> I'd like to tell you how much I appreciate this entire series of posts.
> It's important information, and I thank you for placing it here.

Mike,

Good questions and all ones I was just thinking this morning might be confusing to some. I realized I really DIDN'T clarify that, and I apologize if it is confusing to some.

Here's the deal. Basically they realized I was leaving this very inner, secret, totally confidential group. No one else had. Yes, I had signed their little (supposedly Huge, but legally in fact little, and quite possibly could screw them if they ever tried to use it legally, as it proves they do things within their own group secretly and hidden from their own people who should know).

I think they got worried, what if I did go to Flag and get some auditing? What could possibly come up?

Now I know as a Sec checker, and I have posted that I audited exec's who had their folders "vetted" which means things said were either blacked out with a magic marker, or much was even cut out, line by line or sometimes whole paragraphs. Who knows what THEY did! So I know they CAN do that. But Gavino saying to Bill, "I told you about her"...he never really explained, nor would Bill. My guess is the old stereotype that was run on me for 30 years:

I have a physical illness (although I haven't had a seizure for 20 years, and don't really even know if I still have it, but technically they can say that, and always did).Thus, I am in the 1.1 tone band (per Science of Survival) and thus cannot be trusted. It is serious Bullshit, but "tech" they all live and die by, so that was my guess and still is.

Soooo ol Mr. Gavino THOUGHT I was going to screw him. I wasn't and quite possibly would have stayed extremely loyal, until HE pulled this crap that night. It was truly like Truman seeing the cameras in his room, once he noticed. Suddenly things he never saw came into view.

So I can only guess, as it was a TOTALLY weird deal for me, and certainly nothing I had ever seen. Well, not ever, as a many weird and "out tech" things had occurred to me within this group, but NEVER from a Class 9, OT 7, Senior C/S auditor, to say nothing of he being one of my best friends at the time.

Here they were, in public no less, and with a Clear, asking me some very confidential questions that honestly even I didn't know the answers to. What might come up?

A) Who gives a shit, as they promised I could and would have these excellent auditors when needed.

B) As I have said, due to these spirits (BT's or groups of them called "clusters") can become suggestible to just about ANYTHING really. Let's say in a sec check, where they are checking for any "out ethics" or bad things one might have done. Let's say they ask, "In your last 6 months, have you done anything illegal?" Well, I guess they were planning on all these OT's just shutting up. I really don't know, because if you think something, it will read on a meter, or come up to be addressed. My guess is they really hadn't thought this all through, and I was the first to leave. I am 99% sure they had gotten in deeper than they had planned, and actually were doing things that could border on illegal. I doubt they planned this out, so they were not thinking of OT's when they rolled in as far as they did. Now I say I am leaving, and they were trying to get from me what I might possibly say about this secret group to ANY auditor, even OSA OK'd. As remember, this shit is secret even to most of their own group.

C) It might have been some for of intimidation, trying to scare me into shutting up. This is only a guess, but it was quite weird.

D) They were asking this question, probably trying to find out IF I considered any of this illegal (WHAT MIGHT COME UP IN SESSSION, TORY!?!), and then if I said anything, they could nail me for being out ethics mentioning any confidential stuff. Again this is only a guess, as I was as confused or more. I guess probably just trying to fuck with me.

E) Some OT's have told me about reverse auditing. I do not know if this would fall into that category, but my guess is yes. From what I have heard, it is done to Screw people up, introvert them, and mess with their minds. All of this occurred during this "session". Plus it was "TOTALLY OUT TECH" which the others have said reverse auditing is. Mostly it has been used with people leaving OSA, or OT 7's that are leaving, that I have heard of. Seriously gross, and created the exact opposite effect of whatever they were hoping to create. If anything, this was one of the gigantic cracks in the walls of the Scio-Truman Show.

So I hope that helps clarify this for you. If I missed any of what you asked, or someone has more questions, please just ask!

Love to you all!

Tory/Magoo~still dancing with the Easter Bunny~

From: bogie@xs4all.nl (Boudewijn van Ingen)
Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2001 01:53:33 GMT
Message-ID: <3adcee31.120234780@news.xs4all.nl>
On 14 Apr 2001 21:11:20 GMT, mistmagoo55@aol.com (Mistmagoo55) wrote:

>Here's the deal. Basically they realized I was leaving this very inner, secret,
>totally confidential group. No one else had. Yes, I had signed their little
>(supposedly Huge, but legally in fact little, and quite possibly could screw
>them if they ever tried to use it legally, as it proves they do things within
>their own group secretly and hidden from their own people who should know).

>I think they got worried, what if I did go to Flag and get some auditing? What
>could possibly come up?

Indeed I think you keep looking upon this issue from the wrong side, Tory.

You seem to keep assuming that these people actually believed -like you did- in $cientology, along with all its "tech".

It seems to me that the people gathered there in that room with you were all criminals, and very well aware of that.

>Now I know as a Sec checker, and I have posted that I audited exec's who had
>their folders "vetted" which means things said were either blacked out with a
>magic marker, or much was even cut out, line by line or sometimes whole
>paragraphs. Who knows what THEY did! So I know they CAN do that. But Gavino
>saying to Bill, "I told you about her"...he never really explained, nor would
>Bill. My guess is the old stereotype that was run on me for 30 years:
>
>I have a physical illness (although I haven't had a seizure for 20 years, and
>don't really even know if I still have it, but technically they can say that,
>and always did).Thus, I am in the 1.1 tone band (per Science of Survival) and
>thus cannot be trusted. It is serious Bullshit, but "tech" they all live and
>die by, so that was my guess and still is.

Their only "tech" is crime. That is "the OSA way". Simple "lies" are for "PR" people, but the real "OSA boys" have to prove themselves by being as utterly criminal and mean as they can get. It is a "gang" with an according "gang mentality", that provides it's "picking order".

>Soooo ol Mr. Gavino THOUGHT I was going to screw him. I wasn't and quite
>possibly would have stayed extremely loyal, until HE pulled this crap that
>night. It was truly like Truman seeing the cameras in his room, once he
>noticed. Suddenly things he never saw came into view.

They obviously expected that you had by then also discovered the stupidity of this "tech" thing like they had done. From their point of view, it would be logical for you to progress to become a criminal and a "member of the gang" like they had done. They were expecting that you would have discovered ways to fleece people and make your living off the "mark"'s back like they did.

>So I can only guess, as it was a TOTALLY weird deal for me, and certainly
>nothing I had ever seen. Well, not ever, as a many weird and "out tech" things
>had occurred to me within this group, but NEVER from a Class 9, OT 7, Senior
>C/S auditor, to say nothing of he being one of my best friends at the time.

>Here they were, in public no less, and with a Clear, asking me some very
>confidential questions that honestly even I didn't know the answers to. What
>might come up?
>
>A) Who gives a shit, as they promised I could and would have these excellent
>auditors when needed.

It seems to be a "religious" sacrament in $cientology to never keep promises. They knew that. You apparently didn't.

>B) As I have said, due to these spirits (BT's or groups of them called
>"clusters") can become suggestible to just about ANYTHING really. Let's say in
>a sec check, where they are checking for any "out ethics" or bad things one
>might have done. Let's say they ask,
>"In your last 6 months, have you done anything illegal?" Well, I guess they
>were planning on all these OT's just shutting up. I really don't know, because
>if you think something, it will read on a meter, or come up to be addressed. My
>guess is they really hadn't thought this all through, and I was the first to
>leave. I am 99% sure they had gotten in deeper than they had planned, and
>actually were doing things that could border on illegal. I doubt they planned
>this out, so they were not thinking of OT's when they rolled in as far as they
>did. Now I say I am leaving, and they were trying to get from me what I might
>possibly say about this secret group to ANY auditor, even OSA OK'd. As
>remember, this shit is secret even to most of their own group.

They were simply hoping you would have become honest with them, saying that all that "tech" was nonsense, and that you would never tell anything to anyone. They were acting as criminal gang members, not as "parishioners".

>C) It might have been some for of intimidation, trying to scare me into
>shutting up. This is only a guess, but it was quite weird.

Indeed, they probably used the approach they chose, because they wanted to determine how much of the "tech" you still believed in, and how determined your beliefs were. If you had shown a very strong resolve, believing in the "tech", they would have found ways to manipulate you into oblivion. If you would have shown compliance to their criminal gang, you would have not been able to leave alive.

But as we all know, $cientology does not have a way to "handle" those who are "in doubt". And obviously the criminals involved here were not prepared to murder in this case. Yet. ;-(

>D) They were asking this question, probably trying to find out IF I considered
>any of this illegal (WHAT MIGHT COME UP IN SESSSION, TORY!?!), and then if I
>said anything, they could nail me for being out ethics mentioning any
>confidential stuff. Again this is only a guess, as I was as confused or more. I
>guess probably just trying to fuck with me.

I think they wanted to hear from you what "shore story" you could come up with. Any selfrespecting criminal gang puts it's new members through that excercise.

If you look at the basics of it all, the "sec check" was obviously developed for the same purpose.

In general, criminals do not like it when they have to deal with people they cannot fully trust. And they can only trust people if they know that these people have commited crimes (that the gang knows about) themselves.

You hadn't. And you were obviously not capable or willing to start lying your way out right then and there.

I'm somewhat puzzled by the way you got out after all this, though.

On the other hand, OSA (or GO as it was previously known as) has never really been known for it's efficiency...

>E) Some OT's have told me about reverse auditing. I do not know if this would
>fall into that category, but my guess is yes. From what I have heard, it is
>done to Screw people up, introvert them, and mess with their minds. All of this
>occurred during this "session". Plus it was "TOTALLY OUT TECH" which the others
>have said reverse auditing is. Mostly it has been used with people leaving OSA,
>or OT 7's that are leaving, that I have heard of. Seriously gross, and created
>the exact opposite effect of whatever they were hoping to create. If anything,
>this was one of the gigantic cracks in the walls of the Scio-Truman Show.

This "reverse auditing" as well as "auditing" itself, is basically self-delusion. You need to be "gullible" to become receptive.

In your case, I tend to think that some efforts may have been initiated at "reverse auditing" (in other words, confusing you maximally).

Of course these attempts were as criminal as the original fraudulous attempts to get you to believe in some bogus "science of the mind".

And I'm glad to find that -in the end- you never really fell for that delusion.

I am a bit worried about the fact that you still attribute much of your own "beliefs" (at the time) to the criminals that made you "believe".

I'm unconvinced that these people shared your set of beliefs. ;-)

>So I hope that helps clarify this for you. If I missed any of what you asked,
>or someone has more questions, please just ask!
>
>Pretty gross stuff, to say the very least. It is amazing to me to this day that
>Judges, Journalists, and people in high places turn their heads pretending none
>of this is true. I know evil is hard to confront, but this IS what they do,
>when they want to cover their asses. I couldn't make this shit up if I tried.

>Actually, neither could you. I ask each person who can and should face up and
>expose this kind of evil tyranny to do so. More than you think is at stake.
>
>Keep in mind, Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. Lots of men and women
>died for those rights. The least we can do is expose violations of it!
>
>Love to you all!
>
>Tory/Magoo~still dancing with the Easter Bunny~

I think of you daily, Tory. And I thank you for being in my life!

Groeten,
Boudewijn.