 |
|
| Religion Forum Index » Scientology Forum » GO investigator hat pack and fair game |
|
Page 1 of 1 |
|
| Author |
Message |
| wbarwell |
 Posted: Mon Jul 12, 2004 3:36 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
GUARDIAN ORDER
GO 1314 9 September 1974
Info Bureau only
CONFIDENTIAL
------------------------
INTELLIGENCE COURSE
--------------------------------------
............
- 18 -
PART E - SUPPRESSIVES
---------------------------------------
1. PL 7 Dec 56 Scientology Cleanup ___________
2. PL 1 March 65 Suppressive acts * ___________
.......
*********************************
Note, items with a * are to be star rated, that is read and
memorized and understood in its entirety, "full duplication".
************************************
1 Mar 65 (AKA 7 Mar 65)
JUSTICE - SUPPRESSIVE ACTS - SUPPRESSION OF SCIENTOLOGY
AND SCIENTOLOGISTS - THE FAIR GAME LAW.
.....
A Suppressive Person or Group becomes "fair game".
By FAIR GAME is meant without rights for self, possessions or position,
and no Scientologist may be brought up before a Committeee of Evidence
or punished for any activity taken against a Suppressive Person or Group
during the period that person or group is "fair game".
...........
Until a Suppressive person or group is absolved ... no Committee of
evidence may be called to punish any Scientologist or person for any
offenses of any kind against the suppressive persons...
The homes, property, places and abodes of persons who have been active
in attempting to suppress Scientology or Scientologists are all beyond any
protection of Scientology justice, unless absolved by later justice or
an amnesty.
************************************************************************
Clip and save. Anybody who says "fair game" was abolished in 1968
is ignorant of the fact it was in truth mandated by GO and was to be star
rated by GO intelligence agents.
That is memorized exactly.
Slap this on the next Hubbard worshipper who says different.
This was not the buggered and gelded 23 Dec 65 version, this is the full
and unadulterated, mean spirited, full "Fair Game" version of 1 Mar 65.
This is why they could not prove in the Allard case that "fair game"
had been abolished as they lied to the judge. Fear of perjury.
**************************************************************************
--
Senator Waxman's searchable database of iraq war lies.
www.house.gov/reform/min/features/iraq_on_the_record/
A good portal to more lies and Bush stupidity is to be found at
www.failureisimpossible.com - Go to the index and go to
"L" for lies. All you need to know about Bush when you
step into the voting booth. Bush is a liar and surrounds
himself with fellow liars.
Cheerful Charlie |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| wbarwell |
| Posted: Thu Jul 15, 2004 12:41 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Susan wrote:
Quote: wbarwell wrote:
Spacetraveler wrote:
wbarwell <wbarwell@munnnged.mylinuxisp.com> wrote in message
news:<40f423f8$0$17089$811e409b@news.mylinuxisp.com>...
Spacetraveler wrote:
******************** snipped ******************
Quote:
Spactraveler is doing a grand job of illustrating to the readers of ars
the control the cult of scientology has on his/her perceptions.
To learn more about controlling groups and how they work, see
www.refocus.org. I suggest that Spacetraveler, of course read this site
too but then, Spacetraveler will try the same sort of arguments against
the points made by refocus.org as he/she is presently doing regarding fair
game. Interesting space travel ;-)
Susan
It has nothing to do really with cults or controlling groups.
Space travellors are all over the net.
Try any political newsgroup. We have large numbers
of people angrily denying Bush, Cheney and Rumesfedl lied, exaggerated, or
were wrong in any way.
Try religous newsgroups. Angry Christians denying there are any
condradictions in the bible, despite many corkers being posted right back
at them.
Crazy talk, Hillary Clinton is attempting to take over the US government.
It goes on and on. Facts, logic, reason, rationality all go by the wayside
so easily. What do you do when obvious and true facts destroy a comforting
myth?
What is amazing is that psychology seems to have done so little real work
on this phenomenon. I long ago concluded the net would make a perfect
laboratory for studying this wretched phenomenon, but I have failed.
Its just to deep and primal to get a grasp on, even as you see it
demonstrated again and again.
I used to, long ago, have this Jeffersonian ideal that if you gathered
your facts and calmly and rationally placed then before people, that people
would rationally respond positively to such reason.
It is not true for many, maybe even most people.
The question is, what is going on under the surface here, what
are the components that allow such thinking, and how can this be
demontsrated and experimented with, given a net full of willing subjects
who will post at length, sometines for years on end, even better than lab
rats, you don't have to feed them and clean their cages.
I from time to time try to catch myself doing it, but that doesn't work,
when I do, that usually changes things and I lose the ability to deal with
how I delude myself, it sort of scuttles away.
If these things did not happen, we would not have cults, people like Bush
would never be able to become president, hordes of fearful Hillary-phobes
would not fill the political newsgroups with their weird conspiratorial
bleatings and astrology would have died centuries ago.
--
Senator Waxman's searchable database of iraq war lies.
www.house.gov/reform/min/features/iraq_on_the_record/
A good portal to more lies and Bush stupidity is to be found at
www.failureisimpossible.com - Go to the index and go to
"L" for lies. All you need to know about Bush when you
step into the voting booth. Bush is a liar and surrounds
himself with fellow liars.
Cheerful Charlie |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Guest |
| Posted: Fri Jul 16, 2004 2:41 am |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Spacetraveler |
| Posted: Fri Jul 16, 2004 3:01 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
<snip>
Quote: Spactraveler is doing a grand job of illustrating to the readers of ars the
control the cult of scientology has on his/her perceptions.
Don't give only opinion, support this with actual reasoning, examples
etc.. With other words provide evidence supporting your argument.
Quote:
To learn more about controlling groups and how they work, see
www.refocus.org. I suggest that Spacetraveler, of course read this site too
but then, Spacetraveler will try the same sort of arguments against the
points made by refocus.org as he/she is presently doing regarding fair game.
What would these arguments consist of? Opinion only does not to the
work for you. You may as well have said not anything at all! As you
are not saying anything now.
I went to look at that site, so far I don't see any need to make any
arguments against it. It describes pretty much the actual scene.
Surprised? You did not actually read my posts did you, you just
figured: "Ah, this person is questioning the 'authorities' (of ars)
around him, he must be wrong, he can not think, etc..."
All I did was pointing out some of the incongruity displayed in claims
being made.
Spacetraveler |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Spacetraveler |
| Posted: Fri Jul 16, 2004 3:06 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
wbarwell <wbarwell@munnnged.mylinuxisp.com> wrote in message news:<40f6dd43$0$17092$811e409b@news.mylinuxisp.com>...
Quote: Susan wrote:
wbarwell wrote:
Spacetraveler wrote:
wbarwell <wbarwell@munnnged.mylinuxisp.com> wrote in message
news:<40f423f8$0$17089$811e409b@news.mylinuxisp.com>...
Spacetraveler wrote:
******************** snipped ******************
Spactraveler is doing a grand job of illustrating to the readers of ars
the control the cult of scientology has on his/her perceptions.
To learn more about controlling groups and how they work, see
www.refocus.org. I suggest that Spacetraveler, of course read this site
too but then, Spacetraveler will try the same sort of arguments against
the points made by refocus.org as he/she is presently doing regarding fair
game. Interesting space travel ;-)
Susan
It has nothing to do really with cults or controlling groups.
Space travellors are all over the net.
Try any political newsgroup. We have large numbers
of people angrily denying Bush, Cheney and Rumesfedl lied, exaggerated, or
were wrong in any way.
Try religous newsgroups. Angry Christians denying there are any
condradictions in the bible, despite many corkers being posted right back
at them.
Crazy talk, Hillary Clinton is attempting to take over the US government.
It goes on and on. Facts, logic, reason, rationality all go by the wayside
so easily. What do you do when obvious and true facts destroy a comforting
myth?
It does! Remember this one:
http://groups.google.se/groups?dq=&start=50&hl=sv&lr=&ie=UTF-8&group=alt.religion.scientology&selm=9f53d1e2.0407110219.380a9805%40posting.google.com
Gee, wonder why no one had the guts the actually response to that one?
<snip>
Spacetraveler |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Spacetraveler |
| Posted: Fri Jul 16, 2004 3:38 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
<snip>
Quote: Its very constructive.
Where did all this fairgaming, these attacks, this savagery come from?
People.
Quote: Hubbard. He started it long ago and it is still with us.
He could have stopped it. he didn't even try.
Ah, that's why we have not HCO PL 6 Oct 70 Issue III "Ethics
Penalties"
Quote:
"This cancellation is contemporary with the justice discovery that
crime is the direct result of a lack of a hat and training on the hat
and that a hat consists of a write up, checksheet and pack fully
trained in on the person.
The motto is "Hat don't hit".
It is also part of this that I have concluded man cannot be trusted
with justice."
I agree! He did nothing at all to stop it! Absolutely nothing at all.
Quote: As a rule people who can not be concise about things have no real
argument. Your responses are very lenghty, full with conclusion,
opinions and irrelevant babbling.
When I get concise, you blow it off as not having the depth of evidence
needed to take it seriously, If I give you the evidence you game us as
above. If one is concise, you label it as mere opinion.
The following proves you wrong:
http://groups.google.se/groups?dq=&start=50&hl=sv&lr=&ie=UTF-8&group=alt.religion.scientology&selm=9f53d1e2.0407110219.380a9805%40posting.google.com
You are never concise and exact actually. You made also a claim that
Mary Sue Hubbard pulled out the copyrights out of HASI prior to it
going defunct. You backed out and even denied you claimed it later on.
it's all in the database.
<snip>
Quote: It is part of the hat of the Hatting Officer to actually see to it
that only the latest version of policies are actually in the
hatpack, and also to remove any issues that were cancelled. Simple
fact. Is anyone denying this is true?
Yes.
I believe you have no authority here, I was there and for a while
actually being the Hatting Officer, you were not. You (who was never
there) tell me (who was actually there) that I am incorrect about
things I actually was doing?
Yes. Because you were acting out a little play, being used.
At the top, they do things different.
And you who have never been there, know all about this?
You weren't a GO B1 agent working under Hubbard and Mary Sue.
What do YOU know about any of THAT?
You know the least of all, you have not been in the organization ever.
I have experienced how the organziation functions, you have personally
seen nothing at all.
<snip>
Quote: Did you correct the Fair Game Time Line per my annotations already.
Not what I have seen. Anyhow you were exposed there for what you
actually are doing.
I corrected facts, I avoided your wrong opinions.
It is far, far away from opinion. I quoted exactly!
the not working link is also still there, the last time I looked. Was
that also opinion. Hmm, probably.
Quote:
Fact. 21 Oct 67 was a savage bit of work.
Ever studied history? Guess not.
Quote: Fact 2. 21 July 68 does not cancel fair game, it does
not say anything about it one way or the other.
And its just as nasty.
Opinion, explained in detail many times. Also dictionaries do not
acknowledge you. Please forward to the dictionary compilers/publishers
that you do not agree with some of the definitions given in them. You
want to have it adjusted. Well, get right at it!
Quote: Fact 3. AFTER July we have 21 Oct 68. This says
that treatmnet and handling of SPS is not changed.
Just don't use "fair game" in EOs.
This strongly implies that 21 July 68 DOES NOT
cancel fair game.
Sorry, opinion only. Explained in detail many times also. You make up
things in such a way they support your preconceptions. Every person
who can think with logic will acknowledge that you actually do this.
Your error: SP is NOT synonym to Fair Game! Big, big error!
Sorry, but you reasoning is nothing else than stupid. You have it all
there and you continue making up your own stuff.
Quote: It just replaces 21 Oct 67 becuse it was politic to do
so.
Thus, 21 Oct 68 essentially smuggles "fair game" back in.
By 1970, Hubbard had given up smuggling fair game in, and so lied about it
with this HCOPL, and the 3 Nov 68 Code of Reform.
Fair game did not go away.
It became a secret, non-public policy.
Done to people such as Allard.
And later made policy on paper in the GO with the intel hat
check pack and HCOPL 1 mar 5 being right back with us.
Along with all the parallel things that never went away,
the Manual of Dissemination, Attacks on Scientoogy I and II,
Battle Tactics and all the old classics.
Above is your usual rambling along again.
<snip>
What has Scientology ever done to you? What are we missing about YOU?
Spacetraveler |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Gerry Armstrong |
| Posted: Fri Jul 16, 2004 9:16 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On 16 Jul 2004 02:38:01 -0700, spacetraveler2000@hotmail.com
(Spacetraveler) wrote:
Quote:
You are never concise and exact actually.
Oooo, your little SPness is showing.
And your OTness is standing out loud and clear. This is a success
worthy of "Advance!" A truly Hubbardian, omniscient generality.
Your pretended stupidity is Miscavige level, which is really a tall
order.
So pass. The Spacetroller op is a huge win. You should insist on libs
this weekend.
© Gerry Armstrong
http://www.gerryarmstrong.org |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Warrior |
| Posted: Fri Jul 16, 2004 11:13 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
In article <40f7e9a3$0$17094$811e409b@news.mylinuxisp.com>,
William Barwell says...
Quote:
I still am looking for whole and unadulterated copies of
many HCOPLs, HCOBs and others. Looks like to get them I
wil have to spring for my own copy of the OEC volumes.
I could help you get most of what you're looking for.
If interested, send your phone number by email, and
I'll give you a call.
Warrior - Sunshine disinfects
http://warrior.xenu.ca |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| ladayla |
| Posted: Fri Jul 16, 2004 11:41 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
In article <99998022.000058db.001@drn.newsguy.com>, Warrior says...
Quote:
In article <40f7e9a3$0$17094$811e409b@news.mylinuxisp.com>,
William Barwell says...
I still am looking for whole and unadulterated copies of
many HCOPLs, HCOBs and others. Looks like to get them I
wil have to spring for my own copy of the OEC volumes.
I could help you get most of what you're looking for.
If interested, send your phone number by email, and
I'll give you a call.
I've been trying to contribute to this effort by William too. Maybe I can help
with some hcopls or hcobs or tape refs. You know how to contact me.
la
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Spacetraveler |
| Posted: Sat Jul 17, 2004 3:19 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Gerry Armstrong <gerry@gerryarmstrong.org> wrote in message news:<aurff0hbua0jbe43nh4v0ioej9ghbvf1va@4ax.com>...
Quote: On 16 Jul 2004 02:38:01 -0700, spacetraveler2000@hotmail.com
(Spacetraveler) wrote:
You are never concise and exact actually.
Oooo, your little SPness is showing.
One characteristis out of 12 does not make you an SP does it? Consult
my communications with William Barwell you may get a surprise.
Generally he is not into being concise and direct.
Quote:
And your OTness is standing out loud and clear. This is a success
worthy of "Advance!" A truly Hubbardian, omniscient generality.
Your pretended stupidity is Miscavige level, which is really a tall
order.
So pass. The Spacetroller op is a huge win. You should insist on libs
this weekend.
This is the second time you jump on me out of nowhere, resorting to
this kind of unfounded 'attacks'. Is this the business you are in
Gerry? Is this a diversion tactic? If so it will not work, not with me
it will.
I responded in detail to your latest lengthy response.
http://groups.google.se/groups?hl=sv&lr=&ie=UTF-8&selm=9f53d1e2.0407131802.775cab17%40posting.google.com
You wrote: "I have hoped a long time to have a conversation with a
Scientologist on this basis."
Well Gerry, I am waiting!
Spacetraveler |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Gerry Armstrong |
| Posted: Fri Jul 23, 2004 11:34 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On 17 Jul 2004 02:19:11 -0700, spacetraveler2000@hotmail.com
(Spacetraveler) wrote:
Quote: Gerry Armstrong <gerry@gerryarmstrong.org> wrote in message news:<aurff0hbua0jbe43nh4v0ioej9ghbvf1va@4ax.com>...
On 16 Jul 2004 02:38:01 -0700, spacetraveler2000@hotmail.com
(Spacetraveler) wrote:
You are never concise and exact actually.
Oooo, your little SPness is showing.
One characteristis out of 12 does not make you an SP does it?
Who or what said it did? LFBD
Oh, Hubbard did! LFBD F/N
Quote: Consult
my communications with William Barwell you may get a surprise.
I missed your surprise completely after much consultation. Please
identify your surprise so I can get it too.
Quote: Generally he is not into being concise and direct.
Yes, well neither are you. In spades. This is just one example.
"Generally [ ] not into being concise and direct" is very different
from "never concise and exact actually."
Your statement about Barwell "You are never concise and exact
actually" is false. Don't your agree?
Your statement "You are never concise and exact actually" is also a
generality. Do you also agree?
Quote:
And your OTness is standing out loud and clear. This is a success
worthy of "Advance!" A truly Hubbardian, omniscient generality.
Your pretended stupidity is Miscavige level, which is really a tall
order.
So pass. The Spacetroller op is a huge win. You should insist on libs
this weekend.
This is the second time you jump on me out of nowhere,
This is patently false. You made a false statement about Barwell: "You
are never concise and exact actually." You willfully *invite*
responses to correct your falsehood just by uttering it. That is not
"out of nowhere." Please correct the falsehood that I jumped on you
out of nowhere.
Quote: resorting to
this kind of unfounded 'attacks'.
Another falsehood. You generated the foundation for my response to you
by manufacturing the falsehood to which I responded. Please also
correct then your falsehood that my response to you was unfounded. I
have shown you it is not unfounded.
Quote: Is this the business you are in
Gerry? Is this a diversion tactic? If so it will not work, not with me
it will.
I find you dishonest. I find your actions cloak and support Hubbard's
and the Scientology cult's criminal "Suppressive Person" doctrine and
the victimization of good people by execution of this dastardly
doctrine. I am in the business of directing attention to this
doctrine, of defending the good people whom the Scientology cultists
beastify and fair game in execution of this doctrine, and I am in the
business of opposing this doctrine and its practitioners.
Surely you won't deny that you apply the "Suppressive Person"
doctrine.
The basis was what you implied in your statement to which I was
responding. You implied with your assertion about an "unfinished
communication" that you were seeking what in Scientology is known as a
"communication cycle" with me. So, e.g. I would originate a
communication to you, you would receive it, originate an answer or
acknowledgement back to me, and thus end the cycle. A finished
communication.
Such a comm cycle, that finishes communications, would require on your
part duplication and understanding.
Instead, you pretended non-duplication and non-understanding. There
isn't any big deal about that, because it is the way Scientologists
and their ops have communicated to and about me me for more than two
decades. You implied that unlike all other Scientologists you were
going to be different, that you were going to duplicate and
understand, and thus finish communications. And I gave you the benefit
of the doubt and responded that I have hoped a long time to have a
conversation with a Scientologist on this basis.
Here's an example from the communication cycle you're pestering me to
finish:
[Quote]
Quote: I'd like you to quote ALL of Hubbard's lies. That would be very useful
in this discussion of honesty relating to Scientology.
In my opinion it is dishonest to quote the 1967 fair game issue & the
21 Oct 1968 issue, but not the 21 July 1968 issue, nor the the 6 Oct
1970 issue, sorry. At least in writing as these issues lay out, the
practice of fair gaiming was cancelled. I said at least IN WRITING.
May be as you say they continued with it any way, but this is a
different matter. So treat them differently. Tell about both these
sides. If you don't mention them and people will find out about them
later on (and I have been throwing these issues in peoples faces
lately), they will start being critcal about what you have to say
elsewhere.
[End Quote]
What you've done here is a diversion tactic. You demonstrably did not
want or provide actual communication cycles, so it makes little sense
to waste much time trying to give you what you don't want.
Quote:
Well Gerry, I am waiting!
Sure, but you're really not waiting for an actual communication cycle,
are you?
© Gerry Armstrong
http://www.gerryarmstrong.org |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Sat Nov 28, 2009 4:38 am
|
|