Links to information related to this article
Definitions for Scientology Lingo by ex-member Martin Hunt
About L Ron Hubbard's Death
Through the Door:
Movies that are helpfuf for understanding Scientology:
August 17, 2006
The following is a discussion started HERE on Operation Clambake forum, titled:
Hubbard's Use of Covert Hypnosis - Exposed
Pick up the cans please this is the session
This is how every "auditing" session starts
after a while scientologists become conditioned to enter a light trance state just upon the hearing of those words.
Full deep hypnosis, is sonambulant, the guy has eyes closed, and is deep in reverie watching soemthing in his subconscious, real or imaged...
Deep meditative trances are like this
Lighter hypnotic trances produce the expressionless scientology dead-pan, weird eyes gaze..
Light meditative trances are called 'daydreaming' , if you have ever been daydreaming only to have someone wake you up and bring your attention abruptly back to 'now' then you have been in at least a light trance. Hubbard, instead of giving one direct commands oftimes would ask repetative questions that lead the answerer to mock up, the intended hypnotic suggestions. The pomp, the setting, the ritual of the routing form, the arrangement of the two the chairs, the implied mysterious function of the E-meter, and all the fiddling with setting it up... all these things create an expectation of feeling better about something.
For those new to critical discussion of scientlogy, I would suggest you get aquainted with the Hubbard-the-hypnotist series of 5 articles, the latest one, LINK is perhaps the best introduction also, for scientologists and recovering scientologists. The First one LINK is likely better for those with no previous expereince with scientology's "auditing"
Once you have read those, or are already familiar with the material goto the 12 minute Audio lecture, it is in Windows media format, only 1.54 Megabytes, so you should be able to listen even on a dial up.
What I do is read 5 pages out of a book titled, "My Voice Will go With You"
Arnie Lerma doing Milton Erickson 1.54 Meg WMA listen HERE
And I would really like to discuss what those who are willing to invest 12 minutes learning about Milton Erickson's techniques think about this stuff
mr. bad quoted:
Here are my thoughts on this subject:
Reverie, which elron says is not hypnosis, but then goes on to say it is kind of like the inbetween place of conscious and subconscious where no hypnotic commands are to be given. In other words, he imediately contradicts himself.
Basically, elron wanted people to access the subconscious and remove portions of it.
Once pieces of the subconscious are remove a void is created. So, the questions is---What fills in the void?? The answer is elron's policies like KSW.
Elron was clever in that he knew a person didn't need to be fully in a hypnotic trance in order to be given "commands."
So, in $cientology, we see a further progression towards becoming a RONDROID. With auditing, subconscious is removed and replaced with elron's conscious or to be more specific--elron's policies.
And when you consider that elron was a heartless manipulative swindler who only cared about his drugs, his money, and the violence he could inflict on his enemies--you can see the path that all $cientologists are headed down.
It's an extremely dark place.
What can be done to safeguard against covert manipulations, and how does one resist covert, unethical forms of hypnosis? The literature suggests that three factors may be important in developing resistance:
fund of general information, and
specific knowledge about the psychology of manipulation.
First, becoming acquainted with the social psychology of manipulation and attitude change will be an asset to understanding mind control. A brief summary of selected research findings in this area suggests the following:
Manipulators often start with making minor requests. Getting people to perform small and relatively unrisky acts now will make it more likely that they will perform larger, more difficult and riskier tasks later. Corollary: giving in now to "minor" requests that are mildly uncomfortable makes it difficult to refuse more difficult and unsettling requests in the future (Freedman, Carlsmith, & Sears, 1974, pp. 395-397).
Manipulators often seem unusually friendly, concerned and sincere. When people perceive that someone likes them or cares about them, they listen less critically to what is told to them and are also less apt to think negatively about the communicator (Zajonc, 1968). Corollary: "love bombing" (being made the center of attention and the target of an unusual amount of praise, affection, etc.) makes it hard to disagree or resist.
Manipulators do not immediately ask for agreement, they ask people to "try it" with an "open mind." Getting people to behave in a manner that is somewhat contrary to their current belief system will often result in changed attitudes (Deutsch & Krauss, 1965; Festinger & Carlsmith, 1968). That is, acting on requests to "try it before you reject it" and assurances that "you can disagree with what you are doing even as you do it" often leads to changes in belief systems, especially if the subject is not overtly rewarded (e.g., by being paid) for performing the new behavior.
Manipulators use group pressure. It is difficult, especially over long periods of time, to be the only one in a group to disagree (Jones & Gerard, 1967, pp. 331-386). It can be painful to feel rejected or different, and sometimes even more painful to think of oneself as someone who has trouble tolerating rejection. Hence, people conform but are not always willing to admit to themselves that they are conforming (i.e., responding to group pressure). People rationalize instead, and claim it was their "free choice" to change.
Manipulators do not make things easy. People actually place more value on their actions if the task to be performed is somewhat unpleasant or difficult, even if it did not need to be unpleasant or difficult (Festinger, 1957). Corollary: making a task artificially "tough" typically makes it appear more meaningful and important than it may in fact be.
Having a specific knowledge of experimental/theoretical as well as practical hypnosis is also important to resistance. What are the implications of role taking in hypnosis, for example? This theory suggests that, by "pretending" to be in hypnosis, people can in fact become more suggestible and open to influence. Research on classical and "nonclassical" (e.g., Ericksonian) forms of hypnosis suggests the following:
It is possible to be hypnotized without being aware of the induction process. Most hypnotic phenomena, including carrying out posthypnotic suggestions, have been produced in subjects who were not aware of being in hypnosis (Erickson, Rossi, & Rossi, 1976).
Hypnosis begins with a shift in attention (Hilgard, 1968). Attention is normally motile. That is, it is dynamic and is relatively freely focused on a variety of events within a large perceptual field; it moves back and forth between the external (e.g., actions and events "outside" the self) and the internal (e.g., thoughts and feelings). Trance is a state that involves relatively focused, fixed or immotile attention. Corollary: anyone or anything that results in decreased motility of attention is highly likely to induce an altered state of consciousness ("trance") whether or not it is labeled "hypnosis."
The language of hypnosis is marked by vagueness, overgeneralizations, metaphors and abstractions. Classical inductions are not the only way to "talk hypnosis" (although they can be found in many "meditation" techniques not overtly labeled as hypnosis). Nonclassical inductions use "normal" conversation and storytelling, often directed at more than one representational system (e.g., sight, sound and touch) to shift attention, in part by activating the subject's tendency to search within him— or herself in order to find ways of relating what is being said now to experiences in the past (Bandler & Grinder, 1975). Corollary: words that sound "deep" or meaningful but feel confusing (and/or strangely calming) can induce trance outside the subject's awareness.
In trance, memories, fantasies, feelings and thoughts are often experienced more vividly and intensely than they are in the normal "waking" state (Hilgard, 1981). If a person is unaware of being in trance, or is unfamiliar or unconvinced of the phenomenon of hypnotic enhancement of perception, fantasy and suggestibility, then that person is likely to attribute the vividness and intensity of the trance experience to some special characteristic of the message and/or communicator. That is, the person links his/her feelings of intensity with what has been said or who has said it, not with how (i.e., hypnotically) it was said. The message is therefore experienced as "more real" or "more true" than other messages, and the communicator of the message is endowed with extraordinary (or even supernatural) characteristics or skills.
Hypnosis involves powerful transference. The induction process involves establishing and utilizing rapport, and hypnosis is perhaps first and foremost an interpersonal process (Fromm, 1979). Most subjects, after being hypnotized, feel closer, more trusting, and more positively about their operator than before. It is always more difficult to objectively assess someone (or what that someone says) after a powerful transference relationship has developed.
Hypnosis involves the suspension of "normal" logic. Trance logic is characterized by, among other things, lack of criticalness and the ability to hold two contradictory beliefs as true without one canceling out the other (Orne, 1959). Thus, in trance one can have the sensation of cold and still be aware of being seated in a warm, heated room. Corollary: in trance, people can accept notions or ideas that they would otherwise reject because they contradict other beliefs known to be based in reality. For example, the members of one Hindu-based cult believe that the space program is a hoax and yet may listen to and accept weather reports based on satellite pictures.
One's fund of general information (e.g., philosophy, comparative religion and history) can be vital in resisting manipulation. Perhaps more important, however, is an awareness of the limits of one's knowledge base, and a willingness to add knowledge when one is unsure of the validity of what is being said. For example, a new form of so-called psychotherapy might claim to be "the modern science of mental health." What makes a discipline a "science?" In part, it is the acceptance and utilization of a very specific method of inquiry that has uniform steps for positing hypotheses and validating them. What are these steps? When these steps are not followed, what risks to validity are usually encountered? What is the "scientific method?" If uncertain, one should seek the answers to these questions before accepting any claim as being "scientific." Similarly, groups or individuals may claim that their beliefs and/or practices are based on scriptural passages, history, research or other literature with which one is unfamiliar; before accepting anything else said, it is wise to check these references for their accuracy. In addition, the following steps might be helpful:
"Paraphrase other peoples' thoughts both aloud and to yourself to see if you're understanding clearly." Dr. Zimbardo and his associate, Susan Andersen, recommend that if a message, book or lecture is difficult to understand, repeating the central points in one's own words might help (Andersen & Zimbardo, 1980). Ask questions. If the answer is equally or more puzzling, a mental "beware" alarm should sound. The same alarm should go off if the answer is something like "well, you will understand more later" or "of course you can't understand now, you're too [nonspiritual, unenlightened, intellectual, ignorant, materialistic, rigid, unaware, unconnected with your feelings, etc.]."
Do not relate personal experiences, thoughts or feelings, or make any kind of confession that may be harmful should the information be released, Anderson and Zimbardo (1980) warn. Confidentiality is not automatic: nonlicensed/noncredentialed therapists and their clients may not come under the protection of state doctor-patient confidentiality laws. Groups or individuals that pressure people to reveal personal information may be acting unethically.
Put off any and all decisions until after the group experience is over, and then decide only after obtaining other information or consulting with trusted confidants.
Outside interests and social contacts are vital, state Zimbardo and Anderson, and any group that makes an overt or subtle appeal to sever these bonds should be rejected. These outside sources are usually instrumental in providing reality-oriented feedback, and in helping to maintain a sense of personal continuity (i.e., a sense of knowing "where I came from").
Any group or individual that arouses guilt to an uncomfortable level should be carefully checked out and probably avoided.
Have at least one good friend who is a "natural born" skeptic or critic. Or, if in a possible mind control situation already, seek out known "doubters" within that group. Put off feeling guilty about doubts for a day or two; discuss doubts now.
Thank you, Arnie. I've found that this one topic - more than any other - Scientologists just will not address. I've raised it over & over here and no Scntst will discuss even the possibility that there is a hypnotic component to auditing. Fascinating. The anti-hypnosis line must be soooo thoroughly drummed into them.
The Prince and the Magician
Once upon a time there was a young prince who believed in all things but three. He did not believe in princesses, he did not believe in islands, he did not believe in God. His father, the king, told him that such things did not exist. As there were no princesses or islands in his father's domains, and no sign of God, the prince believed his father.
But then, one day, the prince ran away from his palace and came to the next land. There, to his astonishment, from every coast he saw islands, and on these islands, strange and troubling creatures whom he dared not name. As he was searching for a boat, a man in full evening dress approached him along the shore. "Are those real islands?" asked the young prince.
"Of course they are real islands," said the man in evening dress.
"And those strange and troubling creatures?"
"I am God," replied the man in evening dress, with a bow. The young prince returned home as quickly as he could. "So, you are back," said his father, the king.
"I have seen islands, I have seen princesses, I have seen God," said the prince reproachfully.
The king was unmoved.
"Neither real islands, nor real princesses, nor a real God exist." "I saw them!"
"Tell me how God was dressed."
The prince remembered that they had been. The king smiled. "That is the uniform of a magician. You have been deceived." At this, the prince returned to the next land and went to the same shore, where once again he came upon the man in full evening dress.
"My father, the king, has told me who you are," said the prince indignantly. "You deceived me last time, but not again. Now I know that those are not real islands and real princesses, because you are a magician."
The man on the shore smiled.
"It is you who are deceived, my boy. In your father's king- dom, there are many islands and many princesses. But you are under your father's spell, so you cannot see them."
The prince pensively returned home. When he saw his father, he looked him in the eye.
"Father, is it true that you are not a real king, but only a magician?"
The king smiled and rolled back his sleeves.
"Then the man on the other shore was God."
The prince was full of sadness. He said, "I will kill myself." The king by magic caused death to appear. Death stood in the door and beckoned to the prince. The prince shuddered. He remembered the beautiful but unreal islands and the unreal but beautiful princesses.
"Very well," he said, "I can bear it."
"You see, my son," said the king, "you, too, now begin to be a magician."
Reprinted from The Magus, by John Fowles,
Dell Publishing Co., Inc.; pp. 499-500.
Actually, now that I think about it a little further, I did have one good conversation on this subject with Ladayla. Link here
I confess that I have trouble understanding why Scientologists aren't curious about this. If it were suggested to me that some important activity on which I was spending a lot of time (and money) involved hypnosis, I'd be intrigued...I'd want to know more. They're aware that LRH had extensive experience as a hypnotherapist before developing Dianetics; wouldn't it make sense that some hypnotic techniques might have been incorporated into Dianetics and Scn? But there seems to be no questioning about this at all among (most) Scientologists. A puzzlement for sure, to me.
Here's a thought-provoking essay:
Scientology and hypnosis
The founder of Scientology, L. Ron Hubbard studied, practised and lectured on hypnosis, and there is evidence he implemented hypnotic techniques in certain Scientology practices.
Requirements for authoritative hypnosis
Scientology Auditing and Authoritative Hypnosis
Auditing and Similarities with Hypnosis
After the subject has been relaxed by these preliminary questions, the hypnotist then commences the session with a loudly uttered, "Start of session," which is designed to impress upon the subject that the auditor had begun the really serious part of the auditing. Such a dramatic and startling procedure conditions the already expectant subject for the exercises or events which follow.
The subject is expecting to be "taken in hand" by the hypnotist. A person who is very expectant is a very ready subject for hypnosis. In future sessions, a hypnotic condition can be induced in some subjects merely by repeating the settings of a past hypnosis. In scientology, where processing goes on day after day, the return to the same hypnotist and to the same place and to the same ritual readily predisposes the expectant subject to submission to scientology's hypnotic techniques and to a return to the hypnotic state.
In scientology hypnosis, there is a bond established between the subject and the hypnotist, and scientology techniques are developed and designed to maintain this bond during the whole of the session; it is considered bad auditing if this bond is broken, and techniques are prescribed for remedying the break.
In hypnosis, a degree of dependency develops and the expert, practitioner is on guard against, and realises the potential danger of, this condition. In authoritative hypnosis this dependency is allowed to develop, often with harmful results. Scientology allows this hypnotist/subject bond to develop without restraint. It persists after the hypnosis has finished and has significance in the desire of the subject to return again and again for further "auditing". In the case of some subjects there has been a quality of almost desperate dependency on the hypnosis sessions.
If command hypnosis is unskilfully practised, hallucinations which have been created during hypnosis persist later as reality. Scientology calls these hypnosis-based halucinations "mental image pictures." They are experienced during an auditing (hypnosis) session and persist thereafter as reality and the subject comes to believe that the past experiences and activities conjured up during these hallucinatory periods really took place. This is why the upper "levels" of scientology are able to contain the Space Opera theories without much questioning by the members.
One characteristic feature of hypnosis is the increased suggestibility of the subject, which the hypnotist can take advantage of. In the state of regression found in hypnosis, fantasies may be experienced which may be spontaneous or the result of suggestion. To the subject, these fantasies are apparently real and true experiences, and if authoritative hypnosis is used, these fantasies persist as reality.
Scientology hypnosis subjects are highly suggestible and readily conjure up past life experiences of a kind and along lines suggested by the auditor and by what Hubbard has written. Hubbard finds much of the material for his "research" in these hallucinations which are quite fanciful and often contain details of "past lives".
In hypnosis, it is not uncommon for the subject to experience disturbing hallucinations that relate to repressed things in his mind, such as hallucinatory homosexual experiences which a subject in his normal existence may never have experienced or entertained. Because of loss of repression, these thoughts become known to him in a hallucinatory form, and the subject is likely to experience extremely severe anxiety even to the extent of panic and self-loathing. A subject who, in passive hypnosis, has experienced these or similar thoughts and may have had feelings of revulsion while under hypnosis, may safely be brought out of hypnosis and no ill effects will follow; on the contrary, benefit may result and feelings of shame will not persist. However, if similar hallucinatory and shameful thoughts are conjured up in authoritative hypnosis there may be dangerous consequences. In scientology, subjects have frequently complained of morbid feelings of guilt and depression persisting after auditing/hypnosis.
In scientology are many processes (such as the patter drill) including those which involve repetitive commands. These may lower barriers of restraint, lessen reticence, and cause a readiness to talk unreservedly about the most intimate and secret things and past shameful experiences. Some scientology techniques are designed to overcome reluctance on the part of the subject to "withhold" anything.
Post hypnotic suggestion, which is an important feature of hypnosis, is the name given to the implanting during hypnosis of a command, belief or idea which is subsequently given effect to. Post hypnotic suggestions may be made in relation to ideas, beliefs, attitudes of mind and the like which the patient is to assume after coming out of hypnosis.
The Scientology hypnotist, in following the prescribed strict procedure for closing the session, inquires of the preclear whether the preclear has achieved his goals set for the session and any other gains and whether he is satisfied with the session. The hypnotist is still very much in control of the situation, for the subject, being in a state of hypnotic rapport with the hypnotist whose wishes are in effect his, is more likely to answer that the goals or some of them have been obtained and that the session has been a success. This is a form of post-hypnotic suggestion, and after the session the suggestion that the session was a success may persist. Dangerous consequences may follow some post-hypnotic suggestions. If a post-hypnotic suggestion be given in hypnosis that the subject would not experience a particular symptom, e.g., a headache, after a session had ended, the subject might not experience a headache which normally he would have experienced, and thereby not be alerted to a possible medical condition, such as a brain tumour of which the headache would have been a warning sign.
In scientology hypnosis, a state which the scientologists call "exteriorisation" is sometimes deliberately sought. Exercises and procedures for exteriorisation are the subject of a large part of Hubbard's instructional writings. This exteriorization, according to scientologists, is the actual departure of the thetan from the physical body to some position remote from the body. "Dissociation" and "exteriorization" are the same thing, produced by essentially the same means. Whereas in hypnosis, dissociation or exteriorization is recognised for what it is, namely, a feeling or sensation or belief on the part of the subject that he is outside his body, in scientology the subject is specifically told that the hallucination which he experienced did in fact occur as a reality and that the thetan has been exteriorized. In such circumstances the harmful effects of scientology hypnosis persist by inculcating in the mind of the preclear an entirely fallacious belief. A preoccupation with such beliefs, involving a refusal to face up to reality, may be dangerous to the mental health of the subject.
A command to "mock up" some object is a standard technique for the induction of hypnosis. Hubbard's writings, both in books and pamphlets, abound with descriptions of procedures which involve mocking up objects. A very great part of “The Creation of Human Ability” is devoted to the explanation of procedures which involve mocking up objects and/or exteriorization.
Ending of Session
This thread is so compelling inasmuch the whole 'hypnosis' things is ONLY evident when you walk away or were never under scientolospells. Thinking back to Hubbards Lectures and re-reading transcripts recently, Hubbard was EMPHATIC with the use of "see" and "you see" repeticiously. Right before our very eyes and ears are we DIRECTED to "see" what Hubbards is 'claiming' as valid and quantified. SEE! YOU SEE! **vomits**
P.S. SongBird, I like how you describe Hypnotherapy as it's how I felt in regard to 'controlled' by an 'auditor' as opposed to being 'in control' in Hypnotherapy, like a co-operation sorta kinda..if that makes sense.
You are right about the "you see"s. He said it soo often it used to completely annoy me - even as a devoted Scieno.
And "you see" you were NEVER SUPPOSED TO NOTICE
related to this, This is why I have found Robert Monroe's meditative home study tapes are sometimes so effective, as you practice creating trance states ( and enjoying the discovery of rummaging through your own subconscious, or whatever) their mere use, returns to the user, the ability to command and control their own "trance" states.
ONCE a being retakes control of his own trance state, all programming invoked by anyone else, during covertly invoked trance states, falls away.. much to the incredible relief of the participant and much to the ire of scientology.
I recommend THE GATEWAY SERIES, the first tape set... by Robert Monroe.
Well, in fact, in other materials Im reading by Milton Erickson, and I ve been looking for the cite for ten minutes,... uhm... he says that memories cannot actually be erased.
Sure, by suggestion certain things may be made to be invisible, but without constant re-enforcement, hypnosis fails.
hence you have
COME TO THE MEETING!
hence you have, TAKE YOUR NEXT STEP
hence you have using WISE/Scientology crap in your business...
AND we now have an explanation of why they send out so much bulk mail with the weird symbols and all..amd pictures of "Ron"
They are keeping their members trance states reactivated!!
I listened to your tape on wma(it ran like a gem) Arnie and relieved my first steps as a 10 month old kid. I must still be very receptive on some level, but thats not necessarily bad thing for me now that I dont have detrimental info flowing freely into me from dubious sources as hubbard. It was pretty freaky listening to what you read and how easily one can be influenced even at a conscious level. Ive got to make time to read through hubbards Research and Discovery Series. Ive briefly perused the first 1950 one and from what I see its all about hypnosis. As much of a drop-out hubbard was and a filthy lying scumbag, he said it all in his Philadelphia Doctorate Course about having new ways of making slaves (Creed even mentioned it in his latest Taped Lecture) in Lecture 20 of 52
Milton Erikson(sp) is very interesting to say the least and I'll ask my Dr about him next week. Ive seen that you get a fair bit of flack about de-programming Arnie, things is though..from what I gather people dont EVER go back when they have FULLY confronted scientology in the cold hard fact of light shining upon it exposing all the dark corners within its box. 'People' carry on about refernce regarding Nazism, Occult, Hypnosis being whacky concepts asin in comparisons to scientology..but it only takes a decent unobscured look at scientology and hubbard's own past to see that some of the professed whackiest notions are evidently closer than some people care to admit.
Hubbard was a Hypnotist
There are too many coincidences that match/fit for anything to be discounted, let alone hubbards writings/Lectures AND his own affirmations pre-dianetics.
re deprogramming, I can not give anyone grief about not coming forward, or walking away from scientology and not looking back..I was silent for ten years after I left working for scientology.
To decide to try and make a difference, is a moral decision that has to come from the heart.
To be, or not to be, that is the question:
The difference between getting deprogramming or just letting the effects and conditioning just wear off, is the difference between 'waking up' sufficiently to want justice... to want to take recourse in Federal or State courts, and doing so within the statute of limitations for fraud ( 2 years)
And Hubbard's Hitlerian Hubris is toxic to the soul. It will interfere with your relationships with others, it will slow your future spiritual progression.
Had I known of someone who I could have gone to for therapy I would have done so, but psychiatrists are so demonized... I could not consider it. Which, incidentally, is another reason that psychiatry is demonized, and another reason that scientology demonizes this activist.
Because every person is different... I find that each person I evaulate has Hubbard's black bubble gum stuck to different parts of them. I then address those ideas... and together, we explore the mechanics of their creation. And I should note that I learn much from the experience. Just as I have reached a point where everything scientology does or says about me, or others, teaches me.
Living in state of impairment, running remnants of hubbard's toxic operating system, has a solution, and that solution is deprogramming.
I admit my real CRIME in the eyes of Scientology, was to GO TO THE SOURCE as Hubbard says, and so, I went TO THE SOURCES HUBBARD STOLE HIS IDEAS AND TECHNQUES FROM. After all, he was (like Scientology) but a thief, and had and has no power of his or their own, until they stole YOUR LIFE FORCE from you! And I help people to get their MANA back from Scientology!!
The question to ask yourself is how much is your life worth?
Do you really want to carry that stuff around with you??
A very noble cause you have taken up Arnie and I agree that deprogramming is probably a much more complete way of getting one's own mind back then letting it happen naturally over time. The added benefit of being able to go after CO$ before the statue of limitations runs out is just icing on the cake!
MORE about Hubbard's covert use of hypnosis continued HERE
Another long time member noticed the hypnotic effect:
(c) 2003 Arnaldo Lerma
Hubbard's own statements about Hypnosis from his books and Scientology official publications.
The Anderson Report Chapter 18 - Scientology and Hypnosis
Peter Forde: Hypnotic coercion uncovered via Coue
Ericksonian Hypnosis: LINK - A description of covert persuasive techniques, in a understandable form, - Eriksonian Persuasive techniques appear to be the core of L Ron Hubbard's apparant "Charisma" instead of any real substance ( Editors note Feb 24th, 2005 )
Dr Joylon West about Hypnosis in Scientology LINK LINK LINK LINK
Home| F.A.Q.'s | Legal | News | Support lermanet.com |