I'm just going to spam this post with any shoops I find/make in accordance with the worldwide theme of the May protests.

Videogames/Battletoads.
Fair Game Policy.





[moar]

Remember Kids.

FAIR GAME.

Fair Game Law

In 1965, Scientology founder L. Ron Hubbard, formulated the "Fair Game Law", which states how to deal with people who interfere with Scientology's activities. These problematic people, called suppressive persons, could be considered "fair game" for retaliation:

A Suppressive Person or Group becomes fair game. By FAIR GAME is meant, may not be further protected by the codes and disciplines or the rights of a Scientologist.

Later in December of that year, Hubbard reissued the Fair Game policy with additional clarifications to define the scope of Fair Game. He made it clear that the policy applied to non-Scientologists as well. He declared:

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 Ethics, unless absolved by later Ethics or an amnesty ... this Policy Letter extends to suppressive non-Scientology wives and husbands and parents, or other family members or hostile groups or even close friends.

Hubbard made it clear elsewhere in his writings that the policy would be applied to external organizations, including governments, that were guilty of having interfered with Scientology's activities. He told Scientologists:

If the Internal Revenue Service (in refusing the FCDC [Founding Church of Scientology, Washington DC] non-profit status) continues to act up or if the FDA does sue we can of course Comm Ev [Committee of Evidence] them and if found guilty, label and publish them as a Suppressive Group and fair game ... [N]one is fair game until he or she declares against us.

The policy was further extended in an October 1967 Policy Letter (HCOPL 18 Oct 67 Issue IV, Penalties for Lower Conditions), where Hubbard defined the "penalties" for an individual deemed to be in a "Condition of Enemy":

ENEMY — SP Order. 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.

When a man named Peter Goodwin in Hampshire, England purchased a high-level Scientology course for £250 and resold it to friends for £50, Hubbard personally issued an Ethics order which "withdrew any future help from Goodwin and his associates, (presumably for eternity), and threatened the most dire retaliations."


"Cancellation"

In July 1968, Hubbard canceled HCOPL 18 Oct 67 Issue IV, Penalties for Lower Conditions, replacing it with HCOPL 21 July 68, Penalties for Lower Conditions. This redefined the condition of Enemy as follows:

"Suppressive Person order. May not be communicated with by anyone except an Ethics Officer, Master at Arms, a Hearing Officer or a Board or Committee. May be restrained or imprisoned. May not be protected by any rules or laws of the group he sought to injure as he sought to destroy or bar fair practices for others. May not be trained or processed or admitted to any org."

In addition, in October that year, Hubbard issued HCOPL 21 Oct 68 Cancellation of Fair Game, which said:

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

This letter states that it cancels only the use of the term "fair game" for its "bad PR" effect, and not the policy on the treatment of "suppressive persons" in question. For example, Lord Justice Stephenson, in the judgement in Church of Scientology of California v. Department of Health and Social Security [1979], declined to order discovery in favour of the Church of Scientology on the grounds that there was a real risk of harassment of the persons named in the documents.

I have carefully considered the documents to which we have been referred and some to which we have not. I am satisfied by my consideration of the documents that there is a real risk that all three categories of documents may be misused, ie not for legitimate purposes of the action but for harassment of individual patients, informants and renegades named in them, not only by proceedings for defamation against them but by threats and blackmail, and that they may be distributed to those in other parts of this worldwide organisation who may misuse them in the same way. I am thinking chiefly of the 'fair game law' against suppressive persons expounded in the HCO policy letter of 1 March 1965 and referred to in the particulars, and the policy letter of 21 October 1968 cancelling publication of the policy in the interests of public relations, but not the policy itself.

In 1976, Hubbard later said in an affidavit that "Fair Game" was never intended to authorize harassment:

There was never any attempt or intent on my part by the writing of these policies (or any others for that fact), to authorise illegal or harassment type acts against anyone. As soon as it became apparent to me that the concept of 'Fair Game' as described above was being misinterpreted by the uninformed, to mean the granting of a license to Scientologists for acts in violation of the law and/or other standards of decency, these policies were cancelled.

Court cases involving "Fair Game"

The case of L. Gene Allard, 1976

In 1976, the Church was found legally liable for the malicious prosecution of a dissatisfied Scientologist named L. Gene Allard who left Scientology in 1969. The suit specifically charged the Church with "Fair Gaming" Allard according to Church policy.

The case of Lawrence Wollersheim, 1980

In a long and contentious trial, Lawrence Wollersheim, a former Scientologist, alleged that he had been harassed and his business nearly destroyed as a result of "fair game" measures. During appeals, the Church again claimed "Fair Game" was a "core practice" of Scientology and was thus a constitutionally protected activity. That claim was denied by the appellate court on July 18, 1989. After over 20 years of legal wrangling, the Church of Scientology paid Wollersheim the amount of the judgement, plus interest: $8,674,643.

The case of Jakob Anderson, 1981

In the March 11-16, 1981, Danish court case of Jakob Anderson vs The Church Of Scientology of Denmark, ex-Guardian's Office operative Vibeke Dammon testified that the Church did in fact practice Fair Game and had done so in Anderson's case, in an attempt to get Anderson committed to a psychiatric hospital.

The case of Gerald Armstrong, 1984

In 1980, Scientologist and Sea Org officer Gerald Armstrong was assigned to organize some of Hubbard's personal papers as the basis for a biography of Hubbard. Omar Garrison, a non-Scientologist known to be sympathetic to Scientology, was hired to write the biography. Both Armstrong and Garrison quickly realized that the papers reflected unfavorably on Hubbard, and revealed that many of Hubbard's claimed accomplishments were exaggerations or outright fabrications. Garrison abandoned the project, and a disillusioned Armstrong and his wife left the Church, retaining copies of the embarrassing materials as insurance against the expected harassment to come. Armstrong was sued by the Church in 1982 for the theft of private documents. The "Fair Game" policy became an issue in court. Armstrong won the case, in part because the Judge ruled that Armstrong, as a Scientologist of long standing, knew that fair game was practiced, and had good reason to believe that possession of these papers would be necessary to defend himself against illegal persecution by the Church. In a scathing decision, Judge Paul Breckenridge wrote:

"In addition to violating and abusing its own members civil-rights, the organization over the years with its "Fair Game" doctrine has harassed and abused those persons not in the Church whom it perceives as enemies. The organization clearly is schizophrenic and paranoid, and the bizarre combination seems to be a reflection of its founder LRH. The evidence portrays a man who has been virtually a pathological liar when it comes to his history, background, and achievements..." "In determining whether the defendant unreasonably invaded Mrs. Hubbard's privacy, the court is satisfied the invasion was slight, and the reasons and justification for the defendant's conduct manifest. Defendant was told by Scientology to get an attorney. He was declared an enemy by the Church. He believed, reasonably, that he was subject to "fair game." The only way he could defend himself, his integrity, and his wife was to take that which was available to him and place it in a safe harbor, to wit, his lawyer's custody." (Judge Paul Breckenridge, Los Angeles Superior Court, June 20, 1984) During the trial, the Church hired Frank K. Flynn, an adjunct professor of comparative religions, to write a report arguing that Fair Game was a "core practice" of Scientology and thus should be considered a constitutionally protected activity.


MOAR

Sean Carasov
Shawn Lonsdale (?)

The Reinstatement of Fair Game?

Soon after the first set of Chanology raids there was a reported leak of Scientology intelligence to the alt.religion.scientology boards. This revealed the totally idiotic concept of that Anonymous was somehow connected to the Marcab Confederacy, the first prong of a full scale alien invasion. Hidden in this soup of fucktardedness lay a chilling quotation attributed to David Miscaviage:

“Several current and formerly overtly prominent ARS SPs are deemed to be Regional Directors of Operations for Anonymous. These Regional directors will be targeted for express handling should legal efforts fail to win injunctions against the mass demonstrations."

— David Miscarriage creepypasta, emphasis added

This intel was uncovered on February 15th - two days before the discovery of Shawn's body. What the hell does "express handling" mean? Could the Scifags have reinstated the policy of fair game against their enemies? (lol, no. They would have to had stop it before they could reinstate it.) Either way, it's fucking weird.

- - - -

TL;BFRI

(Too Long; But Fucking Read It.)

Seriously.

If not only so you know what to say if asked,
but also to stress how fucking serious business this shit is. =)

I know our Oldfags will know their shit, but we seem to have had a slight influx of members.


And I've got too much time.


NOW you can discuss.

Longpost is LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONG

But I reddit.

I think that bit about Fairgame never actually being abolished is most interesting.