Editor’s Note: The following is a guest view – actually originally a comment – from someone who seems to have been following the story fairly closely. I will add a few comments [in brackets and bold] for clarification and an editor’s note at the end. .
By Curious About the DOS Story
The more the minutia of who started DOS is micro-analyzed by Keith Raniere and the DOS women, the more it becomes contradictory and confusing. Maybe that is the goal?
Some highlights.
- Women are invited to DOS.
- Lied to about Keith (or any man being involved).
- Snatch shots are taken as “collateral”.
- Mark Vicente knows something is up. He is concerned about Allison. Her mental state. The extreme weight loss of some women close to Allison.
- When confronted by Mark, Keith denies knowing about DOS. But he does acknowledge that he is ” trying to break” Allison.
- Bonnie Piesse is creeped out and works to get Vicente to see reality. She leaves cult.
- Naked brands are dispensed. The initiates are told an enormous lie about the brand being a symbol of the elements. It is, in fact, Keith’s initials.
- The branding is exposed by Sarah Edmondson & Frank Parlato.
- The brand is now revealed publicly as Keith’s initials (and possibly Allison’s. The latter is later disproven).
- Slaves defect.
- New York Times article.
- Allison goes on record to the press saying Keith is not involved. Allison claims that she ( with other women) came up with brand.
- Keith writes his followers that he is both not involved and DOS (as such) doesn’t really exist.
- Lauren & Allison hold a meeting and address their ” community” telling them that Keith is not involved in DOS.
We hear over and over again about this close ”community” in spite of a wealth of evidence that they are all lied to and about each other on a large and frequent scale.
- Keith flees.
- Slaves follow him.
- Keith is arrested.
- During the trial, audio is played of Keith Raniere dictating to Allison Mack how the slave’s brands should be executed. And filmed. For ” collateral”.
- We now see texts that Cami does not want Nicki involved.
In a later posted jailhouse missive we read from Keith that ” the founding sisters” don’t want Lauren involved. We have also heard from Keith that they didn’t want Nancy to even know about the group. To keep it totally secret from her.
Which begs the question: how is this a group formed by women for the purpose they claim, if many of them do not want each other as ”sisters”? Why would a group of women who do not even like each other ever create such a group together?
In this manifesto, Keith says that he, ”invited Allison to join DOS”. ”the founding sisters” are referenced a lot by Keith in his jailhouse ramblings. We know Cami was not one.
Because there are texts from Raniere to Cami with DOS as a pre-existing entity, that he tries to explain to Cami. This is also where we learn that Cami wants, ”anyone but Nicki” and that Raniere wants Cami to recruit ”fuck toy slaves” for the purpose of servicing him sexually 24/7.
Okay. This only a fraction of what has been put out there. And admittedly not in the best chronological order. [Actually pretty good chronological order.]
Frank could you please do a report on the real founding? [I am working on that presently.] Update it more than just here are the eight first line slaves” graphic? And maybe a timeline of when each of the eight joined?
Thank you!
It is important to note: Currently Nicki Clyne expresses extreme outrage about Vicente, Edmonson, India ”lying.”
But Allison lied. Lauren lied. Keith lied. It seems profoundly obvious that being truthful was far, far less common than being honest in their ” community”.
Editor’s Note: It is my understanding that Camila was considered part of the original group, the first line or ‘founding sisters.” She was described as the first one or that the concept of DOS was created for her. However, I am not clear on whether she understood initially that there were other first-line slaves, or what the real intent of the organization was.
Cami may have thought initially that this was something for her alone but Keith later explained there were other slaves and they would be recruiting slaves.
I also think it is possible that there were vastly differing views among the founding sisters and Raniere as to what the true intent of DOS was. I believe Nicki and some of the other women had a view that DOS was a noble venture. I have written in the past that Raniere seems to have had a much more self-centered, sex-centered point of view.
There is a new “essay” from the DOS 8. Written by Angelica (I think that’s her name) this time around.
Prolix. Boring. Delusional justification.
The theme; alleged mental, emotional anguish is not a crime.
The conclusion of this DOS die-hard? Raniere is very innocent (Ha, ha, ha. That dumb phrase of Vanguard’s).
And the victims are lying for material gain.
None of the crimes are truly addressed. And the non-sexual crimes, virtually ignored.
It is not a very successful argument.
There is an obvious bait-and-switch. The actual case isn’t debated. Instead, a lot of theoretical pontificating.
Traits, values, societal norms, character and hypothetical situations are questioned in a manner that people uninformed of Raniere’s crimes would more likely agree with, in the abstract.
Objective questioning is touted by a person who is obviously biased and very personally involved. And clearly, not objective, at all.
There is also an attempted defense that these former DOS members have changed their view of the master/slave organization due to media scrutiny, pressure from law enforcement, financial incentives, etc. This does not take into account A) blackmail, the secretive nature of DOS, and other intentional structural factors within the cult that did not allow ” slaves” to speak as freely.
And B) this is an untrue account. Even with the attempts to silence (Don’t forget the legal cease and desist letters sent to defectors), there are many testimonies to the contrary. After one “slave” found out about Raniere’s involvement and other deceptions, she ran to another member and arranged a clandestine meeting, at which she divulged how radically they were being lied to and beseechingly asked, “Now, what do we do”? Their sane reply, “We leave”. And they did.
Many other DOS members ordered to perform sex acts with Raniere or who discovered the depth of the deception also plotted their escape after making their discomfort, fear and anxiety known.
There are texts, emails, recordings, and under-oath witnesses all detailing DOS “slaves” expressing their intense distress. Another example, Sarah Edmondson trying to extricate herself in a phone call and Lauren’s gaslighting and campaign to get Sarah to remain a DOS slave.
It was the Keith Raniere and DOS way. Use manipulation to discount these instances of speaking out. Masters told non-consenting slaves that they were giving into fear, weakness, breaking vows, unable to commit, and don’t forget that blackmail!
This is a massive psychological con. “Slaves” did voice their terror. It was discounted and dismantled thru all of the machinations of DOS and Raniere.
The latest “essay” is an overarching appeal to lay people who feel that believing female victims has gone too far.
It’s a long, repetitive, tedious and ultimately failed exercise that raises more questions for the reader than it answers.
The most recent DOS essay may be written by Linda Chung.
Why don’t you pose nude for a girly magazine showing your brand? That should get you some publicity.
Good read:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/NXIVM
Re: Two [IceCream] Bitches
I can’t somehow let this topic fade because I’m interested in understanding how you are now.
Much love,
Tomnesia
Can somebody tell me what the reasoning is for taking Camilla’s picture down at this point in time?
She is a person that has been identified as a child rape victim by the US Federal Government.
The Federal government, Wikipedia are not using her name or her picture. She is also a child rape victim that has helped to take Keith down by actively going into court and stating that Keith did in fact rape her when she was a minor. Together, this made Frank Report decide to give privacy to Camila.
There has been numerous posts on this discussion, and it is important. I am glad Frank Report is respecting her. Similar to Sylvie and other Nxivm victims.
Reminds me of the Stormy Daniels tattoo and that muscular vegan lady from Ireland. What the hell was her name again?
Kim Constable
Thank you, Frank and Mexican Lady, for the reminders.
Is Nicki referring to the chief slave brander and the shock experiment pusher?
https://mobile.twitter.com/nickiclyne/status/1366805028888059912
Pyriel.
Good catch! That tracks.
The way Nicki is now trying to appeal to the fringes of the alt-right is pitiful. But only a few of those beta cucks are paying her any attention. Even her BSG fanboys have abandoned her. 😭😭😭
Important to keep the facts out there as those with an agenda to cover them up presumably hope they will disappear under the recent mis-telling of what happened.
In Keith’s most recent prison call featured on Dateline, he states that the DOS slave’s brands were always, “going to be covered by a tattoo” anyway.
What?
First time I’ve heard that “fact”. Did any slave in DOS know they were getting a brand and then getting a tattoo over it?
What was the design of the tattoo going to be?
This all sounds highly improbable. Sarah Edmondson was vehemently opposed to the brand. Why would she get a really painful and disfiguring brand and then an also unwanted tattoo to (ostensibly) cover the brand?
Not one DOS slave/master has ever mentioned this (alleged) forthcoming tattoo.
Strangely, in the very same short phone call, Keith goes into a rambling & unsolicited opinion piece on tattoos. In general, Keith says he is “dissuasive” of partners getting them. None of his past partners have had tattoos. (Untrue. Pretty sure Allison had tattoos).
Keith’s partners were in DOS (Nicki says she was his partner for over a decade on the same Dateline episode). We have heard Keith planning the branding session. Now he says DOS slaves were also going to tattooed over that brand.
But Keith is “dissuasive” of tattoos?
Please remember that Keith required DOS “slave pods” to pose up to three times a week. “Naked, uniform, instructed that they must look happy and pose with brands showing”. This has been established by multiple ex-DOS members.
Keith would have to approve these naked, brand-forward photos. If Keith wasn’t getting the picture he wanted, the DOS slaves had to retake the photo. Until Keith was happy with it.
Why would Keith ever have them all tattoo over the brand that he clearly loved and saw as very important to him?
India has spoken about how Keith would rub his fingers over her brand. While she remained unaware it was his initials. India stated Keith loved fondling that brand.
This is a prime example of continuing confusing, conflicting, and seemingly dishonest information about the brands. And DOS.
Nothing confusing about it.
Just one more grain of lies in the mountain of them Keith has told and will continue to tell.
He doesn’t do well when he’s asked questions by anyone who isn’t in his thrall. He just comes up with laughable BS like the tattoos. This is the same as his mentor L Ron Hubbard; they just spout crap believers lap up and outsiders laugh at.
‘He doesn’t do well when he’s asked questions by anyone who isn’t in his thrall”. This is the reason I am devastated he did not take the stand in his defence. What a treat we have been deprived of, it would have been comedy gold. Can you imagine Frank’s posts and the comment section. Yes, he deprived us.
Forgive me if I’m wrong but the Jewish religion does not permit tattoos or drawings on the body of any kind.
And most of the women in KR’s inner circle were Jewish.
“most of the women in KR’s inner circle were Jewish.”
Yeah, but only in their current lives. Keith said they actually were Nazis.
Anonymous 6:31 pm,
The Bronfmans’ mother was Christian, not a Jew. All the other women, except for the Salzmans, were Christians. All of the men were Christian.
Raniere is Italian.
Come again.
Why is Raniere Italian when he could just as easily be Ukrainian, since his mother is from Ukraine?
Anonymous- 12:24pm
Raniere is an Italian surname.
Here are some Italian surnames:
•Ranieri (b. unknown, d. 1306), Italian cardinal of the Roman Catholic Church
•Massimo Ranieri (born 1951), Italian pop singer and actor
•Claudio Ranieri (born 1951), Italian professional football player and manager
****
My point is the guy ain’t a jew, an asian, a chicano, or a Black.
BTW: I capitalized Black because the Frank Report editors asked that we all afford the Blacks a modicum of respect.
I do not believe Mack, Clyne, Duran, Garza, Junco or Cami were Jewish. So, we Jews are not claiming them!
Lauren Salzman appears to be the only Jew who was a first line slave. Although, you are correct about tattoos being frowned upon by the Jewish community.
A tattoo over the brand is mentioned in several places at several points.
I think it never happened because they could never agree on a design. What’s funny is they probably also had no idea (probably never got that far) that tattooing over scars is extremely difficult, painful, and probably would have looked terrible. It’s such a shame.
You would think if they were going to decide to be so invested in body modification they might have actually invested in not being so clueless about it.
Where was the tattoo over a brand idea mentioned previously? It’s never come up on this website.
Please point us to the tattoo over the brand information!
IIRC a tattoo with a number at the same time as the brand was mentioned in the Cami texts and the tattoo over the brand was in Lauren’s testimony.
It blows my mind how a little intelligence, a lot of mental illness, and lack of conscious can equal a pie-faced-troll man controlling women. And making men his ardent defenders.I think his sanctimonious smirk is what kills me the most.Some of the followers inherited it.I am still trying to figure out how they were saving the world.? Did the community offer any service based missions to the community at large? Besides reciting a pledge in Mexico? Thank God he got locked up before he ruined Mexico💀😳. It’s hard to explain how dangerous a diabolical person with a nice smile and an easy nature can be. He was non-violent in his actions but able to harm so many people, this will forever fascinate me
Good observation.
The one’s at the top seldom do the dirty work. I don’t believe Hitler ever raised a finger at a Jew, Slav, or Communist, but he had millions of them slaughtered. He kissed a lot babies too.
Great question: what good came out of this organization?
I hear “personal improvement ” in the beginning. Then crickets.
What’s more appropriate for a story about NXIVM than a recording of that great musician Charles Manson?
This demo tape was recorded at Universal Studios Hollywood on 9-11-1967.
Manson had been released earlier in 1967 after serving up to half his life in Federal prison for pimping and car theft.
Two years later, Manson became world-famous.
This studio demo is part of what was recorded by Manson at Universal Studios, Hollywood on September 11th, 1967.
01. Sick City: 0:00
02. Run for Fun: 2:42
03. Clang Bang Clang: 5:52
04. Home is Where You’re Happy: 7:50
05. Monkey/Lock & Loll: 9:26
06. Ego is a Too Much Thing: 12:20
07. Now is the Time: 15:00
08. The House of Tomorrow: 17:28
09. Close to Me: 18:58
10. She Done Turned Me In: 23:12
11. Twighlight Blues: 24:28
12. Your Daddy’s Home: 25:54
CHARLES MANSON ‘Unplugged 9.11.67 Volume 1’ CD (FULL ALBUM)
Allison Mack discussed with her Vanguard the link between madness and creative genius.
Well, by that standard, Charles Manson is a creative genius.
The 9 biggest lies of US politicians from 1950 to now:
1. President Barack Obama, on June 6, 2009 (and on numerous other occasions) said, “If you like the blueprint of healthcare you have, you can keep it.”
2. President George W. Bush stated on May 29, 2003: “We have found the weapons of mass destruction [in Iraq]. As well as the biological laboratories.”
3. Vice President Dick Cheney, on August 26, 2002, stated: “Simply put, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein has weapons of mass destruction. There is no doubt that he is accumulating them to use against our friends, against our allies and against us. ”
4. James W. Johnston, CEO of Tobacco Company RJR Nabisco, on April 14, 1994, stated, “Cigarette smoking is no more addictive than coffee, tea, or twinkies [cream-filled cupcake].”
5. President Ronald Reagan, on November 13, 1986, speaking of the Iran-Contra scandal, rejected any deal with terrorists: “Despite the wildly speculative and false stories about hostage weapons and alleged ransom payments, no – I repeat— we did not traffic in weapons, nor did we make any deals for hostages. We are not going to do it either. ”
6. The Undersecretary of State, Thomas Enders, of the Reagan Administration on the El Mozote massacre on February 8, 1982, stated: “There is no evidence to confirm that the government forces [of El Salvador supported by the United States .] systematically massacred civilians in the area of operations. ”
7. President Richard Nixon, on the Watergate robbery, said on August 29, 1972: “I can say categorically that … no one on the White House staff, no one in this administration, currently employed, was involved in this strange incident, “referring to the raid on the Democratic Party National Committee headquarters in the Watergate office complex.
8. Richard Nixon on the covert operations in Chile to overthrow the newly elected president Salvador Allende, on January 4, 1971 he said: “For us, intervening [in Chile] – intervening in a free election and turning it upside down – I think it would have had repercussions throughout Latin America … ”
9. President Lyndon Johnson, on the Vietnam War, said in October 1964: “We are not about to send American boys nine or ten thousand miles from home to do what Asian boys should be doing for themselves.”
IF THEY LIED, WHY CAN’T KEITH RANIERE DO IT?
“Woe to you, teachers of the law and hypocritical Pharisees, who travel land and sea in search of a proselyte and, when you have succeeded, make him a model of evil twice as bad as yourselves!”
-Matthew 23:15
Don’t leave out ex-Pres T-Rump, who told over 30.000 lies, including the Big Lie that incited the capital mob that tried to overturn democracy…yet he will be the GOP nominee again.
Your heterosexuality is almost as great as mine.
Matthew 23 [King James Version ]
15 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves.
Wow excellent point! Super Hetro!
I guess this means we can all be dishonest assholes and break the law!
I’m gonna cheat on my wife; rob a liquor store; and then beat an old man with his own cane.
HEDONISM! SATAN! DR. SEUS!
FYI: The Iran-Contra debacle did not break the law. The Reagan Administration used legal loopholes.
I think this is completely wrong. V never lied. The fact is that they had no right to know what the initials mean.
V was an unabashed liar.
V most certainly did not stand for Virtue nor Veracious.
And as a Vanguard, he only led himself into a prison cell with a term that should keep him there for the rest of his life.
What is a lie? If I tell you I will sell you a red car, then take your money and give you a green car and then say, ” I agreed to sell you a car and you got a car so I didn’t lie,” some would find that an “ethical breach.”
If you told me that I was entering a “strictly women’s group” and I agreed to the terms, and later found out a man was the leader, some might think I was lied to. Ethical breach.
If someone did all this ethical breaching and then said they never lied and start acting incredulous and claim others are lying about me, many would think I need my head examined.
Seems like Nicki and Danielle are a bit mixed up on what constitutes a lie. Interesting that most of the public see it clearly and Nicki always comes up with twisted explanations to justify why they didn’t lie and then when questioned just disappears.
Why never stay for a dialogue if you can answer in a clear manner all objections?
Perhaps Keith’s idea that others are committing ethical breaches so “we” can’t be handicapped by ethics that our opponents don’t follow is the reasoning?
Sweet Pea, we duplicate your objective data on this matter.
Having reviewed the the constitutions of the United States and New York, we verify that neither document guarantees a right to knowledgify with what initials one is branded both ipso facto and eo ipso. Women who are raising so-called objections on this basis in televisualized and printed media should take care to avoid countersuit for slander and manducans nimis.
“both ipso facto and eo ipso.” Two Lawyers. We aren’t lawyers but we spout off some Latin and play lawyers on the Frank Report.
Pea: Tell us the truth. When Allison and Nicki played Xena: Warrior Princess who played “Xena” and who played “Gabrielle”?
I seem to recall Nicki was not initially thrilled with the extent of Allison’s involvement either.
I recall that as well!
Most women don’t want to share their boyfriends with other women.
Agree. The whole DOS environment and structure appears set up to foster competition amongst the women in relationships with Raniere.
Realistically, Nicki Clyne was merely HALLUCINATING that Raniere was her boyfriend. Manwhore the chunky Pervo wasn’t anyone’s boyfriend. Nicki’s interpretative abilities have really kept her occupied being a damned human lemming. Boyfriend, my ass.
On second thought, never mind. I love my derriere and am keeping it around.
Just ask me about boyfriends, though. (Wilt Chamberlain could even ask.)
I starred in The Boy Friend, playing Polly and still remember the lyrics, after a half-century and multiple roles to memorize thereafter.
“Any girl who’s reached the age
of seventeen or thereabouts
Has but one desire in view
She knows she has reached the stage
Of needing one to care about
Nothing else will ever do….”
Raniere was not the boyfriend. Not ever. And I wasn’t seventeen yet either, while playing Polly, aka Twiggy. Four beats and then the score hits a bridge, and you start to get down with that highly flirtateous rythym and the strutting really begins. It was a ton of fun.
Acting is acting. I cannot stand Julie Andrews. She was about as sexy as a whiskered sea lion. My God, no no no.
But back to Raniere, the pervboy.
Narcissistic personalities are always “acting,” portraying a mangled imitation of real life and genuine emotiveness. That is their way into you and you and you. But there are no feet grounded in any “reality” for these continuously disintegrating beings. A narcissist can ony “relate” to himself, or herself.
The rest is window-dressing. “Won’t you come inside?”. Here’s a steamy pile of shit, but I’m gonna convince you it’s sable. You like dead animals, doncha?!”
—Most women don’t want to share their boyfriends with other women.
Oh yeah Shadow? Talk to our favorite Texan’s wife. 😉
She Was Seen as a Victim in the Sarah Lawrence Cult Case. Now She’s Charged.
Experts on human trafficking and cults said the line between victim and accomplice can be hard to judge. Taryn Merkl, a former federal prosecutor who supervised human-trafficking cases in Brooklyn, said prosecutors must decide “where duress ends, and victimization can no longer be the understood reason for behavior that crosses the line over to more deliberate criminality.”
Rick Alan Ross, the founder of the Cult Education Institute and an expert on persuading people to leave cults, said that if Ms. Pollok was unwilling to cooperate with the prosecution, “she’s cast her lot with Larry Ray.”
Mr. Ross said the same phenomenon could be seen in the case of Keith Raniere, the convicted leader of the Nxivm cult in Albany, in which some women were branded and coerced into serving as sexual slaves.
Five of Mr. Raniere’s most ardent followers ended up being charged with him and later pleaded guilty to charges like conspiracy and visa fraud. Other former Nxivm members who had been branded stood by Mr. Raniere after his conviction.
Mr. Ross, the cult expert, suggested the prosecutors may be trying to send Ms. Pollok a message. “The worst place for a cult is in court,” Mr. Ross said. “It’s no longer a place of myths and make-believe and whatever the leader says is right. Regardless of whether she chooses to deal with reality or not,” he added, “reality will deal with her.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/01/nyregion/lawrence-ray-sarah-lawrence-cult.html?smid=url-share
Vanguard has set the standard for current-day ‘NXIVM-like” cults. Congrats, KAR!
Michelle Hatchett’s been awfully quiet these days. …Anybody heard from her?
Meesh
@thismixele
·
March 2
Mark Luljak
@Fairlight2cx
March 2
‘Deprogramming’ is a bit of a myth. Seems to me it’s simply REprogramming someone with an approved and sanctioned viewpoint the programee was ‘supposed’ to hold all along. This garners moral high-ground…how? Oh, because it’s ‘for their own good’? By whose measure, if I may ask?
Meesh
@thismixele
·
March 1
Answer to
@RobertGavinTU
Aaaaah yes, thank you for the reminder that India knows how I feel and what my experience is more than I do. How silly of me to forget.
Meesh
@thismixele
·
March 1
Answer to
@NPRMommy
and
@nickiclyne
Actually jury’s convict people. And jury’s are made up of individuals who are not exempt from bias and prejudice. If facts were all it took, there wouldn’t be tens of thousands of innocent people in prison right now.
Meesh
@thismixele
·
March 1
Answer to
@Andrew35194852
@NPRMommy
and
@nickiclyne
It’s pretty remarkable that the public continues to insist that they know our lives better than we do. It’s pretty sad how strong the call for women to identify as brainwashed is and for us to be viewed as weak and mindless. No thank you, I’ll pass on that.
Meesh
@thismixele
·
March 1
Answer to
@NPRMommy
and
@nickiclyne
Victim impact statements are not given under oath which = zero accountability for giving truthful statements. They are also not cross examined which = every word said goes unquestioned. Just because people have singing the same tune, doesn’t make it more true.
Maybe it’s just me but I find Nicki’s Twitter BS very irritating. If I wanted to read it, I would go on her feed. Please stop regurgitating her false narrative on FR.
Now Nicki Clyne is retweeting long-time marginal Scientology apologist and wackjob “Alanzo.” She’s wandering around the internet picking up butts to find enough dregs to roll a cigarette. She hasn’t come close to hitting rock bottom yet.
NXIVM is just regurgitated Scientology.
Nancy Salzman is a plagiarist.
Do you even read FR? Or did you mean, Keith is a plagiarist?
Ah yes, Alonzo has been a member of the sub-stratum of culty idiots who want to change the world for years and years and is somewhat of an infamous pro-Scientology nincompoop. He likes to give advice and to “clarify” for others the glories of Hubbard, Miscavige and Schmucktology.
Even now, he sometimes receives minimal attention over at Tony Ortega’s Underground Bunker. He fits well with other fanatical cult dawgies like Clyne, Roberts and crew.
Alonzo’s qualifications to open his mouth at all are like paying Elizabeth Taylor’s ghost to be your personal marriage counselor.
Hell’s bells, maybe tricky Nicki could become a marital advisor, once her mealy, meatball mouth gets remanded back to Canada. Her American missionary sh*t has been like one abortion of her psyche after another.
😂🤣😂
Occam’s Razor
“All thing’s being equal, the simplest solution tends to be the best one.”
Remember in her testimony when Witness Nicole confronted Allison Mack with news stories about Raniere’s pedophilia?
What was Mack’s response?
“Do you think I would work for a child molester?” Allison Mack
Mack was lying/
Mack was gaslighting Nicole.
Mack knew damned well Raniere was and would always be a child molester.
And Mack did not care.
What is the simplest explanation that best explains the NXIVM leadership?
They are all liars.
They are all gaslighters.
Agree. Maybe they were all just horny for Keith, accepted what he wanted, and did not care if he was a pedophile.
Admitting that NXIVM DOS is a sex cult is really the most honest course instead of cloaking it as a “noble cause”.
Hi Mr. Frank Report. Could we remove or blackout Camila‘s picture from this post?
Thank you much.
Best
I changed it
THANK YOU FRANK!! I LOVE YOU! YOU ARE THE BEST JOURNALIST IN THE WORLD!! THANK YOU!!
I want to hear Nicki and or other remaining supporters address two things:
1. Were the women told about Keith’s participation when joining and giving collateral (that he would see)?
2. Were the women lied about regarding what the brand actually was (Keith’s initials)?
I agree that’s a good timeline analysis of the publicly known deception that went on and, no doubt, it’s not the half of it.
IDK who these NX fools think they’re fooling with their outrage and indignation over media accusations and the spoilage of their happy, little perverse community.
It’s disturbing enough to never have heard a single word of any regret, remorse, sorrow or, God forbid, apology from any of these pedophile peddling crooks – past or present [save but a few I can name – India & Catherine, Mark & Bonnie, and the Edmundsons] – but the fact that they’re now playing the victims, furiously defending their actions knowing how much harm, pain, and suffering they’ve caused, is just unfathomable.
IDK how Keith expects any of them to find it in their pure, well-intended hearts to forgive him for failing to adequately ‘trust test’ and otherwise screen out, destroy, silence, and overall prevent whistleblowers and haters from getting him when none of his followers appear to have a conscience capable of any sympathy…
Yep, Keith and Co. sure know how to pick ‘em.
Very astute comment, Heidi. H.
There is so, so much we do not know.
Yet.
Yes, an (inherently) fractured sisterhood, etc., composed of self-deluded groupies attached to a sicko con man is what was happening. In some cases, it’s happening still.
Everything coming out of ANY of their mouths, pens or typing fingers or toes is up for examination. Subjectivity and wall-eyed projections from out of Nxivm/DOS addicts of Raniere, and out of the recovering addicts of Raniere, are bound to be very debatable. Any versions of what is perceived as being “truthful,” from such a grotesquely misrepresented hornet’s nest, is naturally questionable.
There is nothing to “believe” herein. And that very much includes all of their proffered, so-called clarifications, justifications and excuses, and particularly those real or unreal conceptualizations, being scavenged now, via hindsight.
That hindsight itself could be another prevarication, whether a temporary one or one cemented deep into the mind.
A chicken is a chicken.
It’s possible to watch chickens, to examine chickens and to analyze their behavior, their activities and their voices.
Yes, one can watch and observe and perhaps learn, gain insight. But the chicken herself cannot express much voluble…intelligence. The chicken does not know that much about chickenhood.
I appreciate what is being examined here, nonetheless.
A chicken is a chicken. A conman is a conman. A cigar is a cigar. A psychopath is a psychopath.
NutJob-
That’s so deep….
Are you quoting Scott Johnson or Plato?
Unfortunately, such obviousness does not exist in NXIVM world where “collateral” is not collateral, but blackmail. Changing words for something doesn’t magically make it the concept.
Thanks. It’s a combo quote from Freud, Shivani, Nutjob, Nancy, and Wade Boggs.
Where have you been? Was about to call you and Johnson out for taking a New Orleans roadtrip. But you showed up here, and he ripped on my name on another thread. Were you together?
The deception I can trace is from the FBI and the media, but I guess there will always be those who can’t see it. Maybe it’s because they really rather believe in cults and fairy tales than in a country that lies to their citizens like it was 1984. But that’s OK. Keep up the tales…
Maybe you can’t see your nose in front of your face. A mirror can help with that.
So, it’s not a lie if we all follow your line of reasoning. That makes sense.
Is this Ben Szemkus?
Anonymous at 4:39 pm
Put that aside for a moment, please.
These are the words of Keith, Cami, Lauren, and Allison. In texts, from their own mouths (recorded) and now Keith’s letters.
The media didn’t even know about them when some of these utterances, texts, etc. were made.
By DOS (including Keith’s) own hand and mouth (and this is only a fraction of it), they have put forth a very inconsistent, contradictory and, in some cases, very dishonest narrative.
That is on them. Only them.
Both those things can exist simultaneously
What a [redacted] you are.
We’ll never get the truth from this bunch of chronic liars.
What I’d like to know is, who designed the brand? It sure looks to me like the combined initials KR and AM. Which leads me to believe Mack designed it. Obviously with Raniere’s approval, cuz he ran the show. Mack clearly had a crush on the greasy bastard. And the psychological implications of branding the women that her lover was screwing right under her nose are plenty sick-o. The vengefulness, the cruelty. No wonder she was so eager about the project.
So who designed the brand? Of course, we’ll never get the truth out of this bunch of liars.
Aristotle’s sausage,
Would also love to know who designed the brand.
Some things to add to the original post now after Raniere spoke on Dateline.
Keith claimed not to ever possess the collateral. But could not deny he had “seen some of it”.
Keith started to lie about the collateral but then realized there are texts (“All mine”? Devil emoji) acknowledging receipt of group slave nude “family photos” and the branding tapes themselves etc.
Which, btw, if someone sends you a naked photo and it’s on your phone, you do, indeed, ” possess” it.
There were other new statements about DOS in Keith’s latest prison call. Need to review it to extract them.
Aristotle’s Sausage,
Review the testimony of Lauren in court, and you will see that she admits to having been in charge of designing the brand and that she did it under Keith’s instructions.