Thanks to Sam for giving me a link to the so called "Fair Game Policy Letter".
Let me point out Sam that the page simply contains some text that anyone could have typed. It is not a scan of an original document and there is no data on where it came from. How was it found? Who supplied it? These are important pieces of information when one is trying to evaluate the reliability of a piece of data.
From the note on the bottom of the page, the site seems to have been created by Fredric Rice. Who is known to be violently opposed to Scientology. Not a reliable source in my opinion. If it had come from an independent and unbiased third party like CESNUR then it would carry more weight.
In order to evaluate the accuracy of the claims about "fair game" one must ask the question: If "fair game" is as widespread as the anti-religious extremists claim, then where are all the other policy letters that refer to it? Do they really expect us to believe that a single paragraph is the sole source of a widespread practice? That just doesn't strike me as realistic. Surely if a practice is widespread and well know it will be mentioned all over the place?
Another thing that casts doubt on the authenticity of the document is this: The conditions are listed in the wrong sequence. The page lists them in this order: Liability, Treason, Doubt, Enemy. The correct sequence is: Liability, Doubt, Enemy, Treason. This is just one more reason why I doubt the authenticity of the document.
jully, You said you couldn't believe me because you'd read an alleged policy letter written in 1967. I can't comment on it because in 30 years of being in Scientology I've never seen this policy. I have the full set of the volumes that contain all Church policy written by L. Ron Hubbard and the "policy letter" you mention is not in there. I also have a single volume from the 1960's (I'm a bit of a collector) that contains a lot of old canceled policies many of which were not even written by Mr. Hubbard, but were published with his name on them. The policy you reference is also not in there.
You also refer to someone who you claim was "fair gamed" in the 1970s. I don't know who the person is and, as it was probably before I got into Scientology, I can't comment because in the 31 years I've been a Scientologist I've never ever seen any application of the nasty stuff that the anti-Scientology crew claim is being done all the time.
So we come back to "You say it is" versus "I say it isn't".
A couple of simple points in my favor:
If this "fair game" policy is in wide spread use as the anti-Scientology crew claim, then how come in 31 years I've never come across it? How come my son who was working in the Church's International management never heard of it? How come my daughter who worked in the ethics & justice department of a major Church never heard of it? How come my friend Patricia who was on staff at a major Church for ten years never heard of it? How come none of the friends I asked about it have ever heard of it? If it is such a broadly used and wide spread policy someone must have heard of it somewhere. Or is it so secret that none of the people who are supposedly following it know of its existence? Sorry, your claims just don't hold up under logical scrutiny. The truth is that "fair game" does not exist.
You also admit "I don't know much about Scientology". If you did know a little about Scientology and Scientologists you would know that the sort of behavior the anti-Scientology crew accuse us of is actually completely foreign to every tenet of the religion. I can't speak for every individual in Scientology but I can speak for myself, my family and my friends and I can say with absolute certainty that we follow the Way to Happiness, we apply the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and we obey the law - which has been a policy of Scientology from day one.
"Fair Game Comment"
1 Comment -
Thanks to Sam for giving me a link to the so called "Fair Game Policy Letter".
Let me point out Sam that the page simply contains some text that anyone could have typed. It is not a scan of an original document and there is no data on where it came from. How was it found? Who supplied it? These are important pieces of information when one is trying to evaluate the reliability of a piece of data.
From the note on the bottom of the page, the site seems to have been created by Fredric Rice. Who is known to be violently opposed to Scientology. Not a reliable source in my opinion. If it had come from an independent and unbiased third party like CESNUR then it would carry more weight.
In order to evaluate the accuracy of the claims about "fair game" one must ask the question: If "fair game" is as widespread as the anti-religious extremists claim, then where are all the other policy letters that refer to it? Do they really expect us to believe that a single paragraph is the sole source of a widespread practice? That just doesn't strike me as realistic. Surely if a practice is widespread and well know it will be mentioned all over the place?
Another thing that casts doubt on the authenticity of the document is this: The conditions are listed in the wrong sequence. The page lists them in this order: Liability, Treason, Doubt, Enemy. The correct sequence is: Liability, Doubt, Enemy, Treason. This is just one more reason why I doubt the authenticity of the document.
What do you think?
6:31 PM