By Suneel Chakravorty
There are some things I agree with Frank Parlato on but not very much – and I don’t agree with hardly a thing he wrote in his last article.
Parlato says the collateral was coercive. I disagree. The collateral was voluntary and transparent and made known to the DOS members prior to their submitting it. It should not have been made into illegal conduct by biased prosecutors.
Hear me out. If you were a stranger listening to what these adult women did, that these women were told they could join a sorority but had to be in a “master/slave” relationship for life, then give blackmail-worthy material, and they chose to do so and later regretted it, you’d call them fools, not victims.
You can say they got into their own mess and now they want to get out of it. But in order to collect money from this, it requires a lie.
Happily to fulfill that requirement, we have the Earl of Exaggeration, Neil L. Glazer. (Don’t ask what the “L” stands for.)
The 1-Collateral/2-Collateral Lie
I believe Glazer had to make the collateral sound like it was coercion instead of stupidity, otherwise you’d have to conclude that the women complaining are the authors of their own problems.
I am told that some DOS women went to a lawyer before seeing Glazer. Apparently, when he heard the unvarnished story, he concluded it was all voluntary.
Then they went to Glazer. My take is that they had a chance to modify, and Glazer, that Monarch of Modification, helped them get their $tories $traight. The $ecret of the $tory, the essence of making voluntary actions turn into hard cash was a lie.
Here’s the lie:
Glazer writes in his First Amended Complaint, “After supplying collateral … they were told that now, before they could learn about the structure and nature of this sisterhood, they had to provide additional humiliating and damaging collateral… they were trapped, fearful… Once that second collateral had been given and approved, the recruiter/master revealed … that it was a pyramid of “master/slave” relationships … [that would] require absolute trust and obedience…”
Now let me show you why this is a lie. You don’t have to believe me. Look at the testimony.
Testimony at Trial
Glazer said they didn’t learn about “master/slave” nature of DOS until they gave second collateral and were by then trapped.
Here’s what FBI Special Agent Michael Lever said in his affidavit , which authorized the capture of Raniere:
LEVER: “…a master would tell her prospective slave that the prospective slave had an opportunity to join an organization that would change her life. The master then told the prospective slave that, in order to learn more, she had to provide “collateral,” which was meant to ensure that the prospective slave would keep what she was about to learn a secret. After prospective slaves provided collateral in order to learn more about the organization, the masters informed them that DOS was a women-only organization… The masters also told prospective slaves that their respective relationships would be of “masters” and “slaves,” using those words.”
It’s clear, according to Lever, that DOS recruits learned about “master/slave” after the first collateral, not after the second, third or fourth collateral. It’s after first collateral, you chose to vamoose, or join.
One single piece of collateral [usually a nude picture] was used to ensure that if you didn’t want to join, you would at least keep it a secret. That’s a far cry from what that Emperor of Embellishment Neil Glazer’s contortion where he says it was only after multiple collaterals that you learned you were to be a “slave”.
It is so wrong, so defective and in such contradiction to his own plaintiffs’ experiences that it is a fatal flaw.
Here’s what Lauren Salzman, one of the first-line women of DOS, said in her testimony at the criminal trial (Pgs 1602-1603, May 20, 2019) about the protocol of enrollment into DOS:
L. SALZMAN: “… first thing that happened is that the person who would approach you to enroll you … would ask for collateral… Then once you gave that collateral, you were told a certain number of things about the sorority, about the lifetime vow of obedience, the concept of the master and slave. There was an idea of a collar… And the brand. And then if you decided you wanted to go forward and do this, you would collateralize all areas of your life.”
This flatly contradicts Glazer’s allegations. One collateral, then you heard the salient, necessary information to make an informed decision to join or not to join.
Not multiple collaterals where you were trapped forever, as Glazer ridiculously alleges.
Here’s what Sylvie, one of the prosecution’s witnesses, said on May 7, 2019, about her recruitment of “Sam” into DOS:
SYLVIE: “Yeah, with Samantha, Monica told me that I could, once she had given me the collateral and it had been approved by Monica, then I could ask — I could tell Sam what the project was and she could say yes or no, whether she wanted to join it. Like she wasn’t — she wasn’t obligated to join it when she knew about it, but she just couldn’t say anything about it, or we’d release the collateral.”
Sylvie confirms that the first collateral was for secrecy. Glazer’s allegation is contradicted by Sylvie. If you want more proof, here’s what Nicole, one of Glazer’s plaintiffs, said at trial, on June 6, 2019:
NICOLE: “[Allison] said that if I wanted to get more information on this mentorship, that I had to provide collateral…. [Then after giving the collateral] She told me more about this women’s empowerment group… So, she said, like, that The Vow that you would make to this women’s organization would be a lifetime commitment… like everyone did or would have a matching necklace and, like, a small, like, brand, like a tattoo…”
A prospective DOS member learned about the “master/slave” relationship before giving a second collateral, and, according to Nicole, even learned about the brand – all before deciding whether to join.
Let’s look again at what Glazer said: “After supplying collateral … they were told that now, before they could learn about the structure and nature of this sisterhood, they had to provide additional humiliating and damaging collateral… they were trapped, fearful… Once that second collateral had been given and approved, the recruiter/master revealed … that it was a pyramid of “master/slave” relationships … [that would] require absolute trust and obedience…”
Glazer, the Duke of Deception, is contradicted by his client Nicole, FBI Special Agent Lever, and others who testified at the trial – a trial in which Glazer represented four of the major witnesses.
Frank Parlato says he interviewed Nicole and other DOS women prior to trial. I challenge him to disclose what she and others said about collateral, whether it supports his buddy Glazer, or exposes his lie and this will show whether her story shifted with a little Glazer influence in order to support his second collateral revision of the truth.
What Does This Mean?
Glazer is conflating first collateral and second collateral.
One collateral and you learned everything you needed to know – including you’d be a life-long “slave” to the one recruiting you.
I want you folks who don’t know, “slave” means she would have to do things she might not want to do and do them anyway because that’s what “slaves” do. A “slave” does what their master says.
A “slave” knew this, going in. As for what was not told, such as Raniere being the leader, nowhere is it written that a slave is entitled to know everything their master knows. In fact, by virtue of being a slave, they’re entitled to know only what the master wants to tell them.
To make a finer point, they were told they were going to be slaves. Then, if they wanted to be a slave, then, and only then, they gave second collateral. Once you’re a slave, by virtue of what a slave is, you sacrifice, you surrender the right to equal knowledge, equal position, power, authority and rights. They must do what they are told and can’t demand anything, including information. It is irrelevant that Raniere may have been the head of DOS or whether a slave’s master’s master [grandmaster] was Raniere. The slave only agreed to be a slave to their one master and the master agreed to be the master. The master wasn’t obligated to tell everything to a slave.
From the onset, women who joined DOS knew there would be things they might not like but that was the agreement they made. The tradeoff was they would get guidance, mentorship, training and discipline. This was to train and strengthen and whether you want to scoff at that or believe it, it doesn’t matter.
The bottom line is women who gave second collateral did so with eyes wide open. That’s why the first group of lawyers said it was voluntary. The only way to get around voluntary was to do the Glazer shuffle and say it was more collateral than it really was.
The reality was women weren’t trapped. Women volunteered every inch of the way. She gave a nude picture, and all she had to do to walk away, simply keeping DOS a secret, and many women, I understand, did just that.
It’s not so onerous, not dangerous, not coercive, totally voluntary. (If she didn’t want to learn about DOS, she didn’t even have to give first collateral. The fact that she gave a nude picture to learn about DOS shows it wasn’t so horrible for her.)
DOS masters kept their word. It is DOS plaintiffs who don’t keep their word. I think it is despicable if they are agreeing to the Count of Conflation, Neil Glazer’s lie.
Here’s the Glazer lie again:
Glazer writes, “After supplying collateral … they were told that now, before they could learn about the structure and nature of this sisterhood, they had to provide additional humiliating and damaging collateral… they were trapped, fearful… Once that second collateral had been given and approved, the recruiter/master revealed … that it was a pyramid of “master/slave” relationships … [that would] require absolute trust and obedience…”
Why First and Second Collateral?
The whole point of first collateral was to ensure secrecy and tell you about DOS enough so that if you didn’t want to do it, you didn’t do it. If someone tells you you’re going to be a “slave” for life and you need to give more collateral, if that isn’t enough of a wake-up call to not go ahead with this extreme thing, I don’t know what is.
Women got fair warning.
If DOS wanted to be coercive, there would only be one extreme collateral and then you’re in and no way out.
They wouldn’t have first collateral to learn about it – and then tell you the most extreme things before you join and give you a choice to join or not.
The fact that there even was second collateral shows non-deceptive, non-coercive intent.
They were trying to weed out girls from women. If you weren’t ready to do this and it seemed crazy to you, you had your chance not to do it.
If that Crown Prince of Prevarication, Neil Glazer, were not to lie about this, everyone would say the truth: DOS women had fair warning. This is why Glazer’s lawsuit falls to pieces. It depends on a lie.
What Will Happen With the Civil?
If the civil case goes to trial, the women who are complaining will have to get on the witness stand and tell the truth. They’re not going to get away with the lie, which would be perjury.
Glazer can say anything but a jury is going to think these women are fools. If they didn’t want to be “slaves” for life, then they shouldn’t have given second collateral.
It seems obvious that Glazer, that Shah of Shifting Narratives, understands this is a problem for him. He shifts the narrative and says they only learned about “master/slave” AFTER second collateral. That is false.
They learned about master/slave before they joined, before they gave second collateral. The testimony proves it. The affidavit of Special Agent Lever proves it.
In conclusion, Glazer, the Baron of Baloney, is not going to win a dime for anyone. This case will implode as it was poorly conceived and based on a bad foundation. He’s spent all this time and his law firm’s money and got everyone’s hopes up.
At the end of the day, none of the plaintiffs are going to get money.
Viva Executive Success!
The Glazer lawsuit: the holes are too big and there’s not enough dough to go around.
Dear NXIVM 5 and DOSsier ladies: I just saw this on my FB and thought about you guys.
“Don’t worry about the haters, they are just angry because the truth you speak contradicts the lie they live.”
Great win, and congrats at the courthouse on Thursday.
Looking forward for the house of cards to continue coming down.
Poor Suneel is all alone. Nicki Clyne has left him in the lurch because Suneel is cheap, not just because he’s an ugly dude. Now all Suneel does is cry and post crappy essays for NiceGuy to ridicule.
The anthology below has been created to lift, bugger, Suneel’s spirits.
Suneel’s ExLove Compilation:
1. How can you just walkway, c*nt?!?!?https://youtu.be/Qa1AqKxakRM
2. Bitch Comeback!
3. Love Smells like Bombay Curry.
4. Lonesome Winner!
Suneel like, Nice Guy, the author, you’ve got nothin better to do than to click on each link. 😉
Suneel talks as if he were dandruff on the shoulders of Mack and Clyne and wants us to believe he has first-hand or second-hand knowledge of these conversations. Truth is, he came to the game far too late and now is head n’ shoulders deep into the b.s. he is being fed.
You can’t change the past, Suneel — that’s why it’s called ‘history.’
—One collateral and you learned everything you needed to know – including you’d be a life-long “slave” to the one recruiting you.
Wow, that’s not insane, it’s a totally rational explanation, and DOS already has already, collected blackmail material, so, how can you refuse?
Sunneel, Nicki ain’t coming back; you can stop pretending to still support NXIVM. Don’t forget, there’s an entire universe out there that you can explore in your spacecraft. In other words, there are more “fish” in the Universe(sea). 👽🚀
— You’d be a life-long “slave”.
This makes total sense to Alonzo. He signed up to be a slave for 2 billion years, in Scientology, for free.
When I was young many Catholics signed up for short decades with their church or else they would be sent into servitude in an uncomfortably warm climate for eternity which is a lot longer than two billion years. But I don’t suppose anyone still believes in eternal damnation anymore.
Did you sign or are you going to the tropics? 🏝
Did they still give the Mass in Latin back then? (Serious question)
I was an altar boy – messed up the order of lighting the candles – and was terminated. Not kidding.
I think you do have to sign in effect — or your parents do– you have to get baptized [water placed on baby forehead], first communion [dry waver given to child], confirmation – or you go to hell in this cult.
They did a Latin mass and there is a lot of beauty in the sound of it and its hoariness.
As an altar boy, you may have been lucky about your mistake and got terminated. Many altar boys fared far worse.
Yep, signed papers with Church. I had thought you meant signing something else like with Opus Day, self-flagellation or sleeping without a pillow. Opus people actually sleep without pillows. WTF that is all about I don’t know.
By the way ,I definitely dodged a big bullet by not being an Alter Boy.
Latin Mass must have been cool.
I went to a Midnight Christmas Mass partially in Latin.
Asking this question is answering it. A vast majority of evangelicals believe in the existence of hell: the eternal fire pit. I suppose your point here is that there are a lot of people that have unconventional beliefs.
I mean all of us believe whoppers or one man’s cult is another man’s religion.
Nice Guy – Suneel the Sultan of Spin is busy thinking up new nicknames for Mr Glazer. Obsessions are strange….
LMAO! It’s Suneel to “T”. Suneel could turn his “Glazer Donut” into one of those NFTs.
The ‘article’ is like it’s based on Suneel. 😉
Thanks for sharing it!
RE Suneel Quote:
Lest, anyone think my 9:24 quote of Suneel is out of context, it can be found under the subtopic “What Does this Mean”,
I love Suneel’s convoluted take on Raniere/DOS practices and rituals. He can rationalize anything.
“Keith didn’t want his brand on those women, he wanted his name on them.”
“They chose to drink the CoolAid, the guns to their heads had nothing to do
with their choice at Jone’s Town.”-
Last Suneel Quote:
“Nicki needed a roof overhead, and she chose to be under my roof, and me. I just happened to be part of the deal.
She really scored!”
And Nicki saves a rent for the apartment in Brooklyn, for which she paid about $2400, according to my estimate.
Rob Gavin of Albany TU has posted a story about today’s hearing if you want to read an independent side with no vested interest.
Such a dumb argument.
Blackmail is a crime regardless of whether the material is fake or given voluntarily or whatever else.
Blackmail is an act of coercion using the threat of revealing or publicizing either substantially true or false information about a person or people unless certain demands are met.
This exactly what occurred and suneel only proves the point: “One single piece of collateral [usually a nude picture] was used to ensure that if you didn’t want to join, you would at least keep it a secret.”
This is blackmail and it is illegal. Period. End of story.
You’re giving the spin A LOT of posts.
Can you please do a post all about the DOS handbook?
Some of it was utilized in Keith’s criminal trial.
It really is much more informative then some dude who wasn’t even in DOS just making shit up.
The DOS loyalists should welcome it. This is their sacred literature straight from vanguard’s crusty amphibian lips. Direct from the slave grandmaster’s own top 3 problem solver’s brain.
Suneel is just a nothing follower. Let’s hear more directly from the close to 300 point IQ holder himself now. Keith’s own DOS handbook.
Oh my goodness! There’s an actual handbook? Yes, please, Frank! I wanna see this, too!!!
Frank, if possible, this would be an excellent idea. The hard-line delusion Suneel is taking advantage of is, what was the collateral “show the public” which would be criminal and wrong. But publishing the DOS manual particularly as collateral is defined by NXIVM in it manual of what collateral is and how often the collateral is to be renewed in the context of a manual would be enlightening.
If this manual actually exists. It should be easy to follow text email exchanges but a manual would take this beyond the personal issue of the individual recruiters to an organizational practice, which a reasonable person would conclude.
A manual of entrapment and enslaving women into sex toys for KAR.
From my sense, Suneel has moved from committed to saving the World, to saving KAR his once savior. This is an extremely curios relationship as so few men were in NXIVM.
I wonder also if there was a manual or operating policies for members of the SOP. And if that exists, maybe Suneel could publish that on FRANK REPORT.
The DOS manual definitely exists. It was used in the criminal trial.
I, too would love to see theSOP materials.
I have the DOS manual and if you good folks really want to see it, I can probably publish it. Just none of you go and get any ideas and start using it. Especially the rules about branding. I will dig it up – I think Rosa Laura and Lauren wrote it, but I doubt they will claim any copyright on it.
Post it! Post it! Post it!
The one who got away SCOTT FREE and the other who got probation wrote it, how convenient.
Ask Nippy, Sarah’s husband. He was a leader in SOP, he should know.
It doesn’t matter what Suneel Chakravorty thinks.
What we all know is Keith Raniere is doing 120 years in prison for his actions. The results already show that Raniere, Bronfman, Salzman and Mack were wrong with their actions. They were found guilty and all got prison time for their actions in NXIVM’S RICO charges.
Chakravorty has a right to his opinion. Frank thinks enough of him to give him free range on his platform.
The Frank Report has become the NXIVM Five Report outlet. If you haven’t noticed, most post are either from the NXIVM Five or from Frank about the NXIVM Five.
It’s almost like the NXIVM Five has taken over the Frank Report.
Maybe they are going to – or have already – bought the Frank Report with Clare Bronfman’s money.
Everything is for sale, right!
What is it, Frank? Are you still 100% owner of the Frank Report?
Does the NXIVM Five have free access to your site?
I own the Frank Report and I am giving voice to a variety of opinions. Including, ultimately, my own.
Frank posts Aloonzo for free and nobody, especially, me(NiceGuy), wants to read what Mr, RingDings has to say.
Interesting argument by Suneel.
If we assume that Suneel’s first argument is true (and legal) — i.e., that the women did voluntarily give consent to be slaves before submitting the ‘2nd’ collateral — it would still bring up another legal point.
Suneel is tacitly admitting that, at the time these women submitted their 2nd collateral, they still had NO IDEA what the ‘parameters’ of being a slave would be — regarding the types of slave assignments they might be given in the future (i.e., they had no clue that they might be ordered to send pussy photos so that an older man can get his rocks off, or that they might be given an assignment to seduce & fuck somebody, or get their pussy eaten).
Those types of MATERIAL DETAILS were not provided to each participant, before surrendering their 2nd collateral.
That means ‘informed consent’ was never given, since they were never ‘informed’ (ahead of time) about Keith’s ability to order them to send pussy photos to get his rocks off. Consent given by deception or omission (of material facts) is not informed consent.
Being told that it’s a “women’s empowerment sorority” with a ‘slave/master’ format (and being told about getting a ‘brand’) is NOT the same thing as admitting that an older man will have the power to make slaves send him pussy photos so that he can get his rocks off.
If Suneel believes they were fully aware of this possibility (or that it wouldn’t have affected their consent) then why was it necessary to HIDE Keith’s presence in the chain of command?
The only logical reason to hide Keith’s presence — which any logical jury will agree with — is that Keith believed that disclosing his presence would have made these women think twice before consenting to be slaves (which means NXIVM knew, ahead of time, that these women may not have consented if the truth were revealed to them). This is called intentional deception. It would invalidate any concept of ‘consent’.
Even in basic contract law, any agreement made between parties is automatically invalid (and not enforceable) if a court considers the terms of the agreement to be ‘unconscionable’ (i.e., so absurd or unfair that it would literally shock the conscience of a reasonable person).
For instance, several companies have had their arbitration clauses (which users fully agreed to) ruled invalid, simply because the court considered these clauses to be so unfair that they were ‘unconscionable’.
And that’s just arbitration clauses (not sexual slavery agreements where a perverted man is hiding his presence, lol).
Although I realize this isn’t a contract case, it still has to do with informed consent.
Suneel is attempting to argue that people can consent to being ‘slaves’ for their entire lives (i.e., they can agree to be consensually blackmailed) without them having any idea of the FULL PARAMETERS and LIMITS of the power being surrendered to an elusive grandmaster who is not defined to them.
I’m almost laughing while typing this, since I know that Suneel is deadly serious when saying these things. LOL.
Neil is doing just fine. I suspect that’s why Suneel seems so desperate to get the other side to back down
*Meant to say “DOS knew” instead of “NXIVM knew” (DOS ran the slaves, not NXIVM).
Totally agree Magoo!
Seems like Suneel has entirely forgotten the charges were “Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act”.
Could have been simple blackmail if there was not so much more to the story.
What was the outcome of the show cause hearing today ?
We will be reporting shortly
I really appreciate your work here, Frank.
We all benefit from it. Way to go.
We, who is we….
Oh ya, meaning the NXIVM Five and the Frank team will be putting their spin on it.
Frank were you there?
We know it will be totally factual, as it happened in the courtroom… until the court transcripts come out so we know the real truth.
The NXIVM Five would never lie or stretch the truth about anything…
Oh ya, where it that Rule 33 we have been waiting for so sooooooo long.
The one about the tampering of the pictures that makes Raniere innocent.
I’m getting sick of all this popcorn waiting for it.
Anonymous Coward February 17, 2022 at 7:43 pm wrote:
The Alanzo Mafia
We Run This…..
Operation Snow White
“We, who is we?”
That’s a legitimate question. Alonzo doesn’t have any friends
He has his BTs (body thetans.)
Can you imagine living with these boring f******? This is what they spend all their considerable free time on.
“Good morning! I was thinking last night in my sleep about how we can free our pedophile boyfriend.”
“Same! Hey, on the civil case what if we terrorize all the civil defendants with veiled threats to release all the collateral I still have?”
Smiles. “I love planning cyber-bullying first thing in the morning.”
And on and on all day. Everyday. It’s too boring even for parody. Especially because it’s already so over the top koo,koo crazy pants.
You can tell Suneel spent too much time with Raniere while he was at the MDC — and then followed up by living with Nicki Clyne for hourly programming sessions.
There is no hope for Suneel to ever be the man who stepped foot into his first NXIVM training.
He has become the machine of Raniere now. Willing to spend all his money. Willing to go to any lengths to get Raniere’s messages out there. He is now Raniere’s mouthpiece.
When Suneel Chakravorty speaks, he should have the mask of Raniere on.
Give him 5-10 years and enough sex, he will start to speak gibberish like Raniere started to. He will have more than one woman at a time, because one isn’t enough.
Is he the new Raniere Avatar? It’s beginning to sound like it
Suneel. Your 40s and 50s will be the best of your lifetime when you stop this he-said/she-said shit. You and the Dossier dolls are ruining your best lives by ruminating over nonsensical details. I understand Nickie floundering without a script but I don’t get your buy in. As an experienced buy-iner turning 70…STOP. Let them have their own path and treat yourself to nurturing loving kindness. Find a different adventure. Unless, of course, Sara B is bankrolling your jaunt into this doomed enterprise.
“If you were a stranger listening to what these adult women did, that these women were told they could join a sorority but had to be in a “master/slave” relationship for life, then give blackmail-worthy material, and they chose to do so and later regretted it, you’d call them fools, not victims.”
Since Suneel has provided no evidence to support his claim here, he is either being presumptuous about what people would call them, or sharing his own thoughts that he considers the women to be fools. Why can it not be a foolish decision made because they were defrauded, and hence they are victims?
You can be a fool AND a victim
This is true. Some of the involved parties are fools, victims, and conspirators.
Yes. A criminal organization is full of criminals.
I’d wager that a majority of victims are/were probably also foolish.
Whether it’s a senior citizen or new immigrant getting scammed by someone impersonating the government or a domestic abuse survivor who probably saw a few red flags to a person interested in investing their money in a way to earn the highest returns? Many possible examples here.
Bottom line is responsibility for the crime belongs to the criminal. Not to the foolish person who was fooled.
Well the collateral was not voluntarily given to Raniere after all. So how was it an informed decision on behalf of the slaves? The “friends” who took the first kompromat deceived the slaves and handed it on towards other members. They kept it in a readable form in online storage so that it could be stolen with the intent to use it and for Raniere to wank to it.
So, the woman gave away blackmail material – and, therefore, it is not a crime to use it? Yeah, try that argument with other crimes.
Wishful thinking, Suneel
If what Agent Lever said is true, I can’t understand why women would sign up for DOS. But I also don’t understand why Glazer would misrepresent the process. Frank, can you elaborate more here?
Yeah, I think this is a good point. And what I find intriguing is that this does seem to be a choice the women made, and they had opportunity to not pursue it. So, the question then becomes, are they not responsible for their own actions and choices? We all make choices every day and sometimes regret them. Joining DOS seems like a big choice to make with big consequences if you have regrets later on. But if you know that going into it. then how is it criminal and who is to blame but yourself? This is getting interesting…
The women did not KNOW Keith Raniere was the head of DOS.
The women were told NO MEN AT ALL were involved.
It’s not a “choice” if it is based on intentional misinformation.
I may be inclined to agree with you, but I’ll play devil’s advocate to try and flesh it out. Let’s say they didn’t know Keith’s involvement. Is that a crime? Does that mean people should be jailed? If that’s true, I have some ex’s I’d love to put away!
I ask b/c I’ve been thinking a lot lately about men and women and double standards. If you reverse the gender roles of this, we would tell the guys to suck it up and laugh at them for making a stupid choice. I’ve known guys in frats who did MUCH worse.
I’m just tired of people treating women like fragile balls of emotion that need to be saved and are so easily brainwashed. I’m not fragile or easily brainwashed.
Would I have joined DOS? Absolutely not!
Would I condemn someone for joining? No, it’s their choice.
At the end of the day, I wasn’t there so I can only have an opinion. And that’s true of most of us on this blog. I’m curious to see where this goes, b/c tbh (unpopular opinion here), I don’t think the NXIVM supporters sound crazy. At least not any crazier than the victims.
Even when you try to hide it, you sound just like a NXIVM/DOS member.
Anyone who engages in a relationship with Suneel needs to know: “Can I take an intimate pic of you … showing your private parts and your face (so I know ‘who’ I am looking at). This is just for the two of us. Tell me about the things that make you most ashamed, that you don’t want the world to know. You can write down your darkest thoughts/deeds/fantasies. You trust me, don’t you? You have to now to be my slave for the next 1000 years for your own good. Oh, and you’ll also need to f… my boss – you know, my master on demand. Didn’t I tell you about my master? How remiss of me. You gave your word to obey me … if you leave, well you know … I would never personally do a thing like that, but you know … unfortunate things do happen. If you must know, the pics and document you gave me … I forwarded them to my Master, and I think the board members of my company have access as well. And remember, I never coerced you, I never mentioned the word ‘collateral’, you volunteered to give them to me it as tokens of your devotion to me. That was a tad silly of you, wasn’t it? We need to book you some more EM sessions.”
Mocking attorneys for doing their job is for the small minded. Not too long ago, there was an entire article published about the women lawyers who defend bad men.
Nicki Clyne tweeted her displeasure with it. I agreed with her stance on that piece. But then, not long after that, here’s Nicki Clyne, again, tearing apart Moira Penza on social media.
Moira Penza – who is also doing her job. You may not like the outcome, but Moira was hired to do the job of the prosecution.
It’s so predictable that criminal defendants hate the prosecution. Hate the judge. Especially when the guilty party is convicted.
But criminals almost never hate their own actions that put them in prison. Criminals never accept the fact that it’s their own illegal behavior that put them into criminal custody.
So, fucking boring. What is that saying? Great minds discuss ideas? Small minds discuss people?
Neil Glazer is also doing a job that he was retained to perform. Criticizing him is childish. You would not like ANY attorney involved in a civil suit against Keith, Nxivm, DOS or any if it.
It’s not always a lawsuit against an airline’s faulty navigation system. Sometimes, it’s representing women who were branded.
Plaintiffs get representation in America. Neil Glaser is their attorney. Grow up. Get over it.
This is the US legal system. Hate the game. Not the player.
I don’t hate Neil Glazer.
In my personal interactions with him he behaved quite honorably. I do have respect for him as a person and how he comports himself.
But his lawsuit is a mess.
And some of the people who are being terrorized and destroyed by it do not deserve it.
Neil is going after Deep Pocket Bronfman Money. OK then. Be honest about it and pursue actual justice by deleting the other defendants who his own plaintiffs profited off of through NXIVM.
I believe Neil thought he’d get a quick settlement. Instead, he’s getting a shit-fight – which he deserves.
Philly Neil – do a 3rd do-over and delete the defendants who your own plaintiffs made money on in NXIVM.
Why are you having “personal interactions” with Neil Glazer?
—In my personal interactions with him he behaved quite honorably.
Like a restraining order?
The truth is always fair, right Frank?
No matter who your friends are.
The truth is always fair – it is paramount – the only thing that counts.
To paraphrase Franklin – Do you love life than do not lie for Truth is the stuff life, existence is made of. Even anonymous cowards will have to face up to that.
Address Suneel’s challenge to you, then.
Pursue the truth over any tribe.
Alanzo – that’s what I do – pursue the truth – I doubt you’ll catch me part of any tribe that is untrue. My new favorite untruthful tribe – the Anonymous Cowards tribe – so brave to condemn, so afraid of putting their name on it.
I know you do, Frank. I’ve seen it myself.
It’s why I respect you so much.
So here’s Suneel’s Challenge:
Meet Suneel’s challenge head on.
Tell the truth despite your tribal ties to Philly Neil or anyone else.
The truth is always fair.
I am in a tribe of one – myself.
This is not quite true, Frank. You are in a tribe of one which includes you and your mom and probably some other members of your family.
@Frank Parlato, you don’t need to accept Suneel’s challenge to prove anything. You do your thing. No need to fall into these mind games.
— Pursue the truth over any tribe.
Alonzo, you don’t belong to any tribe – not because you haven’t tried, but because you’re a loser.
But why are you having,”personal interactions” with Neil Glazer?
You brought it up.
Please answer. Thanks!
He’s not even a Duke!
Why are you having “personal interactions” with Neil Glazer?
Please clarify what you previously stated.
Suneel, none of this changes the fact that slavery is illegal, even if one volunteers. You have a minor point with the women being told about the nature of the relationship before they joined, yet it doesn’t change anything. For instance, if hypothetically the women had been asked to do something like rob a bank or kill another person your logic could also be used to justify that they agreed to not being told about it, and would need to do it. This is precisely why regardless of anything, the nature of the relationship was not an informed consent, and could never have been, even if Raniere’s name had been told to the women. Though it would have likely helped them make a better decision, but It would have always remained a non-consensual relationship. Unlike BDSM relationships, there was no safe word. The minor fact that the collateral was not released by the DOS masters yet, doesn’t change much. You could at best argue that they had good intent, but even then you must remember that the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
Wow. We all knew Suneel was an immoral person.
Didn’t expect him to spend paragraphs where he essentially proves his lack of morals. It’s kind of impressive.
He continues to confuse what is legally criminal with what is moral. It’s a concept that even elementary children understand, yet he doesn’t. Is he on the spectrum? Sociopath? It’s something he just keeps doing.
Here is the thing, civil cases are often decided by the moral question. And since this cuts both ways, I do agree that a jury trial is a significant problem for the plaintiffs for the voluntary nature of it all will be hammered relentlessly by the defense. As for his nonsense about “first collateral”, “second collateral” (and all those that followed), it’s a distinction without a difference and the jury would just see it all as collecting blackmail material. The lawyer part of the defense will go nowhere near trying to make this distinction. Clyne might be stupid enough to try. Kind of hope she does.