Home

bpr

By MS2 Admin

There is a good article from on the Religious Liberty League blog in the last few days on the subject of Black Propaganda. You can read it here.

In our experience, over the last 3 years, Black Propaganda is the chief resource used by the C of S and by those who oppose Scientology to try and quell, unmock and confuse delivery of standard Scientology in the field.

Rumours are spread, which are hard to trace back to the actual source — but in each case, the rumours can be disproven as false, twisted and distorted facts.

When rumours are heard by enough sources, people tend to believe them — so campaigns to spread lies are often encountered in the field. They are rumours about individuals (their past and present activities, and their intentions) and about groups (their activities, training and products).

One of the best ways to not fall prey to black propaganda is simply never except rumours and reports 3rd hand about a person or group. Personally inspect, look, talk and find out yourself.  Interestingly, the rumours always prove to be BS.

And never bother to get revenge. Just see it for what it is, ignore it, and keep on studying, delivering, auditing, training, flourishing and prospering.

11 thoughts on “Black PR

  1. “Interestingly, the rumours always prove to be BS.” Isn’t that an absolute? I’ve certainly encountered situations where rumors were true. I think each situation and rumor would have to be judged individually.

    • Sunny,

      I believe Lana qualified this remake by saying:

      “Rumours are spread, which are hard to trace back to the actual source”

      The above by definition is evidence of Black Propaganda which according to the Oxford English Dictionary is:

      Falsified or unacknowledgeable propaganda, especially that purporting to come from an enemy’s own sources, and designed to lower morale.

      Unacknowledged in this case would be synonymous to unattributable as to source:

      According to HCO POLICY LETTER OF 21 NOVEMBER 1972 Issue I
      PR Series 18
      HOW TO HANDLE BLACK PROPAGANDA

      “Black propaganda” (black = bad or derogatory, propaganda = pushing out statements or ideas) is the term used to destroy reputation or public belief in persons, companies or nations.
      It is a common tool of agencies who are seeking to destroy real or fancied enemies or seek dominance in some field.

      The technique seeks to bring a reputation so low that the person, company or nation is denied any rights whatever by “general agreement.” It is then possible to destroy the person, company or nation with a minor attack if the black propa- ganda itself has not already accomplished this.

      Vicious and lying gossip by old women was the earlier form of this tactic and was so bad that some areas put them in public stocks (neck yokes) or drove them out of town.

      In modern times there is no such check on black propaganda. Difficulties and costs of libel and slander suits, abuse of press privilege, lay anyone open to such a campaign.

      All one needs is an enemy. And there are few men in history who have been without enemies.

      There are random individuals in the society who do not understand very much.

      This is expressed as a sort of malicious glee about things. Such pass on slanderous rumors very easily. In an illiterate society such people abound. Since they cannot read, the bulk of knowledge is denied to them. Since they do not know very many words, much of what is said to them is not understood.

      This is not isolated to the illiterate only.

      What they do not understand they substitute for with imaginary things. Thus such persons not only listen to slander but also corrupt and twist even it. Thus a rumor can go through a society that has no basis in truth.

      When numbers of such rumors exist and are persistent, one suspects a “whispering campaign.” This is not because people whisper these things but because like an evil wind it seems to have no source.

      Black propaganda makes use of such a willingness to pass on and amplify falsehoods.

      Much black propaganda is of course more bold and appears blatantly in irresponsible (or covertly controlled) newspapers and radio and television.

      But even after a bad press story has appeared or a bad radio or TV broadcast has been given, the “whispering campaign” is counted upon by black propagandists to carry the slander through the society.

      Thus any person, any being, is at risk.

      No person, company or nation has totally clean hands. That is left to the saints. In childhood one stole a few apples, broke a window or two, dented a fender, went joy riding in a “borrowed” vehicle or took pennies or candy bars that weren’t his own.

      Childhood is quite lawless and the teenage period is often a revolt against the closer and closer fitting straitjacket of “proper social conduct.” One marries the wrong spouse or goes astray with another in some incautious moment, or com- mits various large and small sins of which society disapproves.

      Any of these things tend to make one vulnerable to attack, upon his past or repute.

      A person comes to fear bad things being said about him. In the face of a whispering campaign, real or imagined, one tends to withdraw, tends to become less active and reach less.

      This is equally true of companies and even nations.

      Thus, unless one knows how to handle such an attack, one can in fact be made quite miserable and ill.

      (End Fair Use Quote)

      So one can suspect that if one can not attribute the source of such rumors then it is more likely then not Black Propaganda.

      Something that Scientology and L Ron Hubbard have been the subjected to for decades. See the following link:

      http://www.freezone.de/english/timetrack/data/policies/1971-05-07_SMERSH.htm

      Thus the best way to counter such rumors is by the *proper* use of the dead agenting:

      The technique of proving utterances false is called “DEAD AGENTING.” It’s in the first book of Chinese espionage. When the enemy agent gives false data, those who believed him but now find it false kill him-or at least cease to believe him.
      So the PR slang for it is “dead agenting.”

      This consists of disproving utterly the false statement with documents or demonstration or display. One has to have a kit (a collection of documents) or the ability to demonstrate or something to display.

      (Ibid)

      As one author of the upcoming book on Watergate has pithily said:

      “fiction doesn’t leave a paper trail,”

      http://www.chaletbooks.com/chaletreports/

      Even so. One has to verify the provenance of the paper trail:

      https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/kent-csi/vol5no1/html/v05i1a03p_0001.htm

      Since one of the techniques of Black Propaganda is to forge documents.

      This is what happened in the famous MJ 12 case:

      http://www.theufochronicles.com/2014/10/mj-12-hoax-that-quickly-became.html

      Of which I suspect a similar operation was run against Hubbard personally and Scientology in general.

      Thus with the above data and using the PR Series one can determine whether a rumor is true of not using something other then one’s preconceived bias or opinion.

  2. The only thing I would add to this is to note the source of the rumors. Keep your own mental (or physical) file of who starts and who forwards such rumors. If you find repeated offenders amongst these names, you will have discovered something important in your future communications and dealings with that person.

    Paul

    • I have been doing it with my relatives and their friends. Indeed, what I found out it has good pro-survival predictive value.

  3. This is just a lame attempt to third party good people using third partying.
    I may not remember this perfectly but I believe that when one wants to discover the identity of a third party, one begins by clarifying exactly WHAT was said, (2) findng out WHEN it was said, and (3) WHO said it.

    I recently received a telephone call exactly as described in the Religious Freedom League article. It went like more or less like this:
    Caller: “Hello, Mr. Woodrow, you have been observed going in and out of (so-and-so’s) residence, (so-and-so) is the target of an ongoing investigation, and this is an interrogatory! Have you ever observed……blah, blah, blah, blah…..”

    Me: “Excuse me. Hold on a minute. Wait. Stop talking…..thank you. What did you say your name is and what organization are you representing????

    Caller: (after a stunned silence) “I will not be authorized to release that information until this interrogatory is completed, now my question is……blah, blah, blah, blah…..”

    Me: “OK, Wait, wait, wait. Stop. Stop talking. Hold on a minute. Ok, thank you. Here’s what you need to do: First, get in touch with your superiors and get permission to release that information which I just requested, and then call me back. Thank you very much. Bye, bye.” (click)

    I was actually hoping that he would call back with the information I requested but of course he never would because the purpose of his handlers was simply to enturbulate me and my dear friend by means of third partying.
    And he failed to do that too.

    As it says in the Religious Freedom League article,
    “This is an example of black propaganda, albeit a third-rate one – it’s too obvious, and it represents an inverted reality: Miscavige is the one who has made less of LRH and his tech by altering and perverting it into a shadow of itself, and a form of reverse Scientology.”
    and
    …..”Just noise. The solution to which is: Carry on! More, not less.”

    So, let’s just carry on. As I believe that Ron said somewhere, “Damn the downstats and full speed ahead!” 🙂

  4. ESP:

    Very good point. Time spent tracking Black PR down is time not spent in production. Not that one should always ignore Black PR. But given a choice, and where Black PR has not become overwhelming, I would suggest pouring the coals on production. Do some casual probing if you must, but prefer production.

    Paul

  5. Good post, Lana. I believe it’s the tech that the naysayers fear, and attacking LRH is their vain attempt to diminish the value of our wins.

    I’ve given up looking at entheta sites since leaving the CoS, and found every time that referring to source materials brings me back up-tone.

What is your view?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s