The first rule of Fight Club is you don’t talk about Fight Club. The first rule of cults is you don’t call it a cult. This was certainly the rule in Nxivm.
Journalist Sarah Berman titled her comprehensive book on Nxivm “Don’t Call It A Cult”.
Former Doc Roberts didn’t lose her medical license because of narrow-minded “mainstream American culture”. She lost it because she was branding dear leader Vanguard’s initials onto women’s nethers. Women who had been coerced and lied to.
It had nothing to do with Roberts being in a cult. Even though she was. Nxivm was a cult. The exalted leader, the bowing to his picture, the enforced groupthink, the sashes, the Knox Woods compound. Cult, cult, cult.
Cults aren’t some freedom-loving expression of individuality, persecuted because of “mainstream American culture”.
You don’t shave your head and put on orange robes and chant in unison and do whatever dear Leader tells you because you’re an independent thinker. It’s a surrender of freedom. It’s choosing to be a slave.
Ah yes, the Hare Krishnas in robes at airports. Haven’t seen them since the era of the Hippie. They were the embodiment of the word “cult”. Forty years ago.
They weren’t a cult? They were “straight-up Hindus”? What is a straight-up Hindu? There are four sects of Hinduism, subdivided into six sub-sects https://religionfacts.com/hinduism/branches
Hinduism has a very ugly side, sectarian and violent. Brought to prominence by Modi’s recent Hindu Nationalist chauvinism https://www.economist.com/briefing/2020/01/23/narendra-modis-sectarianism-is-eroding-indias-secular-democracy
So saying “they’re Hindus!” Isn’t much of an endorsement.
Lastly, this sneering at “mainstream American culture”. What exactly is it? Republican or Democratic? Pickup truck or Prius? LA or rural Oklahoma? Evangelical, Unitarian, Mormon, liberal Catholic like Biden, or agnostic? BLM sign in the front yard, or the American flag, or both?
I find it odd that all this disparity can be lumped together as “mainstream American culture” and the various sects of Hinduism can be grouped together as “straight-up Hindus” and yet there is no commonality that allows Nxivm and Scientology to be categorized as modern-day cults. I find that both odd and unconvincing.
[…] Several comments appeared in response to Guest View: Dr. Roberts DID NOT Lose Her Medical License Because She Was in a Cult […]
It has been obvious who’s behind the “Ex” sock puppet since its appearance here, but this person is getting lazy.
A quick Google search reveals that this person (who I’m not going to name because he loves seeing his name in print) is recycling an old blog post of his.
Conisder this comment: https://frankreport.com/2021/11/16/guest-view-dr-roberts-did-not-lose-her-medical-license-because-she-was-in-a-cult/#comment-179880
Compare it to what this troll wrote in his blog post entitled “Leah Remini’s Scientology and the Aftermath Attack Their Critics Too” (I’m not going to grace him with a link, but you can find is easily enough with a quick search):
“Usually, a person will look for a way to explain this, latching on to the first explanation they see which confirms their present beliefs. Then, clutching on to that one explanation, or hypothesis, they will discount all other hypotheses which don’t fit in with what they already think.
This is a bad way of getting to the truth.
I’ve made this same mistake myself many times, and have seen many others make this mistake in Scientology-watching as well.
Because so much is being hidden from you with regard to Scientology, I’ve learned to use multiple hypotheses to explain what we see in Scientology watching, assigning a probability percentage to each one.
I’ve found this to be a much more effective way of trying to figure things out with regard to Scientology.”
“Any good demagogue knows that you can’t emotionally manipulate your tribal ninnies with complex, nuanced ideas that are intellectually honest. You have to deny the nuance and over-simplify the idea if you have a group of tribal ninnies to motivate.”
While I give you credit for changing your approach, and while I acknowledge you will have a better shot at reaching your goals on FR using this approach, I’m calling bullshit. I also noticed the commenter “Ex” and noticed the words that “Ex” was using. Immediately, I knew “Ex” was one of Alanzo’s Scientology stalkers who was pretending to be an incognito Alanzo.
Like I’ve typed before, the problem with Alanzo’s stalkers is all they do is lie. Their act is offensive and I’m embarrassed for them.
If I was signing their check – errrrr handing them their bag full of cash – they’d be fired. To the one paying these has-been, bumbling, wreckless, dopes: time to cut ties. At the least, reassign them.
Nutjob, you are just repeating yourself ad nauseum.
Apparently, David Miscavige is happy with the job that his $cientology spies are doing.
Do you believe Capn’ Davie gives a rat’s ass what you think? If so, you don’t know jack shit about the man or his cult. Maybe you should edumacate yerself about the cult. Read a book or two–there are a ton out there.
Have you considered that $cio spies are messing with you precisely to get you to make people afraid of them by posting crap like this?
Have you contributed money to the Hot Pocket Philosopher’s Anti-Cult Investigations Fund?
Or are you just a keyboard warrior?
Call me what you want. You showed up here with the specific intent to???? I want to give you the opposite reaction of what you want. Hopefully, giving you the opposite reaction will get you the fuck out of the comment section.
To Frank: If it already isn’t on the radar, it seems this Alanzo fellow has a story to tell about Scientology murders that were made to look like suicides. You, Frank, did an Investigation Discovery documentary that featured Keith Raniere possibly killing people and making it look like suicides. It has been well documented on FR that Keith stole tech from Scientology and was a fan of Scientology.
Why are these apparent Scientology freaks so intent on disrupting FR? Is it just a moronic rogue OSA dude? Are they legit scared of Alanzo delivering the goods? Are they simply incompetent and lazy?
As an investigative reporter, aren’t you obligated to figure this out?
Lazy Sock Puppet-
Nice catch! You bagged the Cult Groupie.
Self-admittedly, I’ve used sock puppets myself. However, I haven’t crossed the line into dialogue and exchanging pleasantries with myself.
There’re some lines a man does not cross.
Lazy Sock Puppet-
Additionally, I find it humorous that Alonzo went into such a lengthy and verbose
explanation of what amounts to the term CONFIRMATION BIAS.
One has to wonder if he has seen the term before reading it in “my comments”, right now. [Hi Alonzo!] 😉
It hasn’t dawned on Alanzo that the Greeks didn’t have a word for
CONFIRMATION BIAS! Just think how much time they would say if they had had a simple term instead, of using philosophy to describe confirmation bias. 😉
The Ancient Greeks aren’t the only ones with a lack of vocabulary words, in present day Bosnia, the “there are no words for fiction and nonfiction, or the distinction thereof”.
This is an incredible interesting on article about different cultures lacking certain simple vocabulary words and terms:
Alonzo should pontificate and philosophize and design a byzantine construct for two simple words. Fiction. Nonfiction. Thus he could help the Bosnians.
The board cited their reasons for revoking her license. The ruling requires no justification from outside parties, and whining from her supporters and their attempts to rewrite the dictionary are not going to help her. Hopefully, the doctor will clean up her act and regain her license in the future, but for now, she sells insurance.
In any event, I am opposed to Danielle Roberts ever being allowed to practice medicine again. She has definitively disqualified herself from doing so. Pity or the cost of her education is not a criterion for me of reinstatement to the medical profession.
Let us hope that if you ever need forgiveness, have demonstrated genuine repentance, fulfilled your legal obligations, and thus earned another chance, that others will give it to you, and not withhold what they would naturally give to themselves without hesitation.
Although your comment implies you believe all humans are selfish, I do like the part about forgiveness and repentance. It’s truly a shame Danielle couldn’t have been a bit more thoughtful regarding why her license was even under consideration of being revoked.
It’s a very long report so I only made it to page 25 but this panel of decision makers were actually pretty kind to Daniele, acknowledging her professional success and tremendous potential.
On the flip, they also made it very clear that they were wholly unimpressed that she expressed no remorse, demonstrated no regret and was unwilling to hold herself accountable for her role and actions to the point of even blaming Sarah for victimzing herself.
In short, it was Danielle’s pride and lousy attitude, (besides her poor decision making) that greatly influenced their judgement.
I’m not sure why these DOS women speak and act so arrogantly? I wonder if like Keith’s other experiments they were selected for this character trait. Nothing wrong with being proud of oneself but it should be tempered with some humility.
Because? You know what, Danielle? So what if you fucked up. You didn’t think this would/could happen. You thought everything was cool and yet? Your medical community disagreed. Majority of the public disagree. And you basically failed. Nobody needs to be convinced to see things your way. This is about judging you and your actions, not the other way around.
You knew that tattoo artists need to be licensed and follow protocol and you chose to go along with branding instead so you could skirt the law. You chose to deceive people by lying about the origin of the design. The consequence of skirting the law and lying to people? You are perceived as unable to make good decisions, especially regarding the care of others. Licensing board reserves the right to approve only those thoroughly educated to a high standard and fit to practice. I’m pretty sure that a surgeon who lost his arms would not be able to perform surgery. And Danielle? In the eyes of many, you lost your good judgment.
I really hope you can find a way to let down your pride and forgive yourself. I hope you can truly open yourself up to see that everyone makes mistakes. There’s no great conspiracy about being held accountable for bad decisions. It happens every day. It’s what’s happening here and you’ll get through it. I kind of hope you can get your license back, but I also hope it’s not before you’ve given a bit of thought as to how you ended up in this state. Are you really sure this guy keith was actually leading you all down a good path? His history is fraught with destruction and everyone knows you did not come up with this idea on your own.
Q: What is a DOS slave’s favorite hobby?
A: Because they are into cultivation.
I’m here every night folks!
How are girlfriends like cults?
You have to prove your devotion before you’re welcomed into the folds.
Q: What is a DOS slave’s favorite drink?
I’m here every night, folks!
Doctors can practically murder patients and not lose their license. She just burned a few of them. All of which volunteered for the burning and did not have a real problem with it until their significant others did.
She didn’t really lose her license for burning people. She didn’t really lose it for being in a cult. She lost it because she became famous for burning members of a cult. It’s a small but important distinction.
If not for the sex/control aspect of it all, chances are NXIVM would have never made national news. It might have (barely) made the local news. At most, they would have heard branding of women that volunteered, thought “people be weird” and moved on. But being famous for it requires action of some kind. Her infamy meant they had to revoke her license; otherwise, they would have to explain why they didn’t revoke her license. One can be effortlessly justified if any reporter asks, the other not so much. Without the “fame”, it’s unlikely she would have lost her license.
Remember: intentional act vs. negligent act
Doc Roberts was intentional.
Yes. Good to see someone who approached this topic with objectivity.
Q: If she was not in a cult, then why does her family seemingly always come second to dancing outside a prison for a guy who is old enough to actually be her own father but has no real interest in her?
The answer could be on a forever postcard for a family’s fridge or just on a sash.
I Told You So!
Picture taken outside Los Angeles’ Iconic City Hall.
Gasoline in LA pushes 6 dollars a gallon!
Is that Biden’s Build Back Better?
Is that the Democrats’ Green New Deal?
$6 for a gallon is way too little. Please let prices continue to rise.
After all, almost everyone has to drive an SUV. That increases consumption.
You have to think about what kind of car you’re driving beforehand.
Biden has not implemented any parts of the new green deal – and the current high gas prices have nothing to do with Biden!!!
Let me point out the gas prices were lower under the Obama administration than Trump or Biden.
Obama is a long time ago. And there were the consequences of the financial crisis of 2008.
The point is that presidents don’t control the price of gas……
No shit Obama was a long time ago. So wasn’t the presidency of William Henry Harrison.
Speaking of Cults let’s talk about the Cult of Joe Biden and the Democrat Party.
Earlier this year I warned Frank Report readers that Biden and the Democrats would sky rocket the price of gasoline.
Here is the price of gasoline in Lancaster, California near Los Angeles.
I told you so!
Shadow, you’re telling fibs once again.
Read this article and weep, as they say in poker:
Shadow, you can never win because you promote lies!
Typical Anti-Cult tribalism.
Why do they always have to choose hate over forgiveness?
You realize this is the website that took down the cult, right?
The way posts here are increasing, this is going to be the cult site that took down the web.
I’m here every night, folks!
Shut up, Alanzo.
You are defending a rapist and pedophile, and a bunch of awful women, who assisted the rapist, by gathering blackmail material on the victims.
At the end of the day, DOS wasn’t a sex cult, it was a RAPE CULT. The female victims were blackmailed and/or coerced into having unwanted sex with Keith Raniere.
DOS was a RAPE CULT!!!!!
You are one for learning exercises Alanzo. How about I give you a lesson in what the female victims felt.
Would you like to experience what the women experienced, Alanzo?
• Sexual Exploitation
• Physical abuse
• Sleep depreciation
• Emotional abuse
Here’s the thing Alonzo, you can’t even handle people posting negative comments about you. You can’t even handle a supposed email from OSA. All you do is cry-victim. You aren’t as strong as any of the women victims.
You are a sanctimonious coward and pseudo-intellectual baboon.
Nice Guy, why can’t you accept that not everyone thinks like you? Why can’t you accept that Alanzo isn’t the only person who isn’t a member of your tribe? You only want to confirm your present beliefs. You clutch on to one explanation or hypothesis and discount all other hypotheses that don’t fit in with what you already think.
This is a bad way of getting to the truth. I’ve made this same mistake myself many times, and have seen many others make this mistake as well.
Any good demagogue knows that you can’t emotionally manipulate tribal ninnies with complex, nuanced ideas that are intellectually honest. You have to deny the nuance and over-simplify the idea to motivate a group of tribal ninnies.
“Rape”, “molestation”, “fear” are terms of emotional manipulation, not objective, logical ways of considering multiple hypotheses and assigning them different probabilities.
Reality is more complex than you are comfortable accepting.
Well, one thing is for sure, you’re not Alanzo. Alanzo actually knows the definition of hypothesis.
The only person I am aware of on the Frank Report Nxivm world who routinely misuses the words hypothesis and theory is Nicki Clyne. BUT you aren’t her. She’s too busy with ‘My Favor Martian’ Suneel.
“” Rape”, “molestation”, “fear” are terms of emotional manipulation, not objective, logical ways of considering multiple hypotheses””
Actually, there are clear definitions and objective verification of what these things are.
Here is an example of subjective and objective:
Subjective is the newer written portion of the SATs. Objective is the multiple-choice questions.
Here is an example of Rape:
Keith Raniere forcibly takes a girl named Rhiannon onto an elevator. He then pulls his pants down, and pulls her pants down as she screams for help — then he penetrates her with his penis. That seems pretty damn objective to me.
If you need further help with understanding “objective” rape, molestation, and fear, I am sure Alanzo can oblige you. Just send him a bus ticket and a few dollars for incidentals (junk food).
You are either a successful troll or someone who lacks any formal education including middle school.
You have a great night and remember, it’s never too late to get your G.E.D.
Keith Raniere was never charged or convicted of “raping” a girl named Rhiannon.
You assume he did because he fits your tribalist narrative. You twist reality to meet your expectations. That’s the opposite of objectivity.
Instead of discussing issues logically, you resort to childish name-calling.
==Keith Raniere was never charged or convicted of “raping” a girl named Rhiannon. You assume he did because he fits your tribalist narrative.
It can be true without him being convicted of it. Conviction is not necessary for truth, but for public punishment.
One can presume he did it based on the credibility of witness testimony, his own beliefs and behavior, or other evidence. For example, other women going on the record in the media, or Rhiannon filing a police report, the texts to Cami and others, his sex addiction, etc. A “tribalist narrative” is not required. Such labeling is just an irrational dismissal via aspersion of someone’s judgement capabilities.
==“Rape”, “molestation”, “fear” are terms of emotional manipulation
No, they’re not. They’re well-defined concepts that have meaning.
== not objective, logical ways of considering multiple hypotheses and assigning them different probabilities.
Well, duh, because they have nothing do with such things.
You sound like a Raniere cult follower.
“Rape”, “molestation”, “fear” depend on the idea of “non-consent”.
Are you saying horror films should be illegal because they scare people? Of course not. People consent to feeling fear. That’s the point of a horror film.
“Consent” is always subjective and people change their minds. It is never the basis of an objective “crime.”
The law should be objective.
You have a poor understanding of reality.
Consent is subjective in the sense that there is a subject who voluntarily agrees. The act itself is objective (truthful, real, sincere, etc.) when both its intent and act correspond.
People do not “consent” to a feeling of fear since it is a primal, primitive, subconscious, etc., response. The body’s “lizard brain” responds in a certain way to an initial qualitative assessment of a particular situation.
People consent to the possibility of feeling fear when they watch a horror movie. Consent requires a conscious, developed, and functioning rational capability. The feeling of fear is subjective to a person in the sense that it is dependent upon the person. People can consciously attempt to suppress a feeling of fear after the fact but they do not choose to originally feel it.
Some people fear things more while others fear them less. There are both rational and irrational fears. Being afraid of something that can kill you is rational, i.e., fearing a Grizzly bear that you stumble upon while hiking a path. Then there are irrational fears, like being afraid of that the sun won’t rise tomorrow and the world will freeze over.
That people change their minds is irrelevant to the act of consent. You cannot withdraw the latter. But you can objectively determine whether the consent was legitimate, i.e., fully informed, voluntarily and sincerely given, not deceived into it, etc.
If you are not a troll — I’m sorry for being rude.
Definitely a troll. See my recent comment above.
I apologize for being so rude. I believe we are quibbling over hairs and semantics.
“Personally, I kinda feel like the problem is we are living in a “post-definition” culture, where people use terms to fit their agenda, regardless if they’re accurate. In order to have any meaningful communication, we would first need to agree that 1) words have explicit meanings, and 2) those meanings matter.”
Do you agree?
A very wise and sly woman wrote those words. I bet you know who she is 😉
Every time I look at that picture of the DOS brand, I’m more and more convinced it’s Allison Mack’s initials in there too. Just look at the top photo.
You have to turn it on its side to make KR. And even then the R is upside down.
Master and Grandmaster. Lover’s initials entwined. At least Mack thought they were lovers. Raniere seems to have regarded her as f*ckmeat.
How sick is that, branding all those “other women”, all those sexual rivals, with his & hers initials. Like these rivals were a tree and she was a smitten schoolboy with a jackknife.
You gotta admit that Keith really knows how to pick dedicated and devoted fuckmeat.
There’s a lot more women out there who prefer harem relationships than most people in the West are willing to admit.
Triple Gold( NutJob’s friend)
Calling a bunch of women “fuck meat” is offensive. I understand you’re a dirty ‘hoe’
yourself, but what if one of these women is a pescatarian? Pescatarians don’t eat hogs, they dine on tuna tartare.
Shit ain’t Kosher!
I bet you’re one of them, Shiksa, with the red string bracelet, and the designer yoga pants, with the Louis Vuitton hand bag.
“Every time I look at that picture of the DOS brand, I’m more and more convinced it’s Allison Mack’s initials in there too. Just look at the top photo.”
If you look long enough at clouds, you will see faces and all sorts of other things. You are imposing meaning on a meaningless situation. You are creating a meaning to make yourself feel comfortable because tribal ninnies can’t stand ambiguity. This is a well-documented psychological phenomenon called pareidolia.
You see initials in the brands because it fits your tribalist worldview that Keith and Allison are evil and must be destroyed.
That is a false equivalence. Imposing meaning on natural events like cloud formation may rightfully fit pareidolia because there isn’t a human intent (teleological) behind it. Clouds have no mind of their own and cannot send human messages; so seeing shapes in clouds that conform to an objective thing, e.g., a car or face, can be dismissed as the imposition of a human image on a natural random formation. However, when it comes to such things a scar, there is a high probability that the symbol does contain AM’s initials because she is a human and, therefore, executes actions with a goal, she was second in command of DOS, the brand was partially her idea discussed with Raniere, the symbol is in the form of letters that are her initials, etc.
Again, it doesn’t have anything to do with a dismissive “tribalist” worldview. Just simple logic based on evidence.
Re The Brand:
Clouds aren’t designed by a man…..
Letters KR designed to be ‘ambiguous’ are not an example of pareidolia.
The Volkswagen symbol alleged to hide a swastika is an example of pareidolia.
Pareidolia: the tendency to perceive a specific, often meaningful image in a random or intentionally ‘ambiguous’ visual pattern.
Ex you keep splitting hairs over the meaning of words and thereby obfuscating the discussion. You keep getting us lost in a never-ending sea of monikers, neologisms, semantics, and connotations, and their meaning within society. It’s like a quasi-mental-labyrinth. Why?
I have to wonder, did you ever enroll, at some point, in a college philosophy course on “meaning” and Plato.
When you decide to hop off the merry-go-round of meaning — let me know. Then perhaps we can have an actual real conversation.
Alonzo the hermit sophist, loves Plato and meaning. The two of you should exchange phone numbers.
This is my gift to you and anyone else who wants to go down the black hole of philosophical meaning:
“If you don’t find it confusing, you’re a liar.”- unknown professor