One of the most controversial aspects of DOS, at least as it is portrayed in the media and by a handful of former DOS members, is the concept of “collateral.” While the traditional definition of collateral is straightforward: “something pledged as security for repayment of a loan, to be forfeited in the event of a default” (Oxford Languages dictionary), the word has taken on a dark and sinister meaning due to the erroneous association with blackmail within the context of DOS.
In order for something to be blackmail, it has to be “extortion or coercion by threats, especially of public exposure or criminal prosecution” (Merriam Webster dictionary).
The key word here is “threat.”
Despite all the testimony from alleged victims in documentaries about NXIVM and a six-week criminal trial, not a single woman has claimed they were actually threatened with the release of collateral.
This means that any agreement where a surety is pledged to back a commitment can be deemed blackmail. So if someone pledges a house as collateral to get a loan, and defaults on that loan, and the bank comes for the house, then the individual can claim they’re being blackmailed. This obviously wouldn’t hold up in court, yet it follows the same logic as calling DOS collateral “blackmail.”
What is the purpose of Collateral?
To offer an example that might help in understanding why anyone would entrust a friend with collateral in the first place, consider the following scenario:
Let’s say I have a friend with a drinking problem. We’ll call her Lisa. Part of Lisa’s issue is that she never intends to get drunk. She’ll go out for dinner, order a drink, which leads to one more and one more until she’s drunk, and then she drives home, drunk.
This is bad for two reasons: the first being that she breaks her word to not drink, but more practically, she puts herself and others in danger by driving while intoxicated. When she’s sober, she is horrified by her behavior and vows to never do it again. However, she has proven that she doesn’t have the strength to make better decisions under certain circumstances. So, desperate to not drive drunk, Lisa asks me for help.
We’re going out for dinner and she gives me the keys to her car (first thing’s first, we’ll deal with the drinking problem later), and says, “No matter what I say, do NOT give me my car keys to drive home tonight.”
Despite her good intentions, she knows there’s a good chance she’ll get drunk and she doesn’t want to put herself in that position. I agree to take the keys and hold them for safe keeping. We go out. She, predictably, gets drunk and, in her intoxicated state, demands that I give her the keys so she can drive home. She assures me she’s fine to drive, even though she’s obviously slurring, and says, “If you don’t give me my keys, I’m calling the cops!”
I don’t hand over the keys.
Lisa says, “I’m going to tell them that you stole my car!” She actually goes as far as calling the cops and, when they show up, she yells and screams that I stole her car.
Now, did I steal the car? Or was there a good faith agreement that, under the circumstances, the act of keeping the keys was 1) in her best interest, and 2) appropriate behavior based on the mutual agreement we made.
You might say, but keeping the keys was obviously for the person’s safety and can be easily explained to the authorities. The same is true for DOS.
At the start of media campaign against DOS, local authorities declined to get involved because it was obvious that consenting adults were making their own decisions. The Northern District of New York, which would have been the correct jurisdiction for any FBI investigation, also declined to get involved for the same reasons.
NXIVM even hired a private company of former law enforcement to investigate the situation and determine if any laws were being broken and the answer was a resounding, “No.”
Within DOS, none of the women felt coerced or were heard complaining about their commitment. By that point, DOS had existed for over two years. When the rumor that the FBI was investigating DOS started circulating, by way of Catherine Oxenberg threatening her daughter, women in DOS genuinely believed that, if true, they would simply explain the whole situation, show all the evidence that proved the agreement was voluntary and collateral was never used outside the scope of the agreement, and that the whole media narrative was just one big misunderstanding. Were we naive?
Yes, most definitely. Were we ill-informed about how powerful people can weaponize the media and the justice system? Absolutely. Did we make mistakes? Of course. But never ever ever did we use collateral to harm anyone, nor release it to the public.
Women who joined DOS did so of their own volition and for a specific, stated purpose. That purpose was to enter into an agreement whereupon they would be held accountable by their master (the woman who invited her) to complete practices, follow through on goals, accept feedback, and work to become a better version of herself with her master’s full support and guidance.
The assumption was that someone joining DOS felt limited in certain areas of her life, and believed that a bold commitment, and guidance from a trusted friend, would help her overcome those challenges. No one’s collateral was ever at risk of being released if she didn’t complete a task or failed to do a practice. As testified at trial, the worst “punishment” for failing to complete a task or command was doing things like a one-minute plank, or the master taking on a consequence, like a cold shower. (Yes, you read that right, the master would sometimes take on consequences to teach how a person’s failures doesn’t just affect them, it affects others too.)
Most of the time, it was the person who failed who chose her own consequence in order to fix the mistake, not the master, always with the intention of learning, growing, and building conscience. Much of the time, masters and slaves lived in different homes, different cities, even different countries. I
t would have been easy to lie about taking on a consequence or admitting a failure, but we trusted each other and it was for the woman’s own benefit, not the master’s.
This dynamic is similar to an athlete trusting a coach to push them and direct them to do practices that help build the strength needed for success. We all have moments when we feel lazy, afraid, or lose sight of our vision, and if we aren’t careful, our life can pass us by while we’re lost in our excuses and distractions.
The intent of DOS was to help women build the inner strength required to stay focused, to not give in to fear, and to understand the responsibility of being a leader — whether that’s in a company, a family, or any other setting. We are all leaders in our own lives. The question is, where are we leading to?
Even answering that question was something a DOS master would help facilitate. Honest feedback from people outside of our circumstance is necessary to gain perspective. It’s often the case that our immediate family and friends don’t want to tell us the hard truths lest it disrupt the relationship, therefore the commitment in DOS was to provide honest, constructive feedback with the goal of personal growth, self-awareness, and self-love.
Now, back to the collateral. There are more facts that can easily debunk the distorted way it’s been represented in the mainstream narrative.
There are those who have claimed the collection of collateral was coercive to begin with. This can easily be debunked by the fact that there are many women who were invited to learn about DOS by giving first collateral (to ensure secrecy about DOS) who declined. There are also women who gave collateral to learn about DOS and ensured secrecy, who then declined the offer to join. These women’s collateral was never released, nor threatened to be released, and the friendships between the women were not affected negatively.
So, how is DOS coercive if there is no negative consequence to saying no, and numerous examples of people saying no? It was assumed that the women who decided to join DOS, through a lengthy and thorough process of evaluation and self-examination, did so because they saw it as something they wanted. Is it possible they thought they wanted it and then changed their minds? Of course, we all do that. But that’s the exact process that all too often keeps us from achieving our dreams.
Our tendency to change course when things get hard is precisely what DOS was trying to address. In life, there are many points where we can either choose away from our commitments because it’s uncomfortable, or we can push through the discomfort and find that we are stronger on the other side. We never know everything involved in a commitment when we make it, whether that’s a career, a relationship, or joining an organization; consider the commitment to join the military! But no matter what the commitment is — a diet, a workout, a creative project — we build internal fortitude and belief in ourselves when we stay the course. DOS was about helping women stay the course, especially through the times when it’s uncomfortable and challenging.
Another relevant fact about the collateral is that no one who was rightfully entrusted with it ever released it to the public. Each individual master collected collateral from the women she invited, then put it in a safe and/or kept it on an encrypted drive for safekeeping.
This is significant because it shows that, despite the agreement that the collateral was to back the commitment to secrecy and the DOS path, it was ultimately a gesture to help each woman in DOS feel a sense of gravity behind their word. Sarah Edmondson, for example, openly admits to breaking her commitment and there were no consequences from anyone in DOS. Quite the opposite.
The smear campaign she pioneered has destroyed the lives and careers of many women she once called friends. Others left before and after Sarah also. It was for the woman giving collateral to build strength behind her commitments and be reminded of what she once thought it was worth to her (like the sober person handing over the keys) to stay the course. It was never intended nor used to coerce anyone to do something that could be harmful or beneficial to anyone else.
There are former DOS members, however, who stole collateral. Jessica Joan claims in her memoir and in sworn testimony that she took screenshots of the collateral (which she was not entrusted with and should not have had access to) and shared it with her boyfriend and Mark Vicente over email in case she needed it as “leverage” down the line.
This exposes a criminal intent on her part, and also explains why her projection of the collateral would be a sinister one. She is the only one who has released collateral, even though she was never threatened with the release of hers, nor was her collateral ever made public. However, Jessica’s breach of trust has harmed many. Mark Vicente gave the collateral to Frank Parlato, and when Nicole (a woman who voluntarily left DOS without consequence in July 2017) spoke to Frank to request her name be taken off his blog, he told her he had her collateral and she should talk to Catherine Oxenberg. So, while Nicole was never threatened by anyone in DOS with the release of collateral, it’s possible she was coerced after she left because her collateral was stolen, and ended up in someone’s hands who never should have had it to begin with.
Excerpts from Jessica Joan’s book, “The Untouchable Jessica Joan”
Another fact that has been ignored by purveyors of the salacious narrative is that the process to keep collateral secure involved keeping it in a safe that only one person had access to.
Keith Raniere never possessed nor had access to collateral, unless someone chose to send something directly to him. The goal was to keep each person’s collateral safe and secure, so it couldn’t be mishandled or unintentionally leaked. The intention was to never actually release collateral.
The intention was to inspire a sense of gravity and seriousness with regard to one’s word so that it wasn’t so easy to quit on oneself.
Early on in DOS, a couple of women joined and then felt that the path wasn’t for them. It was sad to think they could make such a strong commitment and then back out, but it would be wrong to want it more than they did. So, they left and their collateral was never released or threatened to be released. Sometimes we’ll do anything to get out of our commitments because it’s too scary, too hard, too uncomfortable, but we are capable of so much more than our self-created constraints. The discomfort of giving up on ourselves when we’ve backed our word with collateral is intended to be greater than whatever adversity we might face on our path to success.
It is in those defining moments, when we can either quit or continue through the challenges, we have the opportunity to choose our higher selves and prove that we are capable of greatness.
It’s understandable that DOS has attracted critics, questions, and even controversy. Unfortunately, the truth has been twisted beyond recognition and much that was intended to remain private between trusted friends has been made into a hostile public discourse. The perspective of the women who remain positive about DOS is not that the concept was perfect or the people involved infallible.
Clearly not.
But rather, that DOS was created with good intentions and the people involved were honest in their efforts to bring more honor, discipline, and personal responsibility to the lives of the women who decided to join. Unfortunately, DOS’s history has so far been written by dishonest actors with personal agendas and weak character. The most tragic consequence is not just the damage to the women who wish to uphold their sacred vow and commitment to their fellow sisters, who are now wrongfully branded “sex slaves” and worse.
There is also tragedy in the damage to the principle of sisterhood itself. Women who choose honor over hate, and integrity over social acceptance, should be celebrated. Women who choose victimhood over personal responsibility, and delusions over truth, should be helped. That is precisely what DOS was trying to do.
That’s it for the Dossier women. Now I, Frank Parlato, will say a few words. Collateral is what sunk Keith Raniere. It was that and that alone that gave the feds their forced labor and sex trafficking charges. Now Keith is a brilliant man. He had all these good intentions. He would have the women hand over life-ruining if it were released collateral to other women – for life.
He thought this would work for thousands of women. If nothing else it shows he is an idiot. This collateral would coerce secrecy and lifetime obedience. Stupid.
But let’s say it was well intended stupidity. Then why lie? Why did Keith Raniere tells his slaves to lie about him being the ultimate master in a master slave sorority? Why call it a sorority that is 100 percent controlled by a man?
They went out of their way to deceive the recruits – and that’s the fraud. They lied about Raniere, lied about the brand, the meaning of the brand. They told these women that it was the symbol of the four elements, not the rascal’s initials.
Stupid. But dishonest too. Talk about righteousness all you want Dossier ladies, but this was fraud — hiding Raniere.
Maybe collateral was not meant to be bad in the hands of the slave masters of the first line. Or second line or third line. But there was one thing missing – informed consent. The fact is Keith was the master and as we know from the DOS manual – the master is the end all and be all, the all in all for the slave – and every one of the slaves from the first line down were subject to one man – Raniere. If Lauren was your master, you were not placing your collateral with her. Because she had to do whatever Raniere said.
A man heading a sorority is odd enough and should be disclosed. But when that man controls life-ruining collateral – for life- over a person expected to be a slave – recruited under false pretenses – even people stupid enough to believe Raniere had good intentions should realize this will fail.
It did fail, and we never found out if Raniere would have ever ordered the collateral released on anyone. He never got the chance because Frank Report busted him wide open.
Considering his deceptions in the structure of DOS, only a damn execrable fool would entrust life-ruining blackmail worthy material to a deceptive liar.
The only problem is that only eight women knew Raniere controlled all – and the other 97 women who gave collateral were deceived. Stupid on him that he never thought that would fall to pieces. It did and all the Dossier slaves won’t be able to put Dumbo Raniere back together again.
I said it before and I’ll say it again. When Raniere deceptively took the collateral – even if he did not hold it himself- the collateral was on him. His ordering his slaves to get it was his collateral not theirs.
It is like we had a rascal who could not help but do bad things and he said to us – I’ll give you some collateral to hold to stop me – and the blessed boy did.
He’s sunk and he knows it. He’s just playing games with the remaining believers. They have a long row to hoe.
The women who co-created the secret sorority known as DOS sought to challenge social conventions and build strong character through specialized practices guided by Keith Raniere. The group aimed to empower women and was founded on a vow among participants.
However, the sorority has been distorted and misrepresented in the media and society has cast the women as hapless victims or “brainwashed” followers. The binary narrative of “victim/perpetrator” is uninformed and offensive to the women who chose to participate in DOS.
Despite facing adversity, including false accusations and governmental threats, the women remain committed to honor and championing women’s agency. They have resisted the temptation to claim victimhood, even when it has been offered with the promise of reward, because they value integrity and the truth more than material reward or security.
The article appears to be largely coherent, as it presents a clear argument that the concept of “collateral” in DOS has been misrepresented in the media and by some former members as “blackmail,” when in fact it was a consensual agreement between adults. The article also presents a scenario to illustrate the purpose of collateral, as a means of holding someone accountable for their actions in a way that is intended to benefit their own well-being and safety. The article also addresses the fact that local authorities and a private investigation found that no laws were being broken within DOS.
However, there are a few points in the article where the coherence is somewhat disrupted, such as the discussion of the media campaign against DOS and the involvement (or lack thereof) of law enforcement, which may be confusing to readers without more context.
Additionally, some of the language used in the article, such as the use of quotes around certain words, may be confusing or distracting to readers.
Overall, while the article presents a clear argument and generally maintains coherence, there are a few points where the coherence is disrupted and some of the language used may be confusing to readers.
Probably a dumb question, but why weren’t the DOS 5 members testifying again? For some reason, I can’t find where they were providing public statements in court in support of KR and open for cross-examination?
One can totally understand the intent of trying to share a philosophy of follow-through. A principled curriculum to impose on women anathema to societal stricture could seem laudable if wholely consensual.
However, safe, sane, and consensual relationships define the basis for D/s and any derivative. DOS wrote different rules for self-esteem and overcoming distraction to obedience. It wasn’t obedience for the sake of ownership, it was ownership for the enslavement of obedience. These people were genuinely abusers disguised as relationship-bearers with positive intent, preying on those assuming positive intent fresh from any PTSD wounds.
Those whom suffered from Tourette’s shared similar trauma recovery to alcoholics with traduce dyskinesia, BPD and Bipolar sufferers with non-pharmacological modalities. This was a clever magical incantation that worked on believers, and not on the other thousands whom took a course, but didn’t stay the course.
The question that rises above the smoke and mirrors is whether anyone saw the humor in Raniere asking for a presidential pardon from the president he openly stated in The Vow was his impetus for creating the organization for “the thousands of women whom could sway the election” process? Ya, that was an amusing bit of irony.
The Dossier Project Femmes are simply women whom need something to cling to in their lives to give them purpose – if leading a jihad for the Messianic KR is their chosen path, then one might assume they’ll eventually get bored some day because the at the age of 62, he probably won’t last long in prison. He’s already been punched by an angry hermaphrodite (see https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11236899/Jailed-NXIVM-sex-cult-leader-Keith-Raniere-left-unconscious-punched-head.html), so..it’s just a matter of time before he’s just another Jeffrey Epstein.
It will be intriguing to see how employed these Dossier Project Femms will find themselves, apart from the income they might generate from a very, very, very bored but not very gullible, popcorn-devouring public.
If John Paul Rosenberg/Werner Erhard and est were the First Act
and
Keith Raniere and NXIVM were the Second Act …
IF and when someone opens the curtain for The Grand Finale, we need to close the theater for good.
“… TO SOME people, Werner Erhard was always a bit of a cosmic joke.
It was amusing that educated adults flocked to a program called est where they paid substantial sums of money to sit interminably in uncomfortable chairs in hotel ballrooms, where they were told their lives didn’t work and, what’s more, they couldn’t use the bathroom until their “trainer” said they could. …”
https://nikkimeredith.com/articles/family-affairs-werner-erhards-daughters-speak-out/
https://nikkimeredith.com/articles/family-affairs-werner-erhards-daughters-speak-out/
These women are just broken records of Keith’s deception for the term collateral. They just keep repeating the same thing ad nauseum despite it being proven over and over again how it was actually blackmail hidden by the word according to the definition of the term, and not just online, but in a court of law where the rigors of evidence are beyond reasonable doubt.
As Matt Damon’s character Will says in the movie “Good Will Hunting” when he shuts down a humble-bragging, intellectually pretentious mini-Raniere in a bar:
“Do you have any thoughts of your own on the matter? Or do you…pawn it off as your own idea just to impress some girls and embarrass my friend?”
This is Raniere in a nutshell, except he created a cult funded by two mega million dollar bimbos from a family name with “clout” to do it for a (long) while. You can give him “credit” for that I guess, but ultimately it lead to his incarceration and no more sex for the rest of his life. With anyone…well, except for the possibility of unwanted sex from the same sex.
It’s also enjoyable to see the whimpering of desperation of the deadenders with their absurd claims of FBI tampering or the eventual resurrection of NXIVM and it’s ultimate victory! The latter of course is in line with the delusions of grandeur that the cult inculcated in its followers led by a king of it himself. Raniere was nothing more than a conman lacking any sincerity and integrity concerning the purported “mission” of NXIVM. It was just his own personal playground for ego indulgence, control, and sex.
The sooner these deadenders realize this and get over the sunk cost fallacy, the better it will be for their own lives. I guess it’s sadly ironic that these supposed “empowered” women are desperately clinging to last latches of slavery defined and ultimately controlled by a sexually obsessed man.
They are not trying to convince readers. They are trying to convince themselves. If the ladies stop repeating the lies, they will stop believing them.
In most instances they never handed the collateral back, even when they decided, after being told what DOS was, that they didn’t want in. It’s so frustrating that after all these years, all the evidence, they still cling onto him wasting away their potential to do other worthwhile things. He doesn’t deserve anyone’s loyalty.
Also they forget that many of these “slaves” were asked to seduce Keith. Um, WTF? If my “master” had collateral of me, then told me one of my tasks was to seduce KR and I said no, of course I would think I had to do one or the other. The Dossier women are trying to make it seem so tame, unfortunately, it’s very muddy.
This shows how Keith controlled DOS. He orders one of his first line to order her slave to seduce him. The one ordered to seduce him does not know the ultimate order came from Keith.
Did “the women of DOS” ever consider themselves to be human test subjects for experiments?
Did Mr. Raniere and Ms. Salzman think up all the curricula or did others tell them what to do?
It’s possible Raniere, Salzman, Porter and others used experiments such as the “human fright experiment” to cultivate certain “women of DOS” for a specific purpose. Maybe the plan was to eventually have some of “the slaves” do what Charles Manson’s followers eventually did. NXIVM used Hollywood celebrities and international networks just as those in the Manson case did.
Maybe advanced technology, hypnosis, “Neurolinguistic Programming” and Skinner-style behavior modification were so advanced twenty years ago that the drugs Louis Jolyon West used in his “Mass Conversion” experiments in the 1970s weren’t needed for NXIVM to create chaos and change the world.
Since the 1970s, how often has headline news been about various groups of people led around by one charismatic leader or another? How much news has been tip-of-the-iceberg generalization covering for deep state “mass conversion experiments”?
Whether or not deep state villains conducted any of the NXIVM experiments, whether or not heartless technocrats gradually shifted American culture toward the crumbling world we can all easily observe today, this is what’s actually been happening in real life in real time: The Wrong People have been our masters for far too long.
If The World Economic Forum “stakeholders” haven’t infiltrated all election systems yet, we must vote for every candidate who will protect us from the Vanguards, the Prefects, the Worshipful Masters, the Grand Masters, wealthy charlatans, poor charlatans, technocrat tyrants and crazy scientists who want to ruin and rule every nation.
When I worked with them as a consultant they asked me to create some curriculum. I was too busy.
Threats can be explicit or implicit. If someone’s holding a gun to your head, the context of the situation you are in is usually sufficient to influence the likely course of your behaviour. What strikes me about the perverse nature of the collateral includes the following:
1. The type and range of collateral: huge financial pledges (account numbers, title deeds to property etc) to extreme confessions (from embarassing personal anecdotes to career-ending / life-changing admissions) to pornographic photographs and videos
2. The fact that much of what was collected was often not even true – it had to be so damaging that exaggeration progressed to invention progressed to being told what to write
3. Its potential impact on people connected to DOS members who were not even members themselves, but family, friends, employers, potential employers
4. The ever increasing frequency it was collected, especially towards the end of DOS as panic set in among the top brass in response to women beginning to leave
Let there be no mistake, this practice was a disgusting and contemptible abuse of people’s right to privacy perpetrated by a mob of brainwashed, deranged and morally bankrupt leaders at the behest of their narcisistic, psychopathic, Machiavellian and sadistic (the 4 elements!) master.
“They were free to come and go whenever they liked…”, reminisced Clyne in one of her typically equivocal claims (First Line Master of the Understatement) when discussing the freedom DOS ‘slaves’ enjoyed/endured, a bit like a Nazi describing Auschwitz as a place where work makes you free. Like the mythical Hotel California, collateral aimed to ensure you could check out any time you liked, but you could never leave.
What comes across tellingly from former DOS members’ trial transcripts was how genuinely terrified they were, and increasingly so towards the end. Collateral was the like the sword of Damocles which could come down on their heads at any time. It was the ever present threat that ensured they responded to readiness drills, observed their enforced diets, carried out their daily chores, and in some cases even agreed to be pimped to the ‘Grand Master’.
And if they failed in any of the above, to accept an appropriate penance/’consequence’ (onerous physical endeavour, increased starvation, physical discomfort test, or even humiliating beatings that would be filmed for additional collateral).
One of the biggest lies of the DOS apologists is that collateral was never going to be used – it just represented a pledge that member’s would make to themselves that they were serious about what they were entering into, would never divulge its secrets (abuse!), and it would spur them on to achieve the wonderful goals they had to make them better people (the collateral was for them and nobody else!). They claim none of it has ever been released, though Sarah Edmondson’s branding video clearly refutes that, and then there’s the question of where Suneel obtained his Camila photos. The problem, which revenge porn victims are all too well aware of, but which increasingly affects us all in this digital age, is that once it’s out there, it’s out there. It’s unlikely ever to to disappear, and at any time could come back to bite you in the ass.
Essentially collateral served to enforce the asymmetrical structure of DOS, meaning that it could never even approximate to being a ‘sisterhood’. When someone has the goods on you, you’re in an inferior position – you do what you’re told. It was the basis of the whole master-slave dynamic, and the more goods they have on you, the weaker your position becomes, the more vulnerable you become to abuse. Videos of the branding ceremonies provided additional collateral, and the ‘masters’ arrogantly saw no reason to tell their ‘slaves’ what the brand represented, Raniere’s initials rather than the 4 elements.
Raniere knew it. He’d discussed it with Grace Park in an interview in 2015, just as he was setting up DOS. He was obsessed with the Stanford Prison Experiment (SPE) of the early 70’s and how it permanently fucked up people’s psychology: guards became guards (masters) and prisoners (slaves) assumed their roles too; just as in society people learn their place, but in a much shorter space of time. And as with the SPE, some guards (masters) can become permanently stuck in their delusion, eh Nicki?
For Raniere it was going to provide him fresh sex meat on an ongoing basis, the realisation of unbridled S&M sex fantasies – as a sadistic psychopath it was as much as he could have wished for.
It was also his undoing.
How do they explain the leak of Sarah Edmondson’s branding video?
I believe they blame that on the defector, Lauren Salzman.
Possibly these DOSsers have ugly duckling syndrome and have real hard time getting on with women out in the real world so they find comfort in ganging up and bullying other women. Keith, of course, pounced on this and took the women hating to the next level.
There’s definitely a need to feel Elite. And Superior to other women in the dossier project. Keith fostered massive competition amongst women. It was his MO.
Natashka-
Sounds like a very attractive woman, once upon a time, may have been in the crosshairs of these ducklings.
Which is why Frank was a shoo in for that job. He-Man Woman Haters Club of a feather. Someday soon someone is going to shine this glaring spotlight back on this “super hero journalist”. That’s going to be the greatest story of all. Little “rascals” indeed.
Shine away, baby. But something tells me you could not take any spotlight at all. Why I bet you would not even use your real name but post anonymously.
You’re a brave one. Indeed.
This shits about as real as a Rolex in a market stall!
“There is also tragedy in the damage to the principle of sisterhood itself.”
The tragedy is you even describing it as sisterhood in the first place!
“Women who choose honor over hate, and integrity over social acceptance, should be celebrated.”
Nothing honorable about you or the shit you stand for. Clearly its YOU who have a hatred of civilized society not to mention women. You call deceiving a load of innocent women and treating them like shit having integrity? No wonder you aint socially accepted!
“Women who choose victimhood over personal responsibility, and delusions over truth, should be helped. That is precisely what DOS was trying to do.”
You choosing victimhood yourself saying you a victim of Sarahs lawsuit. Only thing your personly responsible for is making those girls lives a misery for 2 years. Your the one that is deluded and needs help! You would not know the truth if it kicked you in the ass!
Well stated, Leroy. The arrogance of this pack of branded, blackmailing bullies believing they are superior and in a position to help other women is mind-boggling.
Don’t forget they all share one old boyfriend who’s now incarcerated.
Just the kind of women you want to model yourself or your daughter after hahaha
Well said Leroy!
Times Union
NXIVM leader claims feds want to ‘set me up’ for rape charge in prison
Keith Raniere, convicted sex trafficker from Halfmoon, says new cellmate has filed 75 complaints under the federal Prison Rape Elimination Act, calls decision to move prisoner into Raniere’s cell “extremely suspicious and inappropriate”
Robert Gavin
Nov. 2, 2022
Updated: Nov. 2, 2022 1:31 p.m.
Jailed NXIVM leader Keith Raniere says the federal prison system conspired to “set me up for a sexual assault charge” when it placed him with a cellmate who has lodged dozens of rape complaints from behind bars.
The 62-year-old Raniere, formerly of Halfmoon, said in an Oct. 24 court filing that he wants to be placed back in general population in the Tucson, Ariz. lockup where the ex-personal growth guru now widely recognized as a cult leader is serving a 120-year sentence for sex trafficking, forced labor conspiracy and racketeering charges.
Raniere, known in NXIVM as “Vanguard,” said he has never been informed about reviews for his custody, which he said should have been done every seven days. Raniere, who claimed to be one of the world’s three top problem solvers and who fostered a god-like image in NXIVM, also griped that he is locked in a cell 23-to-24 hours a day. He said he gets outside for less than an hour a day. And he said he is often caged with sex offenders.
[ … ]
https://www.timesunion.com/news/article/NXIVM-leader-claims-feds-want-to-set-me-up-for-17552304.php
“Kieth said he is often caged with sex offenders.”
When Keith looks in a mirror is the mirror a sex offender?
Imagine when Keith is dead and these DOSsers are wrinkled, grey and dried up and still going over the same old bullshit. What a waste of precious life.
Threats can be explicit or implicit. If someone’s holding a gun to your head, the context of the situation you are in is usually sufficient to influence the likely course of your behaviour. What strikes me about the perverse nature of the collateral includes the following:
1. The type and range of collateral: huge financial pledges (account numbers, title deeds to property etc) to extreme confessions (from embarrassing personal anecdotes to career-ending / life-changing admissions) to pornographic photographs and videos
2. The fact that much of what was collected was often not even true – it had to be so damaging that exaggeration progressed to invention progressed to being told what to write
3. Its potential impact on people connected to DOS members who were not even members themselves, but family, friends, employers, potential employers
4. The ever increasing frequency it was collected, especially towards the end of DOS as panic set in among the top brass in response to women beginning to leave
Let there be no mistake, this practice was a disgusting and contemptible abuse of people’s right to privacy perpetrated by a mob of brainwashed, deranged and morally bankrupt leaders at the behest of their narcisistic, psychopathic, Machiavellian and sadistic (the 4 elements!) master.
“They were free to come and go whenever they liked…”, reminisced Clyne in one of her typically equivocal claims (First Line Master of the Understatement) when discussing the freedom DOS ‘slaves’ enjoyed/endured, a bit like a Nazi describing Auschwitz as a place where work makes you free. Like the mythical Hotel California, collateral aimed to ensure you could check out any time you liked, but you could never leave.
What comes across tellingly from former DOS members’ trial transcripts was how genuinely terrified they were, and increasingly so towards the end. Collateral was the like the sword of Damocles which could come down on their heads at any time. It was the ever present threat that ensured they responded to readiness drills, observed their enforced diets, carried out their daily chores, and in some cases even agreed to be pimped to the ‘Grand Master’.
And if they failed in any of the above, to accept an appropriate penance/’consequence’ (onerous physical endeavour, increased starvation, physical discomfort test, or even humiliating beatings that would be filmed for additional collateral).
One of the biggest lies of the DOS apologists is that collateral was never going to be used – it just represented a pledge that member’s would make to themselves that they were serious about what they were entering into, would never divulge its secrets (abuse!), and it would spur them on to achieve the wonderful goals they had to make them better people (the collateral was for them and nobody else!). They claim none of it has ever been released, though Sarah Edmondson’s branding video clearly refutes that, and then there’s the question of where Suneel obtained his Camila photos. The problem, which revenge porn victims are all too well aware of, but which increasingly affects us all in this digital age, is that once it’s out there, it’s out there. It’s unlikely ever to to disappear, and at any time could come back to bite you in the ass.
Essentially collateral served to enforce the asymmetrical structure of DOS, meaning that it could never even approximate to being a ‘sisterhood’. When someone has the goods on you, you’re in an inferior position – you do what you’re told. It was the basis of the whole master-slave dynamic, and the more goods they have on you, the weaker your position becomes, the more vulnerable you become to abuse. Videos of the branding ceremonies provided additional collateral, and the ‘masters’ arrogantly saw no reason to tell their ‘slaves’ what the brand represented, Raniere’s initials rather than the 4 elements.
Raniere knew it. He’d discussed it with Grace Park in an interview in 2015, just as he was setting up DOS. He was obsessed with the Stanford Prison Experiment (SPE) of the early 70’s and how it permanently fucked up people’s psychology: guards became guards (masters) and prisoners (slaves) assumed their roles too; just as in society people learn their place, but in a much shorter space of time. And as with the SPE, some guards (masters) can become permanently stuck in their delusion, eh Nicki?
For Raniere it was going to provide him fresh sex meat on an ongoing basis, the realisation of unbridled S&M sex fantasies – as a sadistic psychopath it was as much as he could have wished for.
It was also his undoing.
Once additional collateral was demanded, which the slaves were unaware would happen, then free will goes out the window.
The experience of being a slave can be good or bad according to the character of the master. It’s too much power for anybody to have.
Just when I thought these tramps couldn’t get any dumber…they strike again! Get some therapy ladies, y’all need it BADLY!!
Been hearing this excuse for years. The jury didn’t buy it and that’s all that matters.
“‘Blackmail’ is such an ugly word” https://youtu.be/xG6vgzAswgE
This analogy is garbage.
First of all they are putting all.of the friends and acquaintances that the slave masters enticed through lying to join their slave ring on par with drunk drivers. The implication is that these bright, lovely friends if theirs were constantly in danger of killing themselves or others. And needed Nicki and crew to save everyone’s very life. That is a falsely loaded premise from the start .
It’s actually more, as if the cult women took their friend’s keys to allegedly “keep them safe”. And they promised their friends, “only I will have your keys and I will keep them safe and give them directly back to you. You can trust me completely.”
But instead the slave masters took the key to the ignition off of the chain and gave it to a drug dealer to run drugs in their friend’s car.
Next the dead-ender slave master made a copy of their friend’s house key.
And gave that key to their shared boyfriend Keith, so. Keith could come over to the friend’s house and spy on them showering and changing their clothes whenever Keith wanted.
That’s a little closer to the truth if the blackmail.
And before the friend who was a slave master gave the keys back to the friend who was being victimized they would also have to insist on an up close photo of their spread vulva and a branding of their shared boyfriend Keith’s initials right near their friend’s vagina for vanguard’s personal pornography library.
And the slave master probably would have taken the friend to the bar and got them super drunk in the first place. Because the entire Master Slave ring was a lying manipulation from the start.
Lol. Nicely played
Not everyone shared Kieth as a boyfriend no matter how many times you say it
Correct.
Some were just “fuck toy slaves”
What a group of self-justifying, delusional people. I’d like to see them refuse to give the keys back when a sober Lisa asks for them the next day and see how they fare with the police, even in the NDNY. Why didn’t they say to Lisa: ‘to ensure you never drink and drive again, you need to let us take pictures of your crotch and hold them for you – we will only show them to KR. Oh, and you’ll also need to give us something incriminating every month, otherwise you don’t get your keys. Feel free to pledge your house, your first born, make up stories about your nearest and dearest …
If these women truly think the ‘Lisa’ example equates to the crotch pictures/collateral and how they were acquired, then it shows they have no reservations/remorse for what they did and still feel they’re in the right and have been wronged … and therefore are capable to doing it again. Then they wonder why they’re being ‘shunned’.
Great points!
Not buying it.
The fact your explanation is so long makes me wonder if you’re not buying your own explanation either.
And if you all had sex with him, or most of you, you’re a harem, and a collateralized one at that, which means Im doubling down on my ” Bullshit Meter’.
Vanguard’s Pick and Mix😳
You don’t build inner strength with threat of exposure. The harder they work to justify their actions, the more disturbed – and dumb, they sound.
The “threat” is inherent- and continues to grow as more collateral was required as months went by.
What’s damning is they set the collateral to the category of – things that will destroy your life and your family if it’s released. That’s quite a bit different than asking your friend to hold your car keys.
Hey DOS…Your little collateral experiment was actually illegal…who would have thunk. No further explanation of your exploits are required.
Sincerely,
Everyone
If the collateral is over blown than the ladies shouldn’t mind showing us their snatch pics…..
….I for one want to vomit.
Taking a chapter out of the Donald Trump playbook: deny even if it’s false. This statement is an outright lie: “Despite all the testimony from alleged victims in documentaries about NXIVM and a six-week criminal trial, not a single woman has claimed they were actually threatened with the release of collateral.”
4 women under oath testified that the were threatened with release of collateral. Frank has the testimony to prove it. Unlike the brave women who subjected themselves to cross examination in open court, these women of dossier project hid from it entirely. And they lie outright. How more ridiculous can you be?
Great comments by Frank. So spot on.
What absolute nonsense from the folks at the Dossier Project. They should change their name to The Whitewash Project.
I watched episode 3 of season 2 of ‘The Vow’ this morning. That so-called curriculum presented as part of the episode, the one aiming to separate people from their fear, seemed like obvious grooming to prepare people to be victimised. Everyone subjected to that garbage curriculum should pick up a copy of the book ‘The Gift of Fear’ — fear serves a legitimate purpose. We need to work at being MORE in touch with it and our gut instincts – pay attention when you are feeling uncomfortable. With effort we can navigate our lives more wisely and avoid entanglements with dangerous creeps like you-know-who.
Well said Jen