One opened, more to go... Operation Clambake present:

The Fair Game policy
the true spirit of Scientology

COPYRIGHT DISCLAIMER: Fair use extracts of Scientology
policy letters included on this page!

This is the much talked about 'Fair Game' policy in Scientology. Is this an ordinary church that we should just let go about its own business?

Here is the text from the original policy letter (emphasized by me):

                           HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
                     Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

                       HCO Policy Letter of 18 October 1967,
                                     Issue IV

                          PENALTIES FOR LOWER CONDITIONS

                          (Applies both Orgs and Sea Org)

LIABILITY  Suspension of pay and a dirty grey rag on left arm and day
           and night confinement to org premises.

TREASON    Suspension of pay and deprivation of all uniforms and insignia,
           a black mark on left cheek and confinement on org premises or
           dismissal from post and debarment from premises.

DOUBT      Debarment from premises. Not to be employed. Payment of fine
           amounting to any sum may have cost org. Not to be trained or
           processed. Not to be communicated or argue with.

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.

LRH:jp                                                   L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright (c) 1967                                       Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard

When brought up, they often try to change the subject and for example attack you, asking what criminal acts you have on your conscience or if you are payed by the drug cartells or something. According to Scientology all critics of Scientology are criminals, that's why they are critics. Nice logic. This is only standard Scientology tech, it's part of the training they have payed a fortune to learn. Hubbard said so, period.

A Second Opinion! If you manage to see through their stupid personal attacks and desperate distractions, you may manage to force them to ward it off by telling you the Fair Game policy letter was cancelled in 1968. But keep in mind that Scientologists are trained to lie and never defend, always attack (and generate money).

I got the actual cancellation letter they refere to right here:

                         HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
                   Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

                     HCO Policy Letter of 21 October 1968

                           CANCELLATION OF FAIR GAME

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.

LRH:ci:cden                                           L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright (c) 1968                                    Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard


    The PTS/SP Course Pack
  1. It is bad enough that such a policy ever was made in the first place, even if it truly had been cancelled later.
  2. This HCO Policy Letter (HCO P/L) does not cancel the policy, it only cancels the use of the term 'Fair Game'. It states clearly that the practice described in the policy (deprived of property, injured, tricked, sued, lied to or destroyed) is not cancelled.
  3. The "Church" of Scientology does not change anything because it's wrong, no, they change it because it gives bad PR!
I personally got a copy of the course manual "PTS/SP COURSE - How to Confront and Shatter Suppression" as printed by the cult in 1989. This extract is from page 128 and shows that not even the wording was really changed after all:

    If there is no agreement to be audited and the student who is found
to be a suppressive person will not respond to A to E (because student
has blown and can't be found or because the student flatly refuses), the
student is considered terminated.

    A waiver or quit claim is given or sent the student stating

                                                       Date _____________


    I, __________________________, having refused to abide by the Code of
(name and place of org) do hereby waive any further rights I may have as
a Scientologist, and in return for my course fee of _________________, I
do hereby quit any claim I may have on (name of org) or any Scientologist
personell or any person or group or organization of Scientology.


             2 Witnesses_________________________________________________


    Only when this is signed the student may have his course fee
returned, but no other fees as he accepted that service.

    The ex-student should realize this makes him Fair Game and outside
our Justice Codes. He may not have recourse of any kind beyond refund.
And after signing can only return to Scientology as per policy on Fair

Jon Atack writes in "The cancellation of Fair Game":

77. In Wollersheim v. Church of Scientology of California (the "mother church" of the Churches of Scientology at the time the suit was filed), the California Appeal Court ruled, in a decision upheld by the US Supreme Court: "Wollersheim was compelled to abandon his wife and his family through the policy of disconnect. When his mental illness reached such a level he actively planned his suicide, he was forbidden to seek professional help. Finally, when Wollersheim was able to leave the Church, it subjected him to financial ruin through its policy of 'fair game'." (JCA-147, pp.A-7, 15 & 16). At appeal, Scientology asserted that "fair game" was a "core practice of Scientology", and therefore protected as "religious expression". This position was also made on behalf of Scientology in the case against Gerald Armstrong, in 1984, by religious expert Dr. Frank Flinn (JCA-45).

JCA-45. Frank K. Flinn testimony in Church of Scientology of California, 1984, vol.23, pp.4032-4160.

JCA-147. Wollersheim v. Church of Scientology of California, Court of Appeal of the State of California,, 18 July 1989 (upheld by the U,S. Supreme Court, 7 March 1994).

In my opinion this clearly shows organized criminal activity, exactly what we try to warn people about. This cult uses the law and claims to be a "bona fide religion" only to defend its horrid organized activities! It may be hard to imagine, but there are lots more where this comes from. How far are these people really willing to go? I say it is about time we put down our foot and said: STOP!

Scientology claim they are the most ethical
group on the planet!!! They want to save us???

Brought to you by:
Operation Clambake