you or anyone else has links to where the rest of them might be, I'd like to see them.

Thank you.