OSA Operatives: How-to Guide

[Anonycat]

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.

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

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

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.

[Commander Birdsong]

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]

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.

[Anonycat]

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...

Panda does not abide with dark castles, but builds them for homeless toads. Where you been?

[Commander Birdsong]

Panda does not abide with dark castles, but builds them for homeless toads. Where you been?

hanging out with homeless frogs.pretty groovy frogs, all artists, his wife is a grandaughter of belleroche an artist of la belle epoch