Rolf dane: Reply to Blanking the DEEP Clearing article

2015-09-05T10:14:10Z

Reply to Blanking the DEEP Clearing article

New page

Hi Scientolipedia Editor,

Obviously I have a SCN background as I have done scn training prior to 1992. But DEEP is not SCN. I have researched it and written the materials between 2008 and pt. Now I want the public to benefit from it and that takes of course some promotion. I have been associated with a health newsletter, that want to promote our services. For this arrangement to work, I cannot be associated closely with SCN or be called an "offshot".
I can appreciate that you work as a historian in the field. I am more concerned about getting my new technology out and applied. I want to promote it to new people who want the benefits and the training.

Usually boards like scientolipedia are edited by the public and maybe monitored by an editor. But to set it up as some sort of one way trap for information or exposee publication is highly controversial in my opinion.

So I kindly ask you not to use your board to stop the practical application of the DEEP tech.
In my opinion, SCN is doomed due to the continued bad PR and the abuses of the church.
I have learned my lessons dearly and have developed a new tech that takes care of the conflicts that SCN seems to have no cure for but rather create.

Best,

Rolf

Thread:User talk:Rolf dane/Blanking the DEEP Clearing article/reply (3) - Revision history

Rolf dane: Reply to Blanking the DEEP Clearing article