Scientology - The Internet & OSA

Free Being Me

Crusader
Information for whomever.

Ok, yes----I post occassionally on Marty's board. Some of you may wonder: Why?
Well, there's a little thing in the OSA manual called their bible, "The Art of War".
In it Sun Tzu says a few key things that OSA uses, all the time:
1) Master Sun
"Cause division amongst them" (page 54)
2) Cao Cao
"Send interlopers to cause rifts amongst them"
3) Meng Shi
"Strike at their gaps, attack when they are lax, don't let the enemy figure out how to prepare.This is why it is said in military operations that formlessness is the most effective. One of the great warrior-leaders said, "The most efficient of movements is the one that is unexpected; the best of plans is the one that is unknown".

Which is why I believe Anonymous has been so very successful. Also, once I noticed there was this huge
division amongst Critics, Marty and Anonymous, I looked at who that supported, and decided to try being in more communication, not less.

Does that mean we all need to agree? Hell no, and no, we won't either. However, can we all just agree to disagree, and keep our attentions focused on key issues we all agree on, such as the abuses of C of $? Imnsho--to me that's our best and most effective mode of operation. Even if you don't agree with this, my suggestion is try to post more FACTS about the organization known as the "church" of Scientology and their abuses that we all know, but MANY new people do not. People are leaving daily. They don't need to step out into this collision of views between people they thought were going to help them, or at least be supportive of them.
I speak from experience on this one....and I'm telling you, it's a VERY key time for people. They need you, or anyone they find safe. If it's ESMB or OCMB--fantastic. If it's WWP---also excellent. If that's Marty or Mike--that's great, too. They've helped a bunch of new people wake up and leave, and many speak out, also. Good for them! And on top of that, all (from all 4 groups) have helped educate *tons* of people about these very abuses. Yeah!

They're (new people) out, and that's #1 great. #2 is hopefully they'll feel safe enough to speak out.

For people calling each other criminals, please let me remind you of the 3 goals of the Top Secret OSA Int Internet gang, re the Net:
1) Distract off of any topic having to do with anything they don't want known.

I understand people *want* Marty and Mike to say more. Ok, fair enough. Do you think calling them criminals will motivate them to say more, or less?
Try to think of yourself in a similar position. Which would help you be motivated more?
I know for myself, at first I thought of M & M, and not really knowing them personally, just felt they were separate--as it is a bit of a closed group, or so it seemed. I realized I'd never even tried to communicate with that group---and I did, and it's been
far different than I thought. Then I really looked at my own personal views, and I have always said I am speaking out against the abuses, the Human Rights Violations of
C of $, which they all are against, also. I believe people have a right to believe whatever they want. The information is out there, and some shall look at it, some may never. I ~think~we all can at least agree that the abuses are # 1.


2) Degrade any and ALL activists exposing any thing they (DM and gang) don't want known.


Hello? Perhaps we've all gotten a bit blase' about Davey boy beating people up, but until this either STOPS or serious Justice occurs, it hasn't been said enough, imnsho. **Tons** of people have zero clue about this, so every TV show done is good for all of us.
(and unless you've done TV shows, my view is don't start calling others names or ragging on them for not doing enough). Try to keep in mind: We all unravel at different speeds.

3) Slime any public area, so people literally are embarrassed to even post there.


The above was told to me a few weeks before I quit that group, forever.

I hope that helps. While "in" C of $, at the next to the top, I found exclusion rampant, and it sucked.

I'm interested in inclusion, and connections.
I believe we all have things
we can share and it's important we respect each other,
and help each other. God knows we all have been through enough! May we have more of this: :gathering:>>>not this::fencing:

My love to you all.
:rose:
Tory/Magoo

Scientology: Reminder of Internet Mafia Programs - Tory Magoo
[video=youtube;M5_mAMxARec]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M5_mAMxARec&list=UU__gcXYVQlmVocNLZykibUw[/video]

Operation Clambake presents: Tory Christman
http://www.xenu.net/archive/personal_story/tory/
OSA 101 - Part 1 How the OSA Trap really works (Mar 2001)
OSA 101 - Part 2 The key players (Mar 2001)
OSA 101 - Part 3 Who is the real Mike Smith (Mar 2001)
OSA 101 - Part 4 Black PR (Mar 2001)
OSA 101 - Part 5 Super super secret (Apr 2001)

It occurred to me that most here really don’t know how OSA operates and have not seen original Ops programs firsthand. So sometimes OSA is given too much credit, too much fear, or typical tactics are not recognized.

I’ll include what I know from my personal experience, and ask that the rest of you who know OSA can add your own info. My info comes from one year as Dir Income USGO (AOLA staff) in 1980 and reading OSA/USGO programs filed by my predecessor in the debtor files, as well as from programs I saw in ethics files from two years as the Dir I&R AOLA. I was fully hatted, as well as OEC and ESTO trained.

The OSA programs Marty Rathbun posted on Tory Christman and Chuck Beatty are typical. Both Tory and Chuck confirm their accuracy and authenticity. These programs haven’t changed since the ones I saw in the 80s except for the fact they demonstrate less intellect or planning and more harassment and defaming. OSA really isn’t all that smart. Read these and you’ll see what I mean.

OSA Ops consist of:

1) Creating and forwarding defamatory statements about those considered enemies. (Black Propaganda) These usually contain a miniscule amount of (innocent) recognizable truth to them, but it is blown up, exaggerated and altered like a funny mirror. Example: John Ex is going through a divorce primarily over financial arguments (truth). OSA accuses John Ex of cheating, being gay, beating his wife, gambling, hiring hookers and abusing his kids (all lies) as the reasons for the divorce.

These lies are then forwarded as gossip through exScn websites, emails and PMs as well as to C of S Scns through Religious Freedom sites and word of mouth.

2) Fear and Intimidation tactics. OSA likes to mess with others’ heads. Inconvenient but obvious “messages” are left for the person to back off, including following a person, obviously taking pictures of you, hints that they have a phone number or address and contacts made to friends and family told to leave a message for you. The majority of these are more annoying than dangerous, but if it gets a person afraid to the point of backing off or getting distracted, then it is mission accomplished.

3) Attempts to cause internal quarrels within a group. (Divide and Conquer) If there is an argument, an OSA Op will add fuel to fire it up and get as many people involved on different sides as possible. The Op will mis-quote, mis-state and intentionally misinterpret what another said in the worst possible way to incite upset. An OSA Op will take it even further, with PMs about being your friend and on your side and having been the victim of the person in the past, while stating they only want peace.

It’s not brilliant, it’s just sneaky and dishonest. We’ve all known people who have done this sort of thing out of jealousy or other motives, both in or out of Scn. It’s easy to beat by privately asking any with a proven reputation as an Ex who know the person personally and have dealt with him/her, or by immediately contacting the person with which one has a disagreement and sorting things out for yourself.

4) Legal tactics to intimidate, defame, harass. Restraint orders based on fabricated evidence, no evidence or limited evidence. False reports to police to harass a person and get them investigated. Cut and pieced statements made on the Internet or bits about the person, all out of context and misleading (Moxon technique).

5) Infiltration of known exScn, Indy or FZ groups.

Some of the flaws in OSA Techniques include:

1) A lack of foresight and overall view of the “big picture”. OSA programs are updated every week for “stats”. OSA programs assume the OSA Op is less intelligent than the one writing the program (that entire hierarchy of who is better in the Cult). OSA Ops are, by their nature, limited exclusively to those involved in the Op, so there is little or no info or coordination from other Ops and they sometimes unknowingly work against each other.

2) The Cult often hires outside agencies to do their dirty work. While these agencies may be good at gathering info and at spying, they are far less likely to actually hurt anyone and they don’t fully understand things from a Scn or Ex viewpoint. The Cult is short of manpower these days, so the majority of Ops are by outside agencies.

3) OSA plans are simple. Devious, destructive, nasty, but simple. Seriously. Because the people writing them really are of limited intelligence. These are people that must think only with Scn, that have little contact with the outside world and worry about stats every week. Long range planning is rare but when it occurs, the plans are simple because the Data Series on which these are based states they must be. Plans can and are updated regularly – usually weekly – but they are only updated from the birdseye view of the OSA Op. Rarely is the one running the Op smart enough to coordinate different Ops and add accurate info or targets.

Here is an example: A long range OSA Op plan may include infiltrating different Scn or Anon groups and disrupting things or gaining info. But setting up their own OSA squirrel group and receiving or delivering auditing? Not going to happen. Too complex, too many variables, too hard, requires too many people, too many risks, too much coordination and the OSA Ops would worry about it messing up their cases. As Terril pointed out on another thread, it’s never happened in the past (if anyone knows of an instance, please correct me). OSA Ops HAVE been in David Mayo’s classroom, though. I knew of one who did this, a woman who was working on her A-E steps from being declared. She infiltrated Mayo’s group for 3 months as her effective blow and amends – I signed her formula. She told me they didn’t have student points and a few other things. She was extremely uncomfortable doing it, though. When the Op was over, she was pretty confused over who the good guys and bad guys were. She left the C of S completely a few years later, btw. No, OSA wouldn’t start their own group to deliver Scn outside the C of S. No way. The risks! The Op could turn without their knowing and grab the most damaging materials from the Cult and give them to the Ex’s. Who could be trusted that far and not to be caught? Never happened before and I can’t see it ever happening.

Fair Game
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Game_(Scientology)
"The term Fair Game is used to describe policies and practices carried out by the Church of Scientology towards people and groups it perceives as its enemies. Founder L. Ron Hubbard established the policy in the 1960s, in response to criticism both from within and outside his organization. Individuals or groups who are "Fair Game" are judged to be a threat to the Church and, according to the policy, can be punished and harassed using any and all means possible. In 1968, Hubbard officially canceled use of the term "Fair Game" because of negative public relations it caused, although the Church's aggressive response to criticism continued."

Scientology Controversies: Dead agenting
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientology_controversy#.22Dead_agenting.22
"In the 1970s, Hubbard continued to codify the policy of "attacking the attacker" and assigned a term to it that is used frequently within Scientology: "dead agenting." Used as a verb, "dead agenting" is described by Hubbard as a technique for countering negative accusations against Scientology by diverting the critical statements and making counter-accusations against the accuser. In other words, "attack the attacker". Hubbard defined the PR (public relations) policy on "dead agenting" in a 1974 bulletin:

The technique of proving utterances false is called "DEAD AGENTING." It's in the first book of Chinese espionage. When the enemy agent gives false data, those who believed him but now find it false kill him - or at least cease to believe him. So the PR slang for it is 'Dead Agenting.'"
—L. Ron Hubbard, Board Policy Letter, PR Series 24: Handling Hostile Contacts/Dead Agenting, May 30, 1974.

The phrase comes from a misunderstanding of the chapter on espionage in The Art of War. The Scientology-sponsored website, religiousfreedomwatch.org, features depictions of so-called "anti-religious extremists," most of whom are critics of Scientology. Featuring photos of the critics and claimed evidence of their personal wrongdoing (sometimes very vague, for example: "Documentation received by Religious Freedom Watch shows that [Kristi] Wachter paid an individual to carry out a specific project for her, and also instructed this individual to lie about what he was doing in case he was caught"). The "Religious Freedom Watch" site is often cited by alt.religion.scientology users as a contemporary example of "dead agenting."

Dead agenting has also been carried out by flier campaigns against some critics—using so-called "DA fliers." Bonnie Woods, an ex-member who began counseling people involved with Scientology and their families, became a target along with her husband in 1993 when the Church of Scientology started a leaflet operation denouncing her as a "hate campaigner" with demonstrators outside their home and around East Grinstead. After a long battle of libel suits, in 1999 the church agreed to issue an apology[18] and pay £55,000 damages and £100,000 costs to the Woods."


Troll
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_(Internet)
In Internet slang, a troll (/ˈtroʊl/, /ˈtrɒl/) is a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting arguments or upsetting people, by posting inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a forum, chat room, or blog), either accidentally or with the deliberate intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.

Trolling
http://netforbeginners.about.com/od/netiquetteonlineculture/f/What-Is-Trolling.htm
Answer: Internet 'trolling' is the anti-social act of causing of interpersonal conflict and shock-value controversy online. Named for the wicked troll creatures of children's tales, trolling is purposely sowing hatred, bigotry, racism, misogyny, or just simple bickering between others. Trolls themselves are emotionally-immature users who thrive in any environment where they are allowed to make public comments, like blog sites, news sites, discussion forums, and game chat.
 

FlunkYou

Patron with Honors
I, myself, prefer ESMB over WWP or any of the other sites for the simple fact that most of the people here are ex-scners. It makes it easier to relate to someone who knows the subject firsthand rather than someone who only knows what they know from the internet. That doesn't mean I always agree with ex-scners or they agree with me, it just means I can have their viewpoint a little easier than some internet cowboy.
 

Free Being Me

Crusader
Scientology's Internet Trolls
http://askthescientologist.blogspot.com/2008/07/scientologys-internet-trolls.html

"Troll: A user of a newsgroup, forum or message board who posts messages with the intent of inciting an argument or flame-war.

If you spend any time browsing the Internet, you have undoubtedly run into trolls, those people who post comments on forums, message boards and newsgroups that contain inflammatory, false and/or misleading information. Usually, the intention is to trick other users into getting into endless and useless arguments.

With Church of Scientology trolls, they have the added intentions to:

Divert attention from all the negative information about the Church of Scientology and L. Ron Hubbard.
Pollute any discussion thread about Scientology's crimes with flame wars, insults and ugly accusations.
Forward all Church of Scientology attacks, lies and disinformation.
Bury negative information about the church under random, off-topic comments.
Fake outrageous, crazy and embarrassing comments, allegedly from Scientology critics but actually from the Scientology trolls.

They have orders and they have an agenda. The basic job of the Scientology trolls is to suppress the truth. They work all the time to suppress Freedom of Speech. (Just imagine the poor soul who accepts that as their job.)

Scientology's trolls appear to be similar to regular trolls or to very stupid people. It is sometimes difficult to differentiate between these different types of troublemakers.

The Scientology Troll has specific characteristics:

Always states "I am not a Scientologist".
Always parrots the Church of Scientology party line.
Always attacks anyone the church wants attacked.
Always "gets very upset" when outed as a Scientologist or an OSA troll.
They persist in forwarding the church's agenda even after all their false claims have been debunked and disproven. This is because they are not allowed to move from that position.
They claim to have read any referenced web sites containing the truth about the Church of Scientology, but they remain completely ignorant of such information."
 

freethinker

Sponsor
Yes but we do have people on this forum who were never in who are very perceptive and intuitive and "get it". They also provide an untainted viewpoint on things that provoke thought or thinking that may not have occured without their input. We have some here who are excellent contributors
I, myself, prefer ESMB over WWP or any of the other sites for the simple fact that most of the people here are ex-scners. It makes it easier to relate to someone who knows the subject firsthand rather than someone who only knows what they know from the internet. That doesn't mean I always agree with ex-scners or they agree with me, it just means I can have their viewpoint a little easier than some internet cowboy.
 

Udarnik

Gold Meritorious Patron
I don't buy that, Arnie, but it IS a good line. :)

I don't totally buy it either, but the parallels are striking. The more I look at the OT levels, the more I get the idea that Hubbard was somewhat successful at putting his own neuroses into others. It's quite a feat, actually.
 

Panda Termint

Cabal Of One
I don't totally buy it either, but the parallels are striking. The more I look at the OT levels, the more I get the idea that Hubbard was somewhat successful at putting his own neuroses into others. It's quite a feat, actually.
The parallels, where they exist, are only valid in some particular instances and those instances are quite rare, in my experience. As to what may or may not occur with people doing OT Levels, again, I'd say that adopting Hubbard's neuroses would be a rare occurrence. Looking at OT Levels is not quite the same thing as actually doing them.
Just my opinion, for what it's worth. :)
 
Top