Marty leaving Ingleside on the Bay (IOB) Texas

Discussion in 'Independent Scientology' started by Anonymous, Nov 30, 2012.

  1. Anonymous Member

    Grebe, I think I need to state that overall, I agree with you on the moral standing. What's stopping you from standing against fair game in principle? I think we all do that now. CoS has no argument when it comes to claiming anons participate in fair game, anonymous by it's nature can't think the same as you. I'm not sure what you're proposing. Tell me more about this sexy chess. :)
  2. Anonymous Member

    Right, LRH making up his own BS. It's harassment. As you said, justice is blind. The courts don't recognize fair game as anything but harassment. The CoS doesn't get to insert their reality in our wog world.
  3. grebe Member

    • Agree Agree x 2
  4. Anonymous Member

    My point was that you were stating that we should take the moral high ground when it comes to Fair Game and that we can't make the distinction between who perpetrates it. I say that is also true of harassment. Why do you get to distinguish fair game from regular ol' harassment? Recognizing fair game in the courts is not the same as prosecuting harassment charges associated with fair game.
  5. grebe Member

    For the sake of argument, let's say I accuse you of practicing Fair Game against Scientology. I say you are harassing Scientologists and their Orgs because you don't like the things they say and you don't want them to succeed.

    What would be your response?
  6. grebe Member


  7. Anonymous Member

    On the subject of Fair Game

    I see that some are making the common mistake of confusing Fair Game with harassment, even with institutionalized harassment.

    Fair Game was a brief-lived concept of OFFICIALLY painting a bullseye on the forehead of some "enemy" of Scientology and OFFICIALLY condoning, even encouraging, rank-and-file Scientologists to do the "enemy" dirty.

    This bullseye was painted by broad public issue specifically naming someone as Fair Game.

    The concept is based, IMO, in Hubbard's sociopathic tendencies. LRH figured that since he would just lurve to have free rein to do anything he pleased to his "enemies" - in Scientology terms, to dramatize his evil purps - that the rank-and-file would want the same. However, I am sure that most Scientologists, those without sociopathic tendencies, would have zero interest in doing dirty to some "enemy". After all, the basic premise that they all bought into is that "Man is basically good" and those "enemies" just need to handle their cases.

    I think that lack of interest, combined with the "bad PR", let to the cancellation of Fair Game. Following the cancellation, the harassment of "enemies" and the dramatization of Hubbard's sociopathic desires was again left to a select few in the Guardian's Office. But that was not Fair Game. For the rank-and-file, the declared enemy just needed to do the steps to get back in the good graces. All was right with the world again.

    Fair Game is not:
    Harassment, even perpetual institutionalized harassment (by "institutionalized" I mean done under official auspices of the group, such as OSA).
    Shunning (disconnection).
    Holding a grudge.

    That is just normal dirty deeds and is practiced to greater or lessor extent by many groups; governmental, industrial, otherwise. The only difference is that you have in Scientology an extremely mean-spirited leadership backed by a huge warchest and willing dupes to finance all this.

    But none of that is Fair Game. Fair Game was cancelled and does not exist in the Church of Scientology and never, in my many years as a Scientologist, did I see any evidence to the contrary.
  8. grebe Member

    Hmm. By saying I was fighting Fair Game, perhaps I have fallen into the trap I was trying to avoid when I took pains to say I was not fighting Scientology.

    I will have to think about this.

    Off the top of my head, one way to counter the "we have a new word for that now" defense is to show that the prior policy is integral to some important structure that remains.
    • Agree Agree x 3
  9. Anonymous Member

    As a run-of-the-mill wog, I refuse to let you put a scientology label on my reality. There ya go, it's just regular harassment now. If you're claiming that fair game doesn't exist then what are we talking about if it's not harassment?
  10. Anonymous Member

    That is my point exactly. It is harassment done behind the cloak of religious freedom but it is not Fair Game. A current Scientologist would likely not even know what "Fair Game" was if you asked them and would not think that they are supposed to harass anyone. What we have here is harassment done by the intelligence arm of an institution. I just watched The Firm again and it is no different from what the bad law firm practiced except no-one is being murdered in Scientology (let's leave Lisa out of this, please).
  11. grebe Member

    Are you sure you're not a Scientologist hoping to disarm me of one of my most potent weapons?
    • Funny Funny x 1
  12. YouSeeNothing Member

    Nope. It's me. :)
    • Funny Funny x 1
  13. fishypants Moderator

    "Fair Game":

    A Scientology policy (no longer officially known by its original name), which says in relation to those people whom Scientology officially deems to be its 'enemies' (such as critical journalists, public officials, lawyers, judges and ex-members) that:

    1) Hostile or immoral actions of any kind are morally justified when performed against them, and that

    2) They should be harassed and attacked in order to promote Scientology.

  14. Anonymous Member

    There is no new word for it; it doesn't happen; it was cancelled.

    Let me give you a real example to illustrate.

    Years ago, when I was active in Scientology, I held a "wog job" where occasionally I made the decision as to what firm would get a contract for outside services. One time I was looking for a contractor and the firm I liked best happened to be owned and run by "declared SPs". These two fellows had left during the schism of the 1980's. One was particularly involved. A current analogy would be if, as a Scientologist, I was considering hiring Steve Hall to do some web design for the firm I worked for.

    I went to the ethics officer and asked what I should do. IIRC, the answer was that, if I had to give them the job, that I should limit my involvement. That was not possible so I said "Fuck it", gave them the job and worked closely with them. Nothing ever came of it.

    The point is that the answer the EO gave me was consistent only with the concept that one should not associate with declared SPs. That is not Fair Game. If Fair Game existed, the EO would have shown me the policy and made it clear that if I wanted to screw with these folks like badmouth them, make the job difficult, find reasons not to pay, etc, then that would be OK, even encouraged. That would be Fair Game. There was not a hint of that.
  15. grebe Member

    Your thinking reminds me of those New Age types who make a big deal about words doing stuff to reality.

    Also, fighting on principle = winning.
    • Like Like x 2
    • Agree Agree x 2
  16. Anonymous Member

    Did this come up in your OT Eligibility?
  17. grebe Member

    Dr. Lily Von Marcab.
    David Love.
    Tory Magoo.
    • Agree Agree x 2
  18. fishypants Moderator


    "The practice of declaring people FAIR GAME will cease. FAIR GAME may not appear on any Ethics Order. It causes bad public relations. This [policy letter] does not cancel any policy on the treatment or handling of an SP."

    L. Ron Hubbard, HCOPL 21 Oct 68 Cancellation of Fair Game

    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  19. fishypants Moderator

    I'm glad that there wasn't.

    I'm not sure that proves it doesn't happen on other occasions.
  20. Anonymous Member

    Harassment /= Fair Game

    Are you missing the entire point?
    • Disagree Disagree x 2
  21. grebe Member

    Thing is, your experience isn't Scientology, just part of it. You were one of the cash cows. They are subject to shore stories and acceptable truths just like the wogs.
    • Agree Agree x 4
  22. Anonymous Member

    Of course. But never have I seen any indication of Fair Game or reports of Fair Game in the sense where it differs from harassment. In the sense where EVERY rank-and-file Scientologist is given carte blanche. It happened for a brief period and then did not happen any more.
  23. grebe Member

    I think you are. Harassment is a large category that includes things like ex boyfriends repeatedly calling ex-girlfriends.

    Fair Game under Scientology is a violation of our civil right to free speech and due process and other stuff. It's not just one crime but a system of organized crime.
    • Agree Agree x 2
  24. Anonymous Member

    Then you don't understand what Fair Game is. It is the entire community attacking, even the "cash cows".
    • Disagree Disagree x 4
  25. Anonymous Member

    Are you saying that when Scientology implements the policy formerly known as "Fair Game", it's incorrect to call those actions "Fair Game" (even if they are the same actions which would have taken place under the now policy when it was known by its former name)?

    In other words, are you saying that we have (for some reason) to follow Hubbard's own definition of "Fair Game"? If so then why?
  26. Anonymous Member

    You're saying it's not "Fair Game" unless every single Scientologist takes part? Surely that's not right?
    • Agree Agree x 2
  27. Anonymous Member

    No, Fair Game is not defined as "a lot of harassment" or "really mean harassment".
  28. Anonymous Member

    So how would you define it?

    Are you saying that any definition other than Hubbard's own definition is invalid? Perhaps I'm misunderstanding.
  29. grebe Member

    How can it be the entire community when usually Fair Game against a specific target is a covert op?
    • Agree Agree x 3
  30. YouSeeNothing Member

    Words do have power. Isn't that what the brainwashing in scientology is all about? Creating a new reality with the help of new or redefined words? By not using "fair game" you're taking away it's power to be anything more than what it is, harassment. BTW, I hate those write-your-own universe sci-fi books. It's a cop out ending.
  31. grebe Member

    I don't think it has to be. The distinction is the additional conspiracy related to LRH's teachings about SPs.
  32. Anonymous Member

    It is painting a bullseye on the offender's forehead publicly COUPLED with the understanding (through written LRH policy) that that bullseye invites or permits ALL Scientologists to take pot shots at the offender. That happened for a brief period, does not happen any more, and is not covered by any other policy that I am aware of.

    So no, every Scientologist might not take part but they all have the option to if they have the means and the inclination.
  33. Anonymous Member

    "In a 1967 policy titled Penalties for Lower Conditions, Hubbard wrote that opponents who are "fair game" may be "deprived of property or injured by any means by any Scientologist without any discipline of the Scientologist. May be tricked, sued or lied to or destroyed." (emphasis added)

    Any Scientologist - I just don't see that as true since the cancellation the Fair Game policy many years ago. All references to this sort of thing are gone from written materials and your run-of-the-mill Scientologist would have no concept of this.
  34. Anonymous Member

    • Funny Funny x 3
  35. YouSeeNothing Member

    I would say, "What is this made-up bullshit you call 'fair game?' I'm protesting a criminal organization and expressing my right to free speech--your harassment of individuals is a crime."
    • Like Like x 2
  36. Ogsonofgroo Member

    Oh man, gotta call utter bullshit on this, and the cult's actions over the last decades will bear it out. Just because you haven't seen or been exposed to it doesn't make it 'not existing', and just because the term was sort of dropped (due to some awful PR flaps, think Cooper, Minton etc.), doesn't make the actions and gyrations done by desperate fucked-up cult of CoS goons 'something else'.
    Your obviously apologetic stance is pretty typical of the PR spin CoS is so fond of spewing.
    For those trying to differentiate between harassment and 'fair-game' it appears merely a game of semantics, the facts remain~ targeted actions against certain ex's and critics have never stopped, maybe slightly more covert now-a-days, and definitely more on a 'need to know' basis. (watch some of Arron's vids for example and listen to what he had to say).
    Call it a pig, call it a cow, it is an integral part of cult all the way back to the sauced source Hubbard. Trying to perpetuate the smoke and mirrors 'it ain't so/I never saw it' means you haven't been keeping up with, or are ignoring, what many ex's have attested to, over and over again.
    Fucking pathetic in my honest opinion.
    • Agree Agree x 8
    • Like Like x 1
  37. Anonymous Member

    I don't agree.

    I believe it's still Scientology policy that 'suppressive persons' (i.e. anyone that Scientology chooses, which is usually its critics) may be tricked, lied to, defrauded, etc etc, without that action being immoral in the eyes of Scientology.

    OK, so it's now also Scientology policy that, for PR reasons, Scientologists must not use the term "Fair Game" to refer to those kinds of underhand activities.

    I don't see that change in nomenclature for PR purposes as making any difference morally or legally.

    I also don't see any reason why we (critics) should be bound by Scientology's change in nomenclature.
    • Agree Agree x 2
  38. Anonymous Member

    I believe that act - of 'painting the bullseye' - was the 'SP declare', which definitely still exists.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  39. DeathHamster Member

    Scientology actually claimed in court that Fair Game was a protected religious practice.
    • Winner Winner x 5
    • Like Like x 1
  40. Random guy Member

    Nice try.

    The cult wanted to have all of Hubbard's insane ranting declared "sacred scripture". That includes his fair game policy. While the cult have lost quite a bit of it's bite, the treatment of Sparrow and AmA should tell you the policy is alive and well thank you.

    Now go DIAF.
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Like Like x 1

Share This Page

Customize Theme Colors


Choose a color via Color picker or click the predefined style names!

Primary Color :

Secondary Color :
Predefined Skins