• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer

Suppressive Person Defense League

  • About SPDL
    • Legal and Disclaimer
  • Key documents: Suppressive Person Doctrine
  • Extremist Material
  • Fair Game Evidence
  • Writings
  • Glossary

September 9, 1974 by clerk Leave a Comment

Drill: TR 3 Int with Bullbaiting

TR 3 Int [Intelligence]1; 2

Purpose: To teach a Student Int Officer to get the answer to a question without startling a target. To teach him not to be startled by suspicion and Accusation [sic].

Position: Student & Coach facing each other.

Commands: No fixed Commands. Use “Start”, “Flunk” & “That’s It” as in other TR’s.

Training Stress: There are two parts to the drill.

(a) The Coach assumes an identity such as Director of a Drug Firm, or Psychiatrist, or PR Man. Coach also picks a question that the student must get answered such as “What is my address”, “What is my brothers name”, “Have I ever had any connection to FDA”. Coach gives the student a couple of minutes to mock up a suitable cover. Then the drill begins with the student being the interviewer who must get the question answered. Flunks are given for being too pushy. Failing to let coach itsa (a silent int. Officer Invites Itsa), for making the Coach Suspicous. Coach gets gradiently tougher & evasive.

(b) The coach picks an identity. The student picks a question as above. Flunks are given as in Part (a). If the coach guesses which question the student is trying to get answered (coaches don’t go looking for the question but if it sticks out like a sore thumb then Flunk it). Coach is more evasive in this one & flunks are given for creating suspicion.

After the student does this well the coach throws in accusative comments, such as “Who are you working for?” “You’re a Scientologist” “What are you, a Detective?”. Flunks are given for failing to handle & for becoming startled.

This drill is passed when the student can do part (b) of this drill flawlessly.

TR 3 INT WITH BULLBAITING.

Purpose: To teach a student Int Officer to improvise and maintain cover when confronted with something unexpected.

3

Position: Student and coach facing each other.

Commands: No fixed commands. Use “Start”, “Flunk” and “That’s it” as in other TRs.

SITUATION TR

Once the normal reporter TR’s [sic] have been completed Rod & I worked on new drill – Handling the Situation.

(This is now done before 5c)

In this we sat opposite each other as before, but the drill was to handle the ‘situation’. This was basically a bad scene, in which something very unpleasant and catastrophic had happened. Normally it was the sort of thing that one would wish to keep out of the papers.

Examples – all big, dramatic events, reeking of entheta and all bad news:-

(a) You are told a yacht called Apollo, registered in the name of LRH has blown up and sunk 10 miles off Gibraltar.

(b) You are told the OES WW and the LRH Comm WW have been stopped at London Airport with 50,000 pounds in cash and 2 lbs of heroin on them, trying to leave the U.K.

(c) You are told that Quentin and Diana H. have been kidnapped by the Mafia in Los Angeles.

d) You are told that the chief witness in the Manson trial, Mrs. L.X. has arrived in London, claiming to be LRH’s illegitimate daughter.

(e) You are told a doctor in Northern England has been criticized by a coroner at an inquest for his use of Dianetics on his patients, one of whom died.

(f) You are told that a senior member of the Gdn. Office WW is in the offices of the News of the World at 11 a.m. one Saturday morning, dictating a series of six weekly articles on the ‘real lowdown of life in the Gdn. Office’.

Now the aim of the drill is to terminatedly handle the situation: in other words keep us out of the Press, keep the journalists quiet, protect us from the situation with honour [sic] – kill the story.

We did the drill by giving each other the situation, a couple of minutes to think about it, and then handle.

4

Stress:

Coach picks an identity. The student mocks up a cover & picks a question he wants answered. The student interviews the coach and must get his question answered.

The coach throws in startling accusations and suspicions and the student must handle and maintain his cover. Coach starts off on a gradient giving the student wins.

Flunks are given for being startled and long comm lags, for failure to give an answer and smooth over the suspicions of the coach.

This is passed when the student can give plausible answers and improvise with ease, so his cover remains intact, and can get an answer to his question.

Reporting: Set up is done as per TR 3 Int (b). Coach is not tough but does give the student many facts. Student departs after terminating the interview. And writes a report on it.

Particularly noting whether he got his question answered.

The report should include all facts given, but not be overly detailed and include a description of the coach.

Flunks are given for, false reports, opinions, evaluation, omitted data, and any other outpoint found in the report not the interview.

Mo Budlong
DG Info WW

Notes

  1. Document studied on Confidential GO Intelligence Course. PDF format. ↩
  2. n.d. Date of checksheet applied. ↩

Filed Under: Extremist Directives Tagged With: GO Intelligence Course, intelligence TRs

Reader Interactions

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Primary Sidebar

Scientology's "Suppressive Person" mask

Transcript: The SP Doctrine on Trial

Footer

Recent Posts

  • More on the SP Doctrine: The Madness of King Davey
  • Twelve Characteristics, Eleven GO Felons (2019)
  • Speaking up for SPs to David Miscavige (2019)
  • SPDL: Speaking up for SPs (2019)
  • News: Scientology Cult Shut Down Over Shady Land-Grabbing Black Ops in Moscow

Tags

black propaganda chaos merchant criminals David Miscavige dead agent enemy Ethics evil purposes Fair game FDA FPRD Gerry Armstrong Glossary GO Intelligence Course government HFPRDA How to Confront and Shatter Suppression PTS/SP Course HSSC illness intelligence Interrogation L. Ron Hubbard legal Mary Sue Hubbard NCG OSA overts overts and withholds personnel requirements PR psychiatrists psychiatry psychosis PTS Rehabilitation Project Force rock slammers roller coaster RPF Russia scapegoating Scientology security Sea Org security checks SP Doctrine Suppressive Person

Archives

Copyright © 2025 · Executive Pro (Edited on 1 June 2017) on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in