This is the next in our series on Lauren Salzman.
We have been examining Lauren’s role in the solitary confinement of Daniella, who was placed alone in a room in her family’s house in Clifton Park for 700 days – because she kissed another man.
Dani was in Keith Raniere’s harem and did not have permission to be with any other man for the rest of her life.
She was about 24 years old at the time.
Daniella felt it was unfair that Keith could have a harem and that she must be just one of 20 or so female members of it, without being able to ever have a relationship with any other man the rest of her life.
She told Keith she kissed the man – his name is Ben Myers, a Nxivm member.
Keith told her she must never do this again. Dani was defiant. She demanded the right to have another man as long as Keith had other women.
This was her ethical breach for which Keith assigned her to a room. Not that she kissed a man, but that she did not promise to not do it again.
In fairness, Dani was not an infant. She was an adult woman in her early 20s and she voluntarily went into the room and stayed there.
There was no lock on the door.
Also, in fairness, only Keith and Dani seemed to know what the ethical breach was – her kissing another man.
She chose not to tell it to her family or anyone else, and Keith would not, of course, admit it. His sex life was always secret from those who were not in his harem [and often secretive in the harem as well since the harem members never knew who he was screwing next.]
But there were some conditions of Dani staying in the room that seem quite coercive.
For one, she was an illegal alien subject to deportation. She was an adult when she illegally entered the USA with Keith’s help and planning. But she had no money, no job and had been Raniere’s full-time slave for years.
In addition, her two sisters, Cami and Mariana, were in Keith’s harem and they clearly took sides with Keith. On top of that, Dani’s parents were devotees of Keith and fully supported whatever he said was best for their daughter.
He knew better than they, their parental instincts could not compare with the superior wisdom of the smartest, most ethical man in the world.
Raniere also told Dani that if she did not heal her ethical breach, not only would he never speak to her again, but he would forbid her family from speaking to her ever again; she would lose her family, her Nxivm community – the only community she had known since she was 16, and possibly her freedom since she was illegally in the USA.
Dani had no money, no job, no family support and faced deportation and possible arrest if she defied Raniere, and though no one locked her in the room, she went there and stayed for 700 days.
She was – and then again she was not – forced to go into the room.
Enter Lauren Salzman.
Lauren was Keith’s long time harem member and one of the most competent in running his Nxivm operations. She had been waiting for something very special for her years of service in his harem: she was under the [false] impression that she, above all other harem members, was chosen to have Raniere’s avatar baby.
In anticipation of being the mother of the supreme child, she waited some 20 years.
In the end, Raniere chose to sire his avatar baby with Dani’s sister, Mariana. Then he got himself arrested and never saw the child again.
Back in 2010, faithful Lauren was on hand, as she waited for the blessed day when she would get pregnant, to supervise Dani’s solitary confinement (It appears that Lauren never once advocated for Dani’s release).
In this excerpt from the trial of Keith Alan Raniere, Lauren is being examined by the AUSA Tanya Hajjar and the testimony focuses on one particular event – a note Dani wrote saying she wanted to be released and an email from Lauren and Keith’s response to it.
Q I’m going to show you what is in evidence as Government’s Exhibit 1242. Can you just describe what the bottom e-mail is from, what the bottom e-mail is?
A Yes. Describe it or read it?
Q Well, who sent it?
A I sent it to Keith on November 8, 2010. Daniella wrote a letter saying, “Let me out. I’m coming undone.” And Camila intercepted the letter and didn’t show it –
Q I’m sorry, Ms. Salzman. Just before that. The subject is what?
Q And BoBi is Daniella?
A BoBi, yes, “BoBi/Cami.” BoBi is — I call Daniella “BoBi,” like just an iteration on [her nickname] “BoBo.”
Q And Cami is Camila?
Q And what email address are you using to communicate with the defendant?
Q Okay. Can you read the text of the email?
A “Doomp, [Lauren’s nickname for Keith] I’m going to sleep, but apparently, BoBo wrote a letter that said, ‘Let me out. I’m coming undone.’ Camila intercepted it and didn’t show it to the parents because they are so reactionary. She instead texted me asking for permission to speak to BoBo. I told her no and explained I thought it was bad on a postulate level. I’m not going there tonight because of the letter, but I will stop by in the morning probably around 8:00 a.m. I plan to explain to BoBi that I think she’s had a huge setback and this focus of ‘letting me out of the room’ is totally in the opposite direction of healing the breach.
“If there’s anything that you think I should add or do differently, please let me know. If not and you’re okay with what I’m planning, I will just report in afterwards. I will call you before I go over there in the morning, but I have not been able to reach you mornings this week. If possible, I would like to sleep through the night tonight, but if there’s anything urgent you need to tell me about, best you can wake me up. If not, I’ll be up around 6:30 a.m. Love you.”
Q And Doomp, what is that?
A It’s a nickname that I called Keith.
Q And when you write, “Apparently, BoBo wrote a letter that said, ‘Let me out. I’m coming undone.’ Camila intercepted it and didn’t show the parents because they’re so reactionary?”
Q What was, “Let me out. I’m coming undone?”
A That Dani was having — was feeling emotionally not okay in the room and didn’t — and wanted permission to come out.
Q “ Let me out of the room?”
A “Let me out of the room.”
Q And when you write, “Camila intercepted it and didn’t show the parents because they are so reactionary,” who is they?
A The parents.
Q And when you say, “they’re so reactionary,” what does “reactionary” mean as you meant it?
A That they would take action on getting the letter by communicating with her in some way that would again be viewed as thwarting the process [of keeping Dani in the room in solitary confinement until Keith felt she healed her ethical breach].
Q So, in other words, that they would want to contact their daughter?
Q And thwart the defendant’s project?
Q And so when you write, “She instead texted me asking for permission to speak to BoBo,” who is she in that sentence?
Q So Camila asked you for permission to speak to her sister?
Q And when you write, “I told her no, and explained why I thought it was bad on a postulate level?”
Q What did that mean?
A It meant that similar to the birthday, that the decision was that she was not — that the family was not to speak to her and that if they did speak to her, she would learn that she could get upset and get things that she wanted.
Q And “on a postulate level,” that phrase, is that a term used in ESP?
A Yes, it’s an ESP term. Basically, it means — postulate is like your belief about how the world works. So if like she feels upset and then her parents communicate with her, then she has a belief that if she gets upset, they will communicate with her and that’s how a postulate is formed.
Q When you write, “I plan to explain to BoBi that I think she’s had a huge setback and this focus of ‘let me out of the room’ is totally in the opposite direction of healing a breach.” Just very plainly, what are you conveying to the defendant [Raniere]?
A I’m conveying to him that similar to the way I described it before, she’s having an emotional reaction and focusing on what she wants to get out of the experience instead of what she was trying to earn through the experience.
Q And so you’re connecting her desire, her statement, let me out of the room to not being helpful to healing her breach, whatever that meant?
Q Did the defendant respond?
A The next day in the morning.
Q November 9, 2010?
A Yeah, I’m sorry.
Q And what did the defendant write?
A “Hi, Honey. You do not want to buy into BoBo’s tantrum or externalization. Likewise, you do not want to tell her what to do or how to be. You might try asking her the difference between being in the room for a day… or as long as she has. From a present time perspective there is no difference except suffering and entitlement…. Hope this helps. Keith.”
Q And when the defendant wrote, “You don’t want to buy into BoBo’s tantrum or externalizations,” what did that mean?
A It meant that she wasn’t — that she was that her emotional reaction and communication that she was coming undone is a temper tantrum — is simply a temper tantrum and her focus on what she wants to get from the outside world is her, you know, blaming that on the outside world or looking to the outside world to get something that’s going to change how she’s going to feel on the inside. And if you give her things or change the circumstances outside, then she won’t be able to have this experience of being complete on the inside. So you shouldn’t do that.
Q And by BoBo’s tantrum, is he referring to fact that she’s expressing, “Let me out. I’m coming undone?”
Q After this, after Daniella said, “Let me out. I’m coming undone –”
Q — how much longer did she stay in the room?…
A Like a year — no like, over a year and almost a half.
What a great examination by Hajjar, saving the punchline on this exchange of emails for the end: Dani is coming undone in 2010 and when did you let her out? — ah, oh, ah… 2012.
And, in this post, we again observe how Lauren like Raniere utters the most exquisite word salad to justify her insane cruelty.
Let’s look at the emails –how Lauren and Keith communicate over the confinement of a woman in a room.
“Doomp, …. BoBo wrote a letter that said, ‘Let me out. I’m coming undone.’ Camila… didn’t show it to the parents because they are so reactionary. She instead texted me asking for permission to speak to BoBo. I told her no and explained I thought it was bad on a postulate level… I plan to explain to BoBi that I think she’s had a huge setback and this focus of ‘letting me out of the room’ is totally in the opposite direction of healing the breach…
Yeah, a 24 year old woman wanting to get out of the room and start living again is “a huge setback.”
“Stay in my pretty – and heal the breach.”
Then, always deferring to her cruel monster avatar wannabe baby father, even if it means being sleep-deprived, Lauren continues:
“If there’s anything that you think I should add or do differently, please let me know. If … you’re okay with what I’m planning, I will just report in afterwards…. I would like to sleep through the night tonight, but if there’s anything urgent you need to tell me about, best you can wake me up…. Love you.”
And the monster replies:
Hi, Honey. You do not want to buy into BoBo’s tantrum or externalization. Likewise, you do not want to tell her what to do or how to be. You might try asking her the difference between being in the room for a day… or as long as she has. From a present time perspective there is no difference except suffering and entitlement…. Hope this helps. Keith.”
Fucking bullshit language. Dani wants to get out of the room. And, for Keith, it is her “externalization,” whatever that means.
Then he tells Lauren, don’t give Dani any advice either. Let her linger and suffer.
For Lauren, wallowing in immense selfishness and stupidity, all she could figure out was that Dani wanting to get out of her prison meant that it was “bad on a postulate level.”
On a postulate level, I would postulate that it will be very bad to let either Keith or Lauren get out of prison too soon.
Otherwise, they will never heal their ethical breaches, one of which was to work together and conspire to keep a woman coerced and mindfucked into staying in a room for 700 days.
If that is not an “ethical breach,” on a “postulate level,” I don’t even know what “externalization” is.
The notorious crime boss James “Whitey” Bulger terrorized Boston from the 1970s into the 1990s with a campaign of murder, extortion and drug trafficking, then spent 16 years on the lam after he was tipped off to his pending arrest.
In 2013, Janet Uhlar was one of 12 jurors who found Bulger guilty in a massive racketeering case, including involvement in 11 murders. But now Uhlar says she regrets voting to convict Bulger on any of the murder charges.
Her regret stems from a cache of more than 70 letters Bulger wrote to her from prison, some of which describe his unwitting participation in a secret CIA experiment with LSD. In a desperate search for a mind control drug in the 1950s, the agency dosed Bulger with the powerful hallucinogen more than 50 times when he was serving his first stretch in prison, in Atlanta — something never brought up in his federal trial.
“Had I known, I would have absolutely held off on the murder charges,” Uhlar told the Associated Press in a recent interview. “He didn’t murder prior to the LSD. His brain may have been altered, so how could you say he was really guilty?”
The CIA used MK ULTRA to experiment on Whitey Bulger without his knowledge.
It occurred to me to offer the Scientology definition of postulate (they have their own dictionaries), which is the unacknowledged (in violation of the NXIVM mission statement point about not “Copying without permission or tribute”) basis for how the word is used by NXians, though they may have further warped its original, normal meaning:
‘postulate: a conclusion, decision or resolution made by the individual himself to resolve a problem or to set a pattern for the future or to nullify a pattern of the past. For example, a person says, “I like Model T Fords. I am never going to drive another car.” Years later, no longer consciously aware of this postulate, he will wonder why he is having so much trouble with his Buick; it’s because he has made an earlier promise to himself. In order to change he has to change that postulate.’
It also shows up in verb form in one of Hubbard’s and Scientology’s “axioms” in a pseudo-logical system (second to last line):
Order manifests when communication, control and havingness are available to theta.
DEFINITIONS: Communication: the interchange of ideas across space.
Control: positive postulating, which is intention, and the execution thereof.
Havingness: that which permits the experience of mass and pressure.”
I’ve seen scientologists use it like that indicating intention with a mix of both wishfulness and planning – similar to “new age” beliefs about thoughts creating reality, and “manifesting,” verging into magical thinking – as in “I’m postulating more clients for my business.”
The insightful and learned ex-scientologist critic, researcher and author Jon Atack uses it as an example of Hubbard’s and Scientology’s Orwellian re-definition of words:
‘A fine example of a concept slipped into a word that actually creates new meaning is the word postulate. In its origins, a postulate is a demand. In logic, it means, “A proposition demanded or claimed to be granted; especially something claimed or assumed as a basis for reasoning, discussion, or belief; hence, a fundamental condition or principle…” (Oxford English Dictionary).
Without allowing any discussion, Hubbard transforms the word postulate into “a self-created truth” or “that self-determined thought which starts, stops or changes past, present, or future events.” This second definition (from Advanced Procedures and Axioms), bothered me even as a believer. How do we “start, stop, or change” past events?
It was only after I had left Scientology that Hubbard’s method for changing the past became evident – I compared tens of his autobiographies and discovered the many contradictions between them: indeed, no two were consistent. In Hubbard’s world, the past is changed by lying – a simple form of “postulate.”
Hubbard also defined postulate as “a prediction,” or “causative thinkingness” (a word Shakespeare managed to avoid). All of this verbiage to hide a simple change in the believer’s information processing: A postulate is nothing more nor less than a wish. Hubbard was determined to make his rag-bag of ideas seem scientific. So pompous, nebulous language like “postulate” fits perfectly. It seems solid enough at first, but like so much in Hubbard’s weltanschauung, it melts like sea foam in the slightest breeze.’
Regarding Lauren Salzman s
I’m glad I’m not the judge. Some days, I feel Lauren deserves 3-5 years and then other days, like today, I believe she deserves 2 years.
Does anyone else flipflop like me?
You’re a lying sack of shit, Frank.
You do little else but campaign for Lauren to receive maximum years.
You hate her. You are not neutral.
Stop trying to BULLSHIT us, sir, since I see right through you.
You suffer from Lauren Derangement Syndrome. Truth is, I’m just surprised you haven’t tried to link her to the Kennedy assassination yet.
“Does anyone else flipflop like me?”
Sometimes I believe that Lauren Salzman deserves six years and sometimes I believe she deserves ten years.
And sometimes I believe that the world owes Keith Raniere a big thanks for making it unlikely that Lauren Salzman will ever have children.
And other days I wish she was cuddling up next to me.
I was reminded by an article today at another anti-cult site, that what was done to Dani is similar of the thought reform of Scientology’s RPF, or Rehabilitation Project Force – though that is done in a gulag-like group setting. And this is more an anecdote rather than a full account:
In Scientology’s Sea Org, the terror originates inside your own head
I can’t readily find a succinct explanation of it from an independent source, but former member and critic Chris Shelton describes it as like a Maoist re-education camp, or a prison detail, for the Sea Org, which is the dedicated inner core of workers who live communally and are subject to sleep and food deprivation as a norm, somewhat similar to Raniere’s inner circle in Clifton Park. Those who are involved in some sort of failure for which they are blamed – as in Raniere’s inner circle, people may be held responsible or scapegoated for things beyond their control, much less normal human mistakes and shortcomings – or who express doubts or want to leave, or just somehow determined to show signs of flagging attitudes or disaffeciton, are segregated and put into the program for months or years. They are prohibited from speaking to anyone except others assigned to the program, have to engage in hard and often demeaning labor, and then spend any remaining waking hours in confessionals, and continue until supervisors decide that the member is somehow sufficiently reformed to return to the main group – again somewhat reminiscent of Dani’s case as administered by Salzman and over seen by Raniere.
For anyone interested, here’s a deep dive from the most prominent academic studying the subject, Steven Kent:
BRAINWASHING IN SCIENTOLOGY’S REHABILITATION PROJECT FORCE (RPF)
This study examines the confinement programs and camps that Scientology operates as supposedly rehabilitative facilities for “deviant” members of its “elite” Sea Organization. These programs, known collectively as the Rehabilitation Project Force (RPF), put coerced participants through regimes of harsh physical punishment, forced self-confessions, social isolation, hard labour, and intense doctrinal study, all as part of leadership-designed efforts to regain members’ ideological commitment. The confinement that participants experience, combined with forms of physical maltreatment, intensive ideological study, and forced confessions, allows social scientists to speak of the RPF as a “brainwashing” program.
“Postulate” is another bit of terminology that Raniere apparently took from Scientology.
Good call, Dianne. It sounds totally nonsensical in both contexts also.
I’m reminded of a headline from the Underground Bunker, “When you Postulate upon a Star.”
There’s one aspect of Lauren’s testimony I find quite humorous; when AUSA Hajjar asks Lauren to explain ESP vocabulary and Lauren simply gives a convoluted definition and explanation of the original meaning of the word in question.
Lauren acts as if she is the sacred keeper of sublime and arcana knowledge that only a very few are privy to, and capable of comprehending…
Does anyone know who is the lead plaintiff is in Neil Glazer‘’s class-action lawsuit?
I consider it important to clearly contextualize that Dani’s alternative was to be deported and lose her family. The more I read about modern research into things like the physiology of fear, the more I’m starting to think that cults put people in situations where members actually feel that they are under as much threat as if they were facing grave physical harm, and, in some circumstances, death – as outsiders, we need to appreciate the reality of that.
I’m also reminded of the sort of hothouse environment created where, among other things, people get incredibly focused on odd bits of theory and ideology, like arguments over how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, or ovew what sort of deprivations monks and ascetics should subject themselves to in order to try to purify themselves, based on readings of particular biblical passages (some of the history of medieval Christian practices makes NXIVM look moderate). There are strange sorts of behaviors and worldviews that develop in closed groups, perhaps best known in popular culture through fictional examples such as Lord of the Flies.
I do think that Raniere orchestrated such things, knowing full well what he was doing as a means of manipulating people. And principal players like Salzman are clearly culpable for what they did to others, even if they were somewhat lost in the matrix themselves.
“physiology of fear…… cults put people in situations where members actually feel that they are under as much threat as if they were facing grave physical harm, and, in some circumstances, death – as outsiders, we need to appreciate the reality of that.”
AnonyMaker, you made some excellent points.
I believe personality cults(cults of personality) almost always depend partially on the Psychology of Fear. Lauren could have feared ending up like Dani to a certain degree; imagine the ethical-breach(transgression), Lauren would have committed if Lauren had allowed Cami to speak to her sister.
I don’t know if it’s possible, but It would be great if the Glazer lawsuit somehow encompassed the defendants having to pay to provide psychological support and therapy for the victims. All those women (especially those he got to early in life) are going to need help retraining to recognize abusiveness and to stand up to not accept it. The “silent wall” always protects the abuser. The fact that Dani didn’t even feel she could tell the real reason she was stuck in a room to rot – because Raniere was throwing a temper tantrum. Given the warped thinking of everyone around her, even the truth might not have helped – but domestic abuse usually continues because there is a tacit silence to not expose the abuser.
Lauren made a good bit of cash – maybe she should be made to pay for the psychiatric care of all those under her as well as her own. Wish the world worked that way: sentencing including a requirement that she not be let out until she is cleared as mentally unlikely to commit abuse like this again. Raniere – he can just rot. Pretty certain he can’t be retrained. Oubliette time for him.
Here is a PDF file describing how the NXIVM defendants will face both compensatory and punitive damages.
15 Years of the Private Right of Action
“Lauren made a good bit of cash” – a lot of them did. Why isn’t the IRS all over them.
Because the IRS is back logged till the end of time because of the Clinton 1998 Tax law.
It’s not the Republicans who f*** up the IRS it was Bill Clinton.
One provision of the law:
“The burden of proof in civil court cases involving tax disputes would be shifted from the taxpayer to the IRS.”
The IRS has limited resources.
Can being ‘f#%*d Up’ be considered a valid mitigating factor?
Fluffy Glazer might know.