By Pious Bangkok
I think Frank is taking the wrong approach with Suneel.
Putting all the endlessly REHASHED legal facts aside for a moment, Frank needs to attempt to verify if Suneel is behaving as a textbook cult-follower or not. That should be Frank’s line of reporting on this topic.
Suneel’s cult-status can be uncovered by having Frank ask him one simple thing…
Is Suneel capable of making ANY personal criticisms about his Vanguard’s personal behavior?
I’m not talking about legal issues here. I’m not talking about issues of guilt or innocence.
What I mean is…A true cult member is mentally INCAPABLE of criticizing their leader’s personal behavior in any fashion, even for the smallest of things.
I believe Suneel fits this definition.
Suneel talks about Keith’s choice to live in polyamorous relationships, but he’s forgetting that ‘polyamorous’ means that everybody involved is allowed to have an open relationship with the consent of all parties.
Keith didn’t live that way. He forbid EVERY sexual partner from having sex with other men and forced them to be with him only — by making them take a solemn vow (and by holding collateral on them). That’s not a true ‘polyamorous’ or ‘open’ relationship.
That’s POSSESSIVE behavior by an INSECURE MAN who doesn’t want his women experiencing superior sex with other men.
Frank needs to delve into the issue of WHY would a GREAT LEADER (like Vanguard) be so insecure that he forbade his women from having sex with other men, especially when he’s allowed to have sex with other women?
What do psych experts have to say about this possessive behavior?
If Keith is that insecure about himself, how can he qualify as a great leader to Suneel?
Why would Suneel follow a man with those types of insecurities?
Let’s take a different path now…
Can Suneel at least admit that Vanguard was an ‘imperfect’ man who lied about his personal credentials, like being East Coast Judo champ and breaking the state record for the 100-yard dash?
My guess is that Suneel cannot admit any of this because he’s still brainwashed.
Can Suneel at least admit that his Vanguard lied about these small things to create a false image in people’s minds?
Why would a great leader have a PSYCHOLOGICAL NEED to lie about small things to enhance his credentials? Doesn’t that indicate a sense of insecurity? If so, how can that leader be a great man who’s qualified to dictate how others should live?
If Suneel cannot answer these questions for Frank, then he’s a textbook cult-follower. Frank needs to begin reporting on how such an educated man is remaining loyal to his Vanguard.
Perhaps Frank could even enlist the opinion of psych experts to explain what’s going on in Suneel’s mind and how he’s failed to break free from the cult —- even after 3 years without his cult leader being there to brainwash him?
I think this would be an interesting line (to report on) rather than having Suneel rehash the same logic again for the umpteenth time, without Frank even challenging him on the elephant in the room (his cult-like loyalty and inability to criticize Keith).
Have a nice day.
End of Bangkok Post
Bangkok wants us to ask the psych experts, ‘What’s going on in Suneel’s mind?’
Dr. H. Edwin Maxwell: It appears to be an acute epileptoid manifestation of the panphobic melancholiac with some indication of a neuroleptic palinacousis with the binary affect of grandiose and persecutory agnosia.
FR: Does that mean he’s brainwashed?
All kidding aside, Suneel disputes the idea that he is brainwashed, a sycophant, or a mindless follower.
He said, “Keith is my friend. I believe his trial was fundamentally unfair and that he is innocent.”
I asked Suneel if he would undertake the experiment Bangkok suggested and review or critique Raniere’s bio and write about it honestly – even if it were negative?
Suneel said he would.