I just wanted to make sure that we started this congress off with a bang. How are you?

Audience voices: All right.

Male voice: We got a bang out of that, Ron. Good. Thank you.

How are you doing this 4th of July?

Audience voices: Wonderful!

Well you look good. You look good.

Male voice: So do you.

Thank you.

Audience voices: Thank you.

We don't have a program for this congress but Steve's had to print something up.

But as a matter of sober fact we are actually celebrating something. We are not celebrating just the independence of this great and glorious nation. Boy; I bet that has been used eighteen hundred - or will be in the course of the day - „For which our forefathers fought, shed their blood in the cause of liberty.“

Well, we're celebrating something else. Do you happen to know that the birthday of the Washington organization is July 4th. It was organized, formed, chartered and incorporated on July 4, 1955, and is today two years old. Thank you.

It is a fairly brawny youngster. I often say it's the first organization we have had. I know this because I can loaf. I do nothing these days, nothing. I just loaf; nothing to it.

The incorporation papers of the Founding Church of Washington, DC, as well as the transfer and reestablishment papers of the HASI in the East, actually were signed on the 4th of July 1955, and it meant a tremendous independence for us. It was the first independent, non-downtrodden organization which Dianetics and Scientology ever had. It owed no money, no favors, no hat tips to anybody.

And since that time we've really been sailing. What we put in now goes in in concrete and basalt, particularly the preclears. We've had a wonderful time here in Washington. Some of us complain that it's hot, but very few of us complain that it's radioactively hot.

An earlier organization existing in Phoenix, Arizona was in an area which is very close to the test sites. And between the bombs that were being thrown at us by the US government, radioactive bombs, and the bombs which wore being pitched us by the APA squared - they are all squares - and the AMA and so forth, the area became radioactively hot. So we decided to move back to where law and order would have to prevail or there wouldn't have to be any nation here at all, you see. So we moved back into an area where all of the federal judges are directly under the surveillance of their superiors and have to get too high a price for their services to make it worth anybody's while.

In these two years in Washington, DC, we have gone from one small building down on R Street to five buildings at the moment. That's an awful lot of buildings, it's an awful lot of space. But the amount of traffic being handled at this moment by the Washington organization is greater than - somebody who goes around and asks what happened to all the people in 1950 - our volume of traffic today is greater than it was at any time at Elizabeth, New Jersey in 1950.

This is very significant because it tells us that there are more people sincerely - not passing or faddishly - more people sincerely interested in Scientology today than there were in Dianetics.

Now we ask this question, we ask this question when it comes to the dissemination, the spread, the number of peoples interested in this subject of Scientology: How many people throughout the world have heard of it? How many people throughout the world are using it?

And here is a great oddity. The Central Organization never contacts more than about six percent of those people. If you ask any field auditor why, he'll say, „Well, they'd have them come in here for processing, and I wouldn't get the case. I'd lose all my preclears!“

But that isn't really the truth of the matter. The truth of the matter is that this subject is progressing beyond the various frontiers that we ourselves touch.

I'll give you an idea. Do you want to know how this all started? How these organizations started? What this was all about? I think it is a fitting time and moment for me to tell you.

Back in 1947 I wrote a little book to explain to some of my friends exactly what the work was on which I had been working and in which I was interested. That little book appears today under the title of The Original Thesis.

Now that original thesis was never published in book form until about 1951. But the original thesis was something which I handed out copies of in a hectographed, mimeographed way to people who were cursorily interested who wanted to know what I had been doing. And they made mimeographed copies of it - it's a very short book - and hectographed copies of it, and mimeographed and hectographed copies of it were given to their friends. And one or two of their friends made mimeographed and hectographed copies of it, and not three months ago I heard from somebody in a far part of the world who was asking me if any more had been done.

Now Book One, what we call Book One is not Book One. That is Book One, that original thesis. It is very amusing that this Book One, so-called, was also written because I was tired of explaining to people what they couldn't understand in The Original Thesis. So, I wrote that rather under pressure, and a psychiatric textbook house published it and it became a bestseller, and that was almost - that almost did us in. We were doing wonderfully up to that time, you see.

And then the public got interested, and Lord knows what we. mean by this term „the public“ unless it is some newspapermen who can't duplicate.

And Time magazine, without ever sending at any time - and nowhere in my career have I ever talked to one - without ever sending a reporter to interview me or anybody of the organization, managed to write in that year as many columns on my personal life and Dianetics as were devoted in that year to the President of the United States. This was intensely insincere interest. Do you understand that? I mean, it never went forward; it never did anything. It made a tremendous commotion, and it certainly almost did us in. An organization was formed at that time of a number of people and as long as I could keep my personality in high gear why, I could dominate it, but organizationally it was not under my control. And organizationally it branched out in various directions, and these people did a good job. But because there was too much traffic, because it was too hard to handle, because there wasn't enough known, because there weren't enough trained auditors and so on. it just overworked everybody. And it's taken us about six years to get over this tremendous popularity of Dianetics.

And I can announce to you today that we have recovered from it.

Now, there are people here at this moment who are here because they picked up a copy of Book One out of the bookstores way back when and wanted to know more about it. I think a copy of The Original Thesis would have gotten into their hands just as easily. I think you'd be here regardless of 1950.

Now, what's amazing is that we never listened to any advice on the subject of „We must stop research. We must halt right here because this is a good thing.“ We all know it's a good thing but in a different connotation.

We have never permitted the subject to be totally, you might say, pegged at one level where people could say, „Well, we will profit by this for our own individual purposes, and the devil with the rest of mankind.“

We've continued its advance. I have called myself a liar more times than I would care to count just because I was doing an honest piece of reporting on research. In the early days I could ... I waxed more enthusiastic at times than later. I would say, „This is it! This is it!“ It was! But what do you mean by it?

Well, it's very simple what you mean by it; very, very simple. It was simply a further advance on our track, And therefore I could rather startle you today by telling you „This is it.“ But that is just what I am here to tell you at this congress: „This is it.“

Well, the past seven years have been interesting - mild understatement. Have been interesting. The past seven years we have been quite active.

And every once in a while an auditor says to me, „Well, why don't we get out? You know, why aren't we being heard! Why haven't we already taken the fort? I just keep talking to people and talking to people and talking and I never hear any of it coming back! Can't you hire somebody to listen to us?“

I'll tell you something very remarkable: They are being heard. You simply have underestimated how many two and a half billion people are. It's a lot of people, a lot of people.

The most amazing things occur. We get all sorts of feedbacks. Some fellow, by the way, who had gotten Book One, was a Book Auditor, had come in for a little briefing - he never did get trained in the Foundation - went back to some unlikely place in Texas and has been practicing ever since without any further correspondence with a Central Organization. He's just never breathed, he's just been getting results, and it's just fine. He didn't even ask me if there had been any further results! He didn't ask me if I'd made any advances in technique and theory! How do you like that? Was I insulted!

You know, good roads and good weather, „This is a great subject I certainly do get nice results. Been keeping a nice practice going. Everything's fine. Got all my friends patched up. Even - thing's going along fine.“

What was he doing? The somatic strip... That was all he was doing. He was running preclears up and down the time track running off engrams. It was quite remarkable.

And I had to wind up and say, „You know, you know there's been some more material on this.“

„Oh,“ he says, „there has? By the way, I want to tell you about an interesting preclear I had back in...“

I said, „We know what this machinery is all about now. We know about things like overt actmotivator sequences.“ That was in his future.

And he says, „Well, why do you want to know any more?“

That was an awful state of affairs, wasn't it? And do you know that to a marked degree we have lost a great many Dianetic Auditors and a great deal of the Dianetic public because it's too good. It works too well. You understand that? This wouldn't really be the way it was, you see, or the way you would think of it.

You'd think, „Well, a bunch of failed cases and so forth, and failed cases would cut us down on the line, and people would be unhappy about it; they found out it didn't work this way or that and therefore they wouldn't have any more contact with us.“ Well, that isn't the way it's working.

People come into one of your Group Processing sessions and they go wong-wong, and three feet back of their head or something, and they find a havingness, and they can work better now, and they are not having any more trouble with the wife or something of the sort, and they go on living their life happily and that's that. And you don't ever hear of them again, simply because they don't come near you.

But they tell people. Every once in a while we run into somebody, he shows up at the front door and says, „Well, here I am.“ We say, „All right, there you are.“

He says, „Well, I'm supposed to have some processing - whatever that is.“

We say, „Well, all right. Okay. Go over and see the Registrar.“

He goes over to see the Registrar. We tell him this fantastic figure for a couple of hours, you know. He pays it. Goes up to the auditing room, sits down in front of a staff auditor, runs an intensive.

Ran into one of these fellows the other day. I couldn't understand exactly what it was all about because he knew absolutely nothing about technology, theory, he knew nothing about nomenclature. An auditor had to sit him down and say; „You are now a preclear.“ And he says, „A what?“

No. Friend of his saw that he wasn't doing too well, says, „You have to go down to Washington, an organization down in Washington the name of Scientology. Scientology. This is the way you spell it; difficult word, doesn't sell worth a nickel. And here is the address of the organization. You go down there and get yourself fixed up. Now, you are supposed to go down there.“ And they just... They've seen something happen to this friend of theirs and he seems to be living a better life and so they have some respect for the word, and they come down and get some processing. I mean, we've had that happen lately - more often than not, You see that?

We are not just falling back on ourselves and taking in our own washing. Two and a half billion people are a lot of people.

Somebody said one time that if Christ stood on the shores of the Sea of Galilee from the moment of his birth until now - although I imagine he would have had difficulty at his birth - pitching a dollar every minute into the sea, he would not, from that time to this, have yet expended one billion dollars - a magnitude of number. It's about 170 million people in the United States. How many people do you ordinarily talk to?

Not very many, but the aggregate number adds up to something respectable. It's probably gone up toward a million now, something like that, but not all these people can talk yet. So what we get is you talk to people a little bit, and then they whisper. Got that? And then we talk to these same people a little bit more and put them in better communication and they talk just a little louder, but the people they're talking to whisper. Got the idea? And we talk more and talk more. So, you're not making a clean new contact every time who is then totally set up and in beautiful condition and ready to operate simply because you've talked to him. See, you talk to him again.

Now, you multiply the number of times you've talked to 170 million people, the number of times you'd have to talk to each one of these 170 million even on an expanding geometric progression, you'll find out that you have to do a lot of talking, so let's get busy. It's quite remarkable. It's quite remarkable the number of people who have heard of this subject.

It's also remarkable the entire change that has taken place in medical circles with regard to Scientology in these past seven years.

A fellow walked in the other day up at a hospital, I think they were treating TB or something in this hospital, and he was doing all right, he was doing all right. He forgot to pull the minister's card on the fellow and straighten him up when he was... they threatened to eject him, but he was doing all right. He was helping these people, he was putting them back together again, and he was just working in this hospital, you know. He wasn't on staff or anything - he was just an auditor and he walked in and he kept working with these people and working with these people.

One day the front office of the hospital called him up and asked him what he was doing, what he was, wanted his credentials, wanted some conversation with him.

And he said, „I'm a Scientologist.“ And immediately „Oh.“ This guy was shattered. This medico director was just shattered at that moment.! Well, here's the oddity: this is a different story than 1950, 1954 even, or '55.

He says, „I think you people are a wonderful group. I think you are doing remarkable work. As far as I am concerned I would be happy to let you work in this hospital from here on out. But I have to think of my personal standing with the AMA. And I'm sorry that you can't work in the hospital.“

That is a different story. I see a couple down here - they were working in Phoenix in a hospital and all they did in those days was just simply kick them down the front steps. Now, they still kick them down the front steps but they apologize. In other words, we're getting... in other words we're getting there. You know, Independence Day is a great day. All sorts of heroic quotes come to mind, you know. John Paul Jones fighting the Bon Homme Richard against the Serapis „Surrender? Wo have not yet begun to fight.“ Well, I... you know, that sort of thing comes to mind. „Don't cheer, boys, the poor devils are dying.“ You know! that sort of thing. Independence Day.

But one of these quotes is terribly applicable. And that one is „We have not yet begun to fight.“ We don't intend to. That's how we lose everything.

I'll tell you more about this later but the surest way to lose havingness is fight it. The way you have havingness is own it.

But we were not in a position, actually, in past years, to throw out our chests very grandly because, bluntly, there were numbers of cases which numbers of auditors could not do anything much for, and we know that as a complete honesty. They were not in the majority but they were around.

We have done some remarkable things even with unconscious people. We have had unconscious people and we've fished them back, we've straightened them up, we've done remarkable things. But remember the invariability with which I was trying to come up in 1950 was not entirely there.

There were some cases that resisted the best efforts of auditors. That's terrifically honest. Now, that doesn't say that there weren't auditors around who could have cracked those cases. Some other auditor maybe or something of the sort. But it does say that it often didn't happen. Nothing happened, you see. All right. All right.

It was necessary to get the subject and the training of auditors up to a level where it consistently happened, where there weren't any failed cases, And after that I was willing to do the equivalent of beginning to fight, see, We actually are just now up to a level of very, very good security on training an auditor, and processes addressed properly to any case will resolve the case. Now we are at that point. We were at it verbally from me in 1950, but we're at it in actuality today.

It's quite remarkable. It's quite remarkable. There are people here who know something about this, and there are people here who think they do and really don't. Because between now and the slight backtrack of just a few months, the entire proving ground of what we call CCH, a new system of processes, and TRs met the test, took the fort, all straight.

In February, I could have said. „Well, we're pretty close to there. Must be.“ But it wasn't proven that we were.

Well, now what's happened since February is that we know pretty well that we are there. When you can take a day-old baby or an unconscious woman who has been lying in a state of coma for six months or a raving psycho and crack their cases rather easily without much stress, wouldn't you say we were there?

Audience voices: Yes.

Well, that's what we're doing. That's what we're doing; what I announce to you officially on this Independence Day of 1957.

There is a great deal to know about this thing called CCH. But there is an entirely different channel today to a state of Clear and control, or what ever else you want to have it, or Homo Novis, or anything else. There is an entirely different route than processing, and that route is training.

If you can live through training as a human being and emerge from training still a human being, I'll fire the Instructor.

This is a tremendous thing. We never expected this one to happen, that there would be a sudden appearance of an entirely new route over here that just bypassed „Look at that wall and fall through it“ and other processes. „Who wouldn't you mind scraping off that wall?“ That by the way, I threw in as a gag process, but it's a wonderful process. Let me see, how would that work? It wouldn't work. Well that's all right - run it on your psychiatric friends.

Here we have achieved something quite startling, quite unusual. We have achieved the technology and what we call the TRs which are the drills which means Training Drills - necessary to free up somebody and bring him into present time willy-nilly and let him operate totally in present time in life as well as just auditing.

And this was an amazing thing. But it isn't something that is done by an auditor. It is done by an auditor who is also an Instructor. It's a different approach. It's something new. Of course all the technologies of it emerged from the utter dismay I have experienced for years in trying to train auditors. No kidding.. I've done a pretty good job and so have they.

But here we have a brand new set of (quote) „processes“ (unquote). See, they're not processes at all; they're Training Drills. And they're addressed immediately and intimately to the individual. They're not addressed to a class of people who sit there and dope off through the lectures.

Training today has become something whereby we pick up somebody by the scruff of the neck and we put him in a chair and we say. „Do it.“

He says, „I can't.“

We say, „Do it.“

And he says, „You're trying to ruin me.“

And we say „That's right. You’ve got the point right there. That's correct.“

Now to show you the difference between processing - which is at an all-time high, and simple address to an individual is tremendously high - there isn't anything that is going to set processing aside, or the new techniques of processing. Nothing is going to set them aside.

But we have achieved this training route. And it's just like having been driving, you know, on a single-lane road, and all of a sudden you're on a two-pass highway. You know, it's a great deal of relief. We don't crack his case easily, we say he's - you know, he's one of these resistive cases, he's trained to be a tough case and so forth. We can always train him! It's quite remarkable.

It isn't that we use training processes when we can't crack the case. And it isn't that we audit them when we can't train them. They're totally independent of each other. They don't have to interchange at all.

We used to do this: We used to bring somebody into class and he wasn't doing too well, so we'd give him processing and bring him back into class and he would do better. That isn't what we do now. We just bear down with both thumbs.

This is quite amazing to have two routes. And we are so accustomed to having the routes of processing and for this to have the subdivisions of individual and group processing, that this new thing that has moved in since February looks like a strange beast.

We say, „What is this thing?“ Well, we say. “Well, it's the same as processing except we run the process of doingness on the fellow.“ Oh. no, that isn't it at all.

Let me tell you that if you were to read the Instructor's Code, and then read the Auditor's Code you would know the difference. I advise you to get one of those ACC Manuals, and read the Instructor's Code in it.

It says „Never invalidate the preclear“ in the Auditor's Code, doesn't it? In the Instructor's Code it says „Never fail to invalidate the student.“ See, they're just mirror images of each other, just opposites.

So if we can make auditors who can take care of such processes as are contained now in the lineup, and if we have processes which are good, why we've got it made across the boards, there's nothing to this. We've got both sides of it. We are always over this other stumbling block.

Well let me tell you how this adds up. If you had a technique which would crack up and end forever the case of a Homo sapiens, it would chew hell out of the auditor, wouldn’t it?

Let's look that over. If the technique had enough dynamite in it to blow up and explode and knock to pieces one of these carefully nurtured seventy-six-trillion-year-old cases and do that over a period of something under a couple of hundred hours - I say „something under a couple of hundred hours,“ I'm being terribly generous - then who is going to apply it? Are we going to import some robots from Mars? Look. if it is a human being sitting in this chair auditing that human being - boom! Fourth of July.

Let me tell you more distinctly what I'm talking about. The atom bomb, about which this congress is not and about which we couldn't care less ...

I loved the headline that appeared the other day. They were counting off a bomb which didn't go off. And the headlines in the papers here in Washington said, „Five- Four-Three- Two-One-Zero-Thffst.“ When an Atomic bomb is no more a weapon than some of these flintlocks they used to make two or three hundred years ago - they'd hang them together with baling wire, a piece of iron pipe - and it was far more dangerous to fire one than it was to stand in front of one.

What happens if anybody uses this A-bomb? Boom! Boom! No boom's anymore. We bomb Russia, Russia bombs us. Within twenty-four hours of Russia bombing us there would be no Russia, there would be no us. Is this a weapon? No, No more than the old flintlock pistol was a weapon. And I think the A-bomb ought to be classified with it. It's a complete bust. They don't know what to do with it. They're now having a disarmament conference trying to get rid of it gracefully. They talk just as though they had something.

Anybody could blow up Earth. Just jokingly, any OT could go up to one of the nearby planets, pick up a flying saucer, come down here and stick a few rays into the core of molten earth, and that would be the end of Earth, but you wouldn't call that a weapon. That's just jokingly. But it wouldn't really work, would it?

No, a weapon is something, according to nations, which must coerce obedience from some other nation or a „better attitude“ on their part toward the nation. That's a weapon. A weapon is supposed to accomplish something, not wipe out everything.

Well, these new techniques couldn't really be pushed too heavily into people's laps or released too far, because they weren't techniques if they were run by people who would have been annihilated by them.

We all know the phenomena of an auditor sitting there and getting into something with the preclear which is so restimulative he can't keep himself in present time, you know. He says, „Well, mock up your mother.“ He had a bad mother himself or something like that. „Mock up your mother again. Mock up your mother again. Mock up your mother again. Mock up your mother again.“

Well, by the time somebody runs some of these CCH processes perfectly - and they have to be run almost perfectly to produce much of a result - if he himself hasn't been up the training route he can't run up the CCH route. I mean that's it.

But we can put him up the training route, which leaves us in the interesting state of we don't have to have it work this way: I audit an auditor on CCH and that makes him clear enough to use CCH, so then he can audit somebody else on CCH, which makes that person clear enough. Get it? You know, if we could go theoretically on geometric progression of this character and so forth, who is going to audit me? You know, I'm in terrible condition. You've seer me staggering around for years. Hardly able to keep up. Hardly able to take it any more. Getting along in years. Have to use motorcycles to get around. Starting to read books instead of simply absorb their contents, Slipping. So, it wasn't really very feasible: it was much easier to invent TRs.

Now, the funny part of it is, that anybody can put somebody through those TRs. And somebody who has been put through the TRs can then use CCH processes. QED - nothing to it.

If you can't audit totally in present time the beefiest process there is, the roughest process there is, there is no sense in even starting it. Because you re going to get lost in the backtrack someplace - going to be way back there somewhere. And that phenomenon which some of us knew back in 1950 whereby the auditor would gradually fog out (we were running an engram that he should have had run - that's why he told us to run it) and gradually he's going thud! thud! His voice is getting weaker and weaker. We get up off the auditing couch, put the auditor on the auditing couch, and say, „We will now begin a session.“ There are actually people present who have done this.

Well, that’s no way to go about this business of clearing Earth. That's no way to go about it. We were actually falling over the fact that when we got very, very good processes, we would often fall back from them as too dangerous to touch. They were too restimulative to handle and instinctively we would turn away from them and have as little to do with them as possible. In this way a great many good processes were invented on the track which people didn't use very much.

And I'll let you in on a secret. There isn't a technique in CCH, really, which in some form or another hasn't been known for three or four years. They're all old processes. They're the best of the processes in all these years. But expertly administered they become very powerful processes, which tells you why nobody ever dared administer them with total expertness - he would have wiped himself out, too.

All right. Well, that's a very technical way to go about talking about things. I'm just discussing things with you here. I'm just telling you that something did happen between the last congress and this one, that a total new route of address to the problem of civilizing mankind - if that's the problem - a total new address to it has come up.

You could probably have all sorts of organizations by just teaching people to audit, and then they'd never audit at all, you see? You could take a large group of people and do this with them and you've got Group Processing, you've got this new weapon over here in the Training Drills, and we've got all of these new alignments here with processing and so on, and boy, if we were using arrows and these things were arrows, this is about the fullest quiver you ever wanted to have anything to do with. You could hardy pack this one around, be so full. All kinds of arrows. In other words, for a long, long time, with many vicissitudes, with good days and bad ones, with hard work and sometimes not any work at all, we have accumulated a technology all amongst ourselves which belongs to nobody but us, maybe. Belongs to him who would know. We have found how to administer it. And there isn't anywhere anybody who can say, „Well, we will use this now only for profit,“ or „we will no longer research along that line because it might invalidate us with the public.“ I never met the public, by the way. I only know people.

And here we are arrived in a very happy state of being in this year of l957 - in a state of owing no favors, being under no security with our information, being in a position where no security could be. placed upon it because the silliest thing in the world would be to place security on anything known in Scientology today, since it is known in almost any nation on Earth.

People ask me, „Why do you keep slugging away at that Dublin Office? Its bank account is only 59 pounds! It takes up more administration around here.“

And I say, „Well, make sure they don’t fall behind.“ Well. it's a whole experiment. It's a microcosm, you might say, that we're going on soberly along our way clearing the Irish nation. And we're doing it; we're succeeding, little by little by little. But Ireland has such good comm lines to anybody that's an enemy of England that anything known in Ireland, that it was known would invalidate putting it under security wraps anyplace else. It's known in Paris, known in Berlin, Egypt - all kinds of places around the world. The very funny part of it is, is most all the information which you have under your skull at this moment is also known anywhere any government would try to deny information to.

So anybody comes along and says, „You know! What's this do? This make pilots who could kill kill! kill! Ah, hah-hah-heh-heh-heh! Security! You mustn't breathe any more of this stuff. Shhhhh.“

We can say, „What's the matter with you, Joe? This can't be put under security. The law which you have just put under security as not to be released was known two years ago in Moscow's largest stronghold, Cairo. It's well known in Cairo. It was printed in German, well circulated into East Germany. To whom are you trying to deny this information - the Martians?“

Actually the international character of Scientology is simply my effort - sometimes exaggerated - to keep the communication lines open so wide that it drives everyone into apathy at the thought of shutting them off. They do go into apathy, too.

I said to some fellow one time - he said. „Wel1, it would be very easy to close down the Central Organization in the United States, and you could no longer get out your stuff.“

And I said, „It doesn't come out of the Central Organization, United States.“

He says, „It doesn't?“ I said, „No! It's ... all the Professional Auditor Bulletins are distributed from London, England.“

„Ohhh??“

It's a funny thing. It's a funny thing to be standing here talking to you about security. You say, „Well, Ron's really reaching for it now.“

Boy, there is only one thing that is not under security, only one thing now, today, really that is broadly spread about - that's your personal income. That's one thing the government doesn't want under security. But the more ... if governments of the world go mad enough to assume that weapons which are not weapons are weapons, if they go so mad as to believe that they can actually depend for their national security on such a thing as an atomic bomb, of course, the next biggest appropriation to the military would be the security.

And then that reverses. They finally find out that the atomic bomb is no longer a weapon, so they stop appropriating for it and they simply appropriate for the security agencies. After that all they have to do to govern is just be secure; be more secure and more secure. After that why they test everybody's breath to make sure no information is getting out when he exhales.

No, truly enough, in a world where science and scientific secrets are the stock in trade of the militarist, one has to be alert to the fact that developed scientific information such as that in Scientology continue to be free, continue to be available.

It's too large a temptation for somebody to say, „Oh. hey! we can button this up. We've got it made here. We've got it absolutely made. All we've got to do is take all this technology, brainwash everybody and put up thought police towers in all the towns and it's all set, we've got a government.“

No, they haven't got a government as long as there are textbooks out there showing how fast you can undo this same thing called brainwashing and thought police. It's discouraging, you know, to brainwash somebody and then have his friend walk into the nearest bookstore and buy a manual of how to unbrainwash. It would seem sort of pointless, wouldn't it?

So, as security measures increase and as security tightens across the world on scientific matters, it is of great interest to us that the information we have and which has been developed with your help, your finance, your. interest, across a period of seven years, is today free. That hasn't been just a little bit of doing.

You're probably not aware of the fact that before the incorporation papers of the HDRF were filed in 1950, the Office of Naval Intelligence right here in Washington, DC, threatened to call me to active duty to use what I knew about the mind. And after that I made sure that the channels were so wide that they were very uninviting.

Nobody wants something that isn't a secret. There is nothing quite as unwanted by a government as yesterday's secret known today. A very amusing story connected with that attempt to seize Dianetics, a very amusing story from my standpoint anyway. Months and months and months before I had decided that the Navy and I had come to a crossroads and I had requested permission from the secretary of the Navy to resign my commission - my commission had been hanging fire since the end of World War Il - and he had granted permission. Now, that's the lengthiest amount of time consumed, trying to get a letter into a government office and get an answer to it. See, that's pretty long.

And I already had that. So this fellow, this officer from the Office of Naval Research, came to see me right here in Washington and he wanted me to go on as a civilian employee in order to use what I knew of the mind to make men more suggestible.

And I smiled a feline smile. And I said, „No.“

And he smiled like something out of Faust, and he said to me, „Well, all you have to do is saw 'No' and I will call you back to active duty because you still are an officer of the United States Navy.“ And with that purr he exited.

So I dived into my briefcase and pulled forth the secretary's permission. I dashed down here and found out there was actually a naval command in this area - it's called the Potomac River Naval Command, I don't know what they run. Once I think they tried to run the battleship Missouri. But there it sat down there, and it had an admiral in charge of it and everything, and I found out that my papers were resident in two places. People thought I belonged in Washington, in Washington, and people in New York thought I belonged in New York, and I had two sets of papers. This admiral that had come to see me thought I was totally out of New York. So I went down here to the Washington Navy Yard, the Potomac River Naval Command, and I got my resignation accepted. And Thursday the admiral came back to see me, and he says, „Well?“ And I said, „Well?“ Fastest resignation on record. There wasn't anything he could do about it then. And I went back up to Elizabeth, New Jersey and the HDRF, the first research foundation, was formed, and we went happily on our way just throwing it all over the place.

The Bureau of Naval Personnel still has a form letter. If you want to know what it says, write them sometime and say, „Why don't you use Dianetics or Scientology? What do you know about these subjects?“

They send you back a form letter, and it's very polite, and it's personally written. It's always the same letter: „We are keeping full records on this and are learning more and more about it. We do not know whether or not it's applicable to our work at this time. Sincerely yours, Soand-So, Chief of Naval Personnel.“ But they've got it on file! And meanwhile we go on and use it.

In other words, here over a period of time, over a period of many year's working together, using our own finances, squaring things up, doing things ourselves in spite of anything that stood on the track, skipping the fact that we fell on our faces here and there organizationally, not paying any attention to the entheta and the upsets but going on doing our job developing Dianetics and Scientology, we have come to this day of July 4th, 1957 with, for my money, a very thoroughly developed subject which commands the field of human behavior and ability. And that subject and information is ours and it is free and it is not subject at any moment to any censure by anybody from anybody! And we can use it as we please. We have what we have fought for these seven years! And this too, I wish to tell you on this Independence Day of July 4th, 1957.

Thank you.

I'm very glad you're here and in the next hour we'll get the congress started. Goodbye now.