What did Keith Raniere mean when he said, “I’ve had people killed because of my beliefs” on an April 2009 video?
Nine Nxivm women, led by Barbara Bouchey, sought to speak to Keith Raniere about their concerns about the way he was running the company and, in particular, his method of teaching which included sexually mentoring students and female members of the company’s executive board.
Of the nine women who confronted him, Bouchey and Susan Dones were the highest-ranking Nxivm members. Bouchey had been one of Raniere’s girlfriends for years but had stopped the sexual component of their relationship, she has stated, about a year before the meeting. Dones was the operator of Nxivm’s first satellite center in Washington State. She never had a sexual encounter with Raniere and is a lesbian, married to another of the nine women, Kim Woolhouse.
All nine women met with Raniere and for three days, Bouchey and, at various times, the other eight women were involved in an in-depth discussion with Raniere, all videotaped on Dones’ camera to determine if they should quit Nxivm or remain.
The famous snippet where Raniere says, “I’ve had people killed because of my beliefs” was part of a much longer conversation – in apparent response to a challenge Bouchey made about his ability to lead the company.
Two recent posts by guest writers on Frank Report have offered opinions on the matter:
Guest View on ‘I’ve Had People Killed’ – Was It an Implicit Threat?
The nine women who confronted Raniere and ultimately chose to leave Nxivm – and who are often referred to as “The Nxivm-9” – are Bouchey, Dones, Woolhouse, Angela Ucci, Ellen Gibson, Nina Cowell, Jan Heim, Sheila Cote, and Kathy Ethier.
Based on the recent discussion on Frank Report, Dones, who made the original infamous clip available on YouTube back in 2010, has decided to weigh in.
She made a powerful victim impact statement at Raniere’s sentencing. The following is as gripping and appalling as her previous statements and perhaps paints a better picture of terror -and how it was possible for an intelligent woman to believe that his statement of having people killed could be taken quite literally.
By Susan Dones
What did Keith Raniere mean? We will never know. You only got a short version of the meeting, so you don’t have the full context of all three days of the meetings that Raniere allowed me to film with my camera.
A missing component to this short video that people do not understand is that we had informed Keith Raniere that the entire group of what has become the NXIVM 9 was done meeting with him, playing his games, and were resigning from NXIVM. It was the first thing that was told to him when the meeting started.
His attempts at any conversations that took place during this entire meeting were an attempt to get us to change our minds. He was going to lose his only Center on the West Coast [Dones’ Washington center], two of his top enrollers [Bouchey and Dones], and this was the first major exit of women from his company [which had started in 1998].
Nine women were about to walk out the door of his company and he failed after the first two days of meeting with us, to sink his claws into any of us to stay.
Why? Because there was power in our ranks as a group, and he could not send in his pack of wolves [his other women in his inner circle] to work us over, hold his power of manipulation of us individually, or threaten us with anything to get us to stay. He was pissed, but he knew he was on tape, the tape I would own, so what was he going to do, get up and kick the shit out of us like he has been known to do when alone with a woman?
It was going to cause big waves to happen, not only to Raniere’s ego but to his company. He had never experienced such a loss of control with so many people at one time. The next time this happened, he left the country for Mexico and hid in a closet when the police tracked him down.
You can speculate all you want about what his intentions behind his words mean. It doesn’t matter to me. You never had to deal with this evil man, had your house broken into, had death threats show up in weird places, had your car followed, have strange cars sit across your house for days, etc. You were not sued, had false charges brought against you in other countries, had your friends and family dragged through the court systems, watched those you once cared deeply for dying from cancer, hear of all the abortions, hear of a young girl being locked away in a room for doing nothing but wanting to be with another man, reading about five women he raped when they were underage and two that killed themselves, one whose body was never found and you knew her personally because you coached her first five days intensive.
I’m not saying you’re not empathic for what some of us have been through; of course, you are. But you didn’t have to live through it. I’m glad you never had to experience the hell and torture we went through.
Had you, then maybe you would take his words of “I’ve had people killed because of my beliefs” a bit differently and why the hair on the back of my head stood up when he said that. He wasn’t the kind of gentle Vanguard people were sold. He is a monster who has not stopped at anything to get his jollies.
When the video was released, he tried to use the LeBarons’ deaths as an excuse for those who might have had questions. When asked about it in my deposition, I went home and did some research thinking that might have been why he said it. I found out it was a crock of shit. Unless Raniere looked into his crystal ball and knew the deaths were going to happen ahead of time, it was just a story he used as a cover-up for his flock.
He made the statement on the video in April of 2009 – and the sad deaths of Benjamin LeBaron and his brothers-in-law, Luis Widmar Stubbs happened in July 2009.
Trying to use their deaths to cover his ass is what Raniere does. He could use it because I released to a group of my friends asking them if something happened to me during NXIVM’s lawsuit against me, to show the video to the police, I knew I was going to expose things NXIVM was not going to be happy with. NXIVM had committed tax evasion in Washington State and I had the proof that had done that. I reported them, and I was going to expose that through the court system along with what Nancy Salzman had told me about the cash coming across the border from Mexico, not paying taxes on it, which only leaves money laundering.
Was this information going to end me up in a cornfield in Iowa? I had no idea. Was it a reason to fear for my life after a man has said he has had people killed for his beliefs? What does that even mean? Do his beliefs mean that his needs come before anyone else? I think we have proof that he is true about Keith Raniere. He is a narcissist.
Judge me if you need for being afraid. There was a plot to get us to Mexico to speak at an anti-cult conference. Mexico. No, no, no, I said, we will never be seen again.
Little did I know at the time how spot on I was. Later, we found out from Kristin Keeffe that she was told by Raniere that a bribe was made by Emiliano Salinas to a judge in Mexico for the arrest of Barbara, Toni, Kim, and myself. As soon as we stepped foot across the border of Mexico, we were going to be arrested on those charges, thrown into prison, and tortured (including raped) until we signed confessions saying we lied about everything we said about NXIVM. Then, we would be released, but not really, we would be killed.
Funny how in NXIVM’s legal case against me, several offers to drop the case against me were to sign a statement that I lied about everything I said about NXIVM, turn over my three-day video to them, and turn over my laptop.
Shortly after that, the NXIVM computer trespassing case happened. I wonder if they would have planted evidence on that laptop to have me arrested in that criminal case and the civil case had I folded and not stood and fought their seven attorneys?
Alex Betancourt also filed extortion charges against a small group of us in Mexico at Clare Bronfman’s request just a couple of years ago.
We still have no idea if any of these charges have been cleared up. One of us who has traveled internationally has been pulled aside by customs and asked about the charges in Mexico. I’ve traveled internationally twice since then and have worked with the EDNY FBI on my return date if I am to get pull-aside, to call someone from the FBI to work with customs.
Why is it that we are still dealing with this legal mess in Mexico? Why hasn’t Emiliano Salinas and Alex Betancourt – who say they have left NXIVM – not clearing up the legal charges they have falsely made against us? When all we did was to leave NXIVM and work to expose NXIVM for what it was?
This is part of the torture of Keith Raniere. Do you think that Alex, Emiliano, and Clare came up with these ideas on their own? No, no one did anything without Raniere’s permission – and things like this were always his idea of how to get back at people who got in his way of having everything he wanted.
No leave Raniere and speaks out against him in a negative way without his revenge.
The more I talked to people who had left before me, heard their stories of what Raniere had done to them, experiences my tortures while I was in and after I left, heard how much worse he became, I don’t put it past Keith Raniere to have people killed for his beliefs.
Think of all those dead babies never born, all the women he was slowly starving to death and you ask how did many get cancer?
Not enough food, sleep and so much stress, breeding grounds for cancer. Even Clare Bronfman is having health issues now with her liver.
Barbara Jeske used to say “if you’re going to dance with the devil, wear your asbestosis pants”. Kind of ironic if the dance with the devil doesn’t kill you, will the asbestosis?
Frank Parlato 
Janine Morrison 
J.J. O'Hara 
Richard Luthmann 
Marie White 
Paul Serran
Please leave a comment: Your opinion is important to us!
[…] It was also at one of those meetings where Raniere made the controversial statement, “I’ve had people killed for my beliefs.” […]
I wonder if he meant the bodyguards he talks about were the women he loved/ruled/appointed and they were actually the purposeful “barriers” set up in his life so the CB business could continue to what it became?
Somewhat ironic as it seems to start with Nancy right at the beginning of that new journey and then ends with Lauren face down with guns pointed at her whilst he is hiding in the closet in Mexico.
Susan (or anyone) can you elaborate on “…what was he going to do, get up and kick the shit out of us like he has been known to do when alone with a woman?” Are you saying Keith was physically abusive with women when he had them alone? Or is that a metaphor?
Thanks.
That is referenced in Lauren Salzman’s testimony. It may be from other sources as well, but that’s one place I can point to with certainty.
Susan,
I believed you and what Keith said in the video clip from the start. If not through actual deed, he meant to make others believe it. The intent is clear.
I was also very vocal about The Vow/Mark Vicente only using you as a prop for his redemption, without disclosure of the wrongs he’s committed against you and others. I told you your story has power and weight all on it’s own and doesn’t need to be filtered through a man, a perpetrator.
And you blocked me for it.
I still believe all of that, despite the block.
The revelation that they took something further from you is completely unsurprising.
The N9 will be exploited to suit Marks narrative, when they can and should have control over their own story.
Maybe Susan is the one who chose to tell her story through “The Vow” as an interposita persona for her own reasons. I would think about it twice before I jumped to the conclusion that she’s being played by a man… Don´t you think she’s too smart for that?
I do think she’s incredibly smart, and many other things, including good hearted. I also think many people have been waiting a long time to tell their story on a larger platform while the national attention is focused on this issue.
It’s because I think Susans story is so important, that I think it would be a disservice to her and all the people that would benefit from learning her story, if it were in the hands of the folks at The Vow.
Yeah, her interview in The Vow gave the impression that she was being played or rather manipulated for others benefit.
I am my own woman and if you think anyone is using me, you are wrong.
If I blocked you, it was because of your behavior. You don’t even have the guts the show who you are on this blog.
I’d be more than happy to have a civil conversation with you via email. Contact Frank and give him your name and email address. I will reach out to you unless you have already abused the shit out of me.
If you have, you know why I cannot have any more contact with you.
No, I don’t think I was abusive to you. I was criticizing Mark Vicente and you were sticking up for him. I didn’t necessarily have a problem with that. As much as I dislike him, he needs friends like you right now.
Frank could out me right now if he wanted to. I’m sure he can see which city my IP address is coming from. I have a distinctive name, only one other person in the world has it. I’ve been the target of long term stalking, so I reduce my internet footprint. I wouldn’t care if you knew or if Frank knew it. I submitted a tip about my own run in with a wannabe sex cult leader, so he has my phone number.
I have zero animosity towards you, I think your story is brave and powerful and should stand on its own.
Susan, I dont know what you do for a career these days – but I do know whatever it is – you must be the BOSS!!!
I agree
Thank you for continuing to shine light on KR’s behavior, Susan. I hope more former Nxivm members realize what was going on and appreciate the work you (and others) have been doing to minimize the damage to everyone who isn’t complicit.
Hey, Frank, have you checked out the site created by the former DOS women?
https://www.thedossierproject.com/dossiers
It’s interesting to hear what they have to say about their experiences.
These are my takeaways so far:
– they all feel DOS benefitted them
– none of them feel like they were abused or became sex slaves
– none of them feel like they were forced to have sex with Keith
– they come across as being genuinely confused about why DOS is viewed so negatively
– they all seem fairly smart, educated, and a few are very articulate
– they all seemed to me like fairly honest people (I had expected to hear a lot of bs and really don’t feel like I did)
All that said though, there is almost no mention of Keith. 95% is about their personal experiences as members.
So, here’s my theory as of right now: KAR targets vulnerable people because he’s a predator. Predators seek out vulnerable people. They don’t target strong people. The women in this group are clearly not pushovers, and again, some of them are quite smart. If DOS has 150 women, Keith aims his abuse at the handful who are vulnerable – and is a perfect gentleman to the rest. The majority never experience his abusive side, and can’t fathom how someone who has been so nice to them personally could be described as a monster.
What do ya think?
After watching their word salad YouTube videos, I don’t see much intelligence and zero independent thinking.
1. They quickly delete any comments providing constructive criticism, lists of questions, and potentially helpful advice.
2. Squeaky Clyne states, “this is OUR platform,” when clearly, it’s YouTube’s platform for which they merely have a crybaby channel on the platform.
3. According to them, Keith is a “victim,” although their mission statement contains, “There are no ultimate victims; therefore, I will not choose to be a victim.” They pretend that they are not victims, but they act like society has made them victims.
4. They speak over each other and interrupt each other. So, they obviously haven’t mastered the art of polite conversation, not to mention the art of persuasive speaking.
I could go on and on. They have a long road ahead of them.
When I wrote my story, which was altered before being published, the intent was to have people consider the “I’ve had people killed” line in the context of the sentence or two before and after the quote, not the entirety of anyone’s experience over a period of several years during and after they were insiders. LOL
The reason I consider this story important is because it has been referenced several dozens of times on this website with very misleading intent: https://frankreport.com/?s=i%27ve+had+people+killed LOL
Because of the sentences before and after the widely misinterpreted isolated quote, I continue to believe the “I’ve had people killed” line is akin to a football coach giving an after game interview and being asked a question about one of his players being blind-sided by one of the opposing players, answers, “i’ve had people injured” from previous cheap shots from opposing teams. LOL
In all earnestness, can we simply rally around this one video clip, please.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=jfDyTUiL8xs
Is the full “I’ve had people killed” video available somewhere? I don’t mean the fragment that was already published in this blog lately, but the entire record of those three days of taped conversations.
No, the agreement with Raniere before they started the recording was they had to keep the entire video private. LOL
Dones posted it on a private YouTube page available to only a few people, probably some of the other NXIVM 9 bunch, such that the video could be used as evidence in the event Raniere had her killed, someone else apparently made that part public and Dones got into legal hot water with Raniere. LOL
Thanks
To be clear, having the video go viral was not what got me in hot water with NXIVM/Raniere.
They had already filed their lawsuit against me. It had over 200 claims from extortion, stealing their materials, teaching their programs after I left, destroying millions of dollars of their business, conspiracy to harm them, etc. After discovery, their charges almost reached 300.
In the end, I won defending ourselves with the help of two attorneys who had fought NXIVM before mentoring me on things like how to write a motion, file a subpoena, how to do a deposition.
NXIVM had seven attorneys because they could. Clare Bronfman was more than willing to open her checkbook for Raniere to torture me and my partner.
Are you denying the video being leaked was not part of NXIVM’s complaint and you lost on that point? LOL
Scott, why ask using the negative? It immediately sets up a tone of hostility. You ask the question to promote friendly exchange of information. For instance, “Hi Susan, was the video being leaked part of NXIVM’s complaint? Did you win on that point?”
You eliminate “denying” “not” and “lost” – three negative words that provoke defense and defiance and open the door to truth. Try it Scott, use diplomacy. With your intelligence, you could get a great deal more from people. A lot of them, maybe even Susan, would go on your show.
That’s your job to be “nice,” Frank. LOL
I ask questions to sort out the strong from the weak. LOL
I couldn’t care less [redacted] LOL
I get that, Scott, but could you possibly sort out the weak from the strong on other sites, on Twitter and social media, and stick around here with helpful comments and insights?
It wasn’t part of their initial lawsuit against me. The video was sent out after they had sued me, then they added it to their lawsuit suit claiming they owed the video.
NXIVM lost the ownership part of the battle. Verbal agreements only last for five years in the State of New York. At any time – especially now that NXIVM has been destroyed and Raniere has been given 120 years – I can easily get my injunction lifted.
My wife was never given an injunction. What is legally mine is hers. She can show the video whenever she wants.
So did we really lose anything? Not really, Scotty.
Mike drop…
Hi Ana,
The answer is “No”. I only released a small portion of this for protection reasons. I blurred out the faces for people’s protection. The rest could someday become available through a documentary if it served an educational purpose. A short piece was shown in The Vow because NXIVM had a copy through their legal case with me.
Somehow, someone got their hands on a copy of the video and turned it over to The Vow. I am working with The Vow now to get my rightful property back from whoever took it and gave it to The Vow and any other filmmaker who might think they have a right to show it without my permission.
The Judge in the case NXIVM vs. Dones ruled in my favor that the video belonged to me. It was filmed with my own camera with everyone’s permission, it was not an official NXIVM event, and I was not a paid employee of NXIVM’s film crew, ever.
If someone else has a copy of my film footage and attempts to show it or sell it, I will come after them with a legal case for stolen goods. NXIVM did not ever own this footage. I took on seven NXIVM attorneys in their lawsuit against me. I know the law is on my side in this situation – and I will win in court. If anyone who took my footage – or if anyone knows who did that – you can get my address by calling Frank, no questions asked. I just want my property back.
I understand, Susan, thank you for answering. I’m interested in cults from a sociological perspective and that’s why I asked.
Susan, It seems like that even still you are getting messed with by the supposed “hero/The Vow” contingent.
It does speak to how incredibly backbiting the hierarchy has, deliberately, become and was created to be.
Once it’s out, it’s out. LOL
You may be able to go after the person who initially took it, but you have no legal recourse against someone who received it and published it. LOL
It’s just like a news outlet that leaks information, they don’t get in trouble, but the people who leaked the information may get in trouble, assuming they can be identified. LOL
[redacted]
You could post the entire video right now and state that the intent is to educate others, being part of a documentary isn’t relevant. LOL
The press has first amendments rights, a docudrama doesn’t have the same rights as the press. Giving someone stolen property to use in their film is a can of worms also. I don’t think your argument holds any legal weight that will hold up in a court of law with “fair use” behind it.
I’ve always admired your honesty and integrity. You’ve never dressed anything up to make yourself look good, and for that reason I see you as a trustworthy source. Be Well and say Well.
You weren’t the only one that wasn’t asked.
“We have never and would never have allowed our music to be included in their promotional video by NXIVM, and we were not approached by the documentary to have this unauthorized use included in the program,” he said.
“It goes without saying that the allegations and accusations surrounding the NXIVM cult are reprehensible and we would in no way want our music associated with such an organization or for the documentary makers to point out that we have approved this practice.”
https://whatnew2day.com/2020/11/21/the-song-by-the-australian-band-sheppard-was-used-by-sex-cult-nxivm-and-in-a-documentary/
There is a legal concept called fair use. LOL
The band is fake upset, they are getting more publicity out of their six year old song than ever. LOL
The “documentary” was critical of NXIVM, does this mean the band are NXIVM members? LOL
It would be interesting to see, but “I drowned a kitten,” is a context-independent statement. Don’t you think?
The analogy would be “I’ve had kittens drowned for my cat beliefs.” LOL
TRUTH. And very well stated.
Yup.
Keith is a monster and it is important for everyone to remember the things he’s done. Thanks to Frank, Susan, and Heidi for helping to end Keith’s run.
Interesting read:
https://www.theparisreview.org/blog/2020/10/29/the-corporate-feminism-of-nxivm/
I had a lot of fun recently and got blocked by the Sultan on Twitter. I highly recommend it to others for the pure entertainment value it brings: https://twitter.com/TexTexTex10/with_replies LOL
Super! LOL.
I saw you were also bullying Ivy. Why?
What do you gain from bullying women? Haven’t they been through enough? Leave Ivy alone.
Yes, Scott. What do you gain by bullying Ivy?
I see you did gain your first twitter follower. Congrats on that.
I didn’t bully Nevares, I put her in her place. LOL
Scott, why not try to win friends and hence influence people? At this point, Ivy does not need you or me or anyone putting her in her place. She needs to find her own place.
I doubt Ivy thinks very highly of me, but I think highly of her. During the years I was attacking Nxivm, and even exposing things about her, to show how monstrous Raniere treated her, I felt deep empathy towards her. I often thought how could this extremely intelligent, disciplined, remarkable person not see what is happening to her? This is indeed a testament to the ability of Keith and his minions, including especially Lauren Salzman, to weave a web of deceit.
If Ivy Nevares could be fooled, then anyone could be fooled. And never forget – and this is not sexist – that without the women, the wolf pack, as Susan Dones calls them, these women would not have been fooled. The man, Raniere, could not have done this. He needed women co-conspirators. And some of those women co-conspirators are also victims.
Ivy has to find her own place and now she has chosen to speak out publicly. This is good because she is a powerful writer and unlike many of the women in Nxivm who were a hybrid of victim and perpetrator, from every source I have ever heard from, Ivy did not participate in the wolf pack or support Keith’s lying. Just the opposite, the wolf pack had to work hard to keep her from finding out lies, while keeping her hard at work. Barbara Bouchey was also tightly managed by the wolf pack.
It is not easy finding you were deceived. The more intelligent you are, the more sensitive you are, the harder it is. You have to fight to win back your confidence. I cannot imagine what possible good it is for her or society for you to challenge her.
You obviously didn’t see Ivy’s twitter comment. LOL
Thanks Frank . This a really nice message 🙂
Love it, Tex.
Suggested he do the show long ago. Spanky has had so much of Kruek kool-aid that he can’t see the forest for the trees. Bet your right about the voice.
She must be thrilled with being stalked for twenty years.
[redacted]
What’s your story, care to sober up and come on my show? LOL
I’m never sober, but would consider it an honor to be on the “Mr. Bubbles Show”
You can contact Scott on his Facebook page at http://www.Facebook.com/ScottTexJohnson LOL
LOL-
Great post. LMAO!
BTW: Your post led me to find NutJob’s and my honorable mention on Sultan’s Twitter feed. I feel Goddamn honored!!!!
WTF—Sultan bothered to post a comment about me, knowing I would never read it. He and I must share a bond. Sultan is my personal Gary Busey.
https://twitter.com/sultanofsix/status/1317291719822630912?s=21
Gotta love Sultan!
First, thanks for the link. But hold up – Sultan tweeted that he is Darth VanDouche. Darth VanDouche was pre-niceguy, pre-soap hoarding, and even pre-DOS. Darth VanDouche was like the first regular commenter on FR. Anyone know if that was really Sultan? Sultan? Frank?
Oh yes, I remember VanDouche some time ago.
I do not know but I never thought Van Douche was Sultan. Maybe he is.
Doubt it. VD was very hard hitting, succinct, and to the point. Different style.
I also doubt they are the same. Darth was more to the point as stated by Nancy. Ask Spanky the time and he tells you how to build a clock.
In light of our new comments policy, I think it is time we stop referring to Sultan as Spanky. And could we just be kinder towards fellow commenters. Darth was to the point, Sultan prefers to delve into things in greater detail.
Don’t you think “Spanky” is a good name, Frank?
It is a bespoke name for him because he spanks it to Kristin Kreuk, with religious rigour.
He must of had a wrist sprain by now. He just spanks through the pain.
Also, “sultan” is an unacceptable name for him, because 1) islamic sultans were scum and should never be celebrated and 2) Spanky will never be a leader of any kind.
Do you propose another name for Spanky? A masturbation/stalking/super-stan name is a must.
How about “Infatuated Autistic Masturbator”?
We can call him “IAM” for short.
Me thinks “Spanky” will do.
When you first called Sultan “Spanky,” I admit I was amused. I even published several stories that supported the inference one is intended to draw from the appellation “Spanky.” But the time has come in the evolution of Frank Report to call us each by our chosen names or monikers. In addition, as I believe it was Sultan who reminded us, there is no evidence that he is deserving of the inference. He may very well look upon Kristin Kreuk as a sister or daughter, and have no amorous feelings for her.
He might also be interested in seeing justice done toward Kristin and made it, in a sense, a matter of personal honor to defend her.
I enjoyed Sultan’s condemnation of me when it appeared on social media, where it might be construed he created a meme of him shooting me. I never took that as anything more than him expressing he was angry with me.
I appreciate his efforts at writing, and admire his consistency in defending Kristin, a woman, I suspect, he has never met. It is easy to be motivated to defend someone you know, but to take it upon oneself to defend someone you have never met, and perhaps likely will never meet, it takes a certain kind of determination.
Most people, including myself, would not bother thinking it is up to the individual to defend herself.
In the next few weeks, we have some serious issues to review on Frank Report, and I am convinced that readers can offer a lot of good comments. The less anger, the less distraction we have among commenters, the better it will be for this study. I am censoring comments where commenters attack or belittle one another.
I will ask again that you call Sultan by his chosen name and not Spanky.
Nutjob
I had once commented here that they are probably one and same person, though I would not be surprised if he/she has commented here using more than those 2 identities.
This person is a LARPer, as are many who comment here.
According to Ivy:
As soon as Clare *supplanted* Nancy Salzman as NXIVM’s* de facto decision-maker on the executive board*, Clare lowered my pay, removed what insignificant privileges the company afforded me and raised my rent—all punishments for my supposed “ethical breach” against Raniere. In truth, she punished me for disobeying him. Salzman would later tell me Clare did these things of her own volition…
…Together with Raniere, Salzman and Kathy Russell, she subjected me to forced labor as soon as she was given the chance.”
I have read this story for a few years now, how Clare “supplanted” Prefect Nancy. Is anyone really buying it?
Nancy went, supposedly “above herself” or in Nx terms, committed an “ethical breach”? With her self-celebratory Saratoga parties and high-end clothing?
Or, more likely, became part of the old lady gang, laughing at the idiocy of, but also angry with, Keith for not making Lauren the Queen of Mexico? Knowing very well that it was about money and connections?
We never hear much about Nancy’s relationships with Jness, Pam, Karen U, the Barbaras, Emi, the Garzas, Alex B. Fernandez family, Boone, etc. And surely our Prefect knew nothing about how DOS was formed and was completely unaware of the Allison Mack charade.
And the reason?
Money talks. LOL
Bronfman had a lot more money than Salzman to fund the various lawsuits, plus Clare Bare is much younger, so she may have supplanted Salzman in some areas, such as sex with Raniere, and not others, such as developing new money-making “training” modules. LOL
One has to think about the conversations among Nancy, Keith, Emi, Alex, Clare, Lauren, etc. *after* the DOS story hit the NY Times, when they orchestrated their “interview” or “charm offensive” with the NYT Mag.
The incredible amount of lying and, from the top, direction to lie to the slaves of the company. Now that is the story that The Vow and Seduced dare not enter.
At that particular point, the gig was up. These inner, inner people were plotting to save themselves.
And who fell? Not particularly Nancy, Emi, Alex, Boone, Sara, etc.
Clare, with her blog post. [You have to think that Nan, Keith, etc. were all, “Clare is an idiot; just dictate her statement.”].
Allison Mack, with her, “Let’s get a tattoo, ya’ll.”
Another question: Where are Garza and Padilla? Certainly not publically supporting their Vow sisters.
Besides Nancy Salzman, Ms. Dones does seem to indicate that Emi and Alex, who, as far as we know, *were not having sex with Keith*, were not the sweet innocents.
Of course, they were SOP, Keith’s henchmen, so by default, they had bought into and promoted their Vanguard’s *and* Prefect’s demeaning ideas regarding women.
I do recall one of the slave’s testimony regarding leaving a wee hours tryst with Keith and running into the loving arms of her hero, Emi, while he was out for his morning jog. Thing is, this slave was *not* protected by Emi. He was just another false front, like all of the major figureheads in the Nx community.
Emi, for all of his (likely purchased or clout-based) Harvard degree was not, apparently, anyone to trust.
I dreamed I met Frank Parlato and we hugged and it felt very nice.
😂 I once had an FP dream. Yours sounds better
To Frank’s groupies — Frank is single if you want to mingle.
I dreamed Frank snuggled me. LOL
That’s so sweet Scott 😂
Susan: Very emotive reflections. I, and I hope many others, wish you the best and warmest wishes trying to digest the trauma from your experience. Be strong. I agree with other commenters – your post is among the most powerful on the Frank Report. Thanks for opening up. I sense you’ve moved in the right direction.
Let’s see: a pedophile and sociopath who creates a Luciferian pedophile cult, that trafficked women, and Mark them makes a comment that could be a quirky remark about how stupid he is, showing some very weird self-analysis or a death threat? Yeah, I think he was trying to intimidate them. Funny that no one investigated shit, right? The government is more useless than Biden.
I appreciate Susan’s no bullshit style.
Powerful. This is more frightening than anything else I’ve read on this blog. Thank you, Susan.
I re-raise the parallels with Jim Jones. Readiness drills, harsh action against defectors, starvation diets, imprisonment – the list goes on and on.
And yes, the dead babies count. Particularly when you’re creating them merely because you prefer sex without a condom. What a cold, selfish bastard.
Also shows parallels with Charles Manson.
Parallels, yes, I agree. Manson liked to send others to do his horrible bidding, keeping his hands clean. He also believed he was special and talented and deserved to be a major rock star.
–He was pissed, but he knew he was on tape, the tape I would own, so what was he going to do, get up and kick the shit out of us like he has been known to do when alone with a woman?
Well this is one hell of a new revelation. I know Toni said he raped her, but this is the first time, at least that I’ve read or heard, that the short, weak, and pudgy sociopath was physically abusive.
Anonymous
We’re forgetting that Keith was a judo champ though. Maybe kicking the shit out of someone is a judo technique.😃
I actually think he is physically capable of committing assault, I just don’t believe that was his style, (as it hasn’t been reported before), except by confirmed liar, Toni.
From what we’ve read about Keith, it appears he preferred to have others do the dirty work for him.
Anonymous, Lauren Salzman testified that Keith paddled Daniela Padilla (not the same Daniela who was imprisoned in a room) for some infraction. Daniela said it was very painful, and Lauren was afraid it might happen to her.
India stated in Seduced that she had to film Allison paddling Dani Padilla. I think Dani liked it.
I’m not sure I buy this explanation. Susan was speaking in the context of something that happened in 2009 and the paddling for punishment of DOS happened well after and is quite different from the description of ‘kicking the shit’ out of someone. To me, it seems she was referring to something else.
Anonymous
You’re right. The paddling incident obviously occurred after the video tape was filmed, so Susan must be referring to something else.
It would be nice if Susan would explain why she made that cryptic comment.
I totally understand, not first hand thankfully, why Susan would have been in fear when she had heard this. I don’t understand why people are trying to downplay someone’s fears and feelings. For the reasons stated above, she feared it, she was in fear and, given all that was going on, how can that be considered to be irrational? If someone does think that’s paranoid or irrational, then that instinct and feeling saved her life when refusing to go to Mexico. It doesn’t matter what he meant by those words and why he said it. Nobody has bothered to investigate the suspicious deaths. We all know he is a sociopath without the words – and we are the lucky ones not to have been terrorized by him.
Natashka, you said it from the bottom of my heart. There are a lot of good articles and comments today, I can barely react.
“It doesn’t matter what he meant by those words and why he said it.”
I agree. It was enough to put reasonable doubt into Susan’s mind that her life could be in danger, and, to put it absurdly mildly, that really sucks. As much as I am on the fence about the correctness of all of the convictions and the length of the prison term, I’m glad she has some peace from this because I can understand why she would be fearful — I thought that even before I read Susan’s post.
PreHappyHourAlison—
RE: Susan Dones:
Do you believe Nicki Clyne would feel bad for Susan Dones?
I often wonder what Nicki Clyne thinks of the dozens of women who say Keith Raniere damaged them for life.
If you were in Nicki Clyne’s shoes, what would you say to the victim?
—If you were in Nicki Clyne’s shoes, what would you say to the victim?
I can’t begin to put myself in NC’s shoes, but I’d hazard a guess that her response would be just like KR’s statement that he feels terrible for the real suffering people went through, but that it wasn’t his intent to hurt anyone, things have been misconstrued/twisted etc, and he’s innocent of the criminal charges.
PreHappyHourAllison-
I asked you a pointed question because so far you are the only person to put forth a defensible narrative for some of the Nxivm defendants.
If the collateral did not exist, I would believe Allison Mack to be innocent.
Thank you for taking the time to answer my question.
Side note: I do think Nicki and the rest are good people at heart.
Pre-Allison and Penn Station, have you reached out to Nicki and co.? I suspect they would be comforted to know you feel for them and recognize them as good people at heart.
Also, I think as a group they are working hard to get Raniere out? Perhaps with your affinity for them, you could be of some help? They are called ‘Weareasyou’ ‘The forgotten ones’ you can find them online.
They would need all the support they can get in this situation. Unfortunately, atm, not many can see their goodness and innocence as clearly as you do.
@NFW
I never said anything about anyone being innocent or good hearted. I am on the fence about the extent of the charges/sentencing etc. Which, kind of as Susan pointed out in her post, is an easy place for me to be because I’m not connected to this case and am just sitting comfortably behind my keyboard reading about it.
I think I can afford to give benefit of the doubt and keep an open mind because myself or a loved one is not potentially in harm’s way. I also don’t believe that any present or former Nxivm members are going to act on my opinions posted here, so I’m just sharing my thoughts as I try to make sense of this complicated case. I also don’t think the judge will read my opinions and say, “Gee, she’s got a point, spring him outta jail.” If I thought I had any power to influence anything related to this case, I’d keep my mouth shut because I’m still kind of lost at sea with it.
To further clarify, if I had a loved one who wanted to join what’s left of Nxivm today, would I say, “Sure, go ahead, let’s keep an open mind as we seek to gather and confirm empirical evidence of wrongdoings and to discern people’s true motivations.” No! I’d say stay the hell away.
You don’t have to physically assault someone to ruin them. Psychologically, it’s more than enough for she/him to be weaker than you.
“Think of all those dead babies?!?”
Such drama! Lol!
Did Keith also forbid women to use birth control? Not sure if that’s been mentioned here before or not….
I have a question about this statement:
“He was pissed, but he knew he was on tape, the tape I would own, so what was he going to do, get up and kick the shit out of us like he has been known to do when alone with a woman?”
Has Keith actually beaten up someone before? Is there any proof that he’s “kicked the shit out” of anyone? Just wondering, because I don’t believe I’ve read that about him before.
See my reply to Anonymous, above.
Flowers,
If you kept up with the criminal trial, you would know these answers for yourself.
Blaming the victims makes you sound like your a Raniere fan
Are you really Nicki Clyne because you’re comments sound like your a follower of Raniere.
Anonymous
Do you understand what a logical fallacy is? You make one when you assume that I support Keith just because I question the meaning of his statement. You draw an illogical conclusion about my intentions.
You make another mistake when you assume I must be blaming the victim just because I disagree with the victim. Another logical fallacy.
The fact is we are making presumptions about Keith’s intended meaning. When I listen to Keith’s entire quote I don’t hear that statement as a threat, considering the context in which that statement is made.
This doesn’t mean I think Keith is innocent or a good person. I’m sure he’s as rotten as everyone says he is….however I still think some people are misinterpreting his statement.
Uhh. That’s a kick-ass article, too.