New OT IV (OT DRD) Ridge on the Bridge


In the early eighties LRH wrote to the then-Snr CS Int questioning why the church was monkeying around using 1968 OT III technology on the OT DRD (OT IV). LRH suggested a pilot  using NOTs (New OT V)  technology which he noted was far more precision and powerful than OT III technology on the OT DRD (New OT IV). Incidentally, as RTC’s go-to  VIP case debugger for several years, and for the past year deliverying from my humble shack in South Texas, I have observed his advice to be spot on. I’ve seen dozens of people parked between OT III and OT V because they were ground to an expensive halt on Old OT IV.   Ray never got around to complying because DM cross ordered him off of it to concentrate exclusively on converting FPRD breakthroughs into a mind control operation against OT VIIs and most every other level of church public and staff.

Well, the first parked OT III completion who came my way down here, I decided to take LRH’s advice on.  The pre-OT had been off the Bridge for 15 years because she took a stand against grotesque criminal regging that by the mid-nineties had become ramapant under DM’s guidance.  I did the complete OT IV rundown utilizing NOTS technology just like LRH advised. 

I gotta tell you I have audited complete NOTS levels and OT IV levels before, but I have never seen a person – with no exceptions – make the ride more smoothly through New OT IV and New OT V completion.  I’ve never seen more tone arm action per session, more cognitions on the woof and warp of the physical and spiritual universes.  I’ve never seen a person blossom and flourish and grow like this pre-OT did on these levels. I delivered it in four blocks spanning 5 months and kept in very close touch with the pre-OT watching her go from a baby OT to a full blown OT. 

Now, by way of comparison, this completion was done in the teeth of DM’s PI’s doing everything short of breaking the law (well, the jury is still out on that one) to prevent this from happening.  Fortunately, I had a couple of great E/O’s (Mike and JB) keeping the immediate environs relatively quiet.

Bottom line: LRH said to do this and DM said “no.”  We said “yes”, went ahead and did it and found out it resolves a major ridge on the Bridge and streamlines the route to OT.

221 responses to “New OT IV (OT DRD) Ridge on the Bridge

  1. Makes sense. VWD.

  2. I saw the SP Times videos and thats then something clicked with me. I think it was that I know when someone is acting. A really good, experienced, professional natural actor could possibly fool me, but I think I would still know. I dont think all you guys are great, academy award level actors. Thats what got me. I knew you and the others were not lying. So that was a tough thing to deal with. However I sort of suspected something like that for some reason.

    As far as what to do now, I dont know. I havent figured that out yet. I havent confronted the whole situation fully I guess.

    On something like this OTIV thing I think I would need to see it in writing or something though. I’m not sure. This is a scary path to go down.

  3. AlexMetheny

    This is exciting Marty!!

    I can’t wait to get auditing from you!!


  4. Great!! This gives so much hopes for the field!!
    hugs and Well done!

  5. Now, who wouldn’t want that?


  6. Accounts of such wins, when LRH is put in as written, makes it easier to see why some of the most able beings are leaving the “church of”. It stands in stark contrast when you see the results of properly applied LRH tech when compared to the altered tech of Mestsavage.

    It’s like watching a thoroughbred racehorse bolt out of the gate after it finally learns it was meant to run, and run fast. Not sit and stew in its own droppings.

    I envy Marty. He is making OT’s.

    Sovereign Scientologist

  7. Just Pretend
    Just pretend for moment, that David Miscavige , is just pretending to be a Scientologist. He never studied all of Hubbard’s materials. He never got trained all the way up. He never cared about another human being long enough to audit him past his cert. He never cared enough about others to ensure his own staff got up the bridge. He never bothered to even listen to everything Hubbard had to say. Just pretend. Because as I understand it he is not highly trained and I have friends leaving the Sea Org after 20 years of labor that have not even done a solo course.

    Just pretend, David Miscavige is pretending to be a Sea Org Member. Just pretend he is not there on the same terms as one other Sea Org Member. He is not on the same pay, the same rules, under the same penalty structure, not subject to stat reports, has different uniforms conditions and friends than everyone else. Just pretend for a moment, he is pretending to be a Sea Org Member. Because as I understand it David Miscavige is pretending to be a Sea Org Member.

    Just pretend, David is pretending to forward the interests of all Scientologists and spread this knowledge throughout the Earth. And ask to see his actual statistics. Even the wogs are reporting they are down in census results.

    Just pretend, there is an official Board Of Directors with any vote, then read the testimony of Sea Org Members reporting his physical abuse upon the Int Execs which have all been declared Suppressives and only held up at events for the public to see.

    Just pretend, David Miscavige is pretending to be a husband and try to find his wife.

    Just pretend, for a moment, that all of what David Miscavige is saying and doing is pretense, and it will all make perfect sense.

  8. Marty, thank you so much for this invaluable piece of information. I will use it.

  9. I don’t have to pretens because he is a non-clear non-OT camera man and now a slick Gameshowhost.

  10. Great News. I’d appreciate a personal mail with the exact procedure used. Having audited with not much problems on the existing OTIV and V I’d want to compare with my own eyes before I implement it as routine if you don’t mind. (I’ve flattened OTDRD on OT8 with great results too using the NOTS procedure)

  11. Virgil Samms

    Marty, I am one of those parked between OT III and OT V. I did OT IV – Co-audit with Worsel, in fact. Haven’t moved on the bridge since (20 years).

    So this is very welcomed news for me!

    ML Virg

  12. Theo Sismanides

    Marty, this is great news! Actually it can be breaking news on the Bridge. Even though I do not know the technical part of this, I know you are a warrior and a tech person too. A hell of a combination. Your time on that is worthwhile. Also on the book you want to write. I lost you on the other threat, the churh is dead, and everything you said is so revealing.

    I am glad you start using the Org Board and have a couple of E/Os, hahaha, you know me and my viewpoint on admin tech.

    But jokes or no jokes aside, I know you can understand how crucial things are and what you are saying there if backed up somehow by written material or results by other auditors is an immediate thing.

    Confusion is blowing off all over the place. I am very grateful you are putting in order in this area, that of the Tech which is the back bone of what we are here for. The making of OTs.

    One thing comes to my mind from LRH, guys:


    No reason to be the small players here.

    More order should be gotten in. Now that’s the big trick. LRH was a BIG being, never acted otherwise. Yes, he did mistakes, but he did much more good. We can do it. Just put more and more order in.

  13. hmm ? did Ot IV about 25 years ago and was unable since then to move any further. Could that be the reason ?
    Is there something here ?
    Pls some more data …

  14. Marty,

    Thanks for improving delivery and results and for keeping the tech alive. The results you’re getting speak for themselves. Gains, gains, and more gains is what it’s all about. When you send someone home winning in life, everyone of us wins.

    Thanks for using as the supreme test the wins and case gain of the individual. Your place is truly where there are no arbitraries. 🙂

  15. Virgil,

    Sounds to me like you should plan a viist to Marty’s place to get unparked!

  16. Moment… since OT IV when I got reviews (had a lot) I’d case phenomenas that the auditor couldn’t address, so I told him this is nots case, isn’t it ?
    In his eyes I saw that I was right and he knew what the tech would be to handle, but wasn’t aloud because I wasn’t on nots.
    Are you talking about this ?

  17. DFB,

    Great that you are looking and spotting the outpoints in the church, and the pluspoints in the Independent field. When I first started on the same path, I didn’t have it all sorted out. That took quite a while.

    As for Marty’s OT IV delivery: I don’t need to see it in writing. I trust Marty enough to know that if he says it was an advice from LRH, then it was. He doesn’t have anything in writing to show us, and we sure can’t ask DM to show us any LRH advices!

    It’s not scary at all if it works and produces wins. That’s the ultimate test, isn’t it?

  18. Joe Doakes

    Interesting. The unfortunate part is the general public (hell, even the general staff (SO and otherwise) are not privy to this type of thing. But debriefs about what LRH advised, etc. are very important to me.

    Yes, I have to wade through my own wonderings of which is true, which is false, which is both and which is neither. But it jogs things around for me and this I appreciate. So thank you for that.

    Honestly, I was a little dissapointed in my New OT IV. I was expecting the “next level” but found it to not quite be that way. I had wins, don’t get me wrong. But it certainly wasn’t what I expected it would be like.

    Anyway, as I try and decompress from what I’ve been through and contributed to over the years, I find myself constantly challenging what is “true”.

    Articles, blog entries, etc. from guys like you, JB, Joe Howard, etc. make a big difference.

    For someone like me that was trained pre-GAT as well as post-GAT I can see a time in the not-to-distant future where people will no longer know about how F/Ns “use to be called”. How instant reads “use to be read”, etc. They will be new people and not know anything other than what they’re being spoonfed. So if/when anyone comes to them with something oppossed to what they’re being taught, it appears to them as being squirrel. And with nothing in writing it could be a tough road to haul in attempting to correct them.

    Anyway, I hope you get the point. As “If it isn’t written it isn’t true” as our religion is, we sort of have and oral tradition (hidden data line) that isn’t accessible to the commoner. Tragic really, as it leaves so many without certainty…

    The upshot being, I’m interested in hearing more results. Because honestly, the stats tell the story more than anything.

  19. Moment…., I’d those phenomena allready on my OT IV and they weren’t adressed and I knew that my auditor knew something I didn’t know.
    When I got my d of p before completion, I told I wasn’t sastified yet, so went back into session again, had a huge win, but this time they didn’t ask me if I’m satisfied but sent me to attest. Was happy that I could go home and wondered about why they did ask me if I was satisfied.
    2 hours later, after I left the Org I’d a spiritual breakdown I’ve never experienced in my life. It took 2 days to get out of it. My wife was so schocked when I arrived home freshly having done the OT levels, and looking like a ghost. She never understood what that was, me neither…..
    Since then I never moved one more step up the bridge, nearly 30 years now……

  20. Bravo Marty. Of course it would be definitive proof of DM’s squirreling if there were a way to show the actual LRH Ref on this. I personally saw at the FSO a subtle but clear effort to prevent OT’s from auditing. There are many SO members that are “on OT7”. Some went into the SO having been on it already and those that are at the CL 9 training level have to have started. There are also those that somehow or other were able to get up to that level. Although there was lip service both in the recruit cycle and in the general everybody knows that OT7 is important and if we get enough folks auditing it the Planet will clear. That is the big PR behind the 10,000 on OT7 campaign. What actually happened during my watch in the SO was hardly any staff that could was solo auditing. In the SO communication is so stifled regarding anything except post matters that it is hard to find out what others are doing and one has to be clever about getting this data. A social “How are you doing on 7” or something of that nature always came up with “Oh I haven’t been auditing for years, can’t get sessionable. Not enough sleep. There are no auditing rooms available for staff. I’ve got to get my stats up or no pay or libs etc. I just saw apathy about the whole area. Another one is the “Other Fish To Fry” accusation If you wanted to do something so out ethics as solo audit, have you forgotten that you are here only to further the 3rd dynamic? One excuse after another but the final result is very few staff that can, are actually auditing.

  21. Well done for beginning the process of finding out for yourself. Keep confronting the situation and applying the Data Series.

  22. What training and case level is DM?
    That info would provide a better evaluation.

  23. Aylesbury Wolf - a Hubbard Knight (ANZO)

    It might just be the case that DM is working for the US government on behalf of the big end of town.

  24. Alan Cohen:

    “It takes a lot of courage to release the familiar and seemingly secure, to embrace the new. But there is no real security in what is no longer meaningful. There is more security in the adventurous and exciting, for in movement there is life, and in change there is power.”

  25. Well Marty that sure as hell blows charge for me.
    Having been a victim of end of endless FPRD I can attest the the implant type of mind control this brings about (particularly when run on moral codes as opposed to what an OT would consider real overts to be).
    Running ANYTHING other than NOTs after OTIII never made any sense to me and the evidence was the bypassed charge on the case manifesting and having to be repaired later.
    As for auditing IV with III tech – it’s kind of like trying to eat a steak with a spoon when you could be using a steak knife (IMHO).
    I’m with you on this one all the way and I can see why it wouldn’t be important to DM. What would it matter to him if OTs could be spared time, money and needless case repair by building a better bridge to OT?

  26. Abraham Maslow:

    “The key question isn’t “What fosters creativity?” But it is why in God’s name isn’t everyone creative? Where was the human potential lost? How was it crippled? I think therefore a good question might be not why do people create? But why do people not create or innovate? We have got to abandon that sense of amazement in the face of creativity, as if it were a miracle if anybody created anything.”

    Marty how did you stumble onto the writings of Maslow that you posted a bit of many post earlier.?

  27. Dearest Marty … you are the best auditor I have ever had. I’m here with crystal clear perceptics and a fluid *state* of *being* … with more peaceful joy than I’ve had in ages.

    How does one say Thank You for that?

    You have given me what I wanted and dreamed of since finding Scientology — my wins have exceeded my dreams.

    It’s sweeping. .. sweeping …sweeping wonder and understanding and operation … flexing theta across all my dynamics in vast and effortless reach that has been dormant for eons.

    I have more love for all Life, for every being I see. When I’m in public, people sense it and respond — from originating to me about their innermost heart to other itsa, to bursting into smiles.

    It is an interesting aside that it was accomplished while sinister threats and harassment and stalking was occurring by “church” goons — people who are supposed to be delivering relief and theta liberation are instead stuck in stopping and impeding people who simply want to practice Scientology.

    It’s glorious, it’s justice, it’s divine that pure theta liberation is happening at the heart of that noisy hurricane of silly if sinister intimidation tactics.

    Nothing can stop what we are doing.

    Marty and everyone who loves and respects you, you deserve more than this comment as an acknowledgment, but here it is as a start.


    Dear People, We *have this Tech*

    The harassment of people who want to use it and experience relief and regain their full self is occurring within the walls of the compound as well as to people on the outside.

    People within the Church are being hindered more from moving up and out (by inval, alter is, Q&A, nonstandard tech, etc) than those of us who have realized that the Orgs are a front for a totally different operation than Scientology.

    It’s important that we stand for truth and rightness — and a fundmental way of doing that is to keep the eye on the mountain — delivery. That’s the only thing Scientology is about.

    There is not one reason to put up with that other heinous nonsense at all. Have fun. Expand. En JOY. Rise and SHINE! Flourish. Prosper. Dance. Wonder. Cognite! Help others.

    Marty … I salute you, I hug you, I thank you! I marvel at the brilliance of this tech. Looking back at how far I’ve come, not only am I enjoying the benefit, but as an auditor I marvel in admiration at the brilliance of how it all worked, how it was laid out.

    LRH has given me the greatest possible gift.


    I want to introduce myself to more of the community, so say hello and I’ll email you back, and then you’ll know what I will say more officially soon.

    I am so very very fortunate. and I know it.

    Thank you with the power of my Life.

  28. It’s great that you confront these things, Marty. According to lots of testimonies on the net it’s hard to as-is these things in the church and I believe some have even been declared SP after a while when trying to discuss cases etc.

    Miscavige seems to be a little bit too much of a “don’t argue” person and that makes an intellectual approach much more difficult.

    What do you think of David Mayo by the way? Did you ever meet him? What’s your opinion of the SP-declare, was there some truth to it or was he just “doing it his way”? Is he still somewhere around?

  29. VVWD, Marty! “Let’s build a better Bridge” from DMSMH is one of my maxims.

  30. Great data Marty. At one point there was actually an action called the NOTS Drug Rundown being delivered in the AO’s. This ridge on the bridge is also applied as part of Advance Programs for those who are already OT5; NOT FUN and laborious.
    Marty, Really interested in your data re the FPRD and converting it into the mind control operation. The FPRD initially was a mind-blowing action, and quick, and laser-precise as LRH described it. Now it would call it a mind-fuck and nothing more. Throw in the misdefinition of an FN when fn’ing the question,and it makes for some very imaginary auditing. Any more data would be appreciated!

  31. froghopper

    intresting martyn your ridge bridge nothing at Nothing at all surprises me with DM he is run by implaneters and for years .

  32. If your various revelations about life at int as well as all those posted as independents have caused dm to implode —

    THIS is going to push him over the edge, on to the carpet and commencing to chew it.

    I applaud you.

    AND of course, can’t help but wonder — how the hell do you find all this stuff. 🙂 —

    But, the more Ludlumesque parts of your story will have to wait … in due time.

    It’s a bright new day — every day — for me, in large part thanks to this blog, Steve’s and Jeff’s.

    *Ludlumesque = Robert Ludlum – American author of thrillers, spy novels

  33. freebeing11

    Here’s my advice on what to do now. KNOW that The Tech DOES exist and his real – just not at the church. Know that because it’s true.
    Stay tuned to this board. This is sanity and truth. These are Standard people.

    I get that you are still in. My further advice is just fade away. No one said you have to go loudly. Just fade away if you like.

    You will be completely surprised who you will find on this side of the fence.

    You took the first step – you looked. Ron said look. Funny huh, COB says don’t look. It’s OK to look.

  34. If he is a non-clear/non-OT, it would be even more ironic how “easily” he could pull the woul over the eyes of so many execs who are clear/OT.

  35. Better watch out Marty your place is gonna be flooded with theta!
    You hit all the major (publics’) buttons on this post. Restoring faith in getting gains for OTs, this is fabulous!
    It even rehabbed my willingness to increase my income and (re-) experience miracles.
    I think a lot of fence watchers may now jump. I hope you are prepared to deliver, word of mouth promotion is the most successful imho.
    I know your original posting promoted your services, but this one hit home, a home run, outta the ball park into the theta universe!

  36. Veritas,

    Congratulations! You sound terrific!

    Just Me

  37. I will straight up say that no matter what process I used, be it Book One, Objectives, Grade O…NED on a PC if they DID NOT have truly GREAT wins then I KNEW something was WRONG, no ifs, ands or buts.
    I say this from an auditor’s POV. I knew this from my case POV too and of course when I had GREAT wins, I knew LRH was being applied the way it’s supposed to be.
    What I saw soooooooooooo much of is “settling” for something less!
    IMO that boiled down to financial considerations pure and simple. Not that people want to quickie but that they just cannot afford to take the time needed to do it RIGHT.
    I can totally duplicate that as I’ve been in AOLA’s HGC too and trying to audit over the money PTP is tough!
    The settling people have done over the years is a real degrade to LRH’s amazing tech, it really is!

  38. Looking over the changes that have happened to the tech since Davie got his claws into the command structure back in the early eighties, just about the entire Bridge has been altered, New books, new GAT checksheets for every course, New OT V, VI, VII and VIII.

    About the only thing that hasn’t changed is OT III and OT IV. How ironic that the one thing the midget has kept the same was what LRH recommended a big improvement for.

  39. Veritas~ Thank you for that!

  40. That`s Entheta Universe! I don`t know how your strange activities, mindfucking PCs, are going to end, Rathbun, but that can`t go on forever, that`s impossible. You seem to lose all selfcontrol, if you ever had such thing. You can`t just do what you want! It`s easy to produce Manic Engramms for money! How long will it last?

  41. I’ts been trained into my brain, mostly by LRH to be wary of such things. A “hidden data line” particularly on an OT level sort of makes me nervous. .

    On FN’s and Instant Reads- I’ve had a lot of trouble with these in training. Particularly instant reads. I fully duplicated LRH’s writings. I believe there’s three or four places he defines an instant read. I didnt even have a doubt. Then I got flunked “FLUNK!” for not calling a prior. I was told to re-watch the EM film and given many pink sheets. I had it “explained” to me by having me clear specific definitions and grammar terms that an instant read was basically within the last part of the major thought. I thought this was wrong for many years and also that it was pretty widespread.
    There is a similar confusion on FN’s I think.

    I’m not sure where it came from. For starters I dont think the film is meant to be a reference for instant reads. It’s meant to show different types of reads. Fluctuations in the film speed and sync with the sound will always be off to some slight degree IMO.

  42. Chris Black

    Hey Marty,

    I appreciate these wins and the release of all that theta. It’s especially gratifying to see someone move again on their Bridge. I’m very happy for them.

    However, as a Class VIII C/S, and someone who has run many a New OT IV (OT DRD) and seen flying completions and then have that pc move onto and through OT V (NOTs), I have to ask, where is this advice? What did it say exactly (or as exactly as from memory)?

    I am quite familiar with Mayo’s OT DRD (later turned into New OT IV by RTC, as you are probably aware) and how NOTs got introduced into the line-up and how the original OT levels (OT IV through VII EP) were removed from the Bridge by RTC. I have never seen any advice to run that aspect of case (drugs) NOTs style ONLY.

    I emphasize “ONLY” as I know that the OT DRD can be addressed using NOTs tech as well, depending on the case. New OT IV (Mayo’s OT DRD, in collaboration with Ron) might not always be needed, depending on case data and scoped out against standard case supervision data. However, that’s more a rarity than anything. But I’ve never seen a problem running NEW OT IV on the case addressing drugs OT III style. I do suggest, though, that it gets done right after completion of OT III. Puts a shine on the case and is much easier to do, usually complete in a few hours to under an intensive.

    Which brings me to my question again. I’d surely like to see a smoother Bridge, but seeing all the alterations both inside and outside the formal CoS, I’m a little loathe without seeing something in writing to just go into agreement and say “Yeh, that’s it, that’s how we should do it!” Violates the data on the VIII tapes. And that’s what happened in the CoS. People took verbal orders and verbal directions without looking into what LRH said exactly, as per the issues on Verbal Tech. So no need to repeat old habits, IMO.

    So, as once head of RTC, Marty, could you recall the advice from memory? If it can be posted, great, although it might not be the best idea. In that case an email discussing it (not a violation of copyright or confidentiality) would be fine. Otherwise it’s a hidden data line and verbal tech.

    Appreciate it, thanks.

    Chris Black
    Class VIII C/S

    P.S. One caveat: you mentioned people who “ground to an expensive halt on Old OT IV”. And later you say you “did the complete OT IV rundown utilizing NOTS technology”. So I may be confused as “Old” OT IV I take to mean the “original” OT IV Rundown, as described on the VIII course. But are you speaking of this RD or the OT DRD developed by Mayo with LRH approving it?

  43. Congratulations to you Veritas! It was so wonderful to meet you and spend time with you. I second every word you have said above. 😀

  44. DFB, your post in yesterday’s thread really hit home for me, as your background in the CoS is not too dissimilar to mine. I will post it here one day soon, no doubt, but in the meantime I wanted to acknowledge you, and your viewpoints.

    There is a reason why you and I, and countless others, have been drawn to Marty’s blog. We are like moths to a flame of truth. I have never felt so validated in asking questions, analysing data, really ~looking~, than on this and other indie sites. (Read Silvia Kusada’s article “Data and Situation Analysis at – AWESOME!). That’s not to say that I blindly accept all that is here, in the same way I do not blindly accept all that is presented by the CoS. But only by asking questions, and finding your own answers, will you find your forward path.

    Me? It is likely I will do one last service within the CoS. But I have no interest in anything further. My path then will be within the independent scene. There’s a reason why I haven’t been active in the CoS for a long, looong time. Something has never felt quite right. I have met some truly exceptional people in my time, many of whom are on staff to this day. But it is no longer for me. I want ~Scientology~, 100% pure and standard, and in a safe, sane environment. The CoS no longer offers that for me.

  45. Aeolus, Bright observation on your part. This is actually just the tip of the iceberg on your very observation. I won’t say more till I audit it myself; then I’ll share that too. LRH never issued rundowns or major tech procedures without first piloting/auditing it. Unlike DM who literally dicatates HCOB revisions and IGNW Bulletins in the middle of tantrums. – Marty, writing on Mike’s administrator loggon.

  46. Hello

    Can you show us the LRH reference? to Keep Scn working.

  47. I was on the RPF once, coaching my twin on TRs. I was using a piece of tech I got from a taped TV demo done at St Hill, Coaching TRO. My sup didn’t know what I was using and due to limited resources in that particular course room, I couldn’t get her a copy of the tape. She freaked out and sent me to the MAA. I got assigned to the RPF’s RPF for ‘squirrelling’. The tape is from 16 Jan 63. There’s two of them, the demo and the tape TRO Lecture which goes over the coaching session.

    Those two lectures, which I’ve seen/listened to, personally, I’ve used ever since I first heard them in 1976 on the Hard TRs Course at Flag. I’ve never seen anyone else do so other than those on that particular TRs course.

    I now have copies of both of these tapes, but up until I did it was always ‘dicey’ to use the materials as it appeared as a Hidden Data Line to some. Even when I pointed out the dates and listing in the Tech Dictionary, without the actual tapes to hand, well, I always considered those who balked had every right to do so.

    For years, the Class VIII CSes were not BPI but were used nonetheless to CS cases. There are pieces of tech applied by those well and thoroughly trained on the full body of materials that are to some ‘obscure’ yet they are roundly sourced from LRH data from tapes and early issues/books for example.

    I’ll opine here, from my training and years of doing thousands and thousands of cramming cycles. Marty, you may have personally seen this LRH tech note and it may be perfectly valid, and therefore you have every right to use it as valid LRH tech. Frankly I have no doubt it is.

    For any other person who has the responsibility to apply tech in such a way as to maintain their own integrity and apply Instruction and Examination, Raising the Standard Of, to wit, use the materials at the level they are trained on, I would be remiss if I didn’t say How To Defeat Verbal Tech is applicable.

    I may also opine, by bringing this point up in this posting, applicable to those hung up on this point of the Bridge, and making it public, and especially under the circumstances we are facing, the actual suppression of not only this LRH data, but the materials beyond NOTs, that LRH charged Pat Broeker with getting compiled and released, and the refusal to release valid LRH data on DM’s part, that this post may bring that issue to a head.

    Does DM deny the tech exists? Does he finally release it? Is there now a campaign to discredit Marty’s independents as operating on a Hidden Data Line and in order to invalidate Marty, Mike, et al, and what is being done by independents the world over, DM further suppresses this material so as to ‘be right’?

    The scene we face as Scientologists, with DM openly blocking the Bridge with arbitraries and blatant suppressive reversal of the fundamentals of the technology, even one of the most important, the subject of a Floating Needle, is a difficult one for issues as presented in this post.

    DM’s monopoly and tyranny over the Advanced Materials would have continued were in not for fortuitous circumstances brought about by individuals that today deny the efficacy of those very materials. Still, we have the Upper Bridge available to us outside DM’s attempt at sole authority to say who can and can’t attain them because of those individuals.

    The L’s are being delivered too, outside DM’s closed circle. Those materials existed in part, with lots of missed critical pieces, for years until they were compiled by one of the independent field based on their own thorough knowledge and training on them and having delivered them to hundreds of others for thousands of hours while at Flag.

    For those of you who audit OT IV in the field, I suggest you study the level, available in the field, and based on sound KRC with the tech, and a thorough study of all relevant materials, you apply what you understand as valid Scientology material: that which works and handles that which it was intended to handle.

    Apply the How to Defeat Verbal Tech list, from HCOB 9 Feb 79 and if it won’t run through, then it won’t run through, for you.

    On this exact piece of tech, this exact level and the technology of it, for those who know the data and have either run on others or had run on them the OT DRD at OT IV, this posting will be understood. What piece of tech do you personally apply at that exact point in the procedure? You must come to a decision based on your own understanding of the materials and your own personal integrity as an auditor and practitioner of Scientology. Apply Knowing How to Know and if you’ve done your training up to where you should be training wise, you’ll be comfortable in your decision.

    One last comment, from me, not as an ‘authority’ on Scientology but as a being faced with being ‘denied my eternity’ by David Miscavige.

    Thanks to many others, I have put together a very complete library of materials, including all I need to get up the Bridge despite DM’s forbidding it. I was subject to his arbitraries, repeated CCRDs, continuous FPRD and sec-checking, anything BUT what LRH said to do, go up through the OT levels. I protested this to the then Snr CS Int, John Eastment directly, he agreed and then followed DM’s executive CSing anyway and took me off the standard LRH route yet again for a new action.

    Shortly after I did this action, I was declared and expelled by DM. Put on his list of ‘never to do the OT levels’. Refused for re-instatement after more than a decade of working on A-E, even completing it and STILL refused.

    What was my decision after realizing that my Bridge was utterly blocked? I was going to study the subject fully and DO IT ANYWAY!

    I have the tech, I know it is correct, and I am applying it. In fact, if I was on a desert planet, with no other being for light years, I could and can do the whole thing.

    I have completed up through OT III in the field. I have certainty on what I’ve done and have NO doubts or reservations about any of it. I have every intention and work daily on being able to rewrite the entire body of work, from scratch, should I end up on Arcturus and ‘forgot my notes’.

    I trust the tech terminals who have helped me out here in the field. Why? Because I can’t be fooled since I’ve taken responsibility for my own progress up the Bridge.

    I’m going up the Bridge, not out into the inky black as described in Safeguarding Technology. Why? Because I’ve taken responsibility for my own progress up the Bridge and I REFUSE to be stopped by David Miscavige.

  48. WoW Marty! How excellent!
    Man, you are revitalizing my ass with all that application of LRH like it’s supposed to be!
    I had a finger-bending post done up on my mobile last night-seems it went somewhere, nowhere, no idea where!
    But it was a comm that I want to put out there. Going for succinct…
    Last lifetime I was around, got where I got (not very well trained, unfortunately) blah, blah, blah died unexpectedly…shit happens. Not hatted on how to do this…hooked back up as quick as I could to the most theta Scn. person I knew before. OK more blah, blah, blah.
    This time I’m gonna train my ass up, audit lots of people, Clear the planet. Well, for ME it came pretty easily BUT the “old tech” I used to know and the “new tech” I was trying to learn weren’t jiving all the time. So I’m sitting there reading about F/Ns and I KNOW the “waiting for the meter to play Dixie” reference but this time around it’s not there! What a flustercluck.
    We handled it with FDS (False Data Stripping) and it all worked out just fine by hook or by crook and with the help of old-timers who knew what the hell I was talking about, who could go to the OLD tech vols for references. That was in 1991 or so and went on for some time and I really only made it because of my willpower, old-timers, doing it full time and my unwillingness to settle.
    Some wrapper thoughts since I’ve gotta go.
    The “average” person would never have made it through training standardly in those circumstances.
    We all come back.
    It’s so important to keep LRH here for our Auditors and PCs and Pre-OTs so they know it’s OK and that it will be here when they come back so they can continue on their path to total freedom.
    Marty~THAT is what I thank you for! THAT is priceless.

  49. V (from Marty on Mike’s administrator page), Hey! You are not joking about the counter intention encountered. Any weaker being wouldn’t have hacked it. But you did with flying colors. By some of the comments the fear of not following DM’s path is evident, even by Class VIIIs and above. Thank you for your rich understanding and courage to do what LRH ordered DM to do, which DM successfully non-complied with. As you know this is only a warm up and first step precedent to fully unburying all LRH intended for II through VII. But as I said in another comment reply, we’ll do like LRH did and audit it first to assure workability.

  50. Jim, Thanks. Excellent advice. (Marty, from Mike’s computer)

  51. LO, I will take the liberty of evaluating for you and answer “yes” to your question as to whether you were running into NOTS case. I actually only realized while writing this answer how it (incorrect OT4) affected me as well, a bit of a holy cow! I have done NOTS and it is for real and you contacted it and were not provided with the tools to as-is it. Rest assured, you are in for a treat. Don’t hesitate if you are able!

  52. Jim ~ YOU ROCK! WoW!

  53. I have heard it mentioned here and that DM is:

    un-interned Class IV
    mid OT VII
    never went near a complete OEC/FEBC checksheet
    has not himself audited more than a mere handful of persons
    has not allowed anyone to audit him in more than 15 years

    But that’s hearsay, it could be wrong.

  54. Chris Black

    Hey Jim,

    Right on. It’s not that the tech’s not there or is not correct, it’s just that, as you say, one has to take responsibility for one’s own Bridge. And part of that responsibility, for anyone who knows LRH, is to scope it out for yourself, work it out, see how it fits, run it through the various checklists and evaluation methodologies – and even pilots – and if it works, and it’s standard tech, hell, fly with the eagles. That way one will make it, despite anything else.

    There’s no fear, just a zealousness for applying ALL LRH tech, even the tech on ensuring it runs through as correct tech.

    Cheers, buddy, and glad to hear you’re doing the Bridge regardless of totally incorrect assignments.


  55. STING,
    Cat Daddy is giving an opinion/evaluation of DM’s case state in the absence of CD actually doing any auditing or training (and CD, you putting the barriers there to doing Self Analysis are self-generated barriers nonetheless). DM has ‘gone up’ through to audited NOTs. There are plenty of tech references on Case Supervision to deal with those who have not attained the expected results of any grade, including the OT materials. Those apply.

    Cat Daddy, try and refrain from this sort of thing. It really isn’t OK.

  56. Chris, Having been in Qual for years, your point is totally valid. From my personal perspective, when I did OT 4 as we know it, I was well into NOTS phenomena by actual originated statements that were found within the NOTS Indoc materials. So I guess another LRH applicable datum would be to audit the PC in front of you, as I had significant wins on OT4 while plowing into the NOTS case simultaneously. And things were not good for some time after that ( gross understatement).
    This will be the difficulty going forward- having full access to research notes, etc as opposed to personal recalls, etc.
    I am inclined to believe this technical presentation, based on my own experiences and awarenesses and the amount of charge that blew in reading it.

  57. Jim, Another from the heart with feet on the ground masterpiece. thanks.
    Whatever happened to Eastment- haven’t heard anything of him in years?

  58. RE: major rundowns and pilots.

    ABSOLUTELY true. I was on one of the pilots for New Era Dianetics. NED.

    It went fine for about 4 sessions. THEN I felt as it I would die from the most severe headache. (I was OT III at the time)

    And shortly afterwards — the HCOB came out canceling Dianetics for OTS …

    And NEW Era Dianetics for OTS was born.


  59. DFB,
    The definition of an Instant Read is: “that reaction of the needle which occurs at the precise end of any major thought voiced by the auditor.” HCOB 25 May 62 as well as the original Book of E-meter Drills, EMD 19.

    A major thought is “the complete being expressed in words by the auditor”. HCOB 25 May 62, as well as the same Book of E-meter Drills.

    THAT’S IT! There is NOTHING ELSE to an Instant Read.

    An Instant RUDIMENT Read is something else:
    “On rudiments, repetitive or fast, the instant read can occur anywhere within the last word of the question or when the thought major has been anticipated by the preclear, and must be taken up by the auditor. This is not a prior read. Preclears poorly in session. being handled by auditors with indifferent TR-1, anticipate the instant read reactively as they are under their own control. Such a read occurs in the body of the last meaningful word in the question. It never occurs latent.” HCOB 21 July 62, ‘adds to HCOB 25 May 62’, E-Meter Drill 18, from 1962.

    Repetitive rudiments:
    “The auditor at first does not consult the meter, but asks the rudiments question of the pc until the pc says there is no further answer. At this point the auditor says, “I will check that on the meter.” And asks the question again. If it reads, the auditor uses the meter to steer the pc to the answer, and when the pc finds the answer, the auditor again lays the meter aside and asks the question of the pc as above until the pc has no answer. The auditor again says, “I will check that on the meter” and does so.

    “The cycle is repeated over and over until the meter is clean of any instant read (see HCO Bulletin of May 25, 1962 for Instant Read).

    “The cycle:
    1. Run the rudiment as a repetitive process until pc has no answer.
    2. Consult meter for a hidden answer.
    3. If meter reads use it to steer (“that” “that” each time the meter flicks) the pc to the answer.
    4. Lay aside the Meter and do I and 2 and 3.

    “The process is flat when there is no instant read to the question.” HCOB 2 July 62.

    Fast rudiments are defined later in the same 2 July issue: “A Fast Check on the Rudiments consists only of steps 2 and 3 of the cycle done over and over.”

    The ‘fast’ check is retained in our modern rudiments as per Rudiments Definitions and Patter of 11 Aug 78.

    On 21 July 62, LRH wrote the issue Instant Reads where he defines the above Instant Rudiment Read and which has the above definition and differentiation.

    This is the tech, this defines an Instant Read and an Instant Rudiment Read. THAT’S IT.

    If DM’s has squirrelled this to mean that prior reads are taken on anything other than the above references, then that is utter bullshit. Dump it in the trash, do False Data Stripping, re-study the above references and do EMD 18 and 19 again.

    They are two DIFFERENT READS.

    Man, this SP has wreaked havoc on tech since I’ve been gone from church lines. HOLY FU#!

  60. I agree fully with using the NOTs data on the OT DRD and have preferred that way of doing it since reading NOTs series 50.

  61. Hi Cris, I share the same viewpoint and experience here. New OTIV runs like clockwork if done right after III, of course doing it after NOTS with III style would be foolish.

  62. NOTE: Before anybody goes and does a ‘fast check’ from the above post, check out the references and do what it says in the 11 Aug 78 issue, Rudiments, Definitions and Patter and apply EMD 18 and 19 and their LRH references to your auditing. If you still don’t get it, get in touch with me and I’ll make damn sure you do.

  63. Jim,

    I love it when someone is called a “squirrel” by a dipshit who has a limited understanding of the tech or a complete or partial misunderstanding of parts or all of the tech. Begs the question, “Just who’s the squirrel?”

    Much love,


  64. Very well put Jim!!!

  65. WTF has DM done to the FPRD!!!

    I audited and received the FPRD on all 8 dynamics, twice. It was a simple, totally effective procedure. I know the theory, I know the practical. Has he twisted this too!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Good freaking GOD!

    ( The rest of what I could say would better be left off this public posting.)

  66. A real source viewpoint Jim.

    I am truly amazed Miscavige let you stay around as long as he did — which is of course the highest compliment that can be paid these days.

  67. Chris,
    This posting is why you are one of the most trusted Tech Terminals in the field. Thankyou!

    At the risk of butting in, the OT IV referred to here is not the OT IV Rundown as per the VIII tapes, but the New OT DRD OT IV and the point mentioned is the change in one part of the procedure for that action from OT III ‘style’ to NOTs ‘style’ for lack of a better term.

    Many months ago Ralph Hilton led a spirited discussion of this area on the Pro LRH Tech site.

  68. Marty,

    Another area that may be of interest that has become snarled up in the current church is the subject of overts and withholds. With all the sec checking which happens under the guise of “I’m not auditing you.” a case can get completely bogged down.

    LRH discovered after years and years that a person could go clear on mental image pictures, and after that point would begin to have case troubles. You had to go back and rehab the state for the person to progress.

    Not that I’m trying to invent tech, but I found that a person can have either a huge release or “go clear” on overts. Overts are rooted in the same ability to cause as the creation of mental image pictures. A thetan is capable of considerations, postulates and opinions. And those considerations, postulates and opinions can be used to harm others.

    After the “clearing cog” on overts one is no longer stuck in considerations, postulates and opinions about harming others.

    But, just as handling the clearing cog on mental image pictures does not handle the NOTs case on mental image pictures, handling overts in a like manner does not handle the NOTs case on overts.

    Just something to be alert to. Might blow off some charge for some people who have been grossly overrun on overts and withholds.

    Much love,


  69. I’ve seen people take this simple E-meter drill and turn it into the most nebulous and esoteric subject known, usually by a supervisors who has never audited. Or the students TR’s are out which is easily resolved with additional TRs drilling.

    That read which occurs a the presice end of a major thought voiced by the auditor. Is just that.

    It should not be harder than looking at a traffic light and note when the light turned from red to green.

    If it is getting complicated stop and get help from Qual before all the false data , inval and eval piles up as that can become a further stumbling block.

    Flag Trained Pro Sup at your service.

  70. Tara,

    This is a subject that seems to be conveniently overlooked. But, despite all the blah, blah, blah’s I know exactly what you’re talking about.

    David Lawrence has a lot to say about the subject as he ran across this a bunch in his mission.

    Keep on truckin.’ Ain’t it a gas?

    Much love,


  71. The Independents have embraced the theme of the Protestant Reformation to breakaway from CoS. In this vein, the Reformation relied solely on the Bible and an idea called “The Priesthood of the Believer.” Protestants believed that they had direct access to God by faith and could read and interpret the scriptures for themselves using the light God gave them. By analogy, the Independents need to develop the principle of the “C/S of the Individual.” In some sense, you are ultimately your own C/S in life anyway.

    True independence is the courage to not be other-determined by a C/S. IMO, many of the stalled cases in CoS have been caused by DM ordering registrars to sell his latest money-making program. This left Case Sups at the effect of regges. C/S’s had to deliver what was sold in many cases. I know several stalled OT’s and it is all due to Flag wanting more money from them.

    If you want to be an OT, be self-determined and decide what is true for you. If CoS is not true for you, then the upper levels it delivers cannot be true. Judge by results: If Flag were delivering workable upper levels, them none of the OT’s would have left to become Independents. Whatever Flag is doing doesn’t work and in fact creates unhappy, stalled OT’s.

    I am interested in this topic because I know stalled OT’s and it is frustrating to watch Flag not allow them to complete their OT levels year in and year out. Why does Flag get to say who and who is not an OT? Worse, once a person is an OT, CoS can revoke one’s OT certs in a heartbeat. How good is CoS’ OT levels if they exist only on certs?

    IMO, the Independents first have to identify what “Miscavigology OT” is all about and then reject those definitions.

    Second, the Independents have to go back and discover what “LRH OT” is about and do those levels. If you want to be an OT, then be an OT and stop being other-determined by Flag, CoS, or DM.

    Here is one of the indicators I watch: A person named Laurie Hamilton claims to be OT V. She claims to be 2nd Gen Scientologist. She posts at a website called IMO, she is a CoS terminal who is authorized to test things online. FWIW: Here is how Laurie defines OT:

    Laurie Hamilton has posted a lot of things the Indies might want to check.

    My question to OT’s on this blog: What is an OT? What abilities should an OT be able to demonstrate? That has long been a subject of discussion among critics. Without disclosing any upper level materials, I ask this as an honest question: What is an OT? What are OT’s ultimately aiming for?


  72. “I’m not sure where it came from.”

    You can read about it here:

  73. DFB,

    I say what all the others said and add that the application of the Code of Honor in regards to myself, LRH and Scientology was vital in looking at my doubt formula. It was what brought me out of a six year “hung up a doubt” cycle.

    As you are looking, feel free to originate. This is an excellent site to get needed LRH references. If Jim can’t refer you to something, someone else will. I have noticed there is a growing number of people posting that are highly trained in both tech and admin.

  74. Mike Lemeron

    This is an awesome post, Jim. I am with you all the way.


  75. Mike Lemeron

    Marty, you bring up a huge point here. It is righ up the ally of not only unblocking DM suppression of Scientology tech but revitalizing the field to a previous state of flourish and prosper as in the old days of old ST. Hill and early times in the US.

    When I lef the int. base in ’98 I noticed from my travels around the US that there was a complete absence of Scn advertising, no billboards – nothing. Yet Gold had produced so many marketing campaign elements, videos etc. All these things never made it of the base. I believe it was just DM creating “busy work” so we could all be occupied spinning our wheels.

  76. Dave Adams

    Yes. What is Miscaviges case and training level?

    According to the incorporation documents of CST and RTC there is a requirement to be a certain level and to be actively engaged in training and auditing.

    COB may be ineligible for his post….

    The consensus on the natter boards is that miscavige was last seen publicly functioning as an auditor at St Hill in the 70’s, as a class IV. Uninterned.

    He is rumored to be bogged on ot7, but more likely blown from ot3 and falsely attested .

    Any more accurate or informed information?

  77. Miss Sunshine, I am sitting here at my desk in tears! Thank you for sharing this with everyone. Shine on ❤

  78. Theo Sismanides

    Marty, this is great news that you are into tech in the middle of handling the SPs at the same time. A hell of a combination as I said. A warrior and a techie. Awesome news, thanks for informing us on this. This is our future, a safe Bridge. Thank you so much!

  79. Mike Hobson


    The E-Meter Reads Tech Film isn’t titled “Instant Reads “, now is it?

    What delightful B/S using that film as a reference for Instant Reads.

    Michael A. Hobson
    Former Tech Films I/C ASHO Foundation (1991-1994)

  80. Theo Sismanides

    Jim, you definitely can do it. We get to know you here as the persistent guy who follows tech and policy by the book. You can study and you can train. It’s all good news to hear this from you. Even if it seems there is a distance between us, true OTs can do it. All we are missing is the lines between us. I know we will feel the urge to put them in as we ALL decompress more and more and handle more of the insanity from outside.

    thanks for letting us know you are doing things on the tech side of life.

  81. “It’s important that we stand for truth and rightness — and a fundmental way of doing that is to keep the eye on the mountain — delivery. That’s the only thing Scientology is about.”

    Yes, the true purpose of Scientology!

  82. Hello Marty;

    I have a question, but I don’t know how to pm you, so I’ll put it here.

    I left the CoS nearly 20 years ago, after being trained up to Class VIII. I would like to connect up with some on-source tech terminals, get my tech cleaned up again, and start back into sesssion. I know there are others out here who feel the same.

    My question is, ‘are you in a position to help set up and work with auditors who want to get their tech cleaned up and get back into the chair?’

    I suppose right now you are like the ‘lonely only’ that LRH refers to on the Class VIII course, but there are undoubtedly others scattered all around who would like to contribute to the motion. The problem is, we need a safe and standard place to gather and help each other get cleaned up, and someone we can trust to oversee the activity.


  83. If I understand it the right way it’s something like this:
    You audit a pc with OT3 Tech on new OT IV, the preOT blows charges but in fact you didn’t get all charges off because of not using Nots tech that would have gotten all off.
    If the Preot instantly starts on Nots you’ll handle the rest of the charge you have restimulated.
    But if the pre-ot doesn’t go instantly onto Nots then you got a pre-ot with heavy BPC and in troubles.
    So it would be better to do the right handling in the first step and not handle the rest later, as it could be deadly.

    Is it that what you are talking about Martin ? I’ve the feeling of having found some diamonds !

    Pls. let me know !


  84. How does the tech deal with returning OTs and Clears? According to Scientology Mythology, there must be OT VIIIs, LRH, Clears that have died and have returned by now.

    QUOTE: “We come back.”

    Are there cases any of you have run across where someone has “clepped out” of the current bridge or road to clear? Or do they have to do it all over again?

    And if a declared person dies and returns, how does DM (or any other Scientology Leader) know who that person is in the next life so he can DENY the tech to them and issue a copy of the goldenrod they sent the first time to say “Ha! We found you!”

    This means a database must exist to track the “unworthy returned.” How does that database work?

    If Lisa McPherson came back right after her death, she would be 15 years old now.

    Is she in the Sea Org? Did she clep out of clear?

  85. Yea that OT7 campaign is a bunch of B/S, more suppression by DM, not only did he destroy the U.C. that were actually making OT’s of staff but he lets valuable OT’s who are F/L’s sit on the side lines for decades w/ huge unmanageble F/L debts until recently a few hand selected were relieved of their F/L debts to keep them out of Marty’s hands and if you were not a threat on going over to the other “side”, or unable to donate thousands to his stupid books and tapes, you were dropped and ignored. I thought mgmt was turning a new page and actually caring, haha what joke that was. If DM really gave a shit about “clearing” the planet he would have long ago forgave those debts and let the show get on the road, but no, he has nothing but vengeance in his heart. Too bad asshole, we still have our eternity, so the last laugh is on you, you no longer own us, hahahaha.

  86. Veritas,

    You have always appeared to me as one DYNAMIC person but I noticed since your visit to Texas, that dynamic energy is imbued with volumes of THETA, now being dispersed throughout the universe.

    Not only are you a beautiful being, you are SMART! You are a force to be reconned with.
    So VERY theta to see you winning in this way!

  87. Tara

    “I KNOW the ‘waiting for the meter to play Dixie’ reference but this time around it’s not there!”

    I know this reference well and I these days it is constantly violated so no surprise that it appears to have vanished. Time after time I’ve witnessed an auditor (or examiner or success officer) sit and stare at my needle (right out of the drill on how to dirty and clean a needle actually). This isn’t in anyway an isolated incidence it is RAMPANT.
    Due to the fact that Flag likes to also practice giving PCs frequent change of auditors I can say that it’s the norm amongst Class IX auditors who one for one are into staring at the meter (‘Helloooo – I’m over here!’)
    Add to that the following: Has anyone ever sat at the examiner (who is staring avidly at the meter so as not to get into trouble when the tapes are reviewed later) thinking ‘please please please don’t red-tag me’?
    LOL – OK it’s funny in retrospect but it wasn’t at the time!
    So proud of myself that I actually managed to make case gain in spite of it all 😉

  88. That’s the spirit !

  89. PS
    Ooops Tara totally forgot what my point was.
    I too survived on recall from “old tech” it’s one of the ways I managed to get up the Bridge this lifetime despite the squirreling. It gives me a great deal of understanding as to why ‘newbies’ get so messed up – there’s no point of reference when confronted with the “new tech” – clusterfuck does sum this up well.

  90. Huh, I had no idea that OT IV was run OT III style.

    I’ve read the theory of OT III and NOTs, but made my own choice that I wasn’t going to pursue my OT levels at this time. (I’m also free to change my mind if I wish. Partly, this was a reaction to having been told I needed them and had to have, and all the insanity in my life around that point.)

    I’m really, really happy that this helped someone.

  91. DFB, that’s why I went to the Human Trafficking Conference in person: it’s easier to tell based on the feel of a room whether someone’s being straight than even through a video or a blog.

    I am glad you’re looking, and am glad that you’re looking at this with your own sense of integrity.

    Ultimately, for me, what matters is simple: what works, no matter who wrote it.

  92. WH,

    “THIS is going to push him over the edge, on to the carpet and commencing to chew it”

    🙂 🙂 🙂

  93. Hey Marty, the sun sure never sets with you around! Great job.It is so good to see people rekindled. Awesome!

  94. Tara, I love you.

  95. Marty, OMG! We definanitely have to talk.
    Can’t wait.

  96. V, LOVE!

  97. Mike Hobson

    Unfortunately, the LRH Advices are locked up in the INCOMM S.I.R. system – [Source Information Retrieval ] system.

    Even, if Marty were to cite the exact advice, there is no way to confirm it without access to either that system or the original archive files.

    Michael A. Hobson

  98. Tara,

    Ooops! David St Lawrence. Not David Lawrence. Got up, went to lunch with my wife, went shopping, slapped myself on the forehead and said…

    Took a while to get back here to correct the knuckle-headed mistake.

  99. Oops, typo in there. Apparently he’s OT IV (not 7)

  100. martyrathbun09

    Bobo, I’d like to; and do so with close friends, much less than I’d like to because of time constraints. I think someone will reply to your comment here and inform you of others who more formally engaged. You can also get hold of Terrill at IFA and he can direct you.

  101. crahing upwards

    Veritas—Fantastic descriptions of your wins and state of being. So different from the absurd and flat speeches of those OT8’s on the freewind which were posted not so long ago. Night and day difference. I havent heard anyone express wins like yours in a long, long time. Happy for you.

  102. He told some one that I know that he was on OT VII, and had so much trouble auditing it that he had to change the Level and put FPRD style. I know he did that to last more, and make more money. I imagine, by his actions, that he is not even Clear, due to his many alterations of the Tech, and fixation in mest. He is a major SP, blocking people progress on the bridge, full of case, also a sadist as can be demonstrated by his own actions, which dramatizes cruelty.

  103. martyrathbun09

    Snowhite, No joke, one reason I post these comments is because they give readers a real time look at Miscavige’s reactions to my words. This is a very accurate one in my estimation. Thanks SW.

  104. martyrathbun09

    To the tech trained folk like Jim, Chris, Ignacio, and others: Thanks for your comments. I am not suggesting anyone follow what I do. I am doing what is right based on my experience, my knowledge, my understanding of the tech, including my understanding of certain directions that LRH was going in – some as expressed in written words. Those words were ignored and buried by DM. To slavishly apply injunctions against never taking a verbal suggestion (meaning a suggestion that you cannot prove in a court of law was written by LRH) is a guarantee, in my humble opinion, one will never make it out the top. After all, DM has announced on numerous occasions between 1990 and the present that he finally accomplished the impossible and once and for all and forever has published ALL LRH ever adivsed being issued. He’s got so much stuff buried and he’s proven himself such a deceitful squirrel, one is delusional if he thinks anyone could ever definitively and authoritatively pronounce “here is LRH’s uncorrupted, complete body of work.” Forget launching future campaigns to do so – I assure you, it will as futile as the Christian crusades in pursuit of the Holy Grail. I posted when I did because I saw enough EVIDENCE before my very eyes – based on application – to know it worked. I thought anyone with much experience delivering the III-VII would see the simple, common sense of all this. If not – fine. But, I will tell you this is just a simple little nothing I posted compared to what else comes from LRH that DM buried on this zone of the bridge. And like what I posted last night, I am not going to bother people with it until I have seen it work before my eyes. And then I will. It will be revolutionary, and just like IV, I know that on the basis that I sensed OV IV (OT III style) was non sensical even before I saw the LRH advice to pilot scrapping it. Regardless of all this here, I truly appreciate you guys keeping a healthy skepticism. In the final analysis, what impressed me with LRH most through my entire studies, was his consistent and continuing devotion to one thing above all others: DOES IT WORK?

  105. Reading this post raises the question, was this delivery a pilot? Pilots would be more than just one case. So for clarification, maybe it’s the word “resolved” in the title?

    Is my understanding correct that this was was something that had been recognized by LRH and by tech persons who were aware of LRH’s memo (was it a memo?) on OT III and OT IV.

    This said, I’m going to comment more about the big Q&A to OT that is rampant in “Clearing for Dollars” “church”.

  106. Marty,
    Exactly; and here is an LRH quote regarding that from HCOB 24 Jan 77 TECH CORRECTION ROUND-UP:

    “What makes tech correct? When it doesn’t get results it is incorrect. When it gets
    the expected result it is correct.
    “My own writings and researches are based wholly upon things that got and get results.”

  107. martyrathbun09

    Yes, “resolved” is wholly subjective. It is resolved for me. That is why I told those other folks, I’m not promoting it. But, I think I would be remiss in keeping it secret. You are right. But it wasn’t one. It was three and the one was the one that completed V. The others flew, but I haven’t had enough time to complete V with them. Thanks.

  108. Chris Black

    Nice, Jim. Thanks for the references, too.

    And as “because” states, things seem to have become mighty complicated! Perhaps it’s a dramatization of a certain person’s case?

    Hey Mike Hobson, I remember you from my ASHO days training on NED and the BC and other courses. Nice to see you around!

    And really, just on this thread, so good to see so many trained – and well-trained at that – people here. Wow!


  109. Thank you for thinking of me MP

    I noticed that, I actually helped clean up the first drafts of the translation in to English. after that the Father of Becky who has a daughter in the Sea Org made the piece posted ready to go on the net

    Becky’s Parents want their daughter back (manchester)

  110. Here comes again our dictator in disguise. Your time is over!!! My pcs are very happy and you can’t stop it!!! Try to sleep on this failure to prevent case gain if you can!

  111. Cat Daddy,

    Just a funny story. I had to take a psychology class en route to my degree. With my great luck, I ended up with the chair of the department. I like to ask questions and participate in what I’m learning. And I try to be respectful. But by the end of the first week, she would visibly cringe every time I raised my hand–until we got to Maslow and his description of the creative individual. As she lectured on the characteristics of the creative personality her attention drifted around the class and settled on me. I watched her pause, reflect, and suddenly cognite. From that point on, she seemed more than happy to take my comments or questions.

    Much love,


  112. Got you Marty, I can think with that. All I know and use works or I would not be using it.

  113. Jim

    Thanks for posting the references.

    Your the best. Thanks

  114. “In the final analysis, what impressed me with LRH most through my entire studies, was his consistent and continuing devotion to one thing above all others: DOES IT WORK?”


  115. Chris Black


    There’s quite a number, many quite active albeit “under the radar”. If you want to shoot me an email, I’ll pass it along to some very good friends who are stable, standard Class VIIIs. Let me know where you’re located as well (city will suffice) and I”ll try to connect you up.

    And great on your desire to get “cleaned up again and back into session”. You’re one of the most valuable people on the planet, you know!


  116. Dont take my devils advocate style skepticism as disrepect Marty. I know that you are a good person. I do that at my org too and I’ve actually gotten a few things changed I felt were a bit off. I’m not always right though, but I do ask questions if I think there might be something wrong.

  117. Theo Sismanides

    Yea LivesWell, Texas can be the Mecca now! Ha ha, Marty you are the Hub now! Keep shifting those wheels, man! Get us rolling ! The tech has been the Hub, the tech. I can’t believe you are auditing in the middle of this zoo! ha ha!

    So, we all move to Texas!! I love it! I am a good communicator you know. Can handle communications, really good. Good PR etc. Are you hiring? Haha. Texas! The New Mecca for Scientology!

  118. Theo Sismanides

    Ha ha Snow, you are losing it! Say to DM Texas is the New Mecca, now! You want to go OT go to Texas! No, no, no, not you Snow, you have to wait a bit. Go to Flag and pay some millions or offer to be a slave for DM.

  119. martyrathbun09

    You da’ man, Ignacio.

  120. J.Swift,

    “IMO, many of the stalled cases in CoS have been caused by DM ordering registrars to sell his latest money-making program. This left Case Sups at the effect of regges. C/S’s had to deliver what was sold in many cases. I know several stalled OT’s and it is all due to Flag wanting more money from them.”

    You are very correct about this. I’ll give you a specific example (among others) how this affected lower orgs.

    It concerns the use of Miscavige’s “Flag World Tours” to try and get lower org pcs to Flag.

    A trick used by the Flag consultants is to give prospects a metered interview after having you fill out a questionairre, which has many questions. This questionairre will include an innocent looking question about if you are having trouble on a dynamic. The interviewer will then put you on the meter, and try to find a read that indicates trouble with out-int on a dynamic. This then mandates you go to Flag, as lower orgs cannot deliver Int by Dynamics. Not only that, no other auditing can be delivered until Int is handled.

    The interviewer famous for this (and who I wrote up for it at the time) was James Byrne.

    My main problem with James was that I would have winning pcs on the Grades or NED, he would give them these shoddy interviews and tell them they had charge on Int by Dynamics and need to go to Flag before their auditing can be resumed. This really pissed me off as I knew they were flying in their auditing. I personally took them in session in some cases and checked for a false read, and cleaned it up so they could resume their auditing. But I did not appreciate what he was trying to do and wrote it up.

  121. The teacher learning from the pupil, priceless. Thank you Michael for sharing that lovely insightfull story.

    Psychology is like a box of choclates, haha. I am very intrested in behavioral mechanisms.


  122. The tightey whities are so damned transparent!

  123. John,

    I just read your write up and found it to be very informative. I am not a tech terminal and did not ever get the full reality of GAT until now. Sure, I’d heard some rumors about what was happening at FLAG but nothing specific.

    Now I understand why some trainees just didn’t make it.

    I also feel very very fortunate that my auditing program post GAT went so well. But it does explain times that I noticed comm lags in calling F/Ns and even times when I was instructed not to move around (body motion) at the examiners, none of which should have occurred. It was sometimes introverting to wait for the FN call and I found myself bypassing the examiner by rehabbing the point of FN in my head which worked every time. I don’t recall having to put my attention on the session to get an FN, prior to GAT, but preferred doing that than going back in over a win.

  124. Theo Sismanides

    Ignazio, Marty and all tech terminals. This is so important that you guys can audit and do audit people.

    When Ignazio was here in Greece auditing us I had tremendous change just by ARC straightwire. I can only imagine what’s to be had up the line on the Bridge.

    You guys should meet once in a while either in Europe or in the US. A tech conference. I know it sounds somehow for me to sit here and just say things but there is tons of people who can help us on this.

    Marty, for example, with all this suppression on our lines, you are an extraordinary guy to pull off auditing people, too.

  125. Theo Sismanides

    Go go Bobo! This is awesome. This is the way. We are piling up resources and we keep them coming in.

    Auditors and administrators are the only people who can put up with this whole insanity that has its grip all over the planet.

    There is no other hope for Mankind than Scientology.

    I have experienced and you have, too. The wins to be had are in concrete. A good auditor, like we had Ignazio here, would make the difference.

    You guys can rock the planet. Soon you will be in clover and people will gather left and right to help you out to form your orgs. That I see coming. You are the pivotal points around which everything will turn in the future. I just had this realization now. A good ED is also an auditor. Head of the Organization and Organization Executive Sec.

    I just saw the picture. Auditors running the place while auditing pcs and training others. This is the combo, this is the future. I was just breaking my wits of how is this organization going to happen and it cannot happen globally overnight. But it can happen for auditors in their sphere of influence.

    Like we do here in Europe with Ignazio. We might take a trip to Sardinia, e Ignazio? Haha. Beautiful place, too!!

    So, keep giving us all this good news like Bobo did.

  126. Your mention of the OT 8 speeches posted was a turning point for me. I was dumbfounded after hearing them. I have had comm course completions have more enthusiastic wins than what I heard from those OTs. It was all the proof I needed that the church really was dead.
    I certainly wouldn’t pay many thousands of dollars to get that product…those people were robbed.

  127. Jim,

    The current (as of 1 1/2 years ago) FPRD course pack is correct. If delivered as wriiten by a skilled, caring auditor and correctly C/Sed as I received it the Rundown is fine, a real life changer.

    If C/Sed to make wrong its a Killer.

    My auditor went past an F/N then into a sec/checker valence on one question and I tell you my auditor knows how close I came to busting that E-Meter over her head. She’s lucky her intention was to help. That’s how restimulative it can be. But she handle it with a correction list and we were back to smooth sailing.

    It was the most case gain per hour for me so far.

  128. Concerned Citizen

    First, that is always my immediate response to things like this, where is the ref? But try asking the MAA at any org where is the ref that says you’re in a lower condition if you don’t attend a meeting or donate something.

    There has been a hidden data line in existence for years, at events, DM loves to talk about LRH advices in which this or that action are based but to my knowledge, not once have these advices been published. A great example is the GAT and all the advices he mentioned. Has anyone seen this published?

    I know people who worked in RTC who did not have access to these advices, or only to some. Possibly only he and RTRC staff had full access, who knows.

    There is also the problem that in piecing together the last years of LRH’s life, and considering that I know someone with personal knowledge that both Miscavige and Starkey can replicate LRH’s handwriting and signatures, and that Miscavige and Broeker held hostage and filtered the only flow of comm between LRH and the general public, it is very know which of these advices are really LRH and which are not.

    But LRH did have another parameter and that was the pilot tech. You pilot something and if it works, then it works.

  129. Chris Black

    Good points, Marty. Nothing I disagree with here. And no slavishihness expressed, or intended.

    Jim and I had a long telephone conversation earlier today. A lot of the conversation revolvedaround this post and correct tech application. We were rolling around, laffing our asses off, especially as Jim was on the can! But a couple of things stood out: one was that one is solely responsible for one’s own Bridge. Look at Jim now: he’s really doing it and has taken full responsibility for it. Me, I took responsibility for my Bridge (and consequently my case) early on in my journey TLT, in the 70s.

    From that point on, I made sure I (ul) got the data as LRH intended it and I’d scope it out until it made sense. Yes, some skepticism can be quite healthy. After all, Ron admonished us to look at the subject with a skeptical eye back on the Student Hat! But when one accepts full responsibility for his/her Bridge, the “robotic slavishness” falls away.

    The other point I found interesting was that at one point near the end of the conversation, we both spurted out at the same time that one has reached the EP of Scientology once one has fully duplicated the subject. It has ceasded to become “something over there” and has become you, or you it. YOU ARE Scientology. And that’s what Ron was making. That’s a free being – one with no lies left. Scientology is a study of the truth, and as Ron says, once all the lies have been stripped away (which is what auditing is doing, moving one up the Grades), then what one is left with is TRUTH. STATIC. OT. It all works out.

    Anyway, as I mentioned, addressing the drug case on an OT can be done – and is being done – using NOTs technique. A lot depends on the case, what to run on it. And as someone earlier so brightly put it, one audits (and C/Ses) the case in front of one, but always against standard C/S data as contained in the basic books and the C/S Series.

    One last thought: after Ron found out that it did indeed work, he then pushed home consistent and exact application. He knew the results would always be there if it was exactly applied.


  130. John,

    My God! Thanks for that data.

  131. You doing something for the PC in front you.

    Basic auditing series right? Logan?

  132. H,
    I’ve been meaning to make a comment about the mistaken and false data that D. Mayo created, invented, originated and whatever one wants to call it, New Era Dianetics for OTs.

    Any person who studies the genus of this subject, which begins with the Orginal Thesis, and has enough sense to study and understand physics, philosophy, basic math, religion, psychology, psychiatry and the rest, will, with a conscientious study of Dianetics and Scientology up through to the Creation of Human Ability realize that L. Ron Hubbard is fully responsible for the breakthroughs and body of materials that led to NOTs. PERIOD.

    Other than that, Ken Urquardt convincingly pointed out to me that D. Mayo was and possibly still is, an auditor and as such deserves the highest respect one can give for the guts and effort and action of really, truly working to help others with that auditing. I am in awe of auditors, whoever they are. In complete awe.

  133. War and Peace

    A cleared cannibal is a cleared cannibal (LRH)

  134. Theo,
    It ain’t just Texas, though Texas is cooking.

  135. Concerned Citizen

    Since an SP can not and does not have case gainf from any auditing other than a specific problems process found in grade 1, I don’t think his case level is anything, regardless of what he might have attested to.

  136. John Eastment caved in to DM. Here’s a bulletin covering it, an excerpt anyway.
    “It was discovered in the Sea Organisation that proven high calibre good standard Class VIII auditors suddenly without any apparent reason ceased to be able to audit well, made gross goofs and backed off from auditing completely.

    “Its source was traced back to INVALIDATION. ”

  137. Thank you to everyone who accepted LRH’s invitation to be more than a robot.

    Auditors RULE!

    🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂

  138. CD,
    One day, maybe, if you will but make the step, I will train you to within an inch of your life. You might be a ‘natural’ and I will revel in the wins of your preclears.

    Self Analysis, ‘Recall a time…’ Go on. DO IT!

  139. War and Peace

    John Eastment is off tech lines. He was a bus driver for a while, but since everyone is now incarcerated on INT BASE, there is no need for a driver for Happy Valley (property sold) and Hemet ~~ so I don’t know what his current post is.

    John has been pretty much given the DM atrocity treatment.

  140. Bobo,
    Get a hold of Chris Black. Between he and I, we’ll hook you and any others up. Class VIIIs, man, that’s the deal.

  141. Deirdre,
    Pursue your OT levels at this time.

  142. Titus Andronicus

    LRH, from time to time on lectures, would use ‘gorgeous’ when, more often than not, referring to some great process that works in a superlative fashion on the pc. So, I’m gonna use it, now.


    I can’t tell you how long it’s been since I’ve had that great just-out-of-session feel, but your writing about using NOTs tech on OT IV not blew me away, it rehabbed for me that feeling. It is a feeling that NOTs really gives.

    At this time, I can only dream that one day I can resume its solo version and have that feeling once again.

  143. Marty,
    Scientology IS knowing how to know. It is a means and not an end. How could it be? There is an infinity of creation from any being.

    If LRH did the job he set out to do, to provide a workable route to recovery of a being’s ability, and the body of knowledge to enable that being to make the most of experience, which he DID, then it is only good sense on my part to use that workable body of materials to help others achieve their very own personal rehabilitation of their very own abilities.

    My view on the Bridge and the route taped out is plain, I am a guide for others on that route, and the last thing I am is wishy-washy about that hat.

    There comes a point where any person who has put forth the effort and hard work and practice on this route, that they will have to ‘cut the cord’ and come to know, themselves and be able to know how to know. That is the whole aim of this exercise. One can’t very well always look to another for one’s own truth. THAT is what LRH wanted.

    Exigencies call for certain action. You have taken responsibility here today for action.

    I am, as your friend, compatriate, and a host of other parts of our relationship, here to smack you silly if that action goes to the point of mucking up a workable route. And that, with as much love as I have for any being.

    THAT is what I’ve promised LRH. That is what I’ve promised any being who reaches for Scientology.

  144. Pingback: Top Posts —

  145. Snowjob,

    Get used to it. Marty’s place is the Ideal Org of the southwest. Give us a fax number so he can fax his stats in by tomorrow at 2.

    Have fun getting solid auditing in the squirrel cage you call a church.

    Arbitraries were canceled, SW. How about finding out who authorized them in the first place? Let’s see, he is loud, dictatorial, abusive, but on the plus side, he is easy to predict, has a nice tan, and you can eat cheese off the top of his head.

    True Scientologists do not just listen. They also look. The independent field looked. That being said, do you think we are going to listen to you?

    I knew you would get that one right. Now, go to exam.

    Sovereign Scientologist

  146. Thank you Marty for posting this!

    I got many many people on the Bridge as a Power FSM for those years that I was still in C of S. All I saw, was that my selectees (those I truly cared about) spending thousands of dollars for their auditing but still were bugged and had to go back for more and more “auditing review”. Their case never was sorted out but instead they were buried in more and more debts.
    I was so disgusted with the whole situation. I wrote several reports but they all fell on deaf ears.

    Since you have been auditing my friends and selectees, I see the standard LRH tech applied to them and noticed how great they are finally doing and winning in life. You are giving me hope. I can not thank you enough for all you are doing.

    I am so proud to call you my true friend and love you from the bottom of my heart.

  147. Concerned Citizen

    Let’s just say some people spent up to 9 or 10 years (I think) not getting thourgh their 8 dynamic forms. That is what made the RPF the hell it is.

    Then there is the FPRD ellegibilty seck checks developed for each major step on the bridge, before and after plust lots of tailor mades in between.

    Then there is the “you are unders investigation, Carmel style FPRD seck cehcks, or Micheal’s obvious misapplication of it, not in session, deciding for the not PC what the evil purpose was and , well, you know how that one went down, it has been in use by untraied MAAs for a while.

  148. hello criss:
    looks like my wife & I picked a guy who knows what he is doing ?
    of cource it did NOT take this post of yours to find that out !!!

    our auditors and students love you – so does Hellen my wife who is running the show !
    (I take all the credit for finding you – OK a bit of it goes to Trey Lotz for letting me know you exist!

    anyhow – thanks Criss for all you are doing for our group —
    soon we will have more complitions on both side of the bridge than LA Day — don’t you think ?

    Love Helmut

  149. Hi John. Nice to see you here.

  150. Snowwhite: That’s Theta Universe! Marty is fixing a lot of damage from the so call “Church of Miscavology”. You are the ones, who produced squirelling tech. Maniac engrams are what DM produced with Red Fowler, Reed, and many other famous good people who received perverted tech, and thereby became criminal.

  151. Chris Black

    Hi Helmut!

    Thanks for the accolades. Tonight we will have two M1Word Clearing comps and shortly thereafter, two co-auditor comps on the M1WC course. As well, we have a Grade 00 pc completing and an Objectives completion tonight!

    The C/S trainee is now C/Sing and received his first pinsheet today! 🙂

    We revitalized an auditor who hadn’t audited in decades and she helped on completing the two M1WC auditors. She did fabulously, too!

    And just over the past few weeks we’ve seen at least 4 repair completions, I think three ARC S/W completions, and some others. This on top of my own pc completions!

    I gotta tell you, I’m in my element. And as ANYONE who really knows me will attest, when I’m in my element, watch out, because I’ve been known to shake the rafters of a few universes!

    Thanks for having me as your C/S and Senior C/S. You and Hellen and all your crew are a great team and it’s a pleasure to serve with you.

    ML & ARC,

  152. Chris Black

    Hi NOTSaware,

    Yeh, I always pushed it when anyone I knew, either a friend or public, was going off to do OT I-III, I’d always strongly suggest they do OT IV right then as well. Cleans any “remnants” up and leaves the being pretty spiffy clean.

    And yeh, when on NOTs, do it with that style. Otherwise it’s mixing RDs.


  153. Certainly, Marty, another reason you post Snowhite is for the LOLs!

  154. Chris Black


    I’d love to see (or hear of) someone who got tired of waiting and got up out of the chair at the examiner and walked off! LOL

    Having just finished a couple of recent graduates from the SO (i.e., left), they had some similar stories to tell. Made me shiver.

    I’ll say this. I don’t think Ron would recognize it as auditing now. It’s gone robotic. There’s a great tape, August 8, 1958, Auditor Interest. If Marty feels it’s ok, I’ll post an excerpt. But when you read/hear how Ron handles a session and then how it’s being done – just like Jim said about the tape on how to do TRs.

    It’s not Scientology there anymore.


  155. Chris Black


    You’re totally right. And this says it all: “I guess another LRH applicable datum would be to audit the PC in front of you”. Spot on point. Ron has something to say about that in the tape Auditor Interest (8 Aug 58):

    “If he can interest me with his origin, fine. If I can get the case advanced with it at the same time, wonderful. If he’s just burning auditing time and isn’t interesting me, I pull the basics out. I say, “What started you thinking about that?” He has to reach down to the bottom of the chain that he’s now dispersing from. He pulls that, tells you about it, you’ve got the origin and keep on going. But remember, it’s YOUR preclear. He has resigned himself to the fates, he stands naked in the winds of the universe, as far as you’re concerned. You want to find out something about the whole track? You’ve got a preclear right in front of you. Get the idea? It’s your preclear. You think he has the most peculiar computation you ever heard of, even at the expense of practically cracking the whole session up, find out about it. It’s your preclear. It’s about time you took ownership.” – LRH

  156. Hi Christie! Thank you! It was wonderful to meet you and share comm and life. I had admired your courage, the awesome job you did representing what Scientology is really about in the media, and I was happy to be able to thank you in person!

    Also, your personal integrity about the consequences leveraged against you by Corporate Scientology with disconnection from your mom was inspiring and moving to me.
    Christie, I was deeply moved by the unshakable compassion you hold for your Mom, by your understanding of how it isn’t really “her”, by your refusal to be pitted against her. Your calm wisdom and the steadfast loyalty to that sacred bond of Love you two share says it all.

    It will be a beautiful day when her tears of self awareness flow, and you hug each other. I know that will happen because truth is the only thing that doesn’t die.

    Just great to meet you!

  157. Hi Just Me. It’s great loving Life with you. Thank you.

  158. Hello, Tara. I’ve been reading and appreciating your posts. Thank you for the acknowledgment.

  159. Okay, I see. Thank you for taking a moment to address my question…and for making it safe to ask questions.

  160. Concerned Citizen

    When I say Carmel-style sec- checking, I mean what RTC ANZO (Vicky Hanna, etc,) did to her, not what she delivers.
    See under authors, select Carmel, read Witch Burning in Scientology

    When I say Michael, I meant Michael Doven’s attempted coffee shop auditing.

    As MAAs, we got ordered to study the HCOB on FPRD procedure and write an essay on how this data applied to our post, specifically in conducting investigations or in situations where suppression needed to be addressed. That was the exact order, and that is what Michael Doven was trying to apply!!!!!

    The FPRD materials presently include a modification were blowing by inspection is not accepted by the auditor. The previous materials did accept blowing by inspection, so a lot of cases are stalled on FPRD running un-charge items. (no longer charged) and overrunning.

  161. Oh, Mosey, beautiful Mosey. How can one not shine around you!? You are a friend to goodness through and through, such a peaceful, strength. Thank you for sharing others’ joy as dearly as your own. ☼ ❤

  162. Karen , thank you dearly my voluminously theta Tech & Qual crackerjack friend. Major surge in people calling me out of the blue to itsa and confide — as well as individuals in public doing so. It’s rather astonishing and sacred sometimes, looking into a crowd on the street and see no strangers.

  163. Crashing Upwards, I’m actually toning it down a lot 🙂 😉 LOL Thank you for your happiness. ☼ Here’s to the Wooooo Hooo WøøT heard … where WE begin, and the universe ends off.

  164. So well stated, Jim. Thank you fro putting that truth into words so well.

    There comes a point where any person who has put forth the effort and hard work and practice on this route, that they will have to ‘cut the cord’ and come to know, themselves and be able to know how to know.

  165. Hi Steve,

    I know several Steves but my guess is you are the one that is a Colts fan. Cheers my man. Check out my forum and don’t be a stranger.

  166. Snowwhite, the creepiest thing about your comm is that it is calculated to hurt and harm.

    Nuff said.

    Look into that and handle it. It belongs in an ethics cycle or an auditing room, nowhere else.

  167. Sarge! Thank you, that was wonderful! LOVE ∞

  168. Concerned Citizen

    Mr Sting,

    I was going to pass this up, but frankly I can’t.
    I have noticed a tendency by non scientologist to try to “prove it wrong” by pointing out how some OT did or said something or failed to do something that does not fit their concept of OT.
    If you have knowledge of any reference where LRH said OTs were infallible, never would make a mistake, could , never be fooled, or where immune to suppression, I’d say your viewpoint as expressed in your comment would have total validity, but since that reference does not exist, let’s look at it from our perspective.
    An OT is in part exactly as Laurie Hamilton described it, someone more able, more at cause and more resilient. Does that mean the person does not experience life and it’s vicissitudes just like anyone else? No, but it does mean that they have a lot less baggage to hold them back, emotionally and otherwise, than non OTs.
    I am as angry at the people fawning to Dm as anyone else here, but let me tell you, until you have been in their shoes, you just cannot hope to judge them accurately. Few people would still function under similar conditions one year in, the mystery is not why they are there and do what they do, and the mystery is that they are not stark staring mad. The thing is, life is life, some of this people did not actually get the real OT levels, otheMr Sting,

    I was going to pass this up, but frankly I can’t.
    I have noticed a tendency by non scientologist to try to “prove it wrong” by pointing out how some OT did or said something or failed to do something that does not fit their concept of OT.
    If you have knowledge of any reference where LRH said OTs were infallible, never would make a mistake, could , never be fooled, or where immune to suppression, I’d say your viewpoint as expressed in your comment would have total validity, but since that reference does not exist, let’s look at it from our perspective.
    An OT is in part exactly as Laurie Hamilton described it, someone more able, more at cause and more resilient. Does that mean the person does not experience life and it’s vicissitudes just like anyone else? No, but it does mean that they have a lot less baggage to hold them back, emotionally and otherwise, than non OTs. May be they trip up less, and when they do trip up, they don’t roll over and succumb, they find a way to get out of the whole they got into and walk till they get where they were going.
    I am as angry at the people following DM slavishly as anyone else here, but let me tell you, until you have been in their shoes, you just cannot hope to judge them accurately. Few people would still function under similar conditions one year in.
    The mystery is not why they are there and do what they do, and the mystery is that they are not stark staring mad. The thing is, life is life, some of this people did not actually get the real OT levels but were told they did or pretended to, but many others did. But since they failed to recognize the SP and suppression and deal with it they became effect of it. And LRH never said being OT was a guarantee that one would never be effect of suppression again, or that one would not ever be fooled.
    The only guarantee comes with one’s ability to maintain personal integrity, as stated by LRH and to grasp the subject to the best of one’s ability. Auditing eliminates thought blocks in form of emotional charge, the rest is up to the individual and his understanding of the mechanics of life.
    DM might have fooled a lot of people into thinking his training and case level is this or that, but I think he wrestled them to the ground not because of that, but because when this people decided Scientology was the stable datum and stop inspecting, he high-jacked the founder’s single communication line to all Scientologist and filtered it, creating a hidden data line (a line of data that is not open to all, but just him)
    But there are some true OTs that though at first may be were fooled, broke through and with amazing resilience overcame that suppression, saw him for exactly what he was and are now here dealing with it in the best smartest manner possible. These are the creators and participants of this family of sites. More people will come to as well. After what these people have been through, NOW THAT IS OT.

  169. Concerned Citizen

    Since we are on the subject Jim, I’d like to ask you what reference would you have me study in regards to an instant FN being taken up as a read in FPRD.

    I know it is listed as a read in the definitions, and it says that it means charge has momentarily blown, but “can key in again” and so it is taken up (as per the new procedure)
    I disagree, since by the definition a key out is a key out and even if momentarily keyed out, is not a charged item you are taking up.

    Can you give me some reference to sort this (my) disagreement with? Thanks.

  170. martyrathbun09

    DM Revision.

  171. Joe Howard

    MOQ, there’s a typo in your quote of “major thought” above. As I recall, it is the word “thought” which should come before “being.” I don’t have copy of the book to hand, but check it out for me.

  172. Theo Sismanides

    Great Jim! ” Cut the cord”.

    May I even add that the deeper reason DM is there is a test of how we are going to undo the suppression. How free beings can put back Scientology and their bridge to total freedom.

  173. Joe Doakes

    Well, FWIW, I disagree 100%.

    I like Marty too but have we not learned anything with this current debacle? Why would you just “take someone’s word for it” when it comes to LRH tech? Isn’t that what we’ve been doing with DM for years? We’ve been told over and over at events that, “LRH advised…” or “According to LRH instructions…”

    This is no different. Marty Rathbun is NOT the second coming. Giving a blind allegence to him and his word is no different than giving it to the cult we’ve all left. Don’t you see that?

    I’m begining to believe more and more in the “addictive personality” talked about by psychs. The concept that some people NEED something to devote and give themselves to, totally. Relenquishing all responsibility with it.

    Marty is just a man. He can be wrong. He could be wrong about this. Even if it was an advice, great! But it wasn’t (to my knowledge) in an HCOB. The Class VIII materials cover the New OT IV DRD quite comprehensively. You don’t think Ron might have written something up about doing it with NOTs technology if he wanted it done that way?

    And the idea of “It’s not scary at all if it works and produces wins.” is about the squirreliest thing I’ve ever heard. Go read KSW 1 again. Remember that whole thing about how the students were in a state of “electrification”?

    Anyway, don’t be so quick to throw away everything and devote yourself 100% to some new mesiah. Marty’s a friend, sure. But he’s not the new LRH…

  174. Joe Doakes

    Don’t know if that’s true for me, but I can appreciate where you’re coming from.

    As an auditor and C/S I’ve never really had a standard that someone had to have wins of a particular kind for them to be “valid”.

    Different people react differently to different things. Someone that really need a DRD big time might have massive life changing wins. Another person may get gains, but not like the other person. Someone who was all sorts of messed up on communication might totally transform on Grade 0 while for another person it might be Grade IV.

    So to me I don’t know if it’s ever “settling” for something. It’s more been about just doing the process and not expecting anything other than an EP; large, small, medium, never mattered…

  175. Do you mean he lied about it ? Oh dear who would have thought.

  176. Joe,

    You are misduplicating both what I wrote and what most of us on this blog think. Neither I nor anyone else here has blind trust in Marty, nor does anyone consider him “the second coming.”

    One trusts another being because that being earns one’s trust. Marty has earned my trust. DM has done the exact opposite.

    If Marty says he saw a particular LRH advice, why would I distrust him on that point? Why would you?

    But even that is kind of beside the point. What matters in the end is the results obtained, and nothing else, regardless of anything in KSW 1. Personally, I wouldn’t care if Marty had improved upon OT IV all by himself. The ultimate test is, “did he get better results doing it the new way?” If he did, then personally I don’t care how he came up with the improvment.

    That was not the case here, as Marty was utilizing an LRH advice. But I really don’t care about that. I care about his pre-OT’s wins. I care about the enhanced wins other pre-OTs may get from this new way of delivering OT IV. Nothing else really matters.

    Scientology can’t harm anyone unless it’s delivered with the intention to harm, as in DM’s Reverse Scientology. The worst that can happen if auditing is done with good intentions is that a mistake is made and the procedure has to be done again. It’s not so damned serious.

    So go ahead and disagree 100%. I think you’re still indoctrinated in the C of M’s totalitarian spirit. I hope you re-evaluate your position.

  177. Beautiful quote!

  178. Jim,

    I think CD was merely noting that, regardless of what auditing DM has had, he does not meeet any stated descriptions given anywhere by LRH on the states of Clear and OT. Therefore, it was quite okay with me. 🙂

  179. God damn it !
    Tku Lookingin .
    I suspected that since 30 years, but never got any help on it. It was looked for endless reasons why I can’t move up the bridge.
    Currently my body is schacking and charge blowing. My god, why didn’t anybody tell me the truth.
    It is so simple !
    Thanks a lot !
    Who wants to put me trough it ?

    Have a good day


  180. Snowhite
    I am ROFL

  181. Snow Job,

    Actually, Marty can do exactly what he wants. This is the United States of America, dearie. We have freedom of speech and freedom of action here — that is, everywhere but in DM’s squirrel church!

    Other than that, thanks for the entertainment.

  182. I always knew when I was F/Ning. To handle the problem I always recalled my biggest win I had on my Ot-Levels AT ANY EXAM to be sure to get my FN indicated. Sitting down by the examiner nowadays his staring alone kills your fn.
    My daughters that started some years ago learned very fast to just think about something beautiful. Each on their own.

  183. CD and Jim,

    I’m a little late on this thread here, but I would bet that CD *is* a natural. In the first place, I think he’s naturally sane. In the second place, he’s naturally compassionate. Both tend to make a person a damned good auditor. 🙂

  184. So you`re taking now comissions from Rathbun! Is it 10% or more?

  185. Joe Doakes says that Marty is not the new LRH, a new messiah or the second coming. His use of those terms may have been purely euphemistic, but they suggest that at least some aspects of LRH were infallible and that the body of work he left behind was perfect.

    Who was LRH, and what did he achieve? IMO, he was a man who had access to some very old ideas and developed some new, quite unusual ideas. He had many friends who shared his dreams. I’ve never considered him to be a god of any kind. Over many years, he and his friends taped and re-taped more than a few times a path to higher states of spiritual awareness and ability. Therefore, and speaking purely theoretically, I can readily imagine that more Scientology refinements and discoveries are still possible.

    Every enduring body of work ever developed—religious writings, political manifestos, scientific knowledge—is subjected to interpretation and re-interpretation as new observations are made. Their basic dogmas may remain inviolable, but sometimes more workable interpretations evolve. For example, we no longer stone people for committing adultery; women now enjoy the suffrage rights once granted only to men; we now appreciate that the earth revolves around the sun.

    This thread is already long and aging, so my comment will not be seen by many. However, I think it would be good if we could continue to discuss these issues of infallibility and perfection openly.

    For me, Scientology is knowing how to know. Therefore, to know, I must be willing to observe.

    Thank you, Marty, for this blog and for the conversations we have here.

    Just Me

  186. Chris Black

    Hey buddy,

    Thanks. That’s what I figured was being talkied asbout, just wanted to make sure.

    IMO, the basic error was including the OT DRD as New OT IV on the Bridge in the first place. As with many “zones” on the Bridge, they all have their items that need to be “in” before doing the level: i.e., Grades; NED; NOTs, etc. The OT III band could have been similar and then the OT DRD, as a handling/remedy (NOT an OT level on the Bridge itself) could have been addressed on the pre-OT, AS NEEDED (i.e., auditing and C/Sing the case in front of you), on OT III, using OT III tech, or after completing OT III if needed and if done immediately. Otherwise, when one was ready to move on after completing OT III, it could well have been addressed on the NOTs case, if it was warranted, using NOTs tech (which can and is being done, in the CoS for many years and also in the independent field). That way would work marvelously, follows LRH’s urge to “play the pianner” well enough to be fluid with the tech (Class VIII Tape 4), and doesn’t mix RDs.

    As someone nicely put it somewhere here, it would have worked “gorgeously”!


    P.S. Butt in anytime. Love to read your views.

    P.P.S. Have to get down to see you this year and we can go for a toot on our “rat” bikes around the area and grab a beer. Ciao.

  187. Joe,
    The full quote from HCOB 25 May 62, E-Meter Instant Reads, from which the EMD quote is taken is:
    “By “major thought” is meant the complete thought being expressed in words by the auditor. Reads which occur prior to the completion of the major thought are “prior reads”. Reads which occur later than its completion are “latent reads”.

    “By “minor thought” is meant subsidiary thoughts expressed by words within the major thought. They are caused by the reactivity of individual words within the full words. They are ignored.”

  188. Concerned Citizen (s),
    The reference is HCOB 20 Sept 78, reissued 9 Oct 78, (cancels 8 Apr 78 HCOB), An Instant F/N Is A Read.

    Study the whole thing. If you don’t have a copy, write to me.

    Here is a salient quote on the subject at hand, squirrel use of altered FPRD tech (and that redundancy is apropos to this suppressive bs):

    “To sort this out, you will have to understand the basic mechanics of key-out, keyin and erasure. It will then become clear why an F/N is a read and when it is taken up.

    “To confuse this could really mess up a pc. For example, on ruds, Prepcheck questions, protest, overrun, rehabs, to name a few, an instant F/N would not be taken up. The EP of charge keyed out has been attained.

    “But to ignore an instant F/N on Dianetic items and certain correction lists etc., will leave the pc with bypassed charge and major areas of case unhandled. The key is “Is a handling required on the item or is an F/N the legitimate EP?””

    Also note, HCOB 30 Nov 78 Confessional Procedure has the above issue as part of its references and under what reads are taken up in a Confessional, point #7 it states:
    “With good TR 1 give the person the first question, keeping an eye on the meter and noting any instant read, i.e. SF, F., LFBD. (Ref: HCOB 5 Aug 78, INSTANT READS.) A tick is always noted and in some cases becomes a wide read. (Ref: HCOB 28 Feb 71, C/S Series 24, IMPORTANT, METERING READING ITEMS.)…”

    There is NO mention of an Instant F/N taken up is there?

    On the FPRD issue that I used for years, it states:
    “(If this question [“Was there an evil purpose . . .”] does not read, this puts one back at Step A. The original question one started with [e.g., “Do you have an overt on cats?”] is rechecked as per standard Confessional procedure. Once that original question F/Ns on being checked, carry on with the next question listed on the False Purpose RD form.)” HCOB 9 Jun 84R, revised 3 May 85, FPRD Series 5R Auditing the False Purpose Rundown.

    If someone else has a valid reference that adds to or changes the above, then speak up. I don’t have one.

    If this doesn’t clear this up. Write to me.

  189. “Crashing Upwards, I’m actually toning it down a lot 🙂 ;)”

    Not only did this make me laugh, I’ve got this cocky ear to ear grin on my face knowing this is a huge understatement.

    Still swirling in your theta…:) 🙂

  190. Just because you are an asshole it doesn’t mean that everybody else is like you! You are unique, thank God for that!

  191. Chris,

    Thank you for that fantastic reference.

    Although I have little in the way of auditor training, I hve always enjoyed delivering Book 1 for this exact reason.

    The fact that there is no meter there and you have to rely completely on obnosis and the comm formula makes it even better.

    It’s RAW and exciting…you (both auditor and PC) instantly get an understanding of the reactive mind and how it impinges on life and can see the power of ones postulates.

    I have repeatedly observed life changing wins on PCs with less than an intensive of Book 1 and know that even with the most basic auditing procedures, life can be improved greatly.

  192. Wonderful to hear the specific actions some of the independents are producing and gaining the knowledge that it is safe once again to disseminate Scientology.

    Very Well Done to you all!

  193. OMG on Eastment. After reading this, dm’s game in life is dismantling people and urging others to do the same. I saw Eastment once, well before the dm regime and on stage he said he had made it as a new public to Class 8 in a very short time by one principle alone. Before he would accept anything as true, he would apply it to see that it worked that way. Simple KSW. Sorry to see he buckled in to dm, for all his dynamics. Bus driver- how f’ing psychotic.

  194. Chris, great tape ref. Certainly takes roteness out of the picture of application. What part of the country ( I assume USA) are you located?

  195. The more you talk Snowhite, the more I am strenghtened in my believe that the Church has to be taken out of the equasion. It is really for your own good/sanity.

  196. John N. that writeup has some great points in it I’ve never known about, thanks.

  197. Titus Andronicus

    I happen to subscribed to the notion that the hallmark of a good blogspot is that trolls, posers and flamers post comments thereon. To me, it’s part and parcel of the ‘Tao of Blog’. So rock on, Snowwhite. You’re part of the food chain.

  198. martyrathbun09

    God you guys, it is not that complicated.

  199. Thanks for the complimet tone 41 and thanks for the the offer Jim.

    The future is what you make it.

  200. Snowhite’s comment is just another indication that all that the churchies can think about is money.
    All is money-motivated these days.

    Another interesting point I’ve notices is that all that Snowhite is able to write is short, snide remarks.
    No analytical thought involved.
    Snowhite lack the ability to come up with a good argument that can be discussed analytically.
    It’s always “attack” and “smear the opponent”.
    classic OSA style.

  201. “false data” Please elaborate on that Jim.

  202. CD,
    False as in g’way, not so, ain’t true, deen’t happen pendejo, are you kidding, wtf, nah, oh yea right and I invented left, roit, get the fuck outta heah.

    How’s that for elaborate?

  203. CD,
    Unless it’s just a redo of the past. That’s why auditing and training. Otherwise…

  204. Because,
    Putting a guy into a prenatal, in front of you, is creating an effect. Auditing is to release a being from the chains that bind him and recover for him his ability to know.

    If that’s what you mean by doing something for the pc then yes, that is very basic.

  205. $nowwhite, There’s more to life than money. Are you there?

  206. Concerned Citizen

    Dear Jim,

    Thank you, this actually does clarify it for me.
    The new issue, if I remember correclty does list Instant FN.

  207. Marty,

    You are so right for being true to what you see work in pc’s in practice! That is the ultimate test and the only test, in my opinion!

    And you are also so right for sharing it with the Independent field.

    And the tech people who are skeptical are also entirely right for being skeptical, and for implementing your observstions only cautiously and only to the extent they see them work in practice.

    This is really a big win for the beauty and sanity of open, uptone, 2WC. With enough 2WC, the very best of the tech will be exposed to view and everyone will win in the end.

    Thanks, Marty, for providing a sane, uptone comm line. That is so necessary for everyone to eventually make it to OT.

    I’m extremely late on this post as I’m behind in reading the wonderful posts this and other articles has inspired. But I just had to add my 2cents, as I wouldn’t want the skeptical posts to make you think you should change anything at all about you are comminicating. An open affluence of communication is the key to OT for all of us, and you are doing that, so please continue!

  208. Beautiful, Jim. Yes, Scn is “knowing how to know,” not slavish following of the written word. It’s good to note the sequence of importances.

    The sanity of this entire discrussion is such a key out!

  209. Ahhhh, Veritas, what a beautiful observation!

  210. On KSW1:

    Two points stick out as I read it. Both possibly applicable in different directions.

    “On the other hand there have been thousands and thousands of suggestions
    and writings which, if accepted and acted upon, would have resulted in the
    complete destruction of all our work as well as the sanity of pcs. So I know
    what a group of people will do and how insane they will go in accepting
    unworkable “technology”. By actual record the percentages are about twenty to
    100,000 that a group of human beings will dream up bad technology to destroy
    good technology. ”

    Also the six points:

    “Getting the correct technology applied consists of:

    One: Having the correct technology.

    Two: Knowing the technology.

    Three: Knowing it is correct.

    Four: Teaching correctly the correct technology.

    Five: Applying the technology.

    Six: Seeing that the technology is correctly applied.”

    I guess it depends on if you think the six points are “in” at the chuch. If one thinks they arent then they would be more open to trying to get them in.

    It’s a tricky area.

  211. Just Me,

    I saw what you wrote, old though this thread is. And I agree with what you said here.

    LRH was a great man, he was not god.

    Scn is knowing how to know — yes! In my opinion, there’s no such thing as a body of work that can be fossilized and never improved, even Scn.

    And, by its very nature, anything that can be considered a “dogma” is already fossilized and needs inspection.

    I love these discussions, and I agree that we should continue to have them. It’s essential to moving on up a little higher. 🙂

  212. Jim Nunez. I feel like I’m in a weird dream or something. I was at Flag after the things you talked about in that link. The EM reads film, FN’s, the new drills, Golden age of Tech, Pro TR’s, dating drills. Holy shit. I think all that stuff is why I’m not auditing now. I knew the film was messed up. I;ve never heard another person even acknowledge it. I know it caused routine and severe confusion. I can confirm the effects I experienced and my obsevations fit right in with your story. Again, holy shit.

  213. I was reviewing the references today and came across this in HCOB Ned for OTs Series 2:

    “After OT III they can be handled on NED for OTs.”


  214. DFB, I got it and thanks.

  215. martyrathbun09

    Thanks John.

  216. Chris Black

    You’re right, because.

    There are many references, especially on tape – even Basic Auditing Series 2 is from a tape – but you’re correct that it is covered in Basic Auditing Series. From BAS 2:

    “Processing goes in two stages.

    1. To get into communication with that which you are trying to process.

    2. Do something for him.

    There is many a pc who will go around raving about his auditor, whose auditor has not done anything for the pc. All that has happened is that a tremendous communication line has been established with the pc and this is so novel and so strange to the pc that he then considers that something miraculous has occurred.

    Something miraculous has occurred but in this particular instance the auditor has totally neglected why he formed that communication line in the first place. He formed it in the first place to do something for the pc.

    He very often mistakes the fact that he has formed a communication line, and the reaction on the pc for his having formed one, with having done something for the pc.

    There are two stages.

    1. Form a communication line.

    2. Do something for the pc.

    Those are the two distinct stages. It is something like (1) Walking up to the bus, and (2) Driving off. If you don’t drive off you never go anyplace.” – LRH

  217. Joe Doakes

    Unfortunately a blog layout is the the easiest way to follow a line of though, as quoting gets lost — replies to a post at the top don’t get seen at the bottom, etc.

    I have no delusion that LRH was a mesiah or anything like that. And like I said, I like Marty and would be happy to be audited by him. My reply was more about the broader picture, so don’t get tied up into semantics.

    “Wins” alone is not the benchmark for getting out of the trap(s). We could get wins on people by doing all sorts of things. Heck, the current New OT VII lineup has people getting big wins, but I’d hardly call it standard. People have wins on course with the GAT but I don’t believe for a minute it’s the way to train students. PCs can get big wins on quickie grades even.

    Instead of thinking of me as hater or adherent to the DM school of thought, go the other way with your evaluation. I’m way more on the jaded side of thinking. Like many of you I’ve been on staff for many years, I’ve been trained pre-GAT and post-GAT, I’ve been through the wringer of IAS reges, worked with OSA, dealt with PIs, CCHR, gotten to be involved with tech films, worked on pilots, been video’d, abused, etc.

    Maybe Marty has it down perfectly (or at least a good rendition), maybe The Pilot had it all figured out. I’m up for looking, that’s for sure. Because I don’t see the current CoS making the OTs that were being made back in the day. And I think that’s what we’re all ultimately after, right?

    So when faced with the prospect of “getting wins” or “going free” I don’t see them as being identities. Wins = Wins. But at least be open enough to realize that doesn’t necessarily make it right.

    Anyway, I have great respect for Marty. I know John from years ago (although he probably doesn’t know/remember me) and respect him as well. Many of the people on this board know me, so don’t get the idea I’m trying to bad mouth anyone.

    But remember how trusting we all were for all these years, how many abuses were committed and justified by those witnessing them. I mean why would someone lie about an advice, right?

  218. John Nunez,
    Thank you for the NOTs Series ref on this area. Perfect. This is a good team here.

  219. Karen ~ I LOVED auditing Book One for those very reasons too! =o)

  220. Prior I had an 80 hour advance pgm (rediculous). I realized I was not Clear and was shunned at the local org. I was restudying the Dn basics. Not to interested in Scn religion. Where can i do Dianetics off church lines.

Leave a Reply

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

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

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s