More on independent thought and Scientology

One of the first things I read upon my introduction to Scientology was the essay Personal Integrity (taken from a tape transcript, excerpts from which I am sure I posted many months ago).   Even though I did some very unkind and irrational things under the culture of culthood that Church “management” had morphed into, I always studied Scientology and any other subjects with the LRH advice I received initially in Personal Integrity in mind. 

Now, in the cult culture Personal Integrity has been cancelled tacitly with an atomic branding iron for some time now.  Since LRH wrote and taped so many words critics can have, and still have, a field day with pointing out apparent contradictions.  And Miscavige has had a field day creating a cult by focusing solely on out of context lines that seem to justify his atrocious hatred for humanity and mission to make the TECH unworkable.

The final word by L Ron Hubbard on how to study TECH and the OEC (Policy) volumes is to assimalite it all, become adept at using it toward a POSITIVE RESULT and then after a while one will be able to simply “play the piano”  with it; that is use it naturally toward POSITIVE RESULTS without having to remember individual lines to justify or direct one’s making of music.

Miscavige has created the perfect CULT by continually violating HCO PL Tech Degrades and telling anyone who points out his off policy or out tech directions that that is “old”, “not used anymore”, or “background information.”  Whenever he gets in a bind during his mission to make the tech unworkable, and he can’t point to something out of context, he trumps it up with “advices” no one else has seen. 

Jeff Hawkins and Glenn Samuels did a great service  in my view  by putting into circulation among us the concepts of thought stopping.

I believe the church of Scientology under Miscavige’s iron fist has created a flock that does thought stopping day in and day out.  If they did not, there would be no flock.

I contend that state of affairs is anathema to the philosophy of Scientology.  Below, are the words of L Ron Hubbard uttered on 30 December 1957, in support of that proposition.  To me, these words are as true today as they were the day they were originally communicated.

In the first place, in the university, they teach only those things which have already been found out. And if you teach them in such a way that nobody is permitted to think on them evermore, you, of course, will get a totally dead-ended scientific world.  Well, the reason I bring that up is because we have a text here called Scientology 8-8008, and if you people think that I have the idea — of course, I can tell you how to achieve a result with a preclear — but if you think I have an idea that nobody ever ought to think on the subject of the mind, he merely ought to read this and bow down, boy, you better change your mind. I really mean it. I really mean it.

I will scold a staff auditor from departing from known procedure occasionally. I will. But only when he didn’t get away with it. Therefore, I give you this, a definition of auditing which some of you have heard before but not all: auditing is what you can get away with…

…Now, data is something one uses to think with. It isn’t thinking.  And when the data becomes a substitute for thinking we have frozen the whole forward progress of education.  A datum is something you think with; it is not a thought.  A definition is something with which to think…

…But anything which you must not touch and upon which you are not supposed to have any effect at all will sooner or later make you the unwilling or unknowing effect of it. Right?  And if I tell you, “Under no circumstances should you alter, change, think about, Scientology” – dizzz – all I’ve done is set up another monster. Right?  And in a world that is all too prone to build Frankensteins, we don’t need another one!…

…So in processing, all we are trying to do is to free the thinkingness of the individual. It is all we are trying to do.  Therefore the goal of all processing is freedom.  We cannot improve anybody unless we free his thinkingness, we free his ability to think.

Therefore we must accustom him to associating thought with matter, thought with space, thought with time, thought with energy. Not forbid it like the mystic, not cancel it out entirely like the Tibetan, but actually, factually make it possible for him to do this without feeling he is being murdered by it.  To associate thought with matter, energy, space or time, freely and knowingly, is to bring an individual up to a point where he can be cause over matter, energy, space and time!…

…But a preclear is not cause across the boards if anywhere he’s an unwilling and unknowing effect.  Now remember, he can be the effect of anything as long as he is not an unwilling or an unknowing effect.  And that’s the one thing we mustn’t forget in Scientology.  We’re not trying to say, “Don’t ever be at effect.”  We’re saying, “if you’re at effect know what it is.”

Therefore we can disseminate Scientology; therefore, I can tell you this material without liability because you’re here by choice; I am here by choice; we’re discussing these things by choice because we are interested.

The day it becomes a vital subject that we must have a credit in, Scientology becomes a slave subject.

So I ask you, don’t ever let it happen.

- LRH, 30 Dec 1957 Cause and Effect. Ability Congress, Washington D.C.

 

 

163 responses to “More on independent thought and Scientology

  1. Marty,

    We are on the same page. This is quite factually the essence of the independent Scientology movement.

    As long as we treat the tech as data to think with, we will remain free and our preclears will continue to win.

  2. Yes, I remember now. That’s the Scientology I signed up for! Thank you Marty.

  3. — The more thetan you have present, the less policy you need and the better things run. Only a thetan can handle a post or a pc. All he needs is the know-how of minds as contained in Scientology. That was all he ever lacked. So, given that, sheer policy is poor stuff, as it seeks to make a datum stand where a being should be. That’s the whole story of the GPMs. So why not have live orgs?
    From: HCO PL 23 October 1963 — Refund Policy; pg 243 OEC Vol. 3

    • One of my FAVORITE quotes “…sheer policy is poor stuff, as it seeks to make a datum stand where a being should be.”

      I use that in my life today. Even said the same to a buddhist friend of mine who was sorta stuck on the “policy” of a center.

      Thanks Loping Wolf.

      WH

    • Lord Of The Undead

      Greetings loping wolf. May I say, if at all possible that I really dig that reference.

      Lord Of The Undead

  4. Thank you Marty!
    I have had many requests for the “THOUGHT STOPPING EXERCISE” I mentioned to MeAgain in her comments about my article, ” Ten Gross Technical Errors from the Golden Age of Tech.” It may be of use as a separate post which I will send you, but for now anyone who is interested please contact me directly at:
    glennnsamuels@gmail.com.
    with Love,
    Glenn

    • Hi Glenn;

      The ‘Thought Stopping’ situation is why so many, many, many CofSers never got past Grade O on the grade chart, regardless as to what a cert has to say. Those in the Indie groups are probably the only Scinos that have their Grade O truely in, or even have a chance of getting it in. Consequently, the vast majority of real OTs in the world will be Indies.

      I think that for those who did the OT levels with out-Grade O, not just the OTers but probably any Scino that has gotten ‘past’ Grade O, just leaving the CofS may get Grade O in for them.

      It is/was so insane working on getting up the Bridge when day after day you had to compromize your own integrity to do so. It’s impossible. No one can. Maybe a ‘shadow’ of OT Beingness can be achieved, but not what is available if you do the Bridge as a free thinking individual.

      • Yes, you could say Grade 0 is today’s biggest ridge on the bridge.

        • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

          Absolutely right, Marty.

          If I were an SP who was intent on destroying the Scientology Bridge, Grade 0 would be one of my first targets to make sure can’t be completed to full EP.

  5. Brilliant. That is exactly it. Perfect.

  6. one of those who see

    OMG Marty. Thank you for this. Reading and rereading post and will go and listen to the lecture. Wow!

  7. LRH at his finest.

    I would say that LRH was asking for help at this point. That he later went on to get caught up in the GPM’s of Orgs, Policies and Body’s points up the fact that not enough people helped and defended him at the time.

    Scientologists have a chance to remedy that now.

    Good post, Marty.

    Scott

    • TheEmperorIsNaked

      You said a lot right there Scott. Thank you.

    • Scott, that is an interesting idea.

    • On the FEBC, Ron talked alot about Execs being audiors on the 3rd dynamic. I can’t wait to get Tech training to I can better make the coorelation between the Red tech and the Green. Fun stuff!

      • Scott and Bozz~I haven’t done a ton of administrative training but I did have to administrate some folks so that auditing could occur for the last 10 of my 12 years on staff. I administrate a very active household of 5, with anywhere from 3 to 6 pets at any given time and I’ve administrated a full-time, successful skydiving business for 8 years along with my part-time “hometyper” (aka transcription) business for 10 years. Let’s see, that’s about 20 years of time now – damn time flies!
        Correct me if I’m wrong, but LRH spent the majority of his years researching and developing the technical processes for spiritual freedom first. Of course he had to figure out the best way to administrate things so that he didn’t have to be the ONLY auditor on earth, so had to train some other people to audit along the way. In the process of doing that, he had to come out with some “standard” ways of handling things (as the group learning to audit grew). I don’t know how many years this covers but I’d assume that he had enough auditing processes for one lifetime perfected, but hadn’t quite perfected how to administrate all this, as it takes more than one person to administrate (see current state of CofM as proof).
        So, I see the current situation to be that we are all still in-progress on hashing out the administration of LRH’s tech. Not because LRH didn’t have administrative tech to use, but because we all (LRH included) haven’t gotten a chance to work it out (he died too soon to)…we’re still in progress in the real world.

        Where DM has gone in working this out is obviously NOT going to work. That’s the standard of how NOT to do it.
        So what the hell am I saying?
        Scott~I think you’re right. Way back before DM took over, there was still a lot to be ironed out with how to administrate all these people that wanted to attain spiritual enlightenment to the highest degree, how they would live and work together and accomplish this on a large scale, across the planet. We’ve now proven out the SP/PTS data in real life and how insidious it is. Like others have said, the live demo has happened. I’d have to give a FLUNK on it taking me/us so long to figure out but it’s figured out, nonetheless. We now HAVE that.
        Winding down now…LoL…we don’t have to have anything more than auditor training to some/any level to DO auditing and then HAVE case gain occurring.
        I think we are working out the new model of how to administrate it here and now outside the CofM.
        It makes sense to me anyway. ;)

        • If you all want to talk about LRH’s intentions, realize the following facts:
          a) He was virtually held hostage the last five years of his life, cut off from the church.
          b) One of the last MAJOR projects he worked on in detail was INCOMM. He said computers are the future and had the church ahead of the curve internationally circa 1983.
          c) The one thing that impressed me the most with my chronological study of all tech and policy – that despite an awful lot of paper memorializing perhaps too much turning into “timeless tech” – the man worked every living second trying to IMPROVE upon tech and policy, constantly trying to figure out WHAT IS EFFECTIVE.

          • Thank you Marty for that insight.

          • Marty,

            I think that the bottom line here is the Independent movement.

            Letting people Do Scientology, Have Scientology and Be Scientologists or not, completely on their own determinism is the right gradient now.

            Help anyone who reaches out to you, experience others and see their value.

            Lead only by example – as you are.

            ML, Scott

  8. Thank you, this is very uplifting.

  9. “…But a preclear is not cause across the boards if anywhere he’s an unwilling and unknowing effect. Now remember, he can be the effect of anything as long as he is not an unwilling or an unknowing effect. ”

    Love it!! I used to get auditing at Flag and would tell them that I felt the effect of Scientology. You can’t come near that subject in auditing unless it has to do with your own overts. For me Scientology was such a major part of my life, I frequently wanted to itsa about it, but alas it wasn’t allowed if you had any slight amount of criticism.

    I longed for the day that the group called Scientolgy would actually practice higher intelligence and demonstrate some of the loftier ideas that LRH talked about. The only place I have found that kind of reason is here on these blogs, along with my fellow outcasts. Because Scientology under DM has turned into a cult and I would rather be in a group of smart outcasts than part of an unreasoning cult any day.
    :-)
    Tony

    • Tony
      Reminds me of the time I was at AOLA in the 80s and was on ethics lines (another story). During one of my “talks” with the ethics officer I mentioned that I felt that Scientology was like an enemy to me in some ways. I know.. I know… Where the hell did I think I was to be so bold as to say such a thing? Well, the response I got from the ethics officer was “If Scientology is an enemy to you then what does that make you?” (nudge nudge… wink wink… say no more.. say no more…). The question was totally rhetorical and was not asked in any effort to understand why I would say that. Shut me up real fast I’ll tell you. It started to become clear where I was and it wasn’t anywhere I wanted to be.

      WW

    • Tony, didn’t LRH say, more than once in various lectures, that many if not most beings on this planet were dumped here because they were rebels & non-conformists elsewhere?

      Maybe this group of outcasts of which you speak consist of those who have gradually gotten back to who they really are & are once again taking their stand against the forces of unreason.

      Hopefully many more will follow.

      Publius

  10. The perfect bit of LRH for this moment.
    Thank you.

  11. It’s interesting that those who have the least ability to think with the tech are the ones who squirrel it the most by enforcing their fixed concept of “the tech” on others.

    Horner, Erhard and now Miscavige.

    • RJ, smart observation.

    • I quite agree.

      The first CS I trained under had been trained under Mayo. He was the best CS I ever worked with. His chief guiding principles were “audit the PC in front of you” and “the program for the PC must parallel the PC’s mind”. His PC programs were brilliant – for example, assessed lists of questions that he would create based on a study of the PC’s case. These programs allowed Class 3 and 4 auditors to handle many cases that otherwise would have needed a Grad 5 to do a major correction list. The programs matched the PC’s and the auditors, and there were many PC gains.

      Unfortunately, the reference Marty has quoted above was not applied in an assessment of the tech of our CS, but rather KSW1 in the anal, asinine way that would allow a charge of squirreling against him. So he and 3 other tech and qual staff were declared, execs were happy (oh ya, that CS scorned executive CS’ing), the TTC was emptied and delivery crashed for years.

      The point here is that this ’57 reference, in the hands of someone who knows how to play the piano, can speed PC case gain. However – and let’s just take a look at “The F/N’ing chair” as an example of “auditing is what you can get away with” – absolutely squirrely shite can be entered in by someone who has departed from standard Scientology. To clarify one thing, what I would call “standard” here is “auditing the way Ron would audit” – which used to be the standard of Flag training, pre GAT.

      Perhaps “playing” with altered processes could be allowed between consenting auditor and PC, as long as the auditor knows how to do an appropriate correction list (and doesn’t have a ser-fac that says “this oddball process is OK, it’s standard Scientology that’s wrong”), and the PC is well enough trained to be able to tolerate being wrapped around a pole. However, that kind of play is risky and I would strongly discourage it if good qual correction is not available for both PC and auditor.

      The upshot of all this is, (with a good qual and very gentle ethics,) you can teach auditors to get standard results with standard Scientology (KSW1 in), correct them if they fail, but allow them latitude if they have to address the case of the PC in front of them (such as asking the exact question that will blow the charge impinging on the PC at that time). When the auditor can play the piano, he will know when to use the “exact question” and when to pull a correction list – and will pull the correction list if his “exact” question is wrong. This doesn’t mean the auditor pulls processes out of the air. The auditor operates from a program and a CS for the session. It does mean that the auditor asks a question that will communicate to the PC and blow charge, whether that charge is a rudiment (often tactically observed i.e. in session), or a rudiment or other charge strategically addressed by a program question.

      All it takes is CS’ing, auditors, qual and ethics all operating without ser-facs and amazing PC results will occur.

      Here’s to a tech renaissance. Cheers!

      • 2ndxmr~That is the perfect example!
        The standard is LRH…PERIOD. How much or how little you know is all you can go by, but you certainly can be fluid in how you use it…all still LRH’s tech.
        Your C/S writing DOABLE programs meant PCs made case gain, versus simply stopping everything for who knows how long, blah, blah, blah. It wasn’t like the C/S said oh, since you don’t know how to do this repair list, then let’s whip out some psychoanalysis checklist and run that and see how that works. The C/S used LRH tech to resolve it.
        That first intention produced results.
        The intention to STOP case gain using Policy did just that…STOPPED case gain.
        And now it goes black…ruins case gain and gets rid of those capable of applying LRH’s processes fluidly, in hopes of ruining case gain forever more.
        Oh those wicked SOBs. It’s NO accident that I became unknowing effect of there with that!

  12. Thought Provoking

    This is fantastic!

    It also explains why so many at the top of the bridge are still robots. At some point they became unwilling effect, perhaps the out tech sec checking or something like that, and they abandoned being cause on their dynamics.
    This is why abuse of tech degrades can occur unchecked even though it is a well known policy.

    Wonderful reference!

  13. Yes – that IS the essence of life or livingness.
    “Un- impressed with winning or losing” (LRH), as long as you know that you are losing, why, and well – are unimpressed, life is gorgeous!
    This post should get quite some case gain –amongst the ones who hold back in some way – in or out of the …….. 
    Love,
    Helmut

  14. Your humble servant

    Thank you, Marty, that was very well put indeed. You are doing a marvelous job of disseminating actual Scientology, and, in my humble opinion, the world needs actual Scientology, and it has needed it badly for a very long time. It has gotten some of it, and what it did get has done a tremendous amount of good. But owing to misunderstandings, misapplications, and the ill intentioned perversions of a relatively small number of persons who neither understood the subject nor wanted to do anything good with it, the world hasn’t yet benefited from it nearly as much as it should have . You are heading in the right direction, for sure. Moving on up a little higher!

  15. That’s some good stuff right there.

  16. Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

    “I believe the church of Scientology under Miscavige’s iron fist has created a flock that does thought stopping day in and day out. If they did not, there would be no flock.

    I contend that state of affairs is anathema to the philosophy of Scientology.”

    Excellent, Marty.

    Church Scientologists, especially Staff, have lost their Freedom of Thought AND Freedom of Choice which has them constantly carrying with them, the emotion of hidden or overt resentment and hostility, as demonstrated by the violent communication culture, AND even physical violence.

    Staff have lost their Spirit of Play. Under such suppressive dominance, the game is no longer fun and they no longer feel they have choices in playing the game.

    Whenever one is forced to do something out having to either comply or rebel, the compassion of truly “giving from the heart” is completely lost. Resentment ensues. That’s why we see empathy virtually missing in the current Church of Scientology.

    A good expression of the joy one gets from giving from the heart is in this song…

    I never feel more given to
    than when you take from me —
    when you understand the joy I feel
    giving to you.
    And you know my giving isn’t done
    to put you in my debt,
    but because I want to live the love
    I feel for you.
    To receive with grace
    may be the greatest giving.
    There’s no way I can separate
    the two.
    When you give to me,
    I give you my receiving.
    When you take from me, I feel so
    given to.

    —Song “Given To” (1978) by Ruth Bebermeyer from the album, Given To.

    When we give from the heart, we do so out of a joy which springs forth whenever we willingly enrich another person’s life. This kind of giving benefits both the giver and the receiver.

    The receiver enjoys the gift without worrying about the consequences that accompany gifts given out of fear, guilt, shame, or desire for gain.

    The giver benefits from the enhanced self-esteem that results when we see our efforts contributing to someone’s well-being.

    This joy is energizing and fulfilling, and expands everybody’s ability and desire to create even more and more and EXPAND their area with more fun and joy.

    Everybody needs autonomy. It’s a human need. Nobody likes somebody else being the boss of their own choice. When choice is robbed, the feeling of WANTING to “give from the heart” is also stolen.

    Clearly, the heart (compassion/empathy) was stolen from Scientology by DM Implant Technology and abusive (violent) communication, no-choice command, and thought stopping.

    IMO, the end product of this abuse has resulted in “Robotismology.”

    I like this quote by Marshall B. Rosenberg, Ph.D. from his book “Nonviolent Communication—A Language of Life, Second Edition”

    Don’t do anything that isn’t play!

    I earnestly believe that an important form of self-compassion is to make choices motivated purely by our desire to contribute to life rather than out of fear, guilt, shame, duty, or obligation.

    When we are conscious of the life-enriching purpose behind an action we take, when the soul energy that motivates us is simply to make life wonderful for others and ourselves, then even hard work has an element of play in it.

    Correspondingly, an otherwise joyful activity performed out of obligation, duty, fear, guilt or shame will lose its joy and eventually engender resistance.

    We want to take action out of the desire to contribute to life rather than out of fear, guilt, shame, or obligation. “

    • Thought Provoking

      Great thoughts throughout this post.

      “Church Scientologists, especially Staff, have lost their Freedom of Thought AND Freedom of Choice which has them constantly carrying with them, the emotion of hidden or overt resentment and hostility, as demonstrated by the violent communication culture, AND even physical violence.”

      This was very true for me.

    • Nice words Wayne
      Marthy thanks for the Quote .

    • Hi ‘Safe';

      Excuse me for jumping in here, but …

      It has been good to see your posts. Last time I read you was back in the days of the AT&T fiasco. Then you went to the ‘Burning Man’ and disappeared. Your absence was noted quite a bit. I used to ask if any one had heard from you, but no joy.

      I was delighted to see you start posting here and just wanted to say ‘Hi!’

      • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

        Hi Bobo,

        Thank you. What you say is true.

        That a “church” would hunt me down like a bounty hunter, and then have NO respect for the DUE PROCESS clause of our Constitution, by rushing process so fast that I had absolutely no time to properly defend myself, completely terrorized me. I realized I was truly dealing with a totalitarian monster.

        To imagine a “church” was one of the first to test the Digital Millennium Copyright Act is beyond my own rational comprehension. Worse, to piss on Due Process is treason to The People. It became vividly clear to me that the Church of Scientology management has no respect for the Constitution of the United States.

        The button I had pushed was exposing the 273 “ethics” rules of the Church of Scientology out of the “Introduction to Scientology Ethics book”, squirrelled (non-LRH) version.

        The list included such vague “crimes” church Scientologists can do such as the ambiguous “crime” as “commiting a problem”. Can you imagine the Police State abuse and what American life would be like if this “crime” was real Law? Totally Orwellian and totalitarian stuff to me.

        The shock of how ruthless the “church” and WHO they really were (witnessed from my own personal experience), and the sickness I felt about the direction they were taking Scientology, I felt I had no other choice but to retreat and regroup. I guess that took me 10 years! lol.

        I cognited that the Church of Scientology (aka the Church of Robotismology) lost their compassionate soul and no longer practices Scientology.

        Instead, management practices total domination. In other words, mental and even physical slavery. CofS is essentially a mini-government who uses Totalitarian Rule to dominate its people.

        to·tal·i·tar·i·an (tō-tăl′ĭ-târ-ē-ən)
        adj.

        Of, relating to, being, or imposing a form of government in which the political authority exercises absolute and centralized control over all aspects of life, the individual is subordinated to the state, and opposing political and cultural expression is suppressed

        – American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, 4th Edition.

        Doesn’t this definition precisely fit exactly what’s being imposed on Sea Org members? In a lessor sense, even church Scientologist public.

        The State in this case, is the CofS (aka CofM).

        This was more than I intended to write, but I kind of line charged here. lol. (By the way, Burning Man is a blast and a very spiritual event, contrary to what a few may try to paint it as.)

        • Wayne/Safe~Whoa dude!
          What you write amazes me.

          PS. I’d love to go to Burning Man in lieu of just watching documentaries about it!

          • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

            Thank you. It’s my utter joy to contribute.

            Everybody should go to Burning Man at least once in their life, IMO.

            It’s an experience of culture which helps one envision how wonderfully creative things could be on Earth. For one week, you get to live in a new world of new hope for a way to live, and a Theta place where each individuals grants others Beingness.

            The experience is so enthralling that you never want it to end. In fact, after the week is over, many have 2 or 3 day “decompression” events to confront having to leave the new, advanced culture they just experienced, and integrate back into the “old world” culture again.

            I was first hesitant to go. But when my “friend girl” told me, “This will be the best experience you’ve ever had since you were born.” I thought that was quite a statement! Anyway, curiousity got to me, so I went. I’m so glad I did. She was right. I’ve never experienced anything else like it, and am truly thankful she talked me into in the way she did. Because I wasn’t that enthusiastic until I arrived.

            However, when I first arrived, I was flabbergasted! It was something very Theta that I never anticipated it to be before.

            I experienced a real spiritual connection with total strangers that I never knew before could even exist. The spirit of real giving without any expectation of return existed there. I learned the potential of what our world can be. Go Tara. You’ll be glad you did, I promise.

            • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

              Note: I want to add;

              The actual burning of the GIANT wooden man-like structure symbolizes to me … the shedding away of the old Beingness you don’t want, and being “reborn” into a better spiritual Being.

              That’s exactly what authentic Scientology does.

              Of course, each individual has their own take on the meaning, but that’s what it meant to me.

  17. ΘTater/GaryLerner

    NOW it’s becoming FUN!!!

    Thank you, Marty (for being you, dude!)

    Love,
    Gary :)

  18. Damn! This is fun! I love reading or listening to LRH, but this blog with its context takes the subject to an elevated level, moving on up.

  19. We must certainly put in KSW on this one :)

  20. I mean, really good point. Thanks Marty, for thinking!

  21. You totally anticipated my next post!

    All of us have heard of “Wundt”, but he is actually more notorious for his impact on SCHOOLS. The Prussian influence on the USA is so profound and prevalent that it almost isn’t noticed anymore. Bismarck, until recently, was prominently featured (complete with Prussian helmet!) on one of the mastheads of the Social Security site.

    Our schools try to produce dumbed-down slaves, let’s not kid ourselves.

    I used to get seriously ill every single time I lived/worked Germany, until I realized that in Germany, I was in the “belly of the beast”. This is where the Prussians codified psycho-physics, as well as the Prussian slave school system (which was then exported to the USA during Wundt’s time).

    This is why I seldom respect “institutes of higher learning”, much less “discoveries” that purport to emanate from any such hellholes.

    This wouldn’t be a “why” for everyone, but it doesn’t hurt to inspect your school background for certain malignant personalities.

    What has Miscavige done but trotted out the Prussian Ideal? He wants a dull, drilled, docile field, and a robotic Sea Org. Such intentions are anti-life.

    • You are still here??
      Look Mr. OT I think you owe Marty an apology for being such an asshole.

    • I think you have a point here, but the overall tone which is presented doesn’t really fit the blog. Could you let us know which version of OT VIII you attested to? I would like to avoid that one like the plague.

      • Lord Of The Undead

        Dear Bryon,
        I haven’t done bloody OT VIII. Maybe the one with curved horns did OT VIII before false purpose rundown was revealed. From what my bats tell me they have seen of the movie anyway.

    • Got it, you also hate schools, higher learning, and Germans. Anything else we should add to the hate list?

    • Yes the Psychs ! Get my Pitchfork s.on ! Need to string me up some Psych.

      Dear lord Satan what an Evil Man, Such a degraded being Didn’t acomplisch anything in his life. Must get Psychs Must get Psychs, lynch then, pull their nails out for they are not human they have no rights ! Kill them all. Against the wall with the Evil Psychs

      Wilhelm Maximilian Wundt (16 August 1832 – 31 August 1920) was a German medical doctor, psychologist, physiologist, philosopher, and professor, known today as one of the founding figures of modern psychology.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilhelm_Wundt

      MUST BLACK PR,DEAD AGENT, FAIR GAME MUST GET PSYCHS. You do’nt KNOW the history of psychiatry I do ! Evil SPs

      We will get them OT VIII ! you lead the way !

    • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

      For an interesting read, OT VIII, you may appreciate this …

      http://www.freedom-force.org/pdf/futurecalling2.pdf

      “JOHN RUSKIN PROMOTES COLLECTIVISM AT OXFORD

      Now let’s put theory behind us and get back into some real history. From the minutes of the Carnegie Endowment, we recall the curious words: “We must control education in America.” Who is this “we?” Who are the people who are planning to do that? To answer that question we must set the co-ordinates on our machine once again, and we are now moving further back in time to the year 1870. We find ourselves suddenly in England in an elegant classroom of Oxford University, and we are listing to a lecture by a brilliant intellectual, John Ruskin.”

      Secret Organizations and Hidden Agendas
      The Future Is Calling (Part Two)
      © 2003 – 2009 by G. Edward Griffin
      Revised 2009 April 19

      I understand the evil of conspiracy is hard for many to confront. It’s not just an issue with church Scientologists, either. Surely, those posting here understand that David Miscavage has committed a Conspiracy to Destroy Scientology. He had a hidden agenda that caught many, many of us Scientologists off guard.

      Of course, that has happened with the The People, too, regarding their own government, which also takes an extremely high degree of confront. G. Edward Griffin (above) is one of the most aware non-Scientologist individuals of the entire global scene that I know on Earth.

      I’m remiss in who posted it, but they said, “i>”CofM is a microcosm of the NWO.”

      That rang SO True for me and stands out in my mind always. Perhaps my simplest unsolicited advice for anybody (Scientologist or non-Scientologist) is to … “Just Look.”

      Collectivism is at the ROOT of all Tyranny.

      tyr·an·ny (tĭrə-nē)
      n. pl. tyr·an·nies

      1. A government in which a single ruler is vested with absolute power.
      2. The office, authority, or jurisdiction of an absolute ruler.
      3. Absolute power, especially when exercised unjustly or cruelly: “I have sworn . . . eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man” (Thomas Jefferson).
      4.
      a. Use of absolute power.
      b. A tyrannical act.
      5. Extreme harshness or severity; rigor.

      – The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition.

  22. I do truly believe that the ability to think freely is the foundation of each Independent in the Independent movement. For each have been able to maintain enough personal integrity to see through the suppression, lies and smoke with mirrors and continue to recognize and follow only true Source — despite consequences each individually have endured.
    Awesome quote Marty, thank you!

  23. Excellent stuff. How ironic that the words of Ron on the lectures sold by the church show how the church has gone by the wayside!

    You mentioned playing the piano, and Ron talks about “what you can get away with.” On one of the BC tapes (and I wish I could remember which one) Ron talks about being a Fundamentalist Scientologist, which is knowing the fundamentals of the tech so well, that it is fluid and you know what to do without resorting to roteness. It is along the line of “you have to know the rules before you can break them.”

    In the Pabs and other sources, Ron spoke about building processes – bracketing terminals, trying different wordings, to get to the bank and flatten off the comm lags. This is thinking with the tech and extending it. This is part of the job.

    I remember reading the frontispiece of Tech Vol 1, with the poem with the last line of “The Work was Free/Keep it So.” It struck me like a lightning bolt 35 years ago when I first read it. I have used that as my standard since.

  24. Thank you Marty, what a spectacular quote. Having not been involved in the church for almost 30 years, it brings tears to my heart to read L.Ron in such unadultured form. Wow. What an unfinished cycle. You are knitting sutures in my wounds, painlessly. Thank you. My very best to all on this blog, including the moles, your time is coming as well…

    Always, in all ways,

    -Dave

  25. The more glamour, the more disgust

    Great lines by LRH, which I didn’t know. Thanks for posting!

  26. Great, that meets exactly the concept I had. To be free is the way of free thingking.
    I had forgotten about this reference but the concept stood with me – and contributed to the disagreements I had.
    Love it.
    Felicitas

  27. Good post, knowing effect is as good as knowing cause.
    I find it remarkable LRH could predict with such accuracy what was going to happen further on up the track with Scientology, it’s terminals and lines. I no longer feel downhearted with the predictions coming true, moreover, I see LRH as a very gutsy Thetan who knew what the future would throw at him and ploughed full steam ahead. He knew someone would pick up the banner if it fell in battle and push foreward – and here we are… we may have lost a couple of battles but the war is far from lost.
    It’s still the greatest adventure there is!

  28. “So I ask you, don’t ever let it happen.”
    We’re all over it Sir. :)

  29. As I did mention in this blog some month ago: the day I decided that I can think every thought possible changed my life totally.
    Think barriers stem from roman catholic church and other sources like school those days in my childhood.

  30. Marty that is so amazing! To me those words of LRH (never read the Ability Congress) were like…. what the hell….!!! So powerful.

    Thank you for your intention and attention on getting Source to the Scientologists. You are a Free Thinker. I was amazed to read that stuff by Ron. We don’t need another monster and Scientology was never meant to be. C of M (now after this quote, could also be called MC, Monster Church or another Monster Church) can do all they please but they ain’t Scientology.

    Scientology is what we are doing here. Freeing Scientologists to regain what they almost lost in the Monster Church. Their Free Thought.

  31. ahhhh…….vLRH’s sanity to calm the weary bones of those who oppose those who can’t think with the data.

    Spot on Marty!

    And spot on LRH! Word like those are what drew me in – anyone who could utter the above and On Personal Integrity is a true friend of mine.

  32. Marty, remember that a Class VIII audits the basics (not Miscavige’s definition) and thinks with the tech. That is because he has a full grasp of the tech, as you do. LRH also stated in lecture 365 that he was not trying to make perfect auditors, “I’m trying to make effective auditors out of you.” Another SHSBC tape, Formation of Commands, covers “Give me that paw, partner.” Then on the Class VIII tapes, he states what must be verbatim. We do need to guard against wandering into the area of unusual solutions, as LRH admonished on SHSBC tape 214 “If extraordinary solution demanded, ordinary was not done.” I went from being an HGC auditor in ’66 with the allowed TR2 of “Good, Fine, Thank you, All right, Okay” to listening to those reel to reels on the BC at St Hill and thinking “My God, he’s talking to the pc!” Finally, the Commodore does say on lecture 215 that “auditing is what you can get away with” can be disastrous. It’s on page 155 of the transcript. We are fortunate that we still have so many highly trained tech terminals. I remain proud of my Non-Enturbulation Order when the GAT came out. And I have recently discovered that I was not alone in holding that distinction.

    • From the sounds of it, you ought to be proud of that Non Enturb order.

    • Independent Scientologist

      Athena, can I interpret your post this way:

      The day you obtain a Class VIII understanding of LRH’s tech is the day you should feel free to start experimenting with that tech and pushing it further?

  33. Proposal:
    Motto of the Independents movement:

    ” WE ARE BACK!”

  34. Marty-

    This post is perfect. Sort of like cream cheese icing on carrot cake. MMMMM!

  35. Gee, thanks Marty! Now DM is going to burn all the Scientology 8-8008’s he can get his hands on. ;)

  36. Thanks for the rehab!

  37. Now, in the cult culture Personal Integrity has been cancelled tacitly with an atomic branding iron for some time now. Since LRH wrote and taped so many words critics can have, and still have, a field day with pointing out apparent contradictions. And Miscavige has had a field day creating a cult by focusing solely on out of context lines that seem to justify his atrocious hatred for humanity and mission to make the TECH unworkable.

    I know who you were directing that jab at ;-)


    In the first place, in the university, they teach only those things which have already been found out. And if you teach them in such a way that nobody is permitted to think on them evermore, you, of course, will get a totally dead-ended scientific world.

    I am in agreement there with Hubbard. It really is a nice quote you dug out there.

  38. Abso-F’in-lutely perfectly placed quote, Marty. Practice the philosophy and technology for positive results. Think with it. No dogma. No sacred scriptures. Freedom of thought and action.

  39. Scientology – knowing how to know.

    There is a level of being where you just know. It’s sort of one and the same. You permeate, you are and you know. But, what about the rest of the tools, methods, means of knowing? Those are part of any scientology (Chart of Attitudes, 28 Dec 51 – the first mention of the word ‘scientology’, upper and lower case).

    I recall the Study Tapes and the idea of ‘second-hand knowledge’. I make use of others observations and communication of them. I use the ‘knowing how to know’ of the Study Tapes (the tools) as part of Scientology, and in my scientology. However, for me, there was a term that kind of hung me up, on that area of second-hand knowledge, actually one definition of that term.

    Evaluation: “the reactive mind’s conception of viewpoint” COHA.

    I had this definition in the ‘bull-pen’ for decades. Waiting there to be resolved as to what the hell he was talking about, until recently.

    Studying the chronological tapes and materials, I came up to the Factors and the subsequent sea change in processes developed. One such process is Viewpoint Processing – P.A.B 8. lays it out. In that issue it cleared up this definition.

    “The blackness on the case is indicative of a scarcity of viewpoints, a necessity for safeguarding and protective “screens,” a defensive and propitiative attitude towards existence, too much loss of allies and goods, too much loss of space, and finally and most importantly, loss of those who have evaluated for the preclear.”

    “The loss, by any cause, of the evaluating personality causes the preclear to believe that he has lost his source of perception. There is no radical difference, and only a gradient scale, between “observing for” and “thinking for.” “Thinking for” is much lower than “looking for” the preclear.”

    “In Viewpoint Processing we are looking for the person in the preclear’s past
    who did not enjoy certain positions on the tone scale.”

    “The cycle, then, of the preclear who has been taught to hate things is that he begins to resist them and eventually piles up energy against them to such a degree that he makes an actual deposit, which is an occlusion and which has on his side of it complete blackness and on the reverse side of it the piled-up facsimiles of that thing which he is resisting. This screen, then, has a hunger for the thing which it was resisting, and if this screen is fed whatever it was set up to resist, it will dissolve.”

    “In processing it is far better to pick up the evaluation which began the screens
    than it is to set out on the adventure of trying to dissolve the screens.”

    Accepting another’s observation, that is, what they from a particular point of viewing, have viewed (their ‘viewpoint of dimension’) isn’t ‘bad’. It is a means of knowing, it IS part of knowing how to know. If what is taken is viewed by oneself, then it becomes one’s own observation and is observed or not.

    Taking something purely as ‘evaluation’, that is, accepting under duress, pain, threat, unconsciously, their viewpoint of dimension and what they see and orient according to their viewpoint, education, aberration etc., you then have a reactive (non- observing in PT) ‘viewpoint’. You have a fixed idea that ‘solves’ an area unobserved by oneself. You have the reactive mind’s conception of viewpoint (of dimension).

    You have ‘thought-stopping’ cliches and datums. The person no longer looks themselves and evaluates what they see, themselves, and they are not ‘scientologying’.

    “Auditing failure evidently comes about by the unwillingness on the part of the
    auditor to have other people “look.” PAB 8.

    • Jim – Man, that’s deep! :)

      Spot on, and excellent observation.

      You know, I have been thinking about “Thought Stopping.” Great term. It appears to me to be the Service Facsimile mechanism. The SerFac is an aberrated stable datum holding back an area of confusion. An avoidance of confront.

      “Hmm – I think there may be something wrong with GAT… [confusion!] No! COB Saved Scientology! [SerFac] There, that handles that.” Except, of course, it doesn’t, just sort of holds it at bay.

      A third dynamic SerFac.

      By the way – I love this! Free and open comm about the tech, discussion and perhaps some dissent. Awesome. This is a hell of a responsibility we are taking on, but it is a hell of a ride, too!

  40. How would you answer this question:

    Would you even c-o-n-s-i-d-e-r becoming a Scientologist if LRH actually meant to f-o-r-b-i-d looking outside of his writings?

    Nobody in his or her right mind would agree to put on such chains.

    So, who actually cares whether LRH “allowed” or “disallowed” it? That he WANTS people to do so (and so very AMPLY) is not surprising and a natural expression of what he tried to achieve.

    Isn’t it equally easy to see (without having to quote YOUR OWN comments across this blog) what the people on this blog try to achieve?

    I even include OSA bots who “have to” leave their comments on this blog (and regularly get a beating for them). Luckily they a-l-s-o “have to” read about all these sometimes wildly free thoughts!

    Do you really believe that this will not have an effect on THEIR thinking? Unless, of course, A, R and Communication do NOT result in Understanding. Seems to me like an effective way to loose a few more OSA people to the independent field.

    This blog and its insidious influence extends right into the heart of the C of M (by order of its Dumb Master) and can’t help but create a bit of free thought there as well.

    I have my favorite people on this blog whose comments I look for as they enhance my thinking, push boundaries, but also continue to look out for new bright minds – even if I wholeheartedly disagree(d) with them. For by that, I learn too.

    So, without the need of an LRH quote to think freely, here’s one that used to hang prominently in real Scientology orgs around the world, read and quoted by many – it’s from the Creed of Scientology:

    We of the Church believe … That all men have inalienable rights to think freely, to talk freely, to write freely their own opinions and to
    counter or utter or write upon the opinions of others.

    Nowadays these words are expensively etched in expensive glass in a few idle orgs collecting dust after the glitzy opening show is over – but nobody in there anymore to read them.

    Samuel

  41. Like a bell, this post rings out.
    Rock & Roll, Marty. Take a BIG Win on this one, my friend

    Gotta lover LRH in the 50’s. He was so spot on. What a shame he had to break it down, break it down, break it down for the rest of us. He had it all back in the day. Spent the next 25 years explaining what he just said! LOL

    Thanks for posting this! Like others have said… it’s getting FUN AGAIN!!!

  42. The data from this lecture helps me put in perspective an idea I had suspected.

    An argument used by critics is that Scientology has not been subject to scientific testing. As if the rigors or scientific method were necessary for us to prove what we observe. Scientology is a means of knowing how to know. When you know how to know, you are cause over data. Science is tested data, but ultimately data. Science puts a person at effect of data.

    Where science succeeds is when imagination takes that data and makes something with it.

    I tell my kids to use their imagination. I tell them to look around and everything they see is the result of imagination. The chairs, the television, the car, the house, everything. I even suggest that the forms plants and animals take is the result of creative design: some awareness had to imagine the way plants and animals form; it’s not accident.

    So a resounding, fist pumping YES! to this post. Scientology, when understood, improves our ability to know and think, but does not supplant that ability.

    Michael


    • As if the rigors or scientific method were necessary for us to prove what we observe.

      Hubbard says several times in DMSMH that Dianetics is, in fact, science and that it does want to be treated as such. In this context, I find it thus hard to accept that “scientific rigor” is to be rejected when it comes to the works of Hubbard.
      Scientology – though some will argue is no science but religion – is nevertheless built upon those very precepts as introduced in Dianetics.


      When you know how to know, you are cause over data.

      Do you really believe it is good to be cause over data? You correctly said that science is inherently incompatible with this point of view. The reason for this is because you can also be cause over false data. Let me illustrate. 10 years ago devote churchees *knew* they had the correct tech. Then came the Golden Age of Knowledge. I am pretty sure there are enough Scientologists still in who now *know* they were wrong 10 years ago and that they now have the correct data.

      Knowing how to know – this must always be based on a scientific fundament. It is no 100% guarantee either, but it is the best method of discriminating facts from fiction. If you believe you are cause over data, you have moved away from facts towards fiction.

      • You missed the point of the lecture.

        • I believe I was answering OnceUponaTime, and the notion of being at effect of data vs being at cause over data. And indeed, with the words from the lecture:


          And that’s the one thing we mustn’t forget in Scientology. We’re not trying to say, “Don’t ever be at effect.” We’re saying, “if you’re at effect know what it is.”

          • OnceUponaTime brings up science proving data and imagination making something from the data. Dr. Faust challenges the idea of being cause over data. Dr Faust also states “knowing how to know – this must always be based on a scientific fundamental. … it is the best method of discriminating facts from fiction. If you believe you are cause over data, you have moved away from facts towards fiction.”

            Science doesn’t prove data. It has a hypothesis and looks for data to verify or negate the hypothesis. If we are cause over data we could not think with it, evaluate it or make use of it. Fiction is false data or a false idea but this isn’t because one is or is not cause over the data. One is senior to the data and that is why we can view it in context of the bigger picture. Science continually changes as new data is observed and old conclusions are no longer valid. Science attempts to explain the physical or mest universe.

            LRH in Dianetics 55 chapter 1 states “There is much argument upon which we could adventure concerning whether Dianetics is an art or a science, whether it is a humanity or a hoax. But all this would avail use very little, for we would only be quibbling with words. Dianetics is what it is. And the totality of it can best be summed by the description, “An understanding of Man.” We do not care whether or not it is a science. We do not care whether or not it is more properly cataloged under “adventure” or “mystery.” We do care whether or not it is promulgated and known, for everywhere it walks slavery ceases. That mind which understands itself is the mind of a free man. It is no longer prone to obsessive behavior, unthinking compliances, cover innuendoes. It is at home in an environment, not a stranger. It is the solver of problems and the maker of games. A mind that is enslaved is weak. A mind that is free is powerful. And all the power there is, is defined by and contained in freedom.”

            Same book chapter 2 he states “the basic subdivision in life is between: ABILITY and MECHANICS. … Life, itself, has quality and ability. The products of quality and ability are mechanics. … Life (it has been adquately established) can, hower, create.”

            We study the data, we think with the data and we use the data. Some of us may use a scientific method to further codify the data but all of that is the mechanics and under our control. The data an datums are never senior to what we think and do with it. Maybe parts it our game but it is our game isn’t it?

            No offense Dr. Faust, but the fiction is to think the data is senior to our cause of it.
            LRH gives us tools to increase our freedom and ability and we can choose and use the data as we see fit. He trusts we are basically good and will do our best with it.

      • Dr. Faust,

        Do I really think one should be cause over data? That leaves me scratching my head. Of course I do. The greatest advances in human history stem from someone being cause over data. Pick any modern convenience and it stems from someone being cause over data. Many of our modern devices were considered the stuff of science fiction sixty years ago. Should those visionaries have tucked in their chins and stuck with the program? Should they have let data dictate what they thought or imagined?

        On a more esoteric note, some criticize LRH for his imagination. But what criteria does one use for truth? The physical universe? If I am a spiritual being trying to rise beyond the physical universe, why in the world would I bow to its dictates? Why would I allow this trap to dictate what I perceive and create?

        Cause is contained in the KRC triangle. With cause comes knowing and responsibility. When you are cause over data, you know the data and are responsible for it. That is integrity. You can accept or reject any datum. You can modify it, fold it, spindle it, mutilate it to your hearts content.

        And most importantly, you can apply it.

        Or not.

        Your choice.

        If you operate at a high level of ARC and KRC you don’t have to worry about differentiating between fact and fiction. You know these things; you can differentiate. It’s low on the tone scale that differentiation becomes difficult.

        Creative processing addressed all of this. It made OTs, but had limitations. Probably NOTs phenomenon. Who was doing the creating?

        When we allow our imaginations to soar, we will move that much closer to freedom. Fixed ideas and 0ther-controlled thinking will keep us trapped.

        Michael

        ps. What kind of scientific rigors could you use on a pc that wouldn’t violate the auditor’s code. The pc has a fantastic win with a floating TA after discovering he postulated such and such during the Mid-Atlantic Wars of 1054. A fellow in a white coat looks at his clip board and scowls. “There was no Mid-Atlantic Wars in 1054.” Floating needle stops. Pc invalidated and evaluated. Who really knows all the nuances of time and universe? Are there parallel universes? Are we re-visiting a previous time stream which causes confusions with this one? What is going on in the Theta/spiritual universe?

        If you use this universe with its time stream as the only possible measure of existence, you might miss some very important information. And you may fuck up your preclear. Why be so afraid to be wrong? Why be so trapped by current thought?

        Grant a little beingness. Relax a bit.

        That I communicate with beings in the Theta Universe does not mean I can’t tell when the grass needs mowing in the front yard. But my imagination doesn’t stop when the mower starts. Jeez, have some fun.

        • Hmm. We are talking about two different “cause over data” then. I am coming from the perspective – let’s compare it to a physicist who is researching quantum mechanics. True, an inventor makes his own “data”, but at the same time he is at effect of it as his inventions must adhere to the laws of physics or they will not work.

          If you operate at a high level of ARC and KRC you don’t have to worry about differentiating between fact and fiction. You know these things; you can differentiate. It’s low on the tone scale that differentiation becomes difficult.

          Yes, this differentiation is the crux. It doesn’t happen with those who are currently in the “church” obviously.


          What kind of scientific rigors could you use on a pc that wouldn’t violate the auditor’s code.

          There are several means I can imagine. Off the top of my head: Create an experiment, where a clear is put under narcosis and have him recollect what has been said while he was in narcosis.


          Jeez, have some fun.

          :-)

      • Faust,
        Cat Daddy introduced the Doidge video the other day. It is becoming apparent in ‘science’ that it isn’t ALL dimension. There IS a viewpoint.

        • Indeed not. If there was no place for controversy in science, the scientific world would be a whole lot poorer.

          • Faust,
            My mistake. I’m referring to a ‘viewpoint of dimension’, from the Factors in 8-8008.

            The viewpoint being the thetan, the dimension that which is observed.

  43. I’m all for this.

    A good word to clear for this activity is the word “heresy”. It means, basically, “to choose”.

    There was a list of approved Christian books sent around to all churches. Those who did not renounce and burn the books not on the list were called “heretics”, and were themselves burned. Heretics were heretics because they *chose* which scriptures were the ones they would follow, and which ones they wouldn’t, instead of just following orders.

    In the spirit of independent thought on Scientology, be forewarned that it will be LRH’s own *later* policies and words that you will need to be violating in order to apply this earlier reference Marty cites above. You will find yourselves needing to choose which LRH to follow, and this will require you to be grown up enough to disobey LRH when you yourself think you should.

    You will need to become a heretic.

    This is the way Scientology needs to go. This kind of reform, while it will not prosecute the criminals and open the books to those who have been defrauded, will produce a less abusive form of Scientology.

    Good luck.

    • Thanks for the history lesson, really.

    • Hi Allen,
      That was a much better way of getting your point across IMHO.

      Still making the point you wanted to make, but it was actually palatable.

    • Allen,
      It is not my intent to ‘bash’ you on this here posting, in respect of the ‘be forewarned’ thing.

      You have kept at that warning now over several of these Scn sites. The ‘two Scientologies’ idea.

      Now, I’ve studied it all the way through. I’m actually doing it again and I really do not see what you concluded – ‘two Scientologies’.

      I’ve seen all sorts of clever arguments about it, and some ‘not so clever’ to put it nicely. (And there is no need to trot out those sundry arguments again here on this thread.)

      In fact, nothing I’ve ever read or applied in any aspect of this subject, from 1948 to 1986, has ever deviated from the fundamental principle of assuming a viewpoint and extending points to view – the very basic on Personal Integrity – of the individual. That is, the effort to recover to a being their own cause and awareness of and over the Factors, Qs, Axioms (Dn and Scn) and even to reach higher to as yet undefined ‘Qs – questionable points’ and possibly more simply align the knowledge gained so far with and in Scientology.

      The ideas communicated in the quote Marty has given here, aren’t contradicted by the discipline of Model Session for example. Model Session is what is applied to achieve the recovery of the viewpoint of various dimension points. In fact, it is to aid in recovery of the ability to assume any viewpoint and extend points to view – to create and destroy those points at will.

      You have proposed a sort of ‘turning point’ of about 65. That is the year of the Justice Codes, as well as KSW, among other policies. Yet LRH has made it abundantly clear NO policy, not a one, exists for anything other than the achievement of what you call ‘Scientology One’, i.e., lectures as above in the Opening Piece.

      Granted, two-terminals are needed to generate a flow. That flow is a fundamental of communication. So, granting that I’ll create for myself the idea that you are mocking-up ‘two Scientologies’ for the effect of a two-terminal flow generator and the havingness of communication. If done at will, then more power (literally) to you. If at effect of your own cause then you’ve violated the basic caveat of the magi – become effect of their own cause.

      One last thing, on this present interchange, let’s you and I make an effort to keep the randomity level at or near optimum. Just for fun.

      • Jim –

        There is no Henry Ford conveyor belt to spiritual freedom.

        Allen

        • Allen,

          Dave Miscavige can’t discharge SP’s with a grounding rod. Nobody else can either.

          Jim

          • A,
            Tha’s a non-sequitur. Henry Ford. Grounding rod. Manhole cover. Chipmunk.

            However, leaping across the chasm, I’ll venture to agree with you on the premise that there ain’t no guarantees. In that Scientology is dealing with the nature of a Being, and H. Ford was assembling MEST into personal locomotives, the analogy is strained.

      • In addition to the justice codes, the ethics penalties and other punishments for heresy that LRH came out with in the mid-1960s, the Bridge to Total Freedom was also released.

        Before the mid-1960’s, there was no Bridge Total Freedom in Scientology. Think about that.

        Instead of many multi-faceted and completely unique processes to choose to apply to any unique situation or individual, there was only one conveyor belt EVERYONE had to get on, and pay for, all along the way.

        Prior to the mid-1960’s, it was a VERY different Scientology than we have today. And the writings that Independent Scientologists love so much MOSTLY come from that era of Scientology – when there was no Bridge.

        That is the Scientology that I believe Marty is trying to re-create, the first one, the one where being a heretic was never punished, and often rewarded.

        And that is the one that will save every sleeping one, and night-walking one of us.

        • Your evaluation is incorrect.

          • There were the Routes, per Creation of Human Ability. But the Bridge to Total Freedom was released in 1963. Prior to that, there was no Bridge in Scientology. There were no “standard C/Ses” because “everyone’s case was the same”.

            Either burn me as a heretic, or show me the pre-mid-1960’s Bridge.

            • I think you miss the forest with your penchant for finding one generalizing paragraph to describe a philosophy that took several decades to develop.

            • Allen,
              Pre 60’s ‘Bridge'; Standard Operating Procedure, all the way up to SOP 8.

              The Bridge isn’t a ‘conveyor belt’. It is a gradient scale approach to awareness. Read the data, in the early-mid 60’s on Rehab, Former Releases, et al. All sorts of ‘grades’ were attained in the processes you mention, from the pre-Bridge arrangement days.

              The Bridge is an orderly arrangment of effective processes, the bulk of which originate pre 60’s, in an effective gradient scale.

      • Lord Of The Undead

        bloody hell Jim. Have you just come down from the mountain?

        Lord Of The Undead

        • LU,
          Nah, I’m still climbing up. I do get a chance to look back every now and again, keep an eye on those climbing along with me, and try and let them know the way I got up – on the shoulders of giants.

    • Thanks, Alanzo. The tech is the tech, it is senior to admin, and Purpose is senior to Policy. Policy is malleable. It has to be to meet changing conditions. Purpose (and goals) guide why we are here and where we are going, and policy exists to forward them. If a policy stands in the way of purpose, even one of LRH’s policies, it must be cast aside. The admin scale depicts this, and it is mentioned here and there. This should not be done lightly, and it would be nice if the review mechanisms and apparatus in the church were functional, but oh well. We are in a position where we need to do what needs to be done.

      • And, by the way, this sounds so heretical, but it is not, really. It is really following senior policies.

        • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

          IMO, you are so spot on, Grasshopper. Policy has to be mallable.

          A dramatic example of this is in the area of marketing, as Mark Moran so vividly and aptly points out in his book …

          Do It Wrong Quickly: How the Web Changes the old Marketing Rules

    • Heresy is a good word to clear, since Marty and Mike are being called “heretical” by the voices of the church. Might be something to embrace and throw back in their faces! HA!

      And why are we being heretics? LRH said to! Double HA!

      Okay, off to Webster I go. ;)

    • Regarding Alanzo’s “earlier vs later Scientology”:

      Grasshopper and Logan as usual lay out their cases extremely well. Here’s my two cents worth:

      I do think 1965 marked some sort of change point for LRH. You can hear it in the BC tapes. There seemed to be an increase in the “seriousness” factor. The sense I had was (and it was only a sense, applying “empathy” to what I was hearing in his voice during the lectures), “getting the show on the road” became more of an urgency for him. Ethics codes came out. PTS/SP tech developed and implemented. And Power Processes, which required a level of auditor perfection probably not seen up to that point, were developed.

      With Power, upper levels, L&N refinement, the auditing standards required to achieve the gains from the processes were considerably higher than before. And the negative consequences to the PC of incorrect application were much greater. The idea of “auditing is what you can get away with” took a back seat to the greater need for technical precision.

      But even the 1965 increase in discipline didn’t achieve Ron’s desired effect. Anyone who has FES’d (folder error summary) folders from the 65-67 era knows how bad tech application could get during those years.

      So in 1968, LRH created Class 8. I suppose if one had not much exposure to the tech development line, and listened to those lectures, one could be appalled by the level of anger LRH expressed throughout the course. But for those tech trained people who know how out the tech could get, Ron’s anger can be admired & appreciated for how appropriate it was, given the amount and degree of misapplication that was going on.

      Whatever, I don’t think there is any doubt that LRH’s intensity, focus, determination, etc seemed to increase at various points along the way. It’s as obvious as skyrockets, for example, that he took the responsibility of handling the “3rd Dynamic Engram” VERY seriously. It clearly was not some minor game to him.

      My whole point is that LRH’s path and the development of Scientology was a gradient scale of change, improvement, refinement, increasing precision from start to finish. Maybe some prefer the more easy-going portion of the spectrum to the more demanding portion. But the idea of a pre-1965 or post-1965 LRH/Scientology is a false dichotomy.

      IMO, most of what we are dealing with, in terms of abuses past and present, is not that LRH or Scientology changed. Rather, the fact that over the years, many people were given positions of authority who had no clue as to what Scientology was really all about, nor did those who went along with (or caved in to) their disastrous misapplications of tech and policy. If I fault LRH for anything, it’s that he didn’t come up with a way to make sure this could not happen. Because there were plenty of signs that it could happen (and had happened), well before he left in 1986. Maybe it’s not fair to assign that responsibility to him. Regardless, it’s being handled now as more & more of us see that in the final analysis, it’s up to us to help Ron make sure “it comes out right in the end”.

      Publius

      • Publius,
        That, dear man/woman, is waaaaay more than two cents. That is a big, shiny, hefty, real, Silver Dollar.

      • Publius~Dang, I think I posted a really wordy god-awful sermon before I read this, which stated exactly what you just said, but you said it sooooo much better!

        • Tara, thanks for your ack.

          I’ve read all your “sermons” since I found Marty’s blog, and they are always among my very favorites.

          And not just ’cause you’re from Loosiana (speaking of favorites)!

          Publius

      • Very well stated Publius. Interesting discussion, but I think its taken a bit of an irrelevant turn, if I may be so bold as to suggest.

        Yes, LRH became more “intense” in 1965 and demanding on the 3D, BUT in the 70’s I never observed any disagreement with LRH or any desire to study other philosophies or to “think differently” about Scientology. Frankly, with posts to hold or jobs to do on the outside, we all had our hands full (time wise certainly) just to study LRH tech, which we all really dug. The precision and standardrness of the tech was one of the main factors that was SO appealing (to me for sure).

        Where there was “no disagreement allowed” and “no thinking for yourself” was ON THE THIRD DYNAMIC (and this got progressively worse.) Had nothing to do with Scientology Standard Technology. In almost 4o years as a tech person (cause I did a bit of CSing last year) I have never “disagreed” or wanted to “think for myself” in re: to LRH instructions on how to audit or handle cases. I have indeed found his techniques EXTREMELY workable and succesful when applied correctly and standardly as LRH instructs (and yes, applied with understanding and judgement because an auditor DOES have to make decisions – “am I looking at an ARCX or out list manifestations?)

        The “thinking for myself” was squashed when faced with my not being “allowed” to have a viewpoint on my own ethics, to make my OWN decisions about what I wanted to with my OWN time, my OWN second dynamic, my OWN money, my OWN opinion about what post I wanted to hold or what event I wanted to attend. And I don’t mean an “only one” thing here. OF COURSE, there are other beings and many third dynamics which we assume responsibility for and obligations to.

        But there is still the right as a being to form our own postulates and have our own viewpoints. And a bunch of dramatising fascistic staff members (many of them young and completely ignorant) DOESN’T CHANGE THAT!

        But this doesn’t have anything to do with standard auditing tech, post 1965. My only disagreement with Ron on the 3D is that I think he progressively encouraged use of force and militarism in the group with minimal recourse, franlky because he was the top guy who could use it, but unfortunately too many other very ignorant and aberrated beings took up this “hat.” And thus we find in the church ‘NO DISAGREEMENTS ALLOWED.”

        And NOW (this never came up in “the old days”) what you can can read or listen to or talk about and whom you can talk to is a big part of what you are not “allowed” to do as the “forbidden comm” can…..encourage disagreement and non-compliance to orders and demands on the 3D.

        • Joe P,
          I think you have just exposed a string to pull. The steps of DS 11, The Situation would follow, with this ‘oddity’ noticed. That’s good. Very good.

        • Joe, I agree 100% with everything you said here. We’re on the same page.

          Publius

        • Nice integrity Joe. I agree with you.

        • To Publius and Joe, Great posts in themselves and each one even “clarifying” the other one.

          • I’m just glad that Marty is allowing this conversation to take place on his blog. Because I think it is a very important one.

            After 1965, you can see LRH contradicting almost every single axiom, factor, and code that he earlier wrote into Scientology . It is as if he discovered that the idealistic basics of Scientology did not work, or he never really believed what he wrote in the first place.

            Numerous specific and revealing examples exist for this observation, and many others have seen the same things I am saying here.

            You can see it for yourself, too, if you follow the dates, and allow yourself to examine and consider outside “unapproved”, “non-party-line” data.

            Just as there is auditing available outside the Church, there is still the chance to remain a Scientologist after you examine this data. I believe that you will be a much better, more informed, and responsible Scientologist after that, as well.

            I know: Arrogant, entheta, 1.1, intent vicious, blah blah blah.

            It’s only an idea. Nothing to be afraid of. And plenty of room for disagreement and a range of opinions on it, too.

            It’s a very useful and revealing idea, nonetheless.

        • To both Publius and Joe, thank you so much for taking time to engage in this conversation. It’s so helpful for me to hear your thoughts on those times and those materials. I LOVE that we are finally getting into tech discussions.

          When I was in the CoS I had a best friend with whom I had these kinds of discussions ALL the time. We actually never ‘knew’ it was ‘wrong’ to talk about and consider how we might apply the tech in life. Lucky us, eh?

          Just Me

          • Hi, JustMe –

            Let’s do keep the tech discussions going. What the heck, almost every article Marty puts up gives us plenty of opportunity to add our unique perspectives to the mix.

            It is nice to see that there are kindred spirits like you who share this passion! I look forward to many more interchanges with you.

            Publius

  44. For a great book on the proud history of being a heretic, read Elaine Pagels’ “Beyond Belief”.

  45. In a very real way, it was BECAUSE of quotes like this that KSW was created.

    Instead, in the CoM, KSW has been used to suppress quotes like this.

  46. Marty,

    Thanks very much for the Source message, it blows charge. It’s not something Mestology would play on “Source night”, preferring to have “Its a PRO world” or something similar. Not that the source message is bad at all.

  47. Marty, thanks for this post. This quote encapsulates both what attracted me to Scientology in the first place and why I left. I was attracted to the idea that here was a subject you could think with, think about, question, challenge, apply or not apply. It wasn’t some sacred scripture you had to swallow whole or “believe” or have “faith” in. I have heard a number of stories of people who followed some LRH datum such as this one, and it eventually led them on a track OUT of the Church of Scientology. Miscavige is in the impossible position of trying to assert power and authority and control over a group, when the very writings he is promoting, particularly these early writings, tell people to question authority, to challenge conclusions, to think, think, think. Great to see more and more people doing just that.

    • I do remember listening to this lecture when I was in the church. I also heard similar things on the Study Tapes (which have since been redacted, I think). I never accepted the idea of anyone telling me what to think, or who to talk to, or what to read. So, naturally I was declared suppressive. Does anyone else get the idea that this massive amount of spurious declares will soon be canceled?

    • Yes Jeff, there’s an massive incongruence between the wisdom contained in the subject and the how the church operates. For example, all the PR activities and events seemed to me to be completey distasteful and unaesthetic!

      Although I could understand the purpose of those PR activities – to reach out into the society – it just didn’t seem authentic and instead seemed tacky and hokey…

      The church lacked things I expected from a spiritual group: compassion, enlightenment, understanding, creativity. And without those the adventure that it offered seemed unappealing. I mean, talk about a solid 3rd dynamic!

  48. Thanks for the great writeup Marty!
    It certainly feels good to be out of that $uppre$$ive environment. The Freedom I feel each and every day now is libation worthy of the high cost I had to pay to get it.

    My Freedom is MINE and NOBODY is ever going to take it from me again!

    Independent & Loving it!
    ~David (The nice one) Thompson

  49. I think Scientology went downhill the year that KSW came out, which was around 1965. People could no longer think freely after that; you could only do exactly what Ron said to do or get into serious trouble. That was in my opinion when the subject started to become regimented. And then the Sea Org was formed around 1967 and things really became regimented after that, and that’s also when the physical abuses like overboarding started to happen. Didn’t Ron lock a four year old boy in a chain locker or something like that, after all kids are just old thetans in small bodies? And then Miscavige came into power around 1982, and things really went downhill.

    • Norm,
      Windhorse is right. Look at the crazy stuff that came up during the 60’s. It was a whole other world. As for things Ron allegedly did in the begining stages of the Sea Org, I’d like to know the truth myself. On the other hand… they are so far from the Ron we knew before, why give them the time of day? Stick with the facts, the tech, the red on white and green on white, and let the rest take care of itself.

      But look at the whole picture, not a narrow fixation of it. Blame that on 50’s camera technology. ;)

  50. Alonzo and Norm Johnson,

    The 50’s were a different time. A rather carefree affluent time.

    The mid 60’s that was beginning already to unravel and did so with rapidity – Vietnam, drugs, the “peace movement” hippies, college dropouts.

    For me – getting involved in 1972 I welcomed some structure and discipline.

    Those hippie druggie days hadn’t worked all that well for me.

    I think looking at LRH without also looking at the times might make your view too black and white.

    Which rarely is productive – long term.

    Take a look where you were in those days. Sometimes it helps to pull back the camera for a long shot.

    Constant close ups or head shots makes for a dull film. Try the occasional over the shoulder too.

    In other words, do a different set up of the scene.

    Love,
    WH

    • Lord Of The Undead

      I vouch for that! Eve of december 1960. I got it straight between the teeth for six months. Omar V Garrisons book titled “Playing Dirty the secret war against beliefs” p22 also LRH reference “The Sad tale of PDH”-old tech vols
      June 1961. And this was only the start of it.

      I pale of my former self
      The Count-ed

    • Windhorse~The mid-60s didn’t work out too well for my folks either…or me for that matter.
      That was a very calming response. Thank you.

    • Windhorse, I would guess too that the Cold War — particularly the Bay of Pigs, bringing the world to the brink in 1964 — may have also lit a fire under LRH’s butt.

      • My opinion:

        The aim was to as-is the dangers of those times via auditing to keep the planet from being blown to pieces. To give us a chance.

        All auditing is basically creative processing IMO, as all life is basically a creative act.

        Anything that helped to make sure that auditing got done was a good thing, despite whether or not it looks bad now. At the time, it looked bleak and LRH was doing what he could to make sure we had a chance.

        Now look at the 4th dynamic. Far from perfect, yet, it is in much better shape than it was back then, and the dangers present then have vanished or are vanishing.

        For one thing, just look at the amount of communication going on now, compared to then! Look at how much more knowledgeable people are now, compared to then. It’s a completely different world now compared to those times. Much better.

        The bridge to a new world was a success.

        What now?

    • Yes, the ’50s were a different time, but I wouldn’t characterize them as “carefree” at all. They began with the brutal Korean War of “North Korean brainwashing” fame, and the deaths of many thousands of Americans, as well as Koreans. The 1950s gave rise to Senator Joe McCarthy and his House Unamerican Activities Committee, HUAC, with it’s witch-hunts for “communists” and guilt by association, which lasted right into the 1960s. The “Cold War” was not really that cold, and HUAC was McCarthy’s “Comm Ev” kangaroo court busily “declaring” folks right and left, a la DM.

      I am no fan of Communism, but I’m sure HUAC had much to do with Ron’s public anti-communist rhetoric, and the Korean War, with his public anti-asian remarks. They were very much in keeping with the tone of the times. The U.S. had just concluded a brutal war with Japan, only to be segued right into the North Korean/Communist Chinese proxy war.

      I’m sorry, but the times were not carefree at all, although there was a sigh of relief at the end of WWII for a little while.

  51. I found this in my tape references:

    6810C07 Class VIII TAPE 11
    ASSESSMENT AND LISTING BASICS
    … auditing at this level is not what you get away with, it’s what you do perfectly. We are auditing at a different strata, a different altitude.”

    That is fascinating to me because it says “auditing at this level”. It makes me wonder if the GACK(tm) was designed to turn every Class 0 into a Class VIII.

    — GACK (1) acronym for Golden Age of Compromised Knowingness. (2) the sound made by a cat expelling a hairball.

  52. If it ain’t LRH’s Bridge then it’s something else. If you want to take a different path starting from the mid-60s, go ahead. But realize it’s something else. And please for God’s sake, call it something else!
    I personally don’t want to recreate a perfectly fine and working wheel! Others before me have tested the wheel and I don’t care to test some other shape, size, whatever! I’m not in guinea pig mode here! I don’t want to be the testER or the testEE! No thank you!
    I’m gonna be super duper pissed off if you tell me it’s LRH and it turns out to be something else!
    It happened to me before…it won’t happen again!

  53. This was lovely. Brought some tears to my eyes. This is what I signed up for, not slavery. Thank you for reminding me!

  54. Theta Networker/Al

    Tara,
    You’re not in “guinea pig mode” … Cooool!! I’m in gently-trying-to-get-some-of-the-folks-to-look mode, as in the Way To Happiness …
    I like your “It happened to me before…it won’t happen again!” For me, that translates to: My eyes will not be “wide shut,” again, as they were indeed for years (Btw, I have no idea what TC’s movie Eyes Wide Shut was about).

    I’m probably in violation of staying on the threads of blogs :-) but I’m latching on here to get some good feedback from you [or from whoever wishes] of any use to send out e-mails such as the following:

    To: newyork@scientology.net
    Subject: What happened? … — Re: Reserve your seat for Super Power’s Imminent Release
    Date: 9/21/2010 8:54:56 PM

    Dear “Undisclosed,”

    What happened? …

    I was at the March 1986 event at the NY Org the day Ron dropped his body and I will always remember Cmdr. Norman Starkey the then-Executor of Ron’s Estate, saying: “Source does not pass to Int Management. there was and is one Source.” Now, I’m not one to stand up a lot and cheer (in lock-step) at events, but when I heard that, I sure did … practically with tears of joy in my eyes … I have never forgotten that.

    I am reminded by friendsof lrh.org that — per LRH ED 301 INT of 17 December 1978 Ron’s Journal 30 (Tech Vol. XI, p. 380) — “Super Power will be delivered at Saint Hills within the next 6 weeks…”

    There was and is one Source. Source did not pass to Int Management or RTC — which is not even part of Int Management. I believe I go with the Old Man.

    ARC,
    Al

    “We of the Church believe…
    That all men {people} have inalienable rights to think freely, to talk freely, to write freely their own opinions and to counter or utter or write upon the opinions of others and, that no agency less than God has the power to suspend or set aside these rights, overtly or covertly.”

    From: New York Church of Scientology [cofsnewyork@earthlink.net]
    Sent: 9/17/2010 2:28:17 PM
    To: undisclosed-recipients:
    Subject: Reserve your seat for Super Power’s Imminent Release Briefing TODAY!! You do NOT want to miss this!!!

    And here’s one I haven’t responded to yet — after Pamela Johnson sent an e-mail back to me — after I inquired about Ray Mithoff:

    From: Celebrity Centre International
    Subject: Pamela L. Johnson – Al
    Date: 9/16/2010 2:55:35 PM

    Dear Al – I have been in the S.O. for 39 years and know Ray well, he used to be our Sr. C/S here years ago.

    He is on Tech lines – as SR C/S Int he doesnot usually speak at events. But I did see him here at the live New Years Event – with ED Int. and the many top management execs who all were there. They were greeting public in the Expo Hall for a while. Very busy people!

    I’m sure you can write him c/o the post title from NY Org. See the Auditor’s Day event there!

    ARC, Pamela Johnson FCS CC Int

    —–Original Message—–
    Sent: Thursday, September 09, 2010 4:29 AM
    To: “admin@mailings.celebritycentre.org”
    Subject: Re: Auditor’s Day at the Westin Bonaventure Hotel! BE THERE! – Pamela L. Johnson

    Dear Pamela,

    I live in NY, so the Hotel is not quite around the corner from me:-) … but — speaking of auditors — I have a question for you:

    What ever happened to Senior CS Int Ray Mithoff? I used to always arrange to attend the Maiden Voyage events that he ran, as I found him so theta and enjoyed the briefings … I notice his absence!!

    ARC,

    Al

    • Theta Networker/Al~I’m not sure I followed what you’re looking for from that email exchange. You can email me at tmb.stuff via gmail if you’d like.

      • Thanks Tara!

        I’ll go to tmb.stuff and contact you that way … One of mine is theta_networker@hushmail …

        The short version, as I’m getting ready to pack it in early tonight:

        It’s so great to have Marty out there … I basically withdrew from the church on instinct not knowing there was any alternative … before I learned from this blog … freezone [some, I’m very selective] … friendsof lrh … and after seeing that … my local org sure didn’t seem to have anywhere near 198 students in the Academy, as mentioned in LRH ED 258 INT
        17 January 1975 How You Are Limiting the Size and Income of Your Org …

        I’m attempting to get “my people” to cognite, as I did, on what’s up, and I have had some success with that:

        Example: I got a wonderfully theta response, to my comm regarding the blog, friendsoflrh.org, etc., from one of my people out west, and she even sent me back a link some kind of open source site for LRH tech. There appear to be 1056 LRH files on this web site which I hadn’t heard of:

        http://www.mediafire.com/?sharekey=9c7be267f2191ff5bda4076e811714c8fa7de627b1a324c2935cbde7375ca78c#

        Another person gave me a big ARCful ack for the data I sent and considered it odd that the Management Team has vanished!

        As far as my e-mail exchanges with CC Int or NY Org — well, that’s another story … I have no attachment to the outcome sez me from my Buddhist side …

        OK. Later alligator
        I figure you’re from down south somewhere where there’s
        alligators :-) ‘Course we probably have ‘em in NY in some of the sewers …

  55. “…But a preclear is not cause across the boards if anywhere he’s an unwilling and unknowing effect. Now remember, he can be the effect of anything as long as he is not an unwilling or an unknowing effect. And that’s the one thing we mustn’t forget in Scientology. We’re not trying to say, “Don’t ever be at effect.” We’re saying, “if you’re at effect know what it is.”

    I particularly like this part of the quote. So important.

  56. CofM is a microcosm of the NWO
    Yes and other before now and after…
    …. repeaters….

    ….of our collective universe?

    Going around in circles…spirals…epochs….however you want to put it….

    and the only way out is through………through what?

  57. Well DM would say 8-8008 was squirrel when ron was talking about it and didnt even know it was squirrel. With Ksw in now DM says you must blind obedient this tech or you will have like freezone scene which DM says is so bad it will mess you up for future lifetimes(which I have not seen a ref. probably an advice on freezone none ever read?)

Leave a Reply

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