Back in Comm

debateOver the last week there has been some dissatisfaction expressed in comments as well as behind the scenes with regard to this blog.

In particular two recent posts by Mark Shreffler have created some controversy and upset. We mention this background as it may not have been visible to casual readers and observers.

We feel it necessary to re-iterate our position and intentions. Late in 2013 it was clear that a storm was approaching for Scientologists in South Africa. There was no local platform for issues to be addressed. Several people got together and decided that there should be a local blog that could deal with these local issues. While there are a growing number of international blogs and websites there was a severe dearth in locally focused content. We believed (and still do) that we will go further if there are stories that involve situations, people and orgs that South Africans know far more intimately..

The response to the blog was immediate and surprising. Aided in large measure by Mike Rinder and some others the blog got wide coverage and quickly built an audience.

Within a few weeks there were comments suggesting that rather than only focus on orgs and their failings there should also be discussion about the future for Scientologists outside of the church.

It also became clear that there are people who have valuable contributions to make who want to contribute. We therefore invited contributors. These contributions have mostly been concerned with philosophical musings of Scientology and it’s place in the world. Judging from the general comments these have been welcomed and appreciated.

But they have also drawn controversy.

We recognise that this is an evolving platform. As it stands now this is our position and vision:

  • Our “agenda” is the democratisation of Scientology as articulated in this article Why this blog?
  • We remain focused on South Africans and South African issues. These are our primary “public”. Not out of any sense of exclusion but simply because it is the area with which we are most intimate and knowledgeable.
  • We have no position on the best alternative Scientology route to take and do not promote any in our articles. We do allow discussion of such in the comments among the community.
  • We take no position on the known personalities. Having said that we acknowledge that without Mike Rinder & Marty Rathbun in particular and many others in general we would probably not be in the luxurious position of being able to so hotly debate such issues. We will certainly lend our support to either should they need it.
  • We encourage and desire debate on hot issues. This is a right denied all of us in the church. We will not stifle it here.
  • We remain, in the main, a pro-Scientology & pro LRH site. We do allow and encourage free discussion on these two topics but we are not a hate site and are sensitive to this. This remains our most challenging aspect – walking the line between “censorship” and “freedom of speech”.
  • Our overriding objective is in our name: Back in Comm. All things are possible through communication including a decision not to communicate. If two people decide through communication that they wish to no longer communicate, that’s ok. That’s a choice. And that it is vital to have such a choice.
  • We will continue to invite contribution from varying sources of disparate views. We would love to run something from the church or onlines active Scientologists if they had the courage to submit a contribution. Publishing a contribution is not an endorsement.
  • We are a platform of inclusion.

There is often a camaraderie between people who have recently left the church but once the novelty has worn off we just have each other and there is no guarantee we will like each other. It is this that makes the idea of some kind of overall unity among the independent, free-zone, milestone two communities unlikely. We do not see such unification as a part of this blog.

But there must remain tolerance, respect and some decency even within contentious debate. All of which can only be obtained through communication. That is very much a part of this blog.

If we can’t do that then we have replaced one cult for another.

We hope to continue to be a platform for debate and communication without being an instrument of favour. With all the available facts (and many opinions), coupled with direct observation, people must make their choices and be responsible for them.

Lastly, we continue to welcome criticism, support, encouragement, suggestion & involvement. We’re all trying to do our bit to make sense of the mess Scientology has become.

We hope this clarifies where we are coming from.


78 thoughts on “Back in Comm

  1. Thank you for the above post. as you said this post “”◾We remain, in the main, a pro-Scientology & pro LRH site.”
    that sentence said all to me..
    I truly believe because the experience I have using the auditing technology that nothing is impossible, all can be achieved, every dream can become a reality IF one removes the obstacles WHICH IS NOT PUT THERE by the Church but by the SELF since that ”SELF went into a agreement with those who spread the negative that auditing is not working, the tech do not work as it is, the Bridge is a hoax, and LRH DM etc.. etc.. are the cause and they are the one who should be blamed for not achieving the dream one set for self when entered into the church..
    Now those excuses are justifications since the TECH is available for every one.. if one really want to continue than that person can because every excuse can be confronted in session, every ARC-B’s can be handled in session and the present time problems can be overridden if one really wants to continue and achieve that dream.
    I really don’t believe that there is a suppressive person… but I believe that every person is capable to do the ”suppressive act” and that is when that person fallows the and believes in the negative and spread the same… Negative smells like manure but manure is good nurture encourages the growth but negative PR kills everything it touches since it was born out of the dead theta.

    • Elizabeth: it may seem like the TECH is available to everyone, but with GAT II, Miscavige (since he doesn’t follow LRH) has issued confidential training “booklets” to cover all aspects of GAT II, and you must be a contracted staff member on specific training to obtain one. There’s special training manuals for Purif, Grades, NED, TRs, Objectives, and Survival Rundown, for example.
      Of course, since LRH said in December 1957 in SCIENTOLOGY: CLEAR PROCEDURE, ISSUE ONE that “The work was free — keep it so”.
      Of course, LRH said it, so Miscavige’s take on it is: He didn’t really mean it. So I’ll do it the way I want.

      • I believed that the TECH is available outside of the church… do I have a wrong belief, information in regard to this? Please plainoldthetan do correct this old thetan here.. you know very well by now I welcome new data. thanks Elizabeth

  2. Interesting POV scnafrica.

    My own observation that the anti-cult scene was just as fanatical as many of the cults they claim to be against. Meaning basically that they are just another cult.

    IMO is that not just a “cult leader” like for example Jim Jones but a whole mind set or group agreement comes with being in a cult.

    That is it is not just what the cult leader who orders such actions but those who decide to follow this leader without question that make a cult a cult.

    At one time Scientology had a safe guard against such actions known as “Orders Query” meaning anyone no matter how low on the Org Board (BTW per actual policy whether public or staff you are still considered to be on the Org board) could question any order no matter how high up on the Org Board it came from.

    I’ve personally queried orders that were said to issued by the Ol’man himself and in many cases the order if it was off policy was canceled or if the order did comply with a policy I was shown the actual policy.

    Try doing that in the Org nowadays.

    Never mind.

    Already been there done that.

    • I like the analogy of slowly boiling a frog in a pot. First the water is comfortable then it gets slightly warmer, warmer, then hot, hotter…then the frog has to jump or becomes “comfortable numb” and allows itself to get boiled to death.

  3. Yip local is still lekka! Our voices were almost stifled by some big names out there. Not that it was a bad thing as it demonstrates how wide our audience has spread!
    After reading this latest post it feels like the aftermath of a great tempest! The previous postings illicited such responses, read them if you havent already folks. Tornadoes from all corners of the globe, rushing in and having something passionate and firey to say. Rooves lifted, smoke bellowed and thunder rumbled! What a spectacle! Exciting stuff, a hardcore ref may have been a good idea at times but shoowee.. Scio’s sure can put it out there cant they!
    Scn Africa, not even you guys thought you would create such an effect haha! Be proud, there is more communication here to put you left, right, front and back in comm! Dont stop now, crank that tone arm waay up to the exosphere..fuckit all the way up into orbit and beyond! We are in this blog the peoples voice. Born in the RSA..Born in the RSA lols!

  4. Sheeple Bane ….”””Our voices were almost stifled by some big names out there. Not that it was a bad thing as it demonstrates how wide our audience”
    Yes be ware of the big names … listen to them. read their blogs and judge: if they don’t promote auditing and courses than they are on the negative side. Simple as that.. because even if they have had loses, and who did not, those loses, ARC-B’s no matter what they were can be handled.
    Those who had auditing, or were solo auditors, if they did not continued that simply means they never really believed in the first place: that it was working.
    Because if you believe in something than one do not give up because one has to face a challenge.
    How many times I have been knocked down but I gritted my teeth and back to session I went.
    I had a major car accident at age 54 where the left side of the brain become lose and mashed.
    With that my life vanished, could not understand spoken words, hardly walk, or function, no longer could read or write and I was told that in few year time I be in the wheelchair with collapsed spine and veggie like…
    I have solo audited my self out of that incredible depressing suicidal condition, I have thought my self to read and write once more. and I have had a very productive live since than.. 74 and in very good health.
    Folks, I simply don’t believe that negative shit people saying about auditing, the rest what goes around is politics PURE UNDILUTED BANKY REACTION and that do not belong on the PATH of Self-discovery in the first place: that is what auditing is about, self -discovery, finding out how we have created our universe.

  5. Everyone has an opinion about something
    Some people have an opinion about everything
    But empty vessels still make the most noise.

    • hehehe Watcher good one and you have on opinion on opinions.
      .in my reality we only can have opinion what we know [the learned stuff] opinions is just assumptions but not the truth. The only truth exist on this planet which are the results of the auditing sessions and those are the COGNITIONS… But again those cognitions are only the truth to the person who had that cognition.
      you figure that one out !

  6. Congratulations on having the integrity to withstand the peer pressure to shut down a viewpoint that some do not agree with, Scnafrica. The particular debate in question is an old one, and has been going on for many years, and there will probably never be agreement on it, with people feeling strongly about it depending on what they experienced or were exposed to.
    Allowing competing narratives airspace is a sign of maturity,and a refreshing departure from the fixed views settled upon on many other blogs. Very, Very Well done, and thank you!

  7. Personally, I have many things about Scientology tech and policy with which I radically disagree. On the other hand, there are also many things that I studied and experienced in Scientology which helped me enormously. I think anyone who claims otherwise who was involved in the Church is deceiving themselves and others, otherwise why would they have stuck with it for as long as they did?
    Now that I am free from the chains of RCS itself (I use Mike’s euphemism because I find it the most apt description) and I’ve come through the period I refer to as “the rage period”, I try very hard to not only practice tolerance and fairness but to actually work to see other people’s points of view on most anything.
    In the end, I believe my philosophy is in the direction of this from Voltaire: “I do not agree with what you have to say, but I’ll defend to the death your right to say it.”
    I have witnessed far too many instances of intolerance, antagonism and personal ad hominem on message boards such as ESMB and in comments on Facebook and on blogs. I don’t like any of that. Rational discourse in the spirit of healthy debate is one thing. Personal attacks, name calling, belittling criticisms meant to bully and suppress opinions are things I have no stomach for. I even try to stay away from such things when I’m writing about RCS or its members. Like many here, I have plenty of reasons to feel anger or even hate towards the RCS, its leaders and its founder. But I don’t. It’s not productive for one. It doesn’t help me lead a better life. It doesn’t help convince anyone who thinks differently from me to call them names or belittle them.
    I believe this blog from the beginning has been about tolerance and understanding and I very much appreciate the spirit in which it was founded. Thank you for being here and for communicating. I’m not in South Africa and I doubt I ever will be. But I feel for what you all are going through and I encourage more communication, not less, in everything you need to talk about in order to come through the process of leaving the Church and leading free, independent lives.

    • Chris Shelton aka Galactic Patrol …. so what I read in your post you have taken responsibility for your action, your universe.. fantastic… great, wonderful, grand, I am thrilled for you and i meant that. You have won the battle… and that is not a small thing.
      Those who blame that their ARC-Bs were cause by others have not taken responsibility yet.. Some how people have difficulty understanding that no one can cause, make one feel anything… we all put what ever we feel on the experienced mass–energy and we say” you made me feel bad”‘ OGGGH . cant be done… Have a lovely day… Elizabeth from Vancouver BC. Canada

    • I salute you Chris Shelton for your courage, i have heard your video on You Tube by Sara Bareilles about

      I have heard it a few times, lovely. Well done my Loyal Officer companion.
      How about a video about violence in Orgs, yes violence that has actually occurred to staff members………………..S.O, etc.

  8. Well, I’m not ‘local’ but when has that ever stopped me joining a discussion?
    For what it’s worth, I think the tone and content of this blog has been spot on. I love hearing personal (and honest) stories, particularly those that have left the ironically named ‘Church’ of Scientology. Big things are happening in SA and although recent events may have been traumatic for those involved, I am certain that anyone leaving the CoS – whether voluntarily or not – will soon see that this is the best move they could have made. Please keep the news coming.
    I no longer call myself a Scientologist, but I respect the right of anyone to practise Scientology, with the one proviso that they don’t inflict harm on others, even if they justify it as ‘the greatest good. . .’ Using and abusing others is not right, however it is dressed up.
    And although I might not agree with some of the views expressed here (and elsewhere), I value the opinions of others. If I only listened to those whom I agreed with, I wouldn’t learn very much would I?
    When I left The Cult back in 2008, I was desperate to find answers to what had happened to me. Being able to communicate to a group of people (ESMB) who had been through the same experiences and could really understand me was vital to my recovery from the effects of a nasty, vindictive and manipulative cult. I can’t say that I have fully recovered yet, but at least I know that there is hope after leaving Scientology.
    Members of a cult and in particular members of the CoS cannot communicate freely. As we have seen so many times, this is very destructive both on a personal level and to the wider group.
    Getting back in comm is the first step to recovery. This blog is well named.

  9. Looks like this blog is the new kid on the block just now getting it’s feet wet.
    Keep the blog going I say, bound to be bumps in the road.

  10. I witnessed the recent postings on this blog, and had to shake my head somewhat at the responses to what I observed, for myself, was a pretty simple message – Part 1 said “do Scientology”. Do with an eye to a related humanity, an awareness of one’s role in a Third and Fourth Dynamic, that one has agreed to previously, or they wouldn’t even be here on this planet, in this universe, living these Dynamics. Part 2 sought to relieve a stuckness in a group engram, with communication – an espoused element of this South African blog, as reiterated in the Opening Piece today.
    I have long since become disabused of having “truth” jammed down my throat with duress. Whether that duress is from “authority”, an “opinion leader”, or someone blustering and bloviating about “well, look these several people agree! This is TRUTH, because they say so!!!! Why don’t you just open your eyes and see what you are supposed to see, as we see it?!!!??” That last being the operative datum of what constitutes “truth” in this instance– agreement. Many viewpoints agreeing, doesn’t make a “truth”.
    I am a Scientologist. That is a postulate. A self-determined decision on a category of beingness, in a game. In this case, the game of living here in this universe, with all the myriad sub-games involved, that I, more increasingly knowingly, play.
    What is Scientology, to me? It is simply as L. Ron Hubbard states it:
    “Don’t ever miss this in what I teach you-don’t ever miss this. I am telling you how to get there, not what is there. Got that? My teachings are entirely a Tao, see?”*
    Yes, I do see. And my success with this body of work is because I have made the aware effort to do just that – see for myself. See what is in front of my face, and if what L. Ron Hubbard has observed and communicated is what I, personally, view, for myself.
    Now, if I have never taken what LRH has said without my own observation of it, I certainly am not going to be browbeat, overtly or covertly into submitting to some “truth”, or name-called into propitiation of some muckety-muck, as in a new sychophantic cultic devotion to “personality”, or any other such inanity.
    My practice of Scientology has a purpose: doing what I can to assist in the attainment of an individual’s Self Determinism, as defined in the “Qs”, or Pre-Logics of Scientology. I have the intention of aiding beings to achieve an awareness of their own considerations that go to make up the Axioms of Scientology, and from there – whatever they thetanly please.
    I pursue a course that embraces this idea, from L. Ron Hubbard:
    “You can undo every Axiom there is in The Creation of Human Ability.”
    Scientology isn’t what “Ron said”. It is what you agreed to, what you continually postulate, what you consider, what you create right this minute, here, in this particular universe. The Axioms are considerations, ongoing postulates, and the route of Scientology is a workable means to a recognition of your own considerations, and a return to the power of choice over them, and the future that you create. No amount of duress, ad hominem beratings, caustic sarcasm, or someone admonishing with the best of intentions “cause they were there” is going to bring this home to you as an individual. You, are here. You, seeing it yourself, is the way.
    * Tape 12 Feb 57, Final Lecture, 16th ACC.
    ** Tape, 4 Feb 57, Auditing Techniques: Procedure CCH.

    • Your viewpoint makes a lot of sense to me Jim. I studied and worked in the tech area of Scientology for 35 years. My own pursuit is for knowledge and greater awareness and enjoyment of the game of life. I accept or reject any datums about life and the spirit for myself as I find them to be true or false based on my own tests of their truth. No matter whether from Ron or from any other source. At this stage of my life, that works for ME.

      • My pleasure Meja. The ACC’s are an amazing exposition of the materials. I heartily recommend any person serious about what Scientology can and does provide, take these up and with earnest study, complement their auditing progress for the actual results that can be, and are, attained.

      • Hey there, Robin. Below you provide a link to an article by Hal Putoff that is fascinating. A couple of things stood out for me, among the rest of them providing the intense interest in the area that Dianetics and Scientology address. The first was a comment by Prof. Puthoff at the end of the piece: “My years of involvement as a research manager in these programs have left me with the conviction that this fact must be taken into account in any attempt to develop an unbiased picture of the structure of reality.”

        And the other observation he made of the current culture: “one group declined to get involved because the whole concept was unscientific nonsense, while a second group declined because, even though it might be real, it was possibly demonic.”

        I think the last one sums up the average of agreements of the sundry entitites. (Using that term advisedly.)

      • Jimbo,
        Excellent observation.
        Actually what Price and Swann were able to do with some test coordinates given by a CIA officer scared the bejesus out of the security personal of the CSS (the Communication Security Section of the NSA) which is covered more thoroughly in Schnabel’s book Remote Viewers: The Secret History of America’s Psychic Spies and merely commented on by Ken Kress in an article sited in this excellent article I’d been trying to find which was first published by the magazine Parascope back in ’98:!%20Parapsychology%20in%20Intelligence%3A%20The%20Rise%20and%20Fall%20of%20the%20CIA's%20Psychic%20Spies.pdf
        Aside from sundry spooky entities
        We may have had those in the Church as well whose fear of the state of OT may have aligned with the assessment that it was somehow “demonic”. Especially one failed auditor who has very little understanding of the actual subject (obvious because he is continually trying alter it) who under his direction (if you can call it that) has never reinstated the original OT Levels.
        We can’t lay this whole Tech Degrade at his feet because he usurped control somewhat after the fact but one can acknowledge that he as the ostensible head of RTC is perpetuating it.
        Actually it was Mayo who had the Grade Chart published with those omitted steps as one of his last acts before he was removed as Snr C/S Int and even though his name is continually mentioned in vain it was him the “Squirrel” who established the current architecture of the Grade Chart.
        Funny how things are not always how they seem
        Anyway thanks for kickstarting this comment Jim.

    • Hi Jim,
      I didn’t really see anyone objecting to the Part 1 part.
      I didn’t really see anyone objecting to the Part 2 with the exception of voicing opinions about how to go about doing it, which probably part of doing a group engram running session.
      Most objections I saw were related to the premise of dm being backed by someone else in order to stop the OT levels from being delivered. This wasn’t related to either Part 1 or 2.

      • Tony,
        The last paragraph is totally your opinion and evaluation. Much like suggesting what “engram” the PC should run which conforms with your idea of what the “engram” should be.
        How do you know that there were no external influences which forced the Church to remove the original OT Levels from the Grade Chart due to what the IC considered a “threat to national security”?
        In the following article written by Hal Puthoff it seems that the IC, CIA in particular was doing a threat assessment on Remote Viewing:
        The only reason CIA would do a threat assessment is if they considered that this technology was some kind of *threat*.
        Thus how could avoid exploring this possibility and actually call it a full 3 Dynamic engram handling.
        To me it seems like limiting the PC to only running TLT engrams because running whole track is too controversial.
        No controversy may be nice and safe but it won’t handle the PC’s case.

      • This is in response to remoteviewed, not you Tony. The system won’t let me reply to remotereviewed.
        To remoteviewed:
        Isn’t the whole bridge a evaluation?
        Aren’t the OT levels a evaluation? Having to run specific implants. Aren’t LRH’s lectures and books but an evaluation? HOM comes to mind.
        Isn’t the state of “clear” and “OT” an evaluation? From LRH’s point of view.
        Are such states possible?
        Even Dianetics is an evaluation. And in Dianetics one has become the label of insane until “cleared” as an engram can restimulate at any moment in time given the PT environment matches the moment of pain and unconsciousness and words spoken as commands?

      • Tony,
        Well, that’s not surprising, that you have a different viewpoint, modified by that point of view, your experiences, and such. The wonderful thing about different realities is that it provides such a diverse look at life. You’ve got one here. Thanks for relaying it.

      • Sing&Dance,

        I mean telling someone that they will fall into the drink if they take a long walk off a short pier may seem like an “evaluation” for instance but it is also true.

        In Scientology (as opposed to the Organization calling itself the Church of “Scientology” which has become “Faith Based”) unlike earlier religions you are allowed to evaluate data for and determine the truth or validity of them for oneself.

        The determining factor should be whether these data when applied produce a result and are workable.

        For instance does running GPMI produce a state where the person erases his reactive mind by having what is called a “clear cognition”.

        It seems it does in pretty well *all* cases who run it correctly with the exception of those who went clear earlier on Dianetics.

        Same with engrams.

        Does running an engram or a secondary or a lock produce a beneficial result?

        In *all* cases (and I’ve done a lot of auditing) I’ve audited it does.

        Same with any grade process directed toward a certain subject like recall, communication, problems, withholds & overts, past upsets and fixed ideas.

        Now you can sit and speculate on these data if you want Sing&Dance but me I’d rather apply them.

  11. There is something gentle and soothing about this blog.
    Maybe it is common sense and respect.
    Thank you for this post.

  12. Nothing in life is black and white — it is full of grey, yellow, magenta, azure…. From the beginning this particular blog has always seemed to be the most welcoming to any color of Scientologist.
    YOu are a remarkable mediator.

  13. I think this is an enlightened and sensible approach. I agree with your thoughts 100%.
    As I am clearly front and center in the discussion, mentioned more than once, I felt I should let you know publicly that I fully agree with your approach.
    I appreciated the opportunity to present another perspective on things — and I think that is healthy. Everyone can read what they want and decide based not on what someone tells them they should think, and not on what they think someone else is going to agree or disagree with, but on what THEY THINK. This is the essence of freedom that has been lost within the church.
    The interchange of communication is healthy. And if there was no passion involved, it would be boring and be indicative of the lack of interest or lack of value of the subject.
    Clearly not the case here.
    I will do all I can to assist you in your efforts to put an end to the abuses, disconnection, lies and money-grubbing that are the stock in trade of the church these days, and support in any way I can the efforts of those who are seeking to help people using Scientology.

    • Mike, thank you. And Marti, too. Please tell him. Thank you, Mark, too. I didn’t like being told how I should be behaving or what viewpoint I should be taking, to be honest. However, it did arouse some interesting debate. So, good!
      For me, not out for too long, but having been withdrawing over a period of years, keeping my integrity intact, actually, what this blog means to me, is just what ScnAfrica has reasserted.
      The zip on our mouths has been so strongly drawn closed, that I’m still revelling in the fact that I can say pretty much what I like, with some decorum, of course. I CAN criticize, natter, slander, vent, etc. I’m trained enough, intelligent and sane enough to know from whence it all comes. I, however, just enjoy the freedom of expression – good or ‘bad’. It’s such a luxury after twenty four years of shutting up and suppressing oneself, minding one’s Ps and Qs and being careful; and habouring unexpressed resentment in the company of certain people. It’s such a luxury to be let loose!
      Thank you so much all of you for this freedom and for the individual viewpoints; and for the last two days of hot debating. It’s a new slant on life, nothing wrong with having different viewpoints, or even being in the middle of some charge. On the latter, so be it and it’s not for any of us to evaluate or invalidate.
      Thanks most of all, Scn Africa, for this blog and for the freedom of expression and understanding you offer with regards our different stages of growth after leaving the church and for some who still have a foot in the door.
      Personally, I’m feeling less and less pissed off, just because of this blog. Sometimes I’ve not even been sure what I’ve being pissed off about! Lol! It’s an emotion that I’m enjoying the luxury of. Having said that, I know, too, that it is lessening but if it persists too long, then something needs to be done about it on my part. But that is MY responsibility and not for someone to evaluate or invalidate.
      So, thank to Scn Africa and all who make all this possible for all of us.

    • Hey Mike,
      For once I agree with every word you wrote here.
      Personally I think you are doing a great job of turning over that rock the Government Approved Tax Exempt Scientology Religion and exposing the slime under it.
      This is an important and valuable service and one I wish was available when I myself was having my own dark night of the soul.
      Mike keep shining a light in all those deep dark places.

  14. Hi please continue your blog, and sensor my post when needed,
    I love your clarity of words , full understanding is seen and the care and interest of the administrator is there, rock on .
    May the force be with you

  15. Anyone who is not reading the available books that are out there is doing themselves a disservice. “Going Clear” give a pretty good overview.

  16. Thanks for once again clarifying our freedom to communicate, get back in comm and share our viewpoints. Very important to the ultimate reinstatement of LRH’s tech as it was originally intended by him.
    Your paragraph: “We hope to continue to be a platform for debate and communication without being an instrument of favour. With all the available facts (and many opinions), coupled with direct observation, people must make their choices and be responsible for them.” shows that your mediation is neutral and this is important. With so many different personalities, having experienced the church in their unique way, answers will be different, will be diverse and will attract debate. At the end of the day, that’s what makes this blog so successful. The freedom to communicate without condemnation of ones viewpoint. Thank you.

  17. Mike (and Marty and the originals) you will forever have my deepest respect for your courage in speaking out.
    BackInComm THANK YOU for the local blog and this platform of communication which has helped me in more ways than you’ll ever know. Even my non-Scn friends have read it in an effort to understand how intelligent people can get caught up in a group that exerts so much control over its members to the point of whole families disconnecting instantaneously.
    My personal journey continues as I evolve daily and reintegrate with society and find my place in the world.

  18. I am in the USA, and know little of the details and nuances of RSA life. But I do enjoy reading this blog. I have no opinion as to how you should run it. It is what it is, and one can choose to read it or not read it. I choose the former. Of course I won’t agree with all the opinions written here. But having read them and seen something from the viewpoint of another, to whatever degree, I think I become more intelligent on the subject for it. Whether I change my mind or not is a separated issue. Just keep doing what you’re doing.

  19. Re: the subject of scientology.
    It has been about 64 yrs since Hubbard launched Dianetics and then scn.
    If you can’t build a better bridge after 64 yrs of experience, then you seriously flunked scientology.
    If you can only parrot authority then you are insane.
    See: How to study a science.
    What was true yesterday, is not necessarily true today.
    The biggest room in the world is room for improvement.
    The intelligent thinking student, always stands on the shoulders of his predecessors (e.i. of all the great minds that came before him) and sees farther.
    That is the formula that LRH used to develop Dianetics and Scn at his time.
    And that is what he really wanted everyone else to do, too.
    See where he gives credit in the intro to 8-0-0-8, ……… 50,000 yrs of thinking men that came before him.
    Today we have exponentially more data to learn from than LRH did.
    There have been a good few good minds who have developed their own bridges after they did LRHs bridge.
    A few that I know of:
    CBRs bridge
    The Pilot’s work
    Dennis Steven’s TROM
    All of those new bridges should now be done, as well as a lot of other none scn material should be gleaned.
    Then build a better bridge.

  20. Scn af maybe you should add a heading titled the ring, and those that want to fight talk can go for it,
    Or you could have the ring of invalidation todays contestants r,
    And the start a online betting slot, all proceeds to go to finding a solution for ring sting , its a South Africain thing ring sting that is!

    • Methinks Dio fits into the progressive camp and RV slots nicely into the orthodox mould. Wicked GPM! How do I say that both points of view are valid without being labeled a fence sitter haha! However the true test is always which perspective provides the best workability in the end. To find that out one may actually have to experience in full each respective side. Would the duo mentioned be willing to do so?

  21. scnafrica, what you said sounds great to me.
    You are demonstrably a sensible person and a hero to boot for creating this safe space and keeping it safe — for ALL people coming out of the Co$ in South Africa.
    Everyone splurges on when they first leave the cult is speaking their minds and disagreeing noisily. It’s heroes like you that keep the conversation going by moderating these forums and preventing any real harm.
    As others above have said, it’s shutting up, not speaking up, that creates cults.
    So — disagreements? Splurge on ‘em. But disagreeing also has its rules, which make them productive.
    Long way around to say, scnafrica, I think you’re doing just great!
    Just Me

  22. Thank you for the freedom of speech this blog allows, it is liberating!
    I have been trying to comment on kswlions to ask why i continuesly receive mail from them despite numerous emails to remove me from their data base, and wgy they keep responding saying I am removed yet I still receive emails from that very address. But they will not post my comment. I guess its because they accusing this blog of the same thing!

      • Hahaha thats so funny! I went back to their website now to copy paste my comments and they have been removed! Wow this site is extremely closely monitored, hello churchies! Hope you learn something while you are here
        Good Choice, my comment asked why they were ignoring my requests to be removed off their mailing list when I had asked numerous times and received acknowledgements every time that I had been removed yet I kept receiving mail. I also stated that they were accusing back in comm of exactly what they were doing. I did not say anything nasty about the church, lrh or any individual person.

  23. Great Post!! I am curious about something – if Scientology is the science of knowing how to know and LRH says LOOK – can we look and discuss the real L Ron Hubbard, and tell the whole truth about his accomplishments. I really want to know the truth about this. Anyone read the “Unbreakable Miss Lovely”? The story about the fair gaming of Paulette Cooper? Did L Ron Hubbard order this? I do want to shine a light on this for my own knowingness and would appreciate other people’s opinions and viewpoints, even if they differ from mine.

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 )

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s