OSA Operatives: How-to Guide

Free to shine

Shiny & Free
Heh! Now that I re-read it, it was a bit wanky. Sorry.

I have started working my way through your "Ron The Hypnotist" information. What a truck-load of work you have done on the subject! I wish I had listened to this earlier. Great intro and, yes, when it comes to garnering a glimpse at the devilish use of "therapy" I am but learning to stand. All those little tricks and tips: mixing past/present tense, unexpected swerves in subject, story telling, little gaps in the narrative for "dub in", redefinition, repetition, and so on, until the "mark" is left with only one way to think. In the intense atmosphere of Scientology where the physical, social, and psychological infrastructure is designed not only impart but also enforce its agenda, what little chance an individual has. And how dare L Ron Hubbard describe his blatant misuse of such skills as "getting Ethics in"!! Ethics?? FFS!!

Fortunately, outside of the Scientology environment there are better odds on recognising and dealing with Hubbard's "planetary therapists". Maintaining access to hard won knowledge, as this thread does, and creating a space for dialogue, as ESMB does, is essential.

Anyway, I'm rambling as usual. I'm going to shut up and go into lurk mode for a while. My data collection phase is largely over. Thank you for your comments, thank you this thread, and thank you ESMB.

I think it's great that you are asking the questions, ones that perhaps those who were in don't now how to frame, specially people like me who didn't have the benefit of much of a 'normal' education, especially in critical analysis. Having to work it all out by yourself is very hard and Arnie has done a terrific job in bringing together info that would normally take a long time to find.

Arnie says earlier:
Just because a person claims they are out of scientology, and now voices criticism of "Ron" this has nothing whatsoever to do with preventing them from being covertly manipulated by devious means into newly believing something else that is patently false...in FACT, until such time as they become familiar with the psychological methods used to manipulate them, those methods will continue to be effective. AND Covert hypnosis works even better upon those who have been hypnotized in the past.

For good people to do evil toward someone they must be tricked into believing that, that someone, deserves it. this is demonization, and scapegoating, both techniques that have been succesfully used upon the public at large to start wars amongst nations since the beginning of time, and still are used, and that technique WORKS, and that technique was being used on trainspotting.

If you read the OSA manuals, you can see that it's often a matter of using and manipulating normal human reactions. Get someone fired, isolated, depressed etc. Sometimes it doesn't take much ... just a whisper from a "friend" to set off and it can easily escalate into this:

Scapegoat:

"Process in which the mechanisms of projection or displacement are utilised
in focusing feelings of aggression, hostility, frustration, etc., upon
another individual or group; the amount of blame being unwarranted."

Projection: Unwanted thoughts and feelings can be unconsciously projected
onto another who becomes a scapegoat for one's own problems. This concept
can be extended to projection by groups. In this case the chosen individual,
or group, becomes the scapegoat for the group's problems.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scapegoating

I don't believe OSA is behind every bush, but I did work in the Guardian's Office in my youth and I SAW those type of programs being done. I didn't understand it all at the time and didn't question it properly until later on. To think that OSA would not try those programs on ESMB or Trainspotting is being naive. The trick is to question, to observe, to form your own opinions not based on words but on actions, to discuss and bring facts to light, not just opinions.

Nothing wrong with having your own opinions, but when it becomes a dogpiling with strident voices (words) it's time to stand back and get a bigger picture and start questioning. Personal integrity is just that, personal.
 

Osiris

Patron with Honors
I think it is interesting that the Scientology organization's, only defense is to LIE, DISCREDIT, MISLEAD, COVER-UP, INTIMIDATE, BULLY, & TERRORIZE, to name a few, in an OSA operation. :confused2:

It obviously speaks volumes that the Scientology Organization's deeds operate at the opposite end of the Truth scale :angry:

(I also often thought that the TRs were only teaching someone to lie while keeping a straight face, :duh:)
 

Lermanet_com

Gold Meritorious Patron
I think it is interesting that the Scientology organization's, only defense is to LIE, DISCREDIT, MISLEAD, COVER-UP, INTIMIDATE, BULLY, & TERRORIZE, to name a few, in an OSA operation. :confused2:

It obviously speaks volumes that the Scientology Organization's deeds operate at the opposite end of the Truth scale :angry:

(I also often thought that the TRs were only teaching someone to lie while keeping a straight face, :duh:)

Good on you re the TR's, the shore story was "Learn to confront" the truth was "Learn to hypnotize yourself and a partner at the same time"

your comment rings to mind a few things...

1) Lawrence Wollersheim pointed out to me in 1995, when i was a Director for the Anti-cult group FACTNet that:

Hubbard said "Always attack, never defend"

and that

"Scientology always attacks because their conduct IS INDEFENSIBLE!"

Frauds have no choice! This applies to people on the net too...

This is one of those "in your face" truisms... and an example that
the best place to hide something is right in front of you...

this is repetitive pattern of the fraud of scientology

2) While reading your comment above another thing occurred to me...

there is a rapid and covert induction into trance technique called "The Paternal Induction Technique" < I should add this to the hypnosis index, but it is posted on ESMB, it should be read by anyone who wishes to preserve their integrity...This method, IMO, has been used effectively in the past to stir up folks to attack those who were perceived as 'leaders' in the anti-cult movement. (Hubbard makes extensive use of this technique in his tapes... and perhaps some of you thought, when he would chuckle, that he was laughing WITH us? He was laughing AT us! Perhaps thinking "They swallowed that?")

This is a restatement of the same technique from the 20's called
"The Stage Attack Method"

Both techniques in short, consist of

"Always attack, never defend"


Note Well: The only place I have found that this material is taught, is at the infamous, US Army Military School of the Americas which is opposed by a group called "SOAW.ORG founded in response to the brutal murder of six Jesuit Priests in El Salvidor. The US Army School of the Americas teaches methods of torture and quelling political dissent to third world country police forces across the globe. the methods taught include techniques of covert hypnosis. This fact was obtained by my wife during a conversation with a US Mil Special Ops graduate of the School of the Americas. (who shall remain anonymous), who, after she described the materials I have described above, admitted, "we are taught that and more" and implied that we were getting very close to sensitive truths....
 
Last edited:

Lermanet_com

Gold Meritorious Patron
I get what you are saying, but this stuff went of for months & months & months with no resolution & quite frankly people (including myself) were fed up with it. I did try to settle it offlines MANY TIMES. I won't go into it now but it wasn't through a lack of trying (at least on my behalf). So at some stage you've gotta say "enough" and draw the line.

I must bring up a parallel example of the situation you describe...

When scientology enters into any litigation - the litigation is pursued with the goal of inducing a sealed cash settlement and sealed case documents. what you describe, the inducement of an identical state of affairs , was the same method used in the Lisa McPherson civil case litigations...

arnie

PS: Emma I need more time to edit... thankfully even with the typos my previous post still makes sense.
errata: rings should read brings
and this is repetitive pattern of the fraud of scientology should read this is a repetitive pattern of the fraud of scientology
and Add a Note: Note well that Hubbard was an expert stage hypnotist see typewritten notes by Ron's literary agent, Forrest Ackerman, mid way down this page LINK see page about the kid he hypnotized who then went around showng everyone the Tiny Kangaroo hopping in his hand, and the adjacent page about hypnotizing another kid who was holding onto a wooden handrail of a staircase, screaming in pain, while thinking he was holding onto a red hot iron rail and but unable to unclasp his hands to let go...Does this not sound a bit like the state of an average good-standing scientologist today?
 
Last edited:

Lermanet_com

Gold Meritorious Patron
Note Well: The only place I have found that this material is taught, is at the infamous, US Army Military School of the Americas which is opposed by a group called "SOAW.ORG founded in response to the brutal murder of six Jesuit Priests in El Salvidor. The US Army School of the Americas teaches methods of torture and quelling political dissent to third world country police forces across the globe. the methods taught include techniques of covert hypnosis. This fact was obtained by my wife during a conversation with a US Mil Special Ops graduate of the School of the Americas. (who shall remain anonymous), who, after she described the materials I have described above, admitted, "we are taught that and more" and implied that we were getting very close to sensitive truths....


[video=youtube;KOQzmtU1SjM]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KOQzmtU1SjM[/video]
 
Last edited:

Lermanet_com

Gold Meritorious Patron
The best way to hide something is right out there in front of you. This is a perfect example.

ten years ago, I thought I'd come up with that line, from observing OSA in action....,"The best place to hide something is right in front of you" 2003, 2008 but just found it 2 years ago in a mind-bending book that ex's should read...called "The CIA and the World of Arts and Letters" as a US CIA Intelligence maxim
 

Lulu Belle

Moonbat
ten years ago, I thought I'd come up with that line, from observing OSA in action....,"The best place to hide something is right in front of you" 2003, 2008 but just found it 2 years ago in a mind-bending book that ex's should read...called "The CIA and the World of Arts and Letters" as a US CIA Intelligence maxim

Haven't you guys ever heard of The Purloined Letter? Written by Edgar Allan Poe and published in 1844?

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100930175539AALaFEo

There truly is nothing new under the sun....
 

Anonycat

Crusader
I think it is interesting that the Scientology organization's, only defense is to LIE, DISCREDIT, MISLEAD, COVER-UP, INTIMIDATE, BULLY, & TERRORIZE, to name a few, in an OSA operation. :confused2:

It obviously speaks volumes that the Scientology Organization's deeds operate at the opposite end of the Truth scale :angry:

(I also often thought that the TRs were only teaching someone to lie while keeping a straight face, :duh:)

I agree - and I would add that I feel it is a sign that:

1) Ron expected to have himself exposed for what he was, a con artist, thief, provider of placebos, and a mind-controlling loon.

2) Being revealed would be bad for his bank account, and ability to stay out of prison.

3) He was pretty paranoid.
 
OSA Operatives: How-to Guide

Several times over the last few months I’ve mentioned OSA operations as they are applied to Critics of scientology. Each time I mention it I usually get replies that add up to bluster about how inept OSA is, rejections of my comments as paranoia or variations on the “I ain’t afraid of no stinkin’ OSA” type of comment.
I know for a fact that the current OSA is nowhere near as good at what they do as the GO of yesteryear was. They just don’t have the same calibre of personnel or the freedom of action and independence that the GO had.
Regardless, I still consider it a mistake of magnitude to underestimate them.
Many are familiar with the few publicly exposed operations such as "Snow White" and "Operation Freakout" but I wonder how many know about the multitude of successful secret operations run by the GO/OSA?
Believe me, the average scn’ist or Ex wouldn’t know a fraction of it.
On the board here at ESMB there are a number of ex-OSA/ex-GO staff and I thought it might be enlightening to some for these people to inform us of their personal experience, particularly as it relates to “handling” Critics.
I’m sure that the title of this thread will undoubtedly entice the wits (at least half of them) to chip in with repartee but, for the sake of making ESMB a safer place to refer newly-out or wavering scn’ists, I beg your restraint in this matter.

I’ll begin:
Intelligence operatives (GO Bureau 1) operated on the following plan in order to achieve their Valuable Final Product;

“PLANS: Generally to locate every source of opposition to Scientology and the control point of these sources and to reduce their power to ineffectiveness and/or take them over.”

“VALUABLE FINAL PRODUCT: Exterior enemies and attacks located and restrained and/or removed.”

I’ve previously detailed some of the statistics of B1 on another thread. All deal with getting people to shut up, cease attacking, get distracted, change sides, attack someone else, run away, hide etc. I’m sure you get the picture.

Here are examples of just a couple of capers run very successfully in the past, they’re not verbatim but are as close as I can recall AND they’re factual and were done to full success hundreds of times that I know of.
Firstly;
Attend any public meeting/forum/discussion that might possibly touch upon scn and successfully steer the talk away from anything negative about scn if it appears to be heading in this direction. (Positive talk about scn was the arena of PR).
I did this cycle many times and was always 100% effective at side-tracking anything about scn and steering the discussion onto designated enemies of scn.
The designated enemy depended on the nature of the forum, eg: if the forum was religious in nature the discussion might be steered onto psych-abuse, if it was mental-health in nature you might steer it to government or religion, if it was “community concern” in nature you would always be safe steering it to politicians/government etc.
According to my observation, this caper has been resurrected (if it ever went away) and is currently being run on internet message boards and chat rooms with great success. ESMB is no exception. The number of threads and “dangerous topics” derailed is quite spectacular from an OSA point of view and they must be justly proud of the success of their modern-day application of this particular program. It probably also accounts for the presence of a couple of notable scn’ists at the recent Melbourne forum about Kenja. (Ken Dyers, a principal of Kenja, had a scn background and so the discussion might have touched upon scn.)

Secondly;
One method of handling a target Critic.
Contact the target Critic by phone, pretending to be a fellow-critic. Agree with the person’s criticisms of scn and voice your own (*see note on “suitable criticisms” below).
Become more strident and whiney until you successfully annoy the person into refuting something you are saying.
Don’t stop, continue to whine using the reject-buttons (these are from a list written by LRH, buttons that cause people to reject what you’re saying) and refuse to stop criticising, don’t acknowledge or listen to anything the target says. If he/she refutes your data accuse him/her of supporting or being a scientologist.
Don’t stop; keep going until the person hangs up on you. (You may have to repeat this action if unsuccessful on first application.)
This one was imminently successful and, amazingly enough, shut down several high profile radio personalities and State politicians. They never again publicly criticised scn (major B1 points when you achieve this). I never had to call someone twice; they just couldn’t tolerate the idea of thinking of themselves as somehow associated with or anything like this brain-dead, obstreperous, whiney critic of scn (the B1 Operative)!
I believe this caper is also alive and well on various internet boards and chat rooms. (Watch for the completely inane and unreasonable idiot-critic who makes you feel like leaving the chat or board.)

That will do for now, perhaps some of the other ex-GO/OSA crew will chip in or perhaps this idea will just be ignored and ridiculed as fanciful paranoia. Unfortunately, it’s not. One day I may even discover the courage to tell the whole story but many of the actors are still alive and would be hurt or imprisoned for no tangible gain (they’re almost all Ex-scn’ists now).
I decided to post this as a means of making good on some part of the damage I did to the Critic Movement in years long gone. Perhaps if I’d been less effective at my job, we wouldn’t even be having this discussion today.
To those I hurt along the way, I sincerely apologise.
Love, Panda.

* The things on the list of “suitable criticisms” were just general, already widely published views about scn. The only thing that was forbidden was any mention of LRH, that was to be avoided if possible but, of course, it never was. The sci-fi writer background or the “why write for pennies, if you want to get really rich just start your own religion” quote were the most common criticisms of LRH at the time. You listened to it and even agreed but never contributed to this particular line of criticism. Of course, we knew nothing about the abuse and exploitation exposed in later years, we thought we were saving mankind.

cooooooool...

ron was no dummy.

so you post this at the height of the anon protests and they still get stampeded off onto other dark castles...
 

Claire Swazey

Spokeshole, fence sitter
LRH had much about which to be paranoid. He pissed off a lot of people.

I just think he may've been paranoid about the wrong people. He should have been looking over his shoulder for those who were members of his organization and who were screwed over.
 

Churchill

Gold Meritorious Patron
OSA Operatives: How-to Guide

Several times over the last few months I’ve mentioned OSA operations as they are applied to Critics of scientology. Each time I mention it I usually get replies that add up to bluster about how inept OSA is, rejections of my comments as paranoia or variations on the “I ain’t afraid of no stinkin’ OSA” type of comment.
I know for a fact that the current OSA is nowhere near as good at what they do as the GO of yesteryear was. They just don’t have the same calibre of personnel or the freedom of action and independence that the GO had.
Regardless, I still consider it a mistake of magnitude to underestimate them.
Many are familiar with the few publicly exposed operations such as "Snow White" and "Operation Freakout" but I wonder how many know about the multitude of successful secret operations run by the GO/OSA?
Believe me, the average scn’ist or Ex wouldn’t know a fraction of it.
On the board here at ESMB there are a number of ex-OSA/ex-GO staff and I thought it might be enlightening to some for these people to inform us of their personal experience, particularly as it relates to “handling” Critics.
I’m sure that the title of this thread will undoubtedly entice the wits (at least half of them) to chip in with repartee but, for the sake of making ESMB a safer place to refer newly-out or wavering scn’ists, I beg your restraint in this matter.

I’ll begin:
Intelligence operatives (GO Bureau 1) operated on the following plan in order to achieve their Valuable Final Product;

“PLANS: Generally to locate every source of opposition to Scientology and the control point of these sources and to reduce their power to ineffectiveness and/or take them over.”

“VALUABLE FINAL PRODUCT: Exterior enemies and attacks located and restrained and/or removed.”

I’ve previously detailed some of the statistics of B1 on another thread. All deal with getting people to shut up, cease attacking, get distracted, change sides, attack someone else, run away, hide etc. I’m sure you get the picture.

Here are examples of just a couple of capers run very successfully in the past, they’re not verbatim but are as close as I can recall AND they’re factual and were done to full success hundreds of times that I know of.
Firstly;
Attend any public meeting/forum/discussion that might possibly touch upon scn and successfully steer the talk away from anything negative about scn if it appears to be heading in this direction. (Positive talk about scn was the arena of PR).
I did this cycle many times and was always 100% effective at side-tracking anything about scn and steering the discussion onto designated enemies of scn.
The designated enemy depended on the nature of the forum, eg: if the forum was religious in nature the discussion might be steered onto psych-abuse, if it was mental-health in nature you might steer it to government or religion, if it was “community concern” in nature you would always be safe steering it to politicians/government etc.
According to my observation, this caper has been resurrected (if it ever went away) and is currently being run on internet message boards and chat rooms with great success. ESMB is no exception. The number of threads and “dangerous topics” derailed is quite spectacular from an OSA point of view and they must be justly proud of the success of their modern-day application of this particular program. It probably also accounts for the presence of a couple of notable scn’ists at the recent Melbourne forum about Kenja. (Ken Dyers, a principal of Kenja, had a scn background and so the discussion might have touched upon scn.)

Secondly;
One method of handling a target Critic.
Contact the target Critic by phone, pretending to be a fellow-critic. Agree with the person’s criticisms of scn and voice your own (*see note on “suitable criticisms” below).
Become more strident and whiney until you successfully annoy the person into refuting something you are saying.
Don’t stop, continue to whine using the reject-buttons (these are from a list written by LRH, buttons that cause people to reject what you’re saying) and refuse to stop criticising, don’t acknowledge or listen to anything the target says. If he/she refutes your data accuse him/her of supporting or being a scientologist.
Don’t stop; keep going until the person hangs up on you. (You may have to repeat this action if unsuccessful on first application.)
This one was imminently successful and, amazingly enough, shut down several high profile radio personalities and State politicians. They never again publicly criticised scn (major B1 points when you achieve this). I never had to call someone twice; they just couldn’t tolerate the idea of thinking of themselves as somehow associated with or anything like this brain-dead, obstreperous, whiney critic of scn (the B1 Operative)!
I believe this caper is also alive and well on various internet boards and chat rooms. (Watch for the completely inane and unreasonable idiot-critic who makes you feel like leaving the chat or board.)

That will do for now, perhaps some of the other ex-GO/OSA crew will chip in or perhaps this idea will just be ignored and ridiculed as fanciful paranoia. Unfortunately, it’s not. One day I may even discover the courage to tell the whole story but many of the actors are still alive and would be hurt or imprisoned for no tangible gain (they’re almost all Ex-scn’ists now).
I decided to post this as a means of making good on some part of the damage I did to the Critic Movement in years long gone. Perhaps if I’d been less effective at my job, we wouldn’t even be having this discussion today.
To those I hurt along the way, I sincerely apologise.
Love, Panda.

* The things on the list of “suitable criticisms” were just general, already widely published views about scn. The only thing that was forbidden was any mention of LRH, that was to be avoided if possible but, of course, it never was. The sci-fi writer background or the “why write for pennies, if you want to get really rich just start your own religion” quote were the most common criticisms of LRH at the time. You listened to it and even agreed but never contributed to this particular line of criticism. Of course, we knew nothing about the abuse and exploitation exposed in later years, we thought we were saving mankind.


To any Newbies or Lurkers:

Lurking is, in itself a giant step in the recovery process.

Posting is another

The above post is very well worth reading. It is heartfelt, and honest.

If you decide to post, post anonymously.

ESMB is a very safe place to post anonymously, in my opinion.

Churchill


PS. Now let's see who comes along to derail this thread.
 

Infinite

Troublesome Internet Fringe Dweller
. . . Don’t stop, continue to whine using the reject-buttons (these are from a list written by LRH, buttons that cause people to reject what you’re saying) and refuse to stop criticising, don’t acknowledge or listen to anything the target says. If he/she refutes your data accuse him/her of supporting or being a scientologist . . .

Ten internets to the person who can provide DOX and/or a tech reference on the "reject-buttons" and (I presume there are also some) the "accept-buttons". Please.
 

billyd

Patron with Honors
OSA Operatives: How-to Guide

Several times over the last few months I’ve mentioned OSA operations as they are applied to Critics of scientology. Each time I mention it I usually get replies that add up to bluster about how inept OSA is, rejections of my comments as paranoia or variations on the “I ain’t afraid of no stinkin’ OSA” type of comment.
I know for a fact that the current OSA is nowhere near as good at what they do as the GO of yesteryear was. They just don’t have the same calibre of personnel or the freedom of action and independence that the GO had.
Regardless, I still consider it a mistake of magnitude to underestimate them.
Many are familiar with the few publicly exposed operations such as "Snow White" and "Operation Freakout" but I wonder how many know about the multitude of successful secret operations run by the GO/OSA?
Believe me, the average scn’ist or Ex wouldn’t know a fraction of it.
On the board here at ESMB there are a number of ex-OSA/ex-GO staff and I thought it might be enlightening to some for these people to inform us of their personal experience, particularly as it relates to “handling” Critics.
I’m sure that the title of this thread will undoubtedly entice the wits (at least half of them) to chip in with repartee but, for the sake of making ESMB a safer place to refer newly-out or wavering scn’ists, I beg your restraint in this matter.

I’ll begin:
Intelligence operatives (GO Bureau 1) operated on the following plan in order to achieve their Valuable Final Product;

“PLANS: Generally to locate every source of opposition to Scientology and the control point of these sources and to reduce their power to ineffectiveness and/or take them over.”

“VALUABLE FINAL PRODUCT: Exterior enemies and attacks located and restrained and/or removed.”

I’ve previously detailed some of the statistics of B1 on another thread. All deal with getting people to shut up, cease attacking, get distracted, change sides, attack someone else, run away, hide etc. I’m sure you get the picture.

Here are examples of just a couple of capers run very successfully in the past, they’re not verbatim but are as close as I can recall AND they’re factual and were done to full success hundreds of times that I know of.
Firstly;
Attend any public meeting/forum/discussion that might possibly touch upon scn and successfully steer the talk away from anything negative about scn if it appears to be heading in this direction. (Positive talk about scn was the arena of PR).
I did this cycle many times and was always 100% effective at side-tracking anything about scn and steering the discussion onto designated enemies of scn.
The designated enemy depended on the nature of the forum, eg: if the forum was religious in nature the discussion might be steered onto psych-abuse, if it was mental-health in nature you might steer it to government or religion, if it was “community concern” in nature you would always be safe steering it to politicians/government etc.
According to my observation, this caper has been resurrected (if it ever went away) and is currently being run on internet message boards and chat rooms with great success. ESMB is no exception. The number of threads and “dangerous topics” derailed is quite spectacular from an OSA point of view and they must be justly proud of the success of their modern-day application of this particular program. It probably also accounts for the presence of a couple of notable scn’ists at the recent Melbourne forum about Kenja. (Ken Dyers, a principal of Kenja, had a scn background and so the discussion might have touched upon scn.)

Secondly;
One method of handling a target Critic.
Contact the target Critic by phone, pretending to be a fellow-critic. Agree with the person’s criticisms of scn and voice your own (*see note on “suitable criticisms” below).
Become more strident and whiney until you successfully annoy the person into refuting something you are saying.
Don’t stop, continue to whine using the reject-buttons (these are from a list written by LRH, buttons that cause people to reject what you’re saying) and refuse to stop criticising, don’t acknowledge or listen to anything the target says. If he/she refutes your data accuse him/her of supporting or being a scientologist.
Don’t stop; keep going until the person hangs up on you. (You may have to repeat this action if unsuccessful on first application.)
This one was imminently successful and, amazingly enough, shut down several high profile radio personalities and State politicians. They never again publicly criticised scn (major B1 points when you achieve this). I never had to call someone twice; they just couldn’t tolerate the idea of thinking of themselves as somehow associated with or anything like this brain-dead, obstreperous, whiney critic of scn (the B1 Operative)!
I believe this caper is also alive and well on various internet boards and chat rooms. (Watch for the completely inane and unreasonable idiot-critic who makes you feel like leaving the chat or board.)

That will do for now, perhaps some of the other ex-GO/OSA crew will chip in or perhaps this idea will just be ignored and ridiculed as fanciful paranoia. Unfortunately, it’s not. One day I may even discover the courage to tell the whole story but many of the actors are still alive and would be hurt or imprisoned for no tangible gain (they’re almost all Ex-scn’ists now).
I decided to post this as a means of making good on some part of the damage I did to the Critic Movement in years long gone. Perhaps if I’d been less effective at my job, we wouldn’t even be having this discussion today.
To those I hurt along the way, I sincerely apologise.
Love, Panda.

* The things on the list of “suitable criticisms” were just general, already widely published views about scn. The only thing that was forbidden was any mention of LRH, that was to be avoided if possible but, of course, it never was. The sci-fi writer background or the “why write for pennies, if you want to get really rich just start your own religion” quote were the most common criticisms of LRH at the time. You listened to it and even agreed but never contributed to this particular line of criticism. Of course, we knew nothing about the abuse and exploitation exposed in later years, we thought we were saving mankind.

You say that OSA will never match up to the old GO. I think the only difference is that OSA has learned not to get caught. In fact i believe that OSA is just an extension of the old GO. The COS used the foundation of the old GO to build upon and changed the name to OSA so no one would remember the stink of what happened when the old GO was supposedly shut down. I think they are one and the same with the same dirty tactics. OSA Opperating Scientologist Assasins
 

Churchill

Gold Meritorious Patron
You say that OSA will never match up to the old GO. I think the only difference is that OSA has learned not to get caught. In fact i believe that OSA is just an extension of the old GO. The COS used the foundation of the old GO to build upon and changed the name to OSA so no one would remember the stink of what happened when the old GO was supposedly shut down. I think they are one and the same with the same dirty tactics. OSA Opperating Scientologist Assasins


Agreed. The difference, imo, is that OSA has never had as many situations to handle at the same time, and even if one assumes they are prioritizing them,

they are losing, big time. Their legal threats do not intimidate the broadcast and publishing media. And as more and more people speak out,

they are further de-fanged, de-clawed, and "neutered."
 

Panda Termint

Cabal Of One
You say that OSA will never match up to the old GO. I think the only difference is that OSA has learned not to get caught. In fact i believe that OSA is just an extension of the old GO. The COS used the foundation of the old GO to build upon and changed the name to OSA so no one would remember the stink of what happened when the old GO was supposedly shut down. I think they are one and the same with the same dirty tactics. OSA Opperating Scientologist Assasins

Of course they're the same thing as to function, Billy, who said otherwise? There are a couple of huge differences though, most notably; the calibre of personnel involved and the degree of oversight and exposure. BTW, OSA gets caught with its pants down way more than the GO ever did, thanks to the internet.
 
Top