From: Kim Baker Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology Subject: FACTNET: Your guide to handling OSA on ARS Date: Fri, 15 Sep 1995 11:40:06 GMT CUT OUT AND KEEP: In keeping with our mission to inform, warn, educate, and provide alternative education on coercive and manipulative techniques, we hereby provide the readers of a.r.s with a brief summary of techniques observed here on a.r.s. We provide an example, name the technique we know of, with an explanation, and allow the readers to judge for THEMSELVES whether these are manipulative techniques or not. If you don't know what the technique is, you are more likely to become affected by it, and say things out of anger, frustration, or confusion, or absolute incredulity at apparent stupidity. We hope to equip you to spot the technique in operation as soon as you see it. EXAMPLE: Fusedon606 "Looks like the Clams are winning - the Co$ is just doing business." TECHNIQUE: Reverse Vectoring (explained in Hubbard's Philadelphia Doctorate Tapes) EXPLANATION: A complex concept to explain, but basically entails reversing basic agreements. For instance, there is an understanding that if you use the word "clam" you are hostile to Scientology - so, this poster is seizing on the basic understanding and words, and reversing them to confuse people. --------------------------------------------------------------------- EXAMPLE: Vera "Why don't you think up something new besides the 'silence the critics story'? It is a bit worn out." TECHNIQUE: Invalidation (Taught as what NOT to do in the Level Zero auditing course) EXPLANATION: Takes what the person has said, and refutes its worth. Employed particularly on sincere posters. --------------------------------------------------------------------- EXAMPLE: Woody "ARS bigots persecute religious freedom" TECHNIQUE: Refusal to acknowledge (Taught in the Professional Training Regimen course, as what NOT to do) EXPLANATION: The deliberate ignoring of what a person is saying, a refusal to understand it in any way, or even acknowledge that anything has been said. --------------------------------------------------------------------- EXAMPLE: Vera "You're a Nazi, Herr Hauser" "There must be a lot of empty space between your ears - like a wind tunnel" TECHNIQUE: Bullbaiting, or pushing buttons. (Taught on the Professional Training Regimen Course - Scientologists are taught how to have their "buttons" removed). EXPLANATION: This is the deliberate identification of subjects a person is likely to be sensitive about, and provocation of those "buttons". Calling a German national a "Nazi", thinking someone needs to be seen as intelligent, and then calling them "dumb". -------------------------------------------------------------------- EXAMPLE: James Parker "You are insulting my religious beliefs" TECHNIQUE: Evaluation (Taught on Level Zero auditor training as what NOT to do to a person) EXPLANATION: Taking what a person has said, and then deliberately re-interpreting it in a manner which is different from what was intended. A person objects to a policy, and instead of answering the objection, which did not refer to a religious belief, but a method of handling enemies, answers by referring to a religious belief. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- EXAMPLE: Bob Wallert "Wollersheim is running a scam" TECHNIQUE: Dead Agenting (Taught in the PTS/SP course) EXPLANATION: Ruining and discrediting the person who is attacking Scientology by seizing upon anything they may or may not have done, and blowing it up into a BIG crime. Every person on this earth has done things wrong, and so any person on this earth is able to be Dead Agented. -------------------------------------------------------------------- EXAMPLE: Anonymous, "The roof is falling in" post "Wolly called Arnie a liar, and said that Bob is barely competent" TECHNIQUE: Third Partying (Taught in how to handle Ups and Downs course) EXPLANATION: Basically consists of going to one person, saying one thing, then the other, saying another thing, and turning the two people against each other. The picture that always accompanies this, to illustrate, is a husband and wife arguing, and a mother-in-law standing in the background with a smirk on her face. ------------------------------------------------------------------- Well, are they deliberately doing this, or not? YOU DECIDE. We provide the information, you be the judge. Ironically, most of these techniques are considered bad things, what NOT to do to your paying public. But then, alt.religion.scientology is not the paying public. Kim Baker Director, FACTNET Fight Against Coercive Tactics, Inc. For more information, point your web browser at: http://www.lightlink.com/factnet1