OSA Investigations "Enemy" Point System Document

Discussion in 'Office of Special Affairs' started by SweetnessandLight, Dec 27, 2009.

View Users: View Users
  1. I don't know if this has already been posted here, I couldn't find it. The link also has more interesting information if you are a critical thinker or a skeptic and interested in debunking the concept that Corporate Scientology is a religion, and should continue to enjoy legal protection as such.

    This text is taken from Perry Scott's "The Scientology Comparative Theology Page", which has other interesting articles and items as well:

    http://www.ezlink.com/~perry/CoS/Theology/index.htm

    From: ronisxenu@aol.com (RonIsXenu)
    Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
    Subject: TRACK YOUR POINTS AGAINST OSA!
    Date: 16 Sep 1997 21:39:23 GMT
    Lines: 345
    Message-ID: <19970916213901.RAA04033@ladder02.news.aol.com>
    NNTP-Posting-Host: ladder02.news.aol.com
    X-Admin: news@aol.com
    Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
    SnewsLanguage: English

    This documents how OSA is to track "enemies" via a point system. How many
    points can YOU rack up against OSA? Post your results! This posting and
    my others have me well above 20 unhandled "points!"

    -------------

    INVESTIGATIONS SECTION


    INVESTIGATIONS SECTION VFPs: 1. A FULLY ESTABLISHED,
    PRODUCTIVE DSA INVEST SECTION WHICH BRINGS ABOUT THE FAILURE
    OF INFLUENCE OF HOSTILE GROUPS OR PERSONS.

    2. THE REQUIRED INFORMATION FURNISHED TO GUIDE THE
    PROGRESS OF SCIENTOLOGY.

    1. TOTAL UNHANDLED ATTACKS AND ATTACKERS (GDS)
    Ref: Advice updated RE GUARD STAT
    Advice 27 March 72 COUNTER ATTACK TACTICS
    Advice 28 March 72 INTELLIGENCE PRINCIPLES

    This is a guard stat with 0 at the top.

    This stat is counted:

    1 point for every attacker

    Plus:

    1 point if the attack is local

    2 points if the attack is regional

    4 points if the attack is national

    The points remain on the stat until handled.

    The category of attacks are listed below:

    1. TM infringement, each TM Infringement counted as per
    the TM Infringers handled stat of Invest. (NOTE: if a
    report is received of a possible TM Infringer, this must be
    verfied as inactive within 4 weeks or it gets counted on
    this stat as a TM Infringer until verified as inactive or
    until handled.)
    2. External Influences - where an org is being influenced
    by External Influences and this is not handled by OSA.
    Also each External Influence who has not been handled.
    This would include any actions done by TM Infringers which
    affect the org or the field.
    3. A suit filed against a Church entity or individual.
    4. Any lost suit.
    5. A print media hit - a newspaper or magazine story which
    is an attack.
    6. An attack on the TV by an individual eg. an entheta
    source who has gotten on a TV talk show to forward an
    attack, or on a radio show.
    7. A TV program that is an attack on the Church.
    8. Legislation proposed in any area that hinders our
    operations in that area.
    9. Legislation passed in any area that hinders our

    -page break-

    operations in that area.
    10. An entheta book published.
    11. Any legislative or governmental inquiry initiated into
    the Church.
    12. Any Scientology activity closed down through
    opposition actions.
    13. Government restrictions imposed upon the Church.
    14. A legal case not involving the Church but resulting in
    a judgement that is an attack upon the Church.
    15. A civil suit filed on the Church.
    16. A civil judgement against the Church
    17. A deprogramming attempt on a Scientologist.
    18. A penal (criminal) complaint against a Church or a
    staff member filed.
    19. A penal (criminal) complaint against a Church or a
    staff member being acted on.

    For every attack, the attack goes on the stat with a point
    value according to whether it is a local, regional or
    national attack plus the attacker behind the attack goes on
    as an additional point if not already on the list.

    When the actual situation is HANDLED, by terminatedly
    handling the attacker the points come off the stat (one
    attacker may be behind a number of attacks and when
    handled, the accumulated points for the attacks originated
    from that person would all come off the stat). The
    exception would be if an Attacker is verified as being
    handled yet an outstanding attack still exists in some
    form, that attack remains on the list until handled (while
    the Attacker and any handled attacks come off the stat).

    Clearly, the Attacker MUST be correctly isolated and named
    before he can be handled and this stat goes up.

    For purposes of calculating the list of UATTACKS to begin
    with, each DSA Invest Officer should list out the major
    attacks connected to each of its current attackers going back
    to the point when they started attacking (in many cases this
    can be several years or even a decade - for the initial
    calculation of this stat it is not intended to get into a
    huge administrative cycle and some approximation of attacks
    based on existing file data may be necessary). Each attack
    will have to be classified as to whether it was a local,
    regional or national attack for purposes of calculating the
    stat.

    Each DSA Invest Officer is to format their UATTACKS breakdown
    by listing out the names of the attackers with the attacks
    under each name, with the attack designated as to whether it
    was a local, regional or national attack. The attacker with
    the most attacks should go at the top of the list. The
    purpose of this admin system is to be able to see at a glance
    who we are getting the most attacks from. If there is more
    than one attacker behind an attack, then that attack would be
    placed under the name of the major attacker with the name of
    the second attacker in parenthesis next to the attack so it
    is clear that the attack would not come off the list until
    both attackers are terminatedly handled. If the major
    attacker gets terminatedly handled, the attack would then be
    placed under the name of the second attacker.

    If there are attacks for which there are no known
    attackers, these are placed at the end of the list until
    the attackers behind them are known.

    -page break-

    Following is an example to illustrate this:

    1) JOE BLOGS = 1 POINT
    A) LA TIMES ENTHETA ARTICLE 15 JAN 1980 - REGIONAL
    = 2 POINTS
    B) ENTHETA TV APPEARANCE 1 MAY 1982 - LOCAL = 1 POINT
    C) ENTHETA BOOK "CULTS" 1984 (FRED FRAME ALSO BEHIND
    IT) - DISTRIBUTED NATIONALLY = 4 POINTS


    Subtotal = 8 POINTS

    2) FRED FRAME = 1 POINT
    A) ENTHETA LECTURE BOSTON UNIV 15 DEC 1983 - LOCAL =
    1 POINT
    B) DEPRO ATTEMPT ON SUE SMITH MARCH 1984 - LOCAL = 1
    POINT
    C) 14 MEDIA ATTACKS 1976-1980 - ALL REGIONAL = 28
    POINTS

    Subtotal = 31

    ATTACKS WITH NO KNOWN ATTACKERS:

    A) 12 JUNE 1981 RAID ON MISSION - LOCAL = 1 point
    B) JULY 1987 ATTEMPTED DEPROGRAMMING ON BILL SMITH -
    LOCAL = 1 POINT

    Subtotal = 2

    Etc.


    Once formatted as per the above, each DSA Invest
    Officer should forward this breakdown to the OSA Cont where a
    master Continental list of UATTACKS will also be kept and
    updated. Each cont should have a break down the UATTACKS by
    the DSA office responsible for handling each attack/attacker.


    2. NUMBER OF ATTACKS PREDICTED AND REPORTED PLUS WHOS
    FOUND BY APPROVED ESTIMATE OR EVAL. (GDS)

    Ref: Dispatch RE: NEW STAT
    OSA NW ORDER 42 INTELLIGENCE, ITS ROLE
    OSA NW ORDER 35 INTELLIGENCE, ESTIMATIONS
    AND PREDICTIONS
    HCO PL 17 FEB 66 PUBLIC INVESTIGATION SECTION
    Advice 28 March 72 INTELLIGENCE PRINCIPLES


    This stat is a weekly point value for the total number of
    threatened attacks found by Defensive minus points for
    any unpredicted attack or any attack which has been
    predicted which then goes unhandled and occurs despite
    the prediction. The stat is not accumulative. The
    points are valued as follows:

    Local Attack - 1 point
    Regional Attack - 5 points
    National Attack - 10 points

    An unpredicted attack, or unhandled predicted attack counts
    minus 10 times the above point value.

    An attack is defined per the definitions of an attack as
    covered under the UATTACKS statistic.

    -page break-

    A bonus of 10 points is given for any Who found by AVC
    approved evaluation and 5 points for a Who found by
    approved estimate.

    As can be seen, for a prediction to be viable it must be
    predicted in sufficient time to handle the matter before it
    becomes a full blown attack and a handling must be worked
    out and exchanged. The actual handling may be executed by
    Support Unit, Staff Security Sub-Unit, HCO, Dept of I&R,
    Legal Off or PR Off, but the Defensive Unit is responsible
    for ensuring that the prediction product is actually of
    quality and exchangeable and utilized to beneficial result of
    preventing the attack.

    To be counted, the prediction must be reported in writing
    in some manner to the proper publics who should know and/or
    act on the data (which reporting may even be in the form of
    a stat breakdown if it is clearly communicated in an
    exchangeable manner with sufficient time, place, form and
    event to be understood.)

    The stat reflects external prediction as well as internal
    prediction lines.

    Internal prediction activities must be aligned with the
    purpose and functions of the Office of Special Affairs and
    Departments of Special Affairs, which are external facing
    units. It is the Staff Security Sub-Unit that monitors the
    prediction and handling of matters which interface between
    internal and external. The Department of Special Affairs is
    interested in matters which if not handled could result in
    external attacks, different from security situations which
    are simply an HCO matter - for example a PTS Type A situation
    which just needs to get a standard handling (and would
    concern us only if there are enemy connections or indicators
    of something that will turn into an external attack unless
    handled); whereas a PTS C found on lines would of course be
    of interest to us. Valid Staff Security matters include such
    things as detection and handling of enemy infiltration;
    detection and handling of the source of external influences
    preying on the backs of orgs, etc.

    Key references on Staff Security functions and duties and
    areas of prediction activity which would validly be
    represented on the WHOATTACKSF stat, and which deliniate
    matters which are the hat and function of HCOs are:

    SPD 2 OCT 88 ORGANIZATIONAL SECURITY
    SO ED 4234 HCO AND OSA COORDINATION ON SECURITY AND
    INVESTIGATION MATTERS
    OSA NW ORDER 42 INTELLIGENCE, ITS ROLE
    OSA NW ORDER 64 RUNDOWN ON INTELLIGENCE
    HCO PL 21 APRIL 70 FIELD ETHICS


    3. NUMBER OF OUTSTANDING THREATS (GUARD STAT)
    Ref: Advice 16 Feb 82, NEW STAT

    This stat is a guard stat and is the total outstanding
    threats. This would cover any predicted attack about which
    information has been received. Once the threat is handled it
    comes off the stat.

    4. NUMBER OF OUTSTANDING SECURITY THREATS (GUARD STAT)
    Ref: Advice 16 Feb 82, NEW STAT


    -page break-


    This stat measures the total amount of outstanding security
    threats and risks and is an upside down graph with zero at
    the top. A security situation for OSA/DSA is as defined
    under the WHOATTACKS Found stat.

    5. NUMBER OF THREATS SEEN, THREATENED OR REPORTED
    Ref: Advice 16 Feb 82, NEW STAT

    Per the above listed advice, this stat shows the amount of
    security threats that are found and reported. A security
    situation for OSA/DSA is as defined under the WHOATTACKS
    Found stat.

    6. NUMBER OF THREATS HANDLED

    Per the above listed advice, this stat shows the amount of
    threats that are handled.

    7. COMPLAINTS ACTED UPON
    Ref: HCO PL 17 Feb 66 PUBLIC INVESTIGATION SECTION:

    This stats measures the number of complaints against
    attackers that were acted upon by authorities.

    This is defined as the number of complaints filed with
    anyone who is in a position of authority and acts upon the
    complaint and thus impinges on an attacker (e.g. judicial,
    governmental, civil, employer, landlord, etc). Each time
    the complaint is acted on counts 1. Not cumulative.

    8. NUMBER OF OPPOSITION ADVANTAGES LOST
    Ref: HCO PL 16 Feb 69 Iss II, BATTLE TACTICS

    This stat measures the advantages of the opposition which
    were lost due to the application of standard Invest tech.

    Total number of advantages lost by the opposition that week
    as a direct or indirect result of Invest actions. See the
    above HCO PL for a description of the type of activities
    that would count on this stat. Not cumulative.

    DEFINITIONS:

    OPPOSITION: A person or group actively opposing the
    Founder, Scientology or the Church of Scientology or its
    principles or activities and/or threatening its survival or
    expansion.

    9. DOCUMENTED EVIDENCE OBTAINED AND USED
    Ref: HCO PL 17 Feb 66 PUBLIC INVESTIGATION SECTION
    Advice 8 June 73 INTELLIGENCE, ITS ROLE

    This stat measures the evidence that has been obtained
    against attackers and was put to use.

    Documented evidence obtained that indicates a crime or
    useable evidence regarding a Who or an opposition terminal,
    and is deemed useable by counsel, PR or Legal.

    This stat is counted on the basis of one point for each
    evidence of a crime documented deemed useable by counsel,
    PR or Legal.

    A 5 point bonus is given for each piece of documented
    evidence that is USED by counsel, PR or Legal. (If the
    data contained in the documented evidence is used, it can


    -page break-

    still be counted as a DOCEV, whether the actual document is
    used or only the data.) Not cumulative.
     
  2. namaste

    namaste Silver Meritorious Patron

    Excellent post. Thank you. Good information to have.

    This sounds like it could be a really fun game. If we could come up with a way to find out or keep our own scores we could even have leagues, tournaments, and lots of exciting competitions amongst ourselves.

    Lots of potential here.
     
  3. Thank you!

    I say all you creative gamer types, knock yourselves out, we might as well get some fun out of this!

    ("If it ain't fun, it ain't Scientology!") :coolwink:
     
  4. HCObringOrder?

    HCObringOrder? Silver Meritorious Patron

    There was an earlier thread with some similar info as I recall, but perhaps there was only a link to start.

    Interesting to see that some of the root docs are G.O. time era.
    Also it seems that OSA NW Orders is an odd series.
    I first read it as North West, but perhaps New World Orders is correct.
    Anyone know?
     
  5. Dulloldfart

    Dulloldfart Squirrel Extraordinaire

    The OSA NW orders, as far as I recall, are reissues of older LRH non-HCO PL issues, like LRH Guardian Orders.

    Paul
     
  6. Ted

    Ted Gold Meritorious Patron

    Re: the OP

    TL;DR

    However, it goes to show what an introverted, wack-job of self-important, micromanagement this organization really is.

    Assuming it's stated purposes are honest and factual, there is but one valid stat for the organization: Number of individuals and companies in the org's field that are flourishing and prospering according to their own goals, purposes, and ideal scenes.

    All stats relative to the scientology organization should revolve around the above. Anything else is superfluous or outright bullshit.

    With each passing year, the scientology field gets dirtier and dirtier. As the flow of new people into orgs grinds to a halt, the dirty field stat should level off. That's one way to control it.
     
  7. Cherished

    Cherished Silver Meritorious Patron

  8. Terril park

    Terril park Sponsor

    Also the stats reward attacking the environment. As opposed to first policy of maintaing friendly relations.
     
  9. Terril park

    Terril park Sponsor

    Its clear these stats came before the main impact of the net. However
    extrapolating from the above, I'been posting at a conservative estimate 3
    invitations per week to do tech outside COS for roughly 10 years, lets call
    them internet media attacks.

    Thats roughly 1500 points.

    However they are in the category of "international" which isn't
    acknowledged as a category, but its got to be 5 per pop.

    Thats roughly 7500 points.

    That don't count other posts I made which are more numerous. Got to be at least as many.

    Then two years worth of monthly protests? Got to be worth a few points.

    And I am list owner of two FZ forums. Have an FZ website.

    Maybe an extra few credits for stat pushing on all this? :)
     
  10. Wow!

    LOL Terril, your stats are straight up and vertical! Good for you, you darling man, keep up the good work!!! :p :happydance:
     
    Last edited: Jan 2, 2010
  11. Veda

    Veda Sponsor

    Don't worry. There are stats for "maintaining friendly relations" too.

    (In fact, when Hubbard was writing letters to the FBI, in the 1950s, claiming that people were communists or communist sympathizers, he was very friendly with some of those same people.)

    "Find out who your friends are, develop them. Find out who your enemies are, destroy them."

    "PR is overt. Intelligence is covert."

    Hubbard developed his PR tech as cover (to which he attached the so called "first policy of maintaining friendly relations"), after he developed Scientology covert Intelligence (Fair Game) tech.

    PR tech is wrapped around Intelligence tech, per his instructions.

    That's a clue, old chap.
     
  12. Terril park

    Terril park Sponsor

    Perhaps I should use straight up and vertical for my sig line.:whistling:
     
  13. Terril park

    Terril park Sponsor

    You contradict yourself re his policy on that.

    You say:- "PR is overt. Intelligence is covert."

    This is from PR series 7 :-

    Next two lines:-

    "PR is at its best when it begins and ends overtly.

    Intelligence is best when it begins and ends covertly."


    " It can be a serious error to cross intelligence and PR

    They are two different fields. They have two distinctly
    different technologies."

    As ex OSA or GO or whatever I bow to your superior knowledge.
    But perhaps you may wish to check for any misunderstandings?

    First policy dates from march 1950. Way before GO/OSA and PR series.

    He of course took this from the vast data base of wisdom that exists.
    He was no dummy!

    Perhaps best expressed by the Sage of bethlehem:-

    "Love thy neighbour as thyself"

    " Turn the other cheek"

    The parable of the good Samaritan.

    This Sage probably gave better lecture than LRH.
     
  14. Veda

    Veda Sponsor

    They don't mix; they complement each other.

    For example, Intel frames someone for a crime he/she didn't commit, and then PR - separately - promotes that the person is "under investigation," etc.

    Another example, Intel concocts a plan to send Scientologists out to buy a particular Hubbard Fiction book (in batches retail) in a specific location during a specific week, making it (fraudulently) a "Bestseller," than - separately - PR promotes it as having been a Bestseller.

    Intel "creates facts" by forgery, fraud, or "setting up" a person, and then that created fact (a lie), becomes a "fact." Once a "fact," it becomes a "truth" and can be used in PR.

    'First policy' is a joke, and always was.

    http://www.forum.exscn.net/showpost.php?p=31490&postcount=3
     
  15. Terril park

    Terril park Sponsor

    Your above comments violate :-

    " Never use lies in PR" PR series 2.

    This and other matters have become celebrated footbullets.

    First policy a joke? Go tell Jesus!

    Enjoying your re -writes of green on white. :)
     
  16. Veda

    Veda Sponsor

    Now, you're mixing PR with Intel.

    Once Intel (covertly) "creates a fact," in the various ways described above - and in the link I provided you - it IS a fact. For example, it was a fact that Paulette Cooper was indicted by a Grand Jury for making bomb threats - that indictment by a Grand Jury WAS a FACT, and was "TRUE."

    And the people - in PR, in Scientology - who were told that she had been indicted, believed it was true. They had NO awareness that Paulette Cooper had been covertly framed by Scientology covert Intel "dirty tricks."

    Another example (which apparently didn't register the first time): Fraudulent means was - discreetly, behind the scenes - used to create "Best Seller" status for Hubbard's 1970s Science Fiction books. The average PR person (or the average Scientologist) telling people that these were "bestsellers" really DOES believe it. It's right there on the 'New York Times' list of bestsellers. It's a FACT. It's "true." and - even per 'PR Series 2' - it is a FACT.

    But, of course, it's a lie.

    "Reality is basically agreement."

    "A datum is an invention which has become agreed upon and so solidified... To get to this state it has to be thoroughly agreed upon. When it is thoroughly agreed upon it becomes, then, a truth."

    What do you think Hubbard meant when he used the terms "nicey nicey PR" and "PR of PR"?

    This is Scentology, remember? "Reality is basically agreement."

    Have you read 'PR Series 18'? (Three sentences of which are contained in this link, but please read the entire issue. http://www.forum.exscn.net/showpost.php?p=219727&postcount=54) and have you - carefully - read all of the PR Series issues? Have you read the confidential PR Series issues? and other related confidential issues?

    If you have - which I doubt - you haven't understood them, or the subject of "PR" in Scientology, or - frankly - Scientology itself.

    And you sure as heck don't understand Hubbard if you're comparing him to Jesus.

    I accept that you really don't grok Scientology, even though you promote it with great enthusiasm and oozing "ARC."

    And this is a problem with many Scientologists. Scientology deeply influences them, yet they - in important areas - don't understand it.

    Worse, it appears to have been meant to be that way, per its devious and manipulative founder's design.

    And I'm very sorry that this is the case. It certainly is a mess.

    Or, as it has been called, a trap.

    And to present to others a supposed system of enlightenment and have it be a trap is, to say the least, seriously rude.

    You've got yourself one seriously rude guru there.

    And good luck with that.
     
  17. Ted

    Ted Gold Meritorious Patron


    Most sensible people would not see First Policy as a joke. It is just good sense. It is assumed this policy was written from strength.

    All things considered, i.e. destructive actions of the GO, SO, ethics policies, LRH's own contradictory orders and advices... This is much violation of First Policy that came from the same man who wrote it.

    If his writings do anything to expose the man, LRH must have been a mixed bag of good sense and idiocy. It now appears to me that First Policy was written from good sense and cowardess. Once the coward-side gained strength it let loose its case, First Policy fell by the wayside.

    In good sense, I can't reconcile the message of "What Is Greatness" with the image a couple of middle-aged men pushing a peanut around the deck of the Apollo while their shipmates and family watched and LRH bellowed, "Faster! Faster!"

    Thank you Veda and Terril for this moment of enlightenment.
     
  18. Mystic

    Mystic Crusader

    I hereby declare myself to be 12 points per minute.
     
  19. Blownforgood

    Blownforgood Patron

    LRH wrote up these points. These are the chink in the armor. Check out my current tally.

    2. External Influences - where an org is being influenced
    by External Influences and this is not handled by OSA.
    Also each External Influence who has not been handled.
    This would include any actions done by TM Infringers which
    affect the org or the field. DONE

    3. A suit filed against a Church entity or individual. DONE

    4. Any lost suit. I/P

    5. A print media hit - a newspaper or magazine story which
    is an attack. DONE (many times over)

    6. An attack on the TV by an individual eg. an entheta
    source who has gotten on a TV talk show to forward an
    attack, or on a radio show.DONE (many times over)

    7. A TV program that is an attack on the Church.DONE

    8. Legislation proposed in any area that hinders our
    operations in that area. I/P

    9. Legislation passed in any area that hinders our
    operations in that area. I/P

    10. An entheta book published.DONE

    11. Any legislative or governmental inquiry initiated into
    the Church. I/P

    12. Any Scientology activity closed down through
    opposition actions.I/P

    13. Government restrictions imposed upon the Church. I/P

    14. A legal case not involving the Church but resulting in
    a judgement that is an attack upon the Church. I/P

    15. A civil suit filed on the Church.

    16. A civil judgement against the Church.

    17. A deprogramming attempt on a Scientologist.DONE

    18. A penal (criminal) complaint against a Church or a
    staff member filed.DONE

    19. A penal (criminal) complaint against a Church or a
    staff member being acted on.DONE



    Until next time...
    BFG
     
  20. HappyGirl

    HappyGirl Gold Meritorious Patron

    :thumbsup: :cheerleader: Wow! As those Aussies say, cool bananas BFG!! :hifive: