By Frank Parlato;
Kristin Kreuk remains silent.
She let NXIVM use her name and image to bring in scores of people. I know, I was there. She was star #1.
Maybe they have collateral on her. Maybe she slept with Keith Raniere who, as everyone involved in NXIVM knows, really prefers to be called by his self-given title “The Vanguard”. . Even back then, Keith had nude pictures taken of women after they had sex with him.
Kristin might be terrified of this. I don’t know. I never confirmed she had sex with Raniere. She was certainly enamored of the courses.
Because they used her fame to lure young people – she should speak out. Not because EXPians need her help. She needs to do it for her own sake.
NXIVM will be written about. Studied. Examined. Dramatized. Books will be written. Movies made.
When this explodes – and it will – she will, unavoidably, go down as part of NXIVM history. After it explodes – and arrests are made – nobody will care what Kristin has to say. After the indictments come down, her role in NXIVM will be written in stone. The criminal trial will bring out morbid and lurid details. The notoriety will not disappear for decades. They might laugh when she takes a role as a brave woman. Perhaps she will become a joke. Her career, toast. When she had the chance; when it still counted – she kept hidden. Let others do the fighting.
Raniere is telling everyone that a few suppressives – Sarah Edmondson, Catherine Oxenberg, Mark Vicente, Bonnie Piesse, Toni Zarratini, Susan Dones, Barbara Bouchey, Toni Natalie, less than a dozen – out of 16,000 students – are ruining the mission.
Her voice now will resonate. It will penetrate the NXIVM world to the very bone. It will hit Mexico like an avalanche. It will comport with Kristin Kreuk’s acting persona of “I am a fighter.”
If she waits until after he is arrested – it will look like she’s a wimp.
I have more respect for Allison Mack or Nicki Clyne than for Keith Raniere or Kristin Kreuk.
Raniere has fled from his longtime home, coward that he is. Allison and Nicki at least are willing to stand for what they believe; wrong though they may be, they are willing to sacrifice their names, fame, wealth and, most likely, their freedom for years to come.
Kreuk and Raniere are hiding. And Kreuk was the first celebrity of NXIVM; used to build NXIVM. She was used to abuse women.
She can stay quiet. Let her hide. The battle is nearing the end. There are heroes enough already. Toni Natalie, Catherine Oxenberg. How about Susan Dones who took on a phalanx of NXIVM lawyers and handed them their asses. Mark Vicente, Joe O’Hara.
Kristin Kreuk plays heroes on TV. She would vomit blood and die if she had to fight in real life like Toni Natalie did.
However, it’s not too late for her to fight a little. In a month or less, it may be too late.
Kristin, you owe the public a statement; you are part of the story. Speak the truth without fear that it will anger Raniere. Truth is always truth. Speak boldly. Speak your convictions even if you support NXIVM. Don’t hesitate to speak the truth out of fear of losing your fans or being drawn into a fight.
Be a hero Kristin Kreuk. Your silence will be gravely construed against you in the long run.
Is it just me, or was this online survey, run by Kristin Kreuth and Allison Mack in late 2007, a recruiting tool for getting new wealthy teenage girls into the cult/pyramid scheme? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TZ4aEk9Ecoc
Take a look at the closeup of the survey at 1:07 in the video. They were specifically asking survey respondents for details of their disposable income. Also, they were specifically looking for college students (i.e., teenagers with enough money to afford college). I wonder if they successfully recruited any college girls into the cult with this survey.
Yes, the survey is very troubling.
It does look like a way to find students with money who ESP could exploit.
It also speaks to the “celebrity draw” of both actresses.
The only mitigating factor is that in 2007, I don’t think KK (and maybe AM) knew of the sex aspects of the cult…still………
Are you seriously trying to throw her under the bus in an attempt to make her talk?
Go ahead and sharpen your knife all you want. You’re only making yourself look bad. You really don’t seem to know anything about her. You think she slept with him. What a joke!! She did no such thing!
And Kristin doesn’t owe you or anybody squat! So get over it. This is so beyond ridiculous. You CLEARLY have some kind of vendatta against her.
Let’s assume Keith has no collateral (of the DOS type) on Kristin…but as an outsider, I would guess that in EM’s or in other confessional situations, she could reveal very personal info…that Keith would have recorded to manipulate her later.
Do any EXpian posters feel such personal info might have been recorded?
“the only way this could be true is if ‘SCARROM’ is ‘Kristin’ and/or ‘Keith’ – or a material witness?!
if anyone else – its just conjecture”
Umm…no. I could know Kristin personally and she could have told me. I could know Kristin’s good friend who Kristin told and the former happens to be a really good friend of mine, but I don’t know Kristin, and they could have told me. It could have been relayed to me via a publicist. Or I could know it in some other manner. These are all viable options.
“The redoubtable Mr. Frank Parlato employs conjecture, as he does fact, to bring an end to a dangerous organisation led by a destructive sociopath. He invites Ms. Kreuk to do the same for the sake of the righteous enterprise – and for her own peace of mind.”
Conjecture is muddled state between uncertainty and certainty and is based on incomplete information. Asking Kristin to come forward to express how she feels about the current situation is completely different from and can do away with invoking logical fallacies and sullying her character in what appears to be some strange attempt to guilt her into talking based on her past association to the group.
“you defend Ms. Kreuk in the manner of ‘Aristotle’s knife'(sic)”
Don’t put me down and associate me with them. I have nothing to do with NXIVM. I defend her using my own mind and logical reasoning. The fallacies I have mentioned are well known.
“i.e. rendering perfectly clear argument incoherent by using much trivial and frivolous objection.
Its fallacious to oppose a point on the basis of incidental aspects – so you can avoid dealing with the main claim.”
You can’t do this. The argument is logical if it is valid (and thus coherent) if it follows from the premises using the rules of deductive logic. It is sound if the premises are also true. So an argument can be valid and not sound, but cannot be sound and not valid. Engaging in logical fallacies is antithetical to logical reasoning and therefore makes the argument invalid, and thus, incoherent by definition. Pointing out the invalidity of the premises or the reasoning itself is not a trivial or frivolous objection. It is how deconstruction of logical arguments work.
‘Because they used her fame to lure young people – she should speak out. Not because EXPians need her help. She needs to do it for her own sake.’
I take this to be Frank’s main claim. backed by plenty of rhetorical conjecture, such as you might find on a crusading website dedicated to the demise of a dangerous cult. Mr. Parlato’s vested interests are freely divulged. I think of him as an Ace Reporter on a highly effective if sensationalist website, not a philosophy Lecturer assessing Logic M1a. It was real low of me to equate you with AK. I am sorry for it.
As a person and a philosopher, you are obviously better than that.
[…] note: I like to give contrasting views. Below already appeared as a comment on a post I wrote earlier today suggesting Kristin Kreuk speak out – for her own sake – about Keith […]
+1 for “scarrom”.
Frank, I think you might as well give up with these attempts regarding Kristin Kreuk. She’s not going to say anything, period.
This type of thing just further cheapens an already cheap website.
if I was going to smear years of sound, transparent and fearless reporting, instrumental in
bringing down a dangerous cult, as – ‘cheapening an already cheap site’ – I too would remain anonymous.
I can’t see Frank giving up anytime soon, even if his work here, has to a measurable extent – been done.
can’t blame him for wanting the women still involved, home safe, which will happen soon as they face up.
Well, “onewomanarmy” isn’t any less anonymous than “anonymous.”
But, actually I do think Kristin Kreuk should say something. And I do agree with some of Franks points.
I’m just saying that she won’t. For better or worse.
You’re so right, sorry it’s a work nickname so I never equate it with anonymity, but of course here, ‘ onewomanarmy ‘ is just as anonymous as ‘anonymous’ I agree with frank too. If she never tells though.. nature abhors a vacuum and it will continue to fill with conjecture and surmise. I say carpe dieum Kristin, take the wind out of everybody’s hot air balloons!
. Keith will get even with the suppressive and kick her tiny little ass for not defending him. After he gave her so much she does not defend him. I call bullshit on her. He made her and Allison stars.
Is that a threat?
No,it’s not a threat its just her opinion. Keith is a vengeful ravenous wolf. Kristin is a lamb. She is no match for the great and powerful Vanguard of NXIVM. Please urge her not to speak. He will devour her in two seconds. Do you understand that being an actress doesn’t mean you are the character. If she played a killer, no one would expect she is s real killer. Just because she might play a brave woman on a tv show doesn’t mean she’s a brave fighter. She’s an actress and a former student of the Vanguard. Although I do agree that the vaginal Vanguard’s conquest of her womanhood or not is irrelevant. He conquered the mind.
You sound retarded.
I fail to see your logic.
‘She let NXIVM use her name and image to bring in scores of people. I know, I was there. She was star #1.’
NXIVM brought in scores of people by various means, at least according to their own figures. Where is the evidence for the causal link that Kristin brought in “scores of people” due to her association? I am aware that Kristin recruited three people. Only Allison Mack remains in NXIVM. Rick Ross has stated that cults hide behind organizational fronts of legitimate businesses. Implying or implicitly conflating that she brought in scores of people into NXIVM to take self-improvement courses with the notion that she brought in scores of women into a “sex cult” is simply bad journalism. Many people take one or two of these type of courses and never return.
‘Maybe she slept with Keith Raniere’
Kristin never slept with him. I know. How I know is irrelevant. Also, you have another source stating that Kristin was never a member of Keith’s harem in your article posted several months ago here: https://frankreport.com/2016/02/08/source-kreuk-never-in-keiths-harem-other-celebrities-are-in-nxivm/. So I don’t see how speculation into this aspect of her life is relevant anymore. It only serves to sully her character.
‘When this explodes – and it will – she will, unavoidably, go down as part of NXIVM history…’
She is already part of NXIVM history. The key word is “history”. She’s been gone from it for several years now – at least since 2012 – and has moved on with her life. She has no relevance to DOS. She was never part of the inner core. And she had no knowledge of any of the financial misbehaving and other illegal criminal activities of Raniere and company. Guilt by association is an ad hominem logical fallacy.
‘I have more respect for Allison Mack or Nicki Clyne than for Keith Raniere or Kristin Kreuk.’
Well this is just stupid and shows your bias. You have more respect for a woman (Allison) who is second in command to Raniere in DOS and who even you have speculated married the other (Nicki) to keep from being deported? Sara Edmondson had been in the cult longer, was in it before her and remained well in it after Kristin left – she even called Lauren Salzman best friend who was also a bridesmaid at her wedding – and even she didn’t know about the branding, yet here you are attacking someone who left several years ago like she’s part and parcel to these secretive machinations when at most her involvement was simply at the level of believing that the group was for the advancement of ethics and self-improvement.
“Kreuk and Raniere are hiding.”
More idiotic conflation between two unequal characters in this saga that serves no purpose except to sully the former. Kreuk has been living in Toronto for five years now. She worked on “Beauty and the Beast” for four years and just recently finished filming a ten episode series called “Burden of Truth” which she also executive produced.
” And Kreuk was the first celebrity of NXIVM; used to build NXIVM.”
This is not true. Mark Vicente, Mark Hildreth and Sarah Edmondson were all in it prior to her. All of them were (minor) celebrities in the entertainment industry. I believe Linda Evans was also associated to it before her. She could be considered the “biggest current star” they had taking and coaching courses when she was in it, but Tom Cruise to Scientology she is and never was.
“She was used to abuse women.”
More ludicrous guilt by association.
This article was little more than nonsense and essentially an ad hominem against someone who hasn’t been relevant to NXIVM for several years and certainly has no relevance to its most recent events. It serves only to sully the content of this site. It also smells of an attempt to use a person’s celebrity for their own purposes. Ironically, something like the author claims NXIVM did to her.
‘Kristin never slept with him. I know. How I know is irrelevant.’
the only way this could be true is if ‘SCARROM’ is ‘Kristin’ and/or ‘Keith’ – or a material witness?!
if anyone else – its just conjecture.
The redoubtable Mr. Frank Parlato employs conjecture, as he does fact, to bring an end to a dangerous organisation led by a destructive sociopath. He invites Ms. Kreuk to do the same for the sake of the righteous enterprise – and for her own peace of mind.
you defend Ms. Kreuk in the manner of ‘Aristotle’s knife'(sic)
i.e. rendering perfectly clear argument incoherent by using much trivial and frivolous objection.
Its fallacious to oppose a point on the basis of incidental aspects – so you can avoid dealing with the main claim.